Florida Heads to Title Game Under Another BCS Cloud

Voting controversy. The states of Ohio, Florida, and Michigan proving critical. An online red state–blue state map showing the country evenly divided — about all that was missing from yesterday's dramatic selection of Florida as the opponent for no. 1 Ohio State in the Bowl Championship Series title game on January 8 was Tim Russert and his dry-erase board.

The wait for yesterday's decisive human polls added an extra day of drama following a shocking Saturday that saw USC bounced from a date with Ohio State by its crosstown rival, UCLA. It's probably safe to assume that Roy Kramer, the former SEC commissioner who spearheaded the development of the BCS, never envisioned a day like yesterday.

It has been known for weeks that the BCS would not enjoy a matchup free of controversy this season. With Ohio State the sole undefeated, major-conference team, the primary question was how great would be the outcry from the schools that were left out. Poll voters and pundits alike appeared to embrace the candidacy of USC for the championship game following the Trojans' rout of Notre Dame last week, but when unranked UCLA pulled the upset, the second spot in the title game became a two-horse race between Florida (12–1) and Michigan (11–1).

Florida learned of USC's loss at halftime of the SEC championship game. Perhaps it was coincidence, but the news seemed to rattle the Gators, who saw a 17–7 halftime lead against Arkansas evaporate in the third quarter. But Florida rallied for a 10-point win, and speculation immediately began about whether the Gators would leapfrog idle Michigan into the second slot in the polls.

As for Michigan, its biggest sin may have been not playing the last two weeks while first USC and then Florida passed it in the BCS standings. But this was no computer snafu. Because of the narrow gap separating Michigan and Florida in the computer rankings, it was the human voters who put Florida in the title game.

It was not just the Gators' at-times ragged win over Arkansas that jumped them over Michigan. This was clearly a vote against Michigan — and against a rematch with Ohio State, who handed the Wolverines their only loss of the season on November 18 — as much as it was a vote for Florida, and although that violates the spirit of the BCS's goal of matching the two best teams regardless of conference affiliation, it's still understandable.

Rankled Michigan fans won't agree, but as controversies go, the snubbing of the Wolverines seems destined to rank below the BCS's greatest blunders: In 2001 and 2003, teams that were blown out in their final games and failed to win their conferences still qualified for the championship game. Though the BCS declined to make a rule change requiring championship-game participants to win their conferences, it seems those two scenarios — in which Nebraska and Oklahoma went on to lose the national title game — were on the minds of the voters who ultimately picked Florida over Michigan yesterday.

The Wolverines, of course, also lost their final regular season game and failed to win their conference. However, unlike Nebraska and Oklahoma, the loss was at no. 1 Ohio State and by just three points (although a late Michigan touchdown and two-point conversion made the game appear closer than it was).

Another past BCS failure also favored Florida. In 2004, Auburn went 12–0 and won the SEC title, but finished third behind fellow unbeatens USC and Oklahoma in the BCS standings. When USC destroyed Oklahoma in the Orange Bowl, the cries grew louder that Auburn had been wronged, especially for having gone undefeated in the powerful SEC.

Through reputation or fact, the SEC typically carries the label of the nation's toughest conference, and perhaps the voters who elevated Florida over Michigan had that Auburn situation in mind when they filled out their ballots and opted not to spurn the SEC a second time.

More than merely avoiding a game we've already seen, the thinking behind the voters' decision appears to have been that Michigan already had a crack at the Buckeyes, and that Florida had done enough to warrant a chance, even if many college football observers feel the Wolverines are a slightly better team than the Gators. It's difficult to interpret the polls any other way. A week ago, both polls maintained Michigan was a better team than Florida, but that changed while the Wolverines were sitting at home.

Because Michigan — unlike Auburn in 2004 — had a shot at the no. 1 team during the regular season, there is less mystery surrounding the Wolverines' exclusion. Of course, the topic will be revisited should Michigan beat USC in the Rose Bowl and Florida fail to be competitive against Ohio State.

Since the BCS has usually reacted to controversy by making changes, it's worth speculating whether the same might occur this off-season. The easiest change would be to eliminate from title-game consideration teams that did not win their conferences, which would have cleaned up three of the BCS's four biggest messes (including this year's). But even that change is no cure-all. Had that rule been in place this year, and had Florida lost to Arkansas and Rutgers beaten West Virginia, the field for the second spot in the championship game would have included teams with two losses (including Pac-10 champ USC coming off a loss), or a Rutgers squad ranked in the lower regions of the top 10.

In tabbing Florida over Michigan to face Ohio State, the BCS probably ended up with the less contentious matchup, but this still makes five times in the system's nine-year history that there has been a controversial selection. Given the BCS's task — to match two out of 119 teams Division I-A teams in a single championship contest without the benefit of a playoff to help narrow the field — this is hardly surprising.

There are those who believe that every BCS dispute brings us one step closer to a playoff system, but BCS controversy does nothing to lower the considerable logistical hurdles currently preventing a postseason tournament. Until then, we're stuck with a flawed system and dubious votes. Does that remind you of another Florida election of note?

Mr. Levine is a regular writer for FootballOutsiders.com.