How many teams that didnt win their conference have played for the BCS title?

And also, how many times did that team not even win it's division?

Is a product of two thIngs on this board one LSU fans wanting a cake in the champ game and not playing the only team with a snowballs chance in he'll of winning and two subconciously it delegitimizes their 2007 argument for jumping GA when they were playing better ball at the end of the season, but to be honest whether there has ever been a nonconf champ go or not doesn't matter It is supposed to be the two best teams and each year is different.

How many teams have played in the nc that haven't won their conference and are playing the team that did win their conference?

The only thing missing from the 2003 BCS formula is margin of victory. Try again.

quote:

---

The only thing missing from the 2003 BCS formula is margin of victory. Try again.

---

NOT TRUE AT ALL - they changed the formula for the '04 season to be 1/3 AP, 1/3 Coaches, 1/3 Computer, later replacing the AP with the Harris at the request of the AP.

I'll have to find the link to what it was before that.

LINK

1997:

quote:

---

A new mathematical formula, the BCS standings, was created to determine the participants. The standings consisted of four elements: subjective polls of writers and coaches, the average of three computer rankings (Sagarin, Seattle Times and New York Times), the teams' records, and a strength-of-schedule index based on the records of a team's opponents and its opponents' opponents.

---

2001:

quote:

---

To further emphasize the importance of a team's strength of schedule, a fifth component, "quality wins," was added to the standings formula. Teams with regular-season victories over opponents ranked in the top 15 of the BCS standings received bonus points-from 1.5 points for a victory over the top-ranked team to 0.1 points for a victory over the team ranked No. 15.

---

2004:

quote:

---

The strength-of-schedule, team-record and quality-win components were removed, inasmuch as those elements were also reflected in the computer rankings. The standings formula was adjusted to include the average of the computer rankings, the AP media poll and the USA Today coaches poll, each weighted one-third. The New York Times computer rankings were removed, and so the standings formula would be the average of six computer rankings. A team's highest and lowest computer rankings would be discarded when figuring a team's computer poll average. Points would be assigned in inverse order of ranking from 1-25; the four remaining computer scores would be averaged and the total would be calculated as a percentage of 100. The standings formula would no longer average the weekly rank of each team in the media and coaches' polls. Instead, a team would be evaluated based on the voting points it received in each poll-a team's AP score would be its points in the poll divided by a possible 1,800 voting points (1,500 voting points in the coaches poll.)

---

quote:

---

If I remember correctly Oklahoma lost it's conference game to Nebraska in 2003 but still went on to play in the BCSCG.

---

K-State beat Oklahoma.

quote:

---

I don't remember the other.

---

Nebraska played in the 2001 without winning the Big 12 or winning the north.

As a UGA fan, if Bama gets a shot when not even appearing in the SECCG, I would personally lead the pitchfork brigade to ESPN HQ after they made it their life's work to screw UGA over at the end of 2007.

quote:

---

Nebraska played in the 2001 without winning the Big 12 or winning the north.

---

... AND the selection process at the time kept Colorado, the Big 12 champion, from getting an automatic bid. They did end up getting selected by the Fiesta Bowl though.