BCS Review Series: 2002, On-Field Dispute Mars Perfect Ending

Part 5 of a series: Over the next few weeks, I will be reviewing each of the 16 seasons since the Bowl Championship Series came into existence in 1998. Here is a look back at who got lucky, who got robbed, what could've been, what should've been and other controversies of the day. The series will appear throughout December and January.

Part 1: 1998, A New Beginning for College Football

Part 2: 1999, FSU Ends Michael Vick's Quest for Perfection

Part 3: 2000, FSU-Miami Sows Seeds of Controversy

Part 4: 2001, Nebraska Fiasco Rocks College Football

---
After two years of turmoil, BCS got a big break in 2002 as two undefeated teams—the only ones—met in a memorable title game that wasn't decided until after two overtimes. This time, the controversy came only during the game.

But just like in 1999, while the BCS could pat itself on the back all it wants, the reality is that a caveman could've picked the Miami-Ohio State matchup—and he wouldn't even need the BCS standings to muddle his thoughts.

After Oklahoma was upset in the first week of November, it became clear that the title game would feature defending champion and No. 1-ranked Miami and second-ranked Ohio State. The Buckeyes had to survive a tight battle with arch rival Michigan, 14-9, while the 'Canes romped through the final weeks, bidding to become the first team in the BCS era to repeat as champions.

Ohio State, riding on the back of the criminally talented freshman Maurice Clarett, would spoil Miami's quest, but it needed two big breaks to do it. First, Hurricanes running back Willis McGahee tore his ACL in the third quarter, slowing down the Miami offensive powerhouse. Then, just as the 'Canes seemingly clinched victory on the game's final play, a pass interference (wait, or was it defensive holding?) flag came out five seconds later that gave the Buckeyes new life.

Was that a good call? You decide.


(Warning: The neutrality of the commentary is in question)

But the most significant development of this season went mostly unnoticed. After losing two of its first five games, USC blew through the rest of the Pac-10 and routed Iowa in the Orange Bowl, led by Heisman-winning quarterback Carson Palmer. The Trojans would re-enter college football's top echelon and become the most BCS-relevant juggernaut for the rest of the decade.

Complete Final BCS Standings

Rank	Team	Poll Avg.	Computer	SoS	Loss	Q-W	BCS
1	Miami	1	1.17	19	0	-	2.93
2	Ohio St.	2	1.67	20	0	-0.5	3.97
3	Georgia	4	3.17	5	1	-	8.37
4	USC	5	3.67	1	2	-0.2	10.51
5	Iowa	3	4.83	49	1	-	10.79

Alternative Methods

Using post-2003 formula: 1. Miami, 2. Ohio State.

Using 1998-2000 formula: 1. Miami, 2. Ohio State.

Likely four-team playoff: Miami vs. USC; Ohio State vs. Georgia.

Both USC and Iowa were conference co-champions, but since the Trojans played a tougher schedule and Big Ten co-champion Ohio State were already in the field, Iowa gets squeezed out. It would've been an easy decision with the benefit of hindsight.


Controversies

The Rose Bowl in Miami: The real Rose Bowl lost out on the traditional Big Ten-Pac-10 matchup and was none too pleased about it. Adding insult to more insult, the Orange Bowl invoked a little-known BCS backroom rule to secure a USC-Iowa matchup that announced the arrival of the Trojan Dynasty.

Here's how it happened:

After the Fiesta Bowl took the top two teams for the national title game, the Orange Bowl snagged No. 5 Iowa, the Big Ten runner-up. At this point, the bowls could not protect their affiliated conference teams so the Rose Bowl, already fuming at losing Iowa, took Big 12 champion Oklahoma to face Pac-10 co-champ Washington State (which beat USC head-to-head).

The Sugar Bowl was next, ready to invite No. 4 USC to play No. 3 Georgia. But the Orange Bowl took advantage of an exception clause that allowed a higher-paying bowl to jump another once every four years and swiped the Trojans away. The Sugar Bowl was stuck with SEC champion Georgia and ACC winner No. 14 Florida State.


