Please explain the whole Bowl picture

[Thing]

The rankings appear to be like this:
1. USC
2. LSU
3. Oklahoma
4. Michigan

except for the BCS.  Because of that, LSU plays OK for the championship and USC plays Michigan to be the bridesmaid.  Shouldn't #1 play #2 for the championship?

[DarkMinion]

The BCS rankings go:

1. Oklahoma
2. LSU
3. USC
4. Michigan

Which is why OU/LSU are playing in the Sugar Bowl.  Now USC will play Michigan and Kansas State will play whoever.

[Grok]

Right.  The AP and Coaches polls are just two components of the BCS system.  Sagarin says Miami(OH) is #3 ... should we get upset that they're not in the Rose Bowl?

[Thing]

It is getting clearer (i think) now that I've read a few articles on it.
The BCS contract expires after 2005.  Do you think it will get renewed?

[DarkMinion]

Maybe, they're considering having a playoff of the two top bowls next year.  If that satisfies the majority of people their contract may get renewed.

It's all about the money.

[Grok]

Right again.  Thing, don't get confused about Division I-A.  There is no "championship" game regardless of what the BCS tells you.  Only the NCAA can provide such a game, and they do not currently sanction the BCS championship game.

If there were a playoff, the only thing we really care about is getting the top two teams in the playoffs.  There is no controversy about "but what about #5?" as some people would say if we had a 4-team playoff.

Take this year for instance, if we had a 4-team playoff, the 3 teams that legitimately think they should be in the final game would each be included.  Looking at the last  decade, no legitimate top-two team would've been left out of a 4-team playoff.  In other words, we never ranked a contender #5 at the end of the regular season.