Just more California whining about things that are the result of their own shortcomings.
I don't like Oklahoma a bit, since they are major Texas opponents - especially this year. I really enjoy seeing them lose. I have no particular reason to either like or dislike USC, other than that I occasionally like to poke fun at the granola crowd. But, as much as I like to see OU loose, I have to admit that they were the better team. USC had a much easier schedule than either OU or LSU and probably would not have been in the running, at all, had their schedule had been as tough as that of the other two schools.
But, the key is that the deciding factors were determined long before the season started and programmed into the computer, which is entirely impartial and which rates all factors evenly, unlike humans, who naturally give more weight to what happened yesterday, than something that happened months ago. Coaches, sports writers and in fact, all humans, are susceptible to fading memory and to letting their emotions and personal favorites affect their votes. Fortunately, we have a computer to deal with those human shortcomings. As a result, the Sugar Bowl will be a much better game this year.
A computer weights all factors, exactly as it is told and gives the answer, based only upon those pre-programmed parameters - no favorites, no emotions, no fading memory - just pure facts. Of course, the granola crowd out there in California, always seems to have trouble with facts, when they don't fit their pre-conceived notions.
I know how it feels to have a local team that is almost championship material. I'm from Houston, where we used to watched the Oilers and Astros consistently come up bridesmaids, but never a bride. The granola crowd, on the other hand, can't deal with the fact that USC just wasn't championship material this year, so they will whine about it, in the hope that the NCAA will reprogram the computer to favor them. After all, California is a state that likes set-asides and other preferences for the lower performers.
"pre-programmed" is the key word. The computers are only as good as what they've been programmed to spit out. If they were so infallible, why do they not spit out the exact same results? Why do they need six different computer polls that are all at odds with each other?
Before the Nebraska debacle (they were pummeled like Saddam Hussein 62-? by Colorado and still played for the title) a few years ago, there were eight computers and, in mid-September, they all had different #1 teams. The computer based in Gainesville, FL had Florida #1, the computer based in Seattle had Washington #1, the computer based in Oklahoma had Oklahoma #1, the computer based in Southern California had UCLA #1. No favorites??? Hardly.
Question the wisdom of pollsters, sure but also question what spits out of a computer. I know because it's part of my job to question what spits out.