2002 BCS Bowl Matchups

Bowl	Score	Attendance	TV Rating
Fiesta Bowl*	#2 Ohio St. 31, #1 Miami 24 (2 OT)	77,502	17.2
Rose Bowl	#7 Oklahoma 34, #6 Washington St. 14	86,848	11.3
Orange Bowl	#4 USC 38, #5 Iowa 17	75,971	9.7
Sugar Bowl	#3 Georgia 26, #14 Florida St. 13	74,269	9.2

BCS formula review: Computer rankings by Herman Matthews and Dave Rothman were dropped and the New York Times added back in, making it a total of seven. The lowest ranking was discarded and the remaining six averaged.

All rankings now purged the margin-of-victory component, as Jeff Sagarin introduced a new ELO-CHESS rating that removed margin of victory, reluctantly—in his words: "In ELO-CHESS, only winning and losing matters; the score margin is of no consequence, which makes it very 'politically correct'."

Final analysis: The BCS celebrated its most successful season yet, and decided to take the rest of the year off to congratulate itself. The Miami-Ohio State game was a boon to the BCS and seemingly validated its existence—without the participation of the Big Ten, Pac-10 and the Rose Bowl, this matchup wouldn't have happened in the pre-BCS era. But the next two years would bring nothing but trouble for the system, especially 2003, when the mother of all controversies would force the BCS to reinvent itself.

BCS Review Series: 2001, Nebraska Fiasco Rocks BCS

Part 4 of a series: Over the next few weeks, I will be reviewing each of the 16 seasons since the Bowl Championship Series came into existence in 1998. Here is a look back at who got lucky, who got robbed, what could've been, what should've been and other controversies of the day. The series will appear throughout December and January.

Part 1: 1998, A New Beginning for College Football

Part 2: 1999, FSU Ends Michael Vick's Quest for Perfection

Part 3: 2000, FSU-Miami Sows Seeds of Controversy

---

If the BCS was shaken by the 2000 controversy, then it was rocked by an earthquake in 2001.

Heading into the final weeks of the regular season, it appeared that a Miami-Nebraska showdown in the Rose Bowl would be inevitable. After Nebraska's 20-10 win over previously unbeaten Oklahoma in late October, the 'Canes and Huskers were ranked 1-2 for the next four consecutive weeks, with non-BCS Brigham Young the only other unbeaten team.

Then a series of upsets changed everything.

Heading into their final regular-season game, the Huskers still needed a victory in Boulder to clinch the Big 12 North against two-loss Colorado. But the Buffaloes didn't comply, and thrashed Nebraska, 62-36, in a game that wasn't even that close. Nebraska tumbled to No. 6 in the polls and its national title aspirations seemingly squashed.

After Nebraska's loss, Florida claimed the all-important No. 2 spot. The Gators just needed to beat Tennessee to secure a berth in the SEC championship game. Annually played in the third week of September, the Florida-Tennessee game in 2001 was postponed because of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. The Vols surprised Florida with a 34-32 victory, in what turned out to be Steve Spurrier's final regular-season game as Gators coach.

The victory catapulted Tennessee from No. 6 to No. 2 in the BCS standings after No. 4 Colorado upset No. 3 Texas in the Big XII title game. Now all the Vols had to do was beat three-loss LSU in the SEC title game to secure their second BCS title game appearance in four years.

In the meantime, left on the sideline seething was Oregon. The Ducks, with their only defeat to two-loss Stanford, were No. 3 in both polls. Yet, they were ranked only No. 5 in the BCS standings, behind two-loss Colorado, who had been beaten by Fresno State and also Texas in the regular season. The Buffs, after winning the rematch against the Longhorns, had their issue, too: Somehow, they were ranked No. 4 in the BCS, behind the Nebraska team that had been idle since being annihilated in Boulder.

The BCS would've dodged a bullet if Tennessee could just take care of business against Nick Saban's LSU Tigers, who had been beaten in Knoxville earlier in the season. But LSU didn't oblige, pulling out a 31-20 victory in the SEC title game, completing the frenzied final three weeks of the season with one more upset.

So who was going to play undefeated Miami? Oregon, now No. 2 in both polls, seemed to have the strongest argument. Colorado, with an impressive late-season run but two losses, thought it deserved a shot, too. The team that really shouldn't be in the discussion was Nebraska, which had snuck back up to No. 4 after the spate of late-season upsets.

