Not much surprise. Lose to a team you should beat, you fall (Oklahoma, VaTech, ASU, Florida); win, rise to fill any gaps above (LSU, USC, Mizzou, Georgia, Kansas, WVU, Texas, BC); lose to a team you were not expected to beat, hold your ground (Ohio State). Unless your Hawaii. With a weak conference schedule, their inclusion in the ranking was hard to place and was in deference to their record (getting it done does matter). Georgia put to rest how real they were this year. A good team, but not Top Twelve.
I can't stand the BCS. I miss the old way: A zillion bowl games on New Year's Day and a week's worth of arguing who the best team in the country was. That said, I have to say it is a smashing success. Sure there are those who are going to clamor for something different like an eight-team playoff, a Final Four, a Plus One, a Plus-3. Whatever. "Whiners," I say.
Consider three things: 1.) Logically, any playoff doesn't necessarily determine the best team, it only determines the winner of the playoff, which is as aribitrary as the BCS, or its predecessor, in its naming of a national champion; 2.) Any playoff system is going to overlap with the NFL, so the idea that you can "maintain the focus on college football" that it used to have in the Good Old Days is a bit of a stretch, not to mention it makes the regular season inherently less meaningful and less interesting in the process; and 3.) More often than not, it has produced the exact same result as the NFL's Ultimate Champion Selection Process(tm): a pretty boring football game for the lead-in hype.
From #3, then, the answer is clear: How do you fix the alleged BCS mess? Better commercials.
[submitted by e-mail]