I'm a big fan of the Final 4 idea for crowning a college football national champion. It’s logistically logical, better than the current system, still creates quality debate throughout the season, and Phil Steele annually breaks down why the 5th ranked team, since the beginning of the BCS in 1999, has never had a valid argument to be included in the Final 4. But given the current system you only get a final 2.

Tonight, Robert Smith and Chris Fowler both stated they have TCU #2 on their respective ballots, ahead of Auburn. To me that is absolutely ridiculous but maybe they honestly feel as if TCU would beat Auburn. Craig James, who most people dislike strongly, laughed at both of them just as he’s done every week. They did later acknowledged that a 13-0 Auburn would definitely be in the final 2. The part that doesn’t make sense to me, and gives college football post season bashers more ammunition, is the different rules for different teams. Last week, on the same show, with the same analysts, all present agreed that if Alabama were to win out they deserved a spot in the national championship game. Tonight, all of the same analysts agreed that a one loss Auburn or LSU team would have no legitimate argument to be included in the national championship game even if they won the SEC. I'm betting that if Florida was sitting with one loss they would probably view them the same way as they did Alabama.

Makes no sense and brings to light the absurdity of rankings and general thought processes of some of the people who have a vote. A Boise-TCU national championship could actually serve college football for the better in the long run. But more than anything, I have no idea why ESPN has continuously shown overwhelming support for Boise all year and now TCU.