But it was Nebraska that claimed the No. 2 spot in the final BCS standings, edging out Colorado by five-hundredth (.05) of a percentage point. Oregon, with a low computer average and hampered by its strength-of-schedule rating, was a distant fourth and never had a chance.

The Buffaloes howled for weeks after narrowly losing out. But the truth is that they were even that close to Nebraska only because of the new "quality win" component, added after the 2000 season as make-good for Miami's snub. Had the 2000 formula been applied, Colorado would've been fourth, behind Nebraska by nearly two full points and also Oregon as well.

At the end, the Ducks were really the aggrieved party, and they proved it by destroying Colorado, 38-16, in the Fiesta Bowl. Miami finished its undefeated season in the Rose Bowl with a ho-hum 34-14 victory over Nebraska, universally disparaged as being undeserving. While the Hurricanes celebrated their national championship, the BCS was sent back to the drawing board once again.

Complete Final BCS Standings

Rank	Team	Poll Avg.	Computer	SoS	Loss	Q-W	BCS
1	Miami	1	1.00	18	0	-0.1	2.62
2	Nebraska	4	2.17	14	1	-0.5	7.23
3	Colorado	3	4.50	2	2	-2.3	7.28
4	Oregon	2	4.83	31	1	-0.4	8.67

Alternative Methods

Using post-2003 formula: 1. Miami, 2. Oregon, 3. Nebraska, 4. Colorado. (Oregon would've been a comfortable No. 2, and there would've been little controversy)

Using 1998-2000 formula: 1. Miami, 2. Nebraska, 3. Oregon, 4. Colorado. (Nebraska would've been well ahead of Oregon)

Likely four-team playoff: Miami vs. Nebraska; Oregon vs. Colorado.

With a slew of upsets in conference championship games, these four teams actually stood far apart from the rest of the pack, even if Nebraska failed to win its division. No. 5 Florida also failed to win its division after losing to Tennessee in the aforementioned SEC East showdown.


Controversies

Other than Nebraska getting into the national championship game in the Rose Bowl, not really. (But that's like saying 'other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?'.) The only other one-loss teams from major conferences, Illinois (Big Ten) and Maryland (ACC), were both throttled in BCS bowl games. No. 5 Florida was the only at-large selection, and as it turned out, sent out coach Spurrier to the NFL with a 56-23 rout of Maryland at the Orange Bowl.


2001 BCS Bowl Matchups

Game	Score	Attendance	TV Rating
Rose Bowl*	#1 Miami 37, #2 Nebraska 14	93,781	13.9
Fiesta Bowl	#4 Oregon 38, #3 Colorado 16	74,118	11.3
Orange Bowl	#5 Florida 56, #10 Maryland 23	73,640	9.5
Sugar Bowl	#13 LSU 47, #8 Illinois 34	77,688	8.6

BCS formula review: Wes Colley (of Colley Matrix) and Peter Wolfe were added to the computer ratings, replacing the New York Times and Richard Dunkel. The move ostensibly was to lessen the impact of margin of victory in computer rankings. Of the eight ratings for each team, the highest and lowest were thrown out and the remainder averaged.

Also, a "quality win" component was added to the team's final BCS score total, in response to Miami's being snubbed in 2000. This scheme called for teams to receive bonus points by beating other teams in the final BCS top 15. As a result, Colorado's late-season wins over Nebraska and Texas gave it a boost of 2.3 points, nearly knocking Nebraska out of the No. 2 spot.

Final analysis: The 2001 mess probably should've been a wake-up call for the BCS to completely revamp its formula. Yet, the powers-that-be continued to tinker with knee-jerk and piecemeal "fixes" that inevitably resulted in another controversy. The next season brought a big relief—through no credit to the BCS system—but the calm would prove short-lived.

BCS Review Series: 2000, FSU-Miami Sows Seeds of Controversy

Part 3 of a series: Over the next few weeks, I will be reviewing each of the 16 seasons since the Bowl Championship Series came into existence in 1998. Here is a look back at who got lucky, who got robbed, what could've been, what should've been and other controversies of the day. The series will appear throughout December and January.

