The computer bashing continues, with the experts heaping scorn on the idiot machines responsible for Nebraska taking Colorado's rightful spot (or was that Oregon's rightful spot?) against Miami. You'll notice that my computer agrees completely with the Rose Bowl match-up. It seems to me that one of the big issues that is not being talked about is the relative importance of having a great overall season versus finshing the year as a "hot" team. For example, we're all OK with Miami being number 1 right now, although some say that Colorado is playing better. So, what if Miami loses a close game to Nebraska? Is it absolutely required that Miami no longer be number 1? My guess is that the computer would keep Miami number 1, and I think that there's an argument a Miami 11-1 season would compare well to anybody else's season. But I guess that if Miami could remain number 1, there would be no reason to play the Rose Bowl (and sell all those ads). But isn't it possible that our enjoyment from seeing the old #1 upset and getting a new #1 clouds our judgment of who deserves the national championship? Or perhaps it's just that we're so attuned to lose-and-go-home playoffs that we want the losers to go home. We just got rid of Nebraska, what are they doing in the Rose Bowl?Here are some of the "highlights" that the bowl selection process has given us this year.
The following predictions are straight from the ratings.New Orleans Bowl: Colorado State over North Texas by 12
|93||San Jose State||34.89|
|94||San Diego State||34.65|
|99||New Mexico State||32.11|