Now, one final scenario to ponder: Not the reversal of a result but rather the lack of a result. Colorado and Washington State were scheduled to play in Pullman, Wash., on Sept. 15, but the game was canceled after the events of Sept. 11. Washington State replaced it with a game against I-AA Montana State, while Colorado just settled for an 11-game regular season (instead of the scheduled 12).

IF that game had been played, and Colorado had won, the Buffaloes would be at least one spot higher in at least one of the BCS computers and would be preparing for the Rose Bowl right now. If Washington State had won, it would have improved the schedule strength of Oregon, hurt the schedule strength of Nebraska and eliminated Colorado from this current equation. It's tough to say if the impact would have been significant enough to vault the Ducks over the Huskers in the final BCS Standings, but there is a possibility that Nebraska might have been out of luck today had the Buffaloes and Cougars actually taken the field on Sept. 15.

Changes for 2001
The changes made to the BCS formula before this season definitely had an impact on Sunday's final numbers. The two adjustments were (1) decreasing the impact of margin of victory within the computers by reducing the number of computers that consider that element from seven to four and (2) introducing bonus points for beating a team ranked in the top 15 of the BCS.

If not for those new measures, Nebraska would have had a commanding lead in second place over both Colorado and Oregon. The Buffs had an advantage of 1.8 bonus points over the Huskers, while the Ducks had an average ranking of seventh in the four computers that do consider margin of victory.

Under last season's format, which included the Dunkel Index and New York Times computer as well as a previous version of the Billingsley and Massey ratings (dropping only the worst score, rather than the best AND worst), the computer averages would have been slightly different. Using this, and taking away bonus points, here's how the BCS top four would have looked:

This year's BCS top four
(Using last year's formula)

Team	Poll avg.	Comp. avg.	Sched. str.	Losses	Total
1. Miami	1	1.00	.72	0	2.72
2. Nebraska	4	2.43	.56	1	7.99
3. Colorado	3	4.29	.08	2	9.37
4. Oregon	2	5.71	1.24	1	9.95

Playing favorites?
Even though the Oregon Ducks have many reasons to be upset and have many solid arguments for why they should be playing in the Rose Bowl instead of either Nebraska or Colorado, "East Coast Bias" is not a term we should be hearing. The concept often has merit in college football talk, but in this case, it should be pointed out that the one human element of the BCS -- the poll voters -- recognize Oregon as the second-best team to Miami. It was the computers, not the people, who placed the Ducks out of the running.

One more 'What if'
After its loss to Boise State on Oct. 19, Fresno State slipped out of college football's public consciousness for most of (if not all of) the remainder of the season. The Bulldogs lost again at Hawaii the following week, but went on to finish the year with an 11-2 record -- basically two plays shy of being undefeated.

Fresno's season-opening win at Colorado ultimately kept the Buffs out of Pasadena, but given the strength of that victory, where might Fresno State now be sitting in the BCS had it gone 13-0? Earlier, people were wondering whether the Bulldogs could crack the BCS top six and automatically be included in a major bowl. There is absolutely no doubt that would have happened.

But how high could they have climbed? If the Bulldogs had gone unbeaten, they would certainly be ranked ahead of Colorado in both polls, which would mean either second or third. Their schedule strength would be slightly better than what it now is, and they would be receiving a substantial bonus for the win over the Buffaloes. The only element of the formula that is difficult to project is the computer rankings.

Assuming an average ranking of third in the polls (behind Oregon and ahead of Colorado) and an average computer rating of 3.5, Fresno State would have finished with a final BCS score of 7.14 -- good enough for second place. If the Bulldogs had been ranked second in either poll, their chances of finishing that high would have been even better.

This is a very educated guess, but we will never know for sure what would have happened had Fresno State gone 13-0. There is little doubt the Bulldogs would have been in the Rose Bowl chase with Nebraska, Colorado and Oregon, and there is certainly a CHANCE they might have faced Miami for the national title. And it wouldn't even have required a lawsuit.

Mission accomplished?
The question has already been asked many times: Did the BCS fail?

Failure, of course, is dependent upon the original goal of the operation. The goal of the BCS is not to match the top two teams in the polls, nor is it to match the two teams that are playing best at the end of the season. The purpose is simply to identify the two best teams over the course of the entire season.

Did it do that? It is difficult to say. With a lack of common opposition, nobody can really be sure that Nebraska is better than Oregon or Illinois or Maryland. Then again, nobody can be sure that they aren't. The only thing we really know is that Colorado was better than Nebraska at the end of the year -- certainly they were on Nov. 23.

But if you look strictly at the traditional methods of evaluating college football teams -- poll rankings, win-loss records and conference titles -- there is no doubt that Oregon should be second to Miami. Unfortunately for the Ducks, that won't get them to Pasadena this season.

Brad Edwards is a college football researcher for ESPN. Inside the BCS appears weekly.