Part 1: 1998, A New Beginning for College Football

Part 2: 1999, FSU Ends Michael Vick's Quest for Perfection

---

After two years of relative calm, controversy exploded on the BCS in Year 3. For the first time, a team's presence in the BCS title game was called into question, and the criticism went unabated even after an undefeated champion was crowned.

But if anything, this was a self-inflicted wound.

Bowing more to an ignorant media than any real pressure from public opinion, the BCS drastically changed its formula to retroactively make amends for an outcome it was powerless to change. Instead of defending its method and holding its ground, the BCS capitulated. This knee-jerk reaction would bring far more serious consequences in the years to come and compromise its claim to legitimacy in the system's formative years.

Oklahoma finished the 2000 regular season as the nation's only undefeated Division I-A team and its No. 1 ranking was undisputed. But Florida State, despite ranking No. 3 in both the AP and coaches polls, leapfrogged No. 2 Miami in the final BCS standings to earn a date with the Sooners in the Orange Bowl.

The media went berserk, more so than even Miami coach Butch Davis. The credibility of BCS computers was called into question because it was the computers' preference for the Seminoles that carried the day. The main argument was this: Since both Miami and Florida State each had one loss, and the Hurricanes beat the Seminoles on the field, how could Florida State be ranked ahead of Miami?

The powers-that-be of the BCS panicked, big time. Changes were promised and then carried out in the offseason. The computer lineup was reshuffled to de-emphasize margin of victory. And a dubious "quality win" criteria was added to the formula—as if the existing arrangement wasn't convoluted enough.

But the BCS really should've responded with: "What's the problem?" and vigorously defended the system.

Florida State was a worthy No. 2 team. If you lined up FSU and Miami side by side, plenty could've been said in the Seminoles' favor.

1. Strength of Schedule: Florida State and Miami ranked second and third, respectively, in the strength-of-schedule component in the BCS standings. But upon further examination, that was laughable. (The SoS, parroted from the RPI that the NCAA uses for its basketball selections, would prove to be the most destructive part of the formula—but more on that later in this series.)

Florida State played in a tougher conference (ACC) than Miami (Big East). Its non-conference games consisted of Louisville, Brigham Young, Florida and Miami. The 'Canes played I-AA McNeese State, Louisiana Tech, Washington and FSU, plus Big East cupcakes such as Rutgers and Temple.

2. Losses: Florida State's lone loss was to Miami, 27-24, at the Orange Bowl on Oct. 7. The Seminoles rallied from a 17-0 halftime deficit to take a 24-20 lead late in the game, only to lose on a Ken Dorsey-to-Jeremy Shockey pass with 46 seconds left. The 'Canes' only defeat was a 34-29 loss at Washington on Sept. 9.

3. The Washington Factor: If head-to-head results were so paramount, then maybe Washington should've been ranked ahead of Miami. After all, the Huskies beat Miami and also only lost once—a 23-16 defeat at two-loss Oregon.

4. Margin of Victory: If Washington was discounted because it won lots of close games—eight of its 11 games were decided by seven or fewer points—then the fact that Florida State won its games against a considerably tougher schedule by a wider margin than Miami (38.9 vs. 30.4) should not have been overlooked—and the computers didn't.

5. Historical Precedent: Even before the birth of the BCS, there had been several instances where a team was ranked ahead of another team despite losing head-to-head matchups and possessing the same record. In 1993, Florida State finished ahead of Notre Dame in both polls even though the Irish beat the Seminoles, 31-24, at South Bend. In 1978, USC finished second to Alabama (11-1) in the AP poll even though the Trojans (12-1) beat the Tide, 24-14, in Birmingham, Ala.

The body of evidence is pretty strong in the Seminoles' favor. Their presence in the BCS championship game was easily defensible. The fact that they laid an egg in an ugly 13-2 loss to Oklahoma was immaterial. Miami's win over Florida in the Sugar Bowl—a Gators team that the 'Noles had walloped—was also irrelevant.

One more thing: Even if today's BCS formula, which gives two-thirds of its weight to the human polls, were applied to the 2000 season, you'd still end up with the same result—Florida State would've finished second ahead of Miami (.9493 vs. .9459).


Complete Final BCS Standings

Rank	Team	Poll Avg.	Computer	SoS	Loss	BCS
1	Oklahoma	1.0	1.86	11	0	3.30
2	Florida St.	3.0	1.29	2	1	5.37
3	Miami	2.0	2.57	3	1	5.69
4	Washington	4.0	5.43	6	1	10.67

Alternative Methods

Using post-2003 BCS formula: 1. Oklahoma, 2. Florida State.

Likely four-team playoff: Oklahoma vs. Washington; Florida State vs. Miami (Fla.).

A four-team playoff really would've been useful this year, as four teams—all conference champions—clearly stood above the rest.



Controversies

Notre Dame windfall: The Fiesta Bowl passed on four teams ahead of Notre Dame in the final BCS standings to take the two-loss No. 11 Irish. Virginia Tech, ranked No. 5 with its only loss to Miami, fell just outside of the "Kansas State-mandate" and was ignored. Three other two-loss teams were also swept aside—No. 10 Oregon (because two other Pac-10 teams were already taken), No. 9 Kansas State (they're pretty used to this by now) and No. 8 Nebraska.

The Huskers especially had a beef because they had defeated Notre Dame in South Bend, 27-24, earlier in the season. This occurred at a time when the Irish received a windfall of $13 million per BCS bowl appearance—as opposed to the more balanced payouts in the latter days of the BCS. Notre Dame was promptly exposed as a fraud, as it was annihilated by Dennis Erickson's Oregon State Beavers, 41-9.


2000 BCS Bowl Matchups

Game	Score	Attendance	TV Rating
Orange Bowl*	#1 Oklahoma 13, #2 Florida St. 2	76,835	17.8
Rose Bowl	#4 Washington 34, Purdue 24	94,392	14.0
Sugar Bowl	#3 Miami 37, #7 Florida 20	64,407	13.0
Fiesta Bowl	#6 Oregon St. 41, #11 Notre Dame 9	71,526	10.7

BCS formula review: No change to the formula was made between the 1999 and 2000 seasons, but that changed in 2001, as the formula was tweaked or overhauled in four of the next five years.

Final analysis: The changes to the BCS formula prior to the 2001 season would prove to be simply reactionary and solved nothing. While an argument may be made on Miami's behalf, the results of the bowl games really made a case for Washington.

The Huskies went 7-1 in what was easily the toughest conference in 2000 and they beat Purdue in the Rose Bowl. Bowl wins by Oregon State and Oregon gave the Pac-10 three teams in the top seven in the final AP poll. The BCS was rocked by its first real crisis, and another one would erupt the following season.

FSU-Miami 2000 Started All the BCS Troubles

Blame Jeremy Shockey and Ken Dorsey.

When Shockey caught a 13-yard pass from Dorsey with 46 seconds remaining, it cemented Miami's 27-24 victory over Florida State in that 2000 showdown. The outcome of that game also ended up creating a hailstorm of criticism for the nascent BCS and, as a result, four years of constant tinkering that arguably made the system worse.

So it's a bit ironic that in the final year of the BCS era we'll have the first meaningful Miami-FSU game since that fateful tussle in 2000. And as both the Seminoles and Hurricanes are currently on the sidelines of the BCS title race entering Saturday's game, they can look back and blame their predicament on what transpired 13 years ago.

The first two seasons of the BCS (1998 and '99) largely went off without a hitch. The consensus top two teams faced each other in the BCS title games, with Florida State taking part in both—losing to Tennessee in '98 and beating Virginia Tech in '99.

(FULL ARTICLE @ BLEACHER REPORT)

Blowout City and That 70s Show

This weekend, 20 teams ranked in the AP Top 25 were in action, with 19 of them winning. No. 23 Arizona State was the only one to lose, but it was beaten by No. 5 Stanford in the only game pitting two ranked teams.

That's not bleak enough to paint the picture of mismatch city? OK, how about this: Five ranked teams actually faced FCS teams and wound up mauling their overmatched opponents by an aggregate of 298-34 (or about 60-7 on average). Shame on No. 18 Northwestern for only getting by Maine, 35-21.

Wait, it gets better (or really, worse): FCS teams were not the only ones that took a beating. Some of the worst woodshed treatments were administered to FBS teams. Louisville whitewashed Florida International, 72-0, and Baylor annihilated Louisiana-Monroe, 70-7. Just how bad did it get? Urban Meyer went for a score as to not humiliate Florida A&M in a 76-0 rout, and Miami shortened the fourth quarter to 12 minutes to end its 77-7 mercy killing of Savannah State.

That's four teams scoring at least 70 points in a game on a single day – a record. That's also four teams winning by a margin of at least 60 points – another record.

So what is the point? Actually, there isn't one.

(FULL ARTICLE @ BLEACHER REPORT)

Fall of Troy? Not So Fast

Pete Carroll's motto is "Win Forever." And by and large, that's what he has done at USC since becoming the head coach in 2001.

After starting 1-4 in his career at Troy, Carroll has laid waste to the college football landscape. Since 2002, the Trojans have gone 83-10. The 10 games they did lose were by a combined total of 39 points (by comparison, Cal lost to Oregon by 39 points just last week). During that span, each game USC lost was by seven or fewer points. In fact, the largest margin of defeat in the Carroll era was 11, a 27-16 loss at Notre Dame in his rookie season. Pete has made amends by not allowing the Irish to beat the Trojans since.


But it looks as if USC is at a crossroads. Coming into this Saturday's game at Cal, the Trojans are vulnerable. They may be ranked No. 7 in the AP Poll, but they have struggled offensively with a freshman quarterback. And just this week, they lost running back Stefon Johnson after a freak and near-catastrophic weight room accident.

A loss to Cal might put a temporary end to Win Forever. Consider this: Since Oct. 20, 2002, the Trojans have never ranked lower than No. 13 in the AP Poll. They finished in the top four in each of the last seven final AP rankings. Both of those trends probably would end if they can't emerge victorious in Strawberry Canyon.

But as someone who's written off Carroll's Trojans prematurely in the past, the Guru isn't going to make that mistake again. Every time when they seemed on the verge of becoming mortal, they have bounced back to finish the season with a flourish. Cal, conversely, after handing USC its only loss in 2003, has folded against the Trojans in the past five meetings.

For the Golden Bears, who have not been to the Rose Bowl since the 1959 game, this season represents their latest best chance to get to Pasadena. The dream of a national championship is dead - thanks to the 42-3 beating in Eugene last week - but the hopes of winning the Pac-10 is very much alive. And this will be Cal's best shot for a good while.

Win or lose on Saturday, USC will be a top national title contender and the prohibitive favorite to win the Pac-10 in 2010. So if the Bears don't knock them off this time, the Trojans just might keep on winning ... forever.

★★★★★ GAME OF THE WEEK: USC at Cal, 8 p.m. ET. For the second week in a row, the Bears will play in the game with the top billing. If they lay another egg as they did last week, then they won't return to this space until at least the 2010 season.

★★★★ FOUR-STAR GAME: Oklahoma at Miami (Fla.), 8 p.m. ET. Much bloom has come off this rose after Miami was manhandled by Virginia Tech last week. With Sam Bradford still out for Oklahoma, this will be Landry Jones' first start against a BCS caliber team. OU has a realistic chance of getting back into the BCS title picture, but it must start with a win in Miami.

★★★ THREE-STAR GAME: LSU at Georgia, 3:30 p.m. ET. The Bayou Tigers needed all their moxie, and a little luck, to get out of Starkville unscathed. But a similar performance will end with a loss between the hedges. This is the start of a three-game monster stretch for LSU that also includes games against top-ranked Florida and unbeaten Auburn.

★★ TWO-STAR GAME: Michigan at Michigan State, noon ET. The Big Brother is back just in time to step on the throat of the Little Brother once again. After a season in purgatory, Michigan struts into East Lansing with a 4-0 record and improbably, the Big Ten championship in sight. After choking against Central Michigan and Notre Dame, the 1-3 Spartans are headed toward another season of ... Sparty, No!

★ ONE-STAR GAME: Auburn at Tennessee, 7:45 p.m. ET. While Lane Kiffin is making all the news, the only unbeaten rookie coach in the SEC is Auburn's Gene Chizik, a somewhat controversial choice (just ask Charles Barkley) to replace Tommy Tuberville. While Kiffin is busy counting moral victories, Chizik has picked up four real ones against pretty decent competition.