In reaction to perceived injustices in last season's college football national championship race, BCS coordinator John Swofford announced some revisions to the formula which will decide the 2001 championship game participants.

The BCS Rankings will now attempt to diminish the impact of victory margin and reward a head-to-head win over a fellow contender. Last season, once-beaten Florida State (the NCAA leader in scoring margin) reached the national title game instead of once-beaten Miami (Fla.) or once-beaten Washington. Miami had beaten Florida State in the regular season, and Washington had beaten Miami.

A team's average computer rating is one of four components of the BCS Rankings, and there were some noteworthy changes made to this element of the formula. The New York Times ratings and the Dunkel Index are being replaced by two new computers, while Richard Billingsley and Kenneth Massey have both eliminated scoring margin as a factor in their rankings.

In addition, the computer average will now be figured by eliminating both the highest and lowest ranking for each team and averaging the other six. Last season, only the worst ranking was dropped.

Margin of victory will now become somewhat less of a factor in the championship race because it will only be calculated by four of the eight computers. Last year, seven of the eight considered victory margin as part of their ratings. It is difficult, however, to project whether this adjustment will have a significant impact on the overall standings.

The BCS and the American Football Coaches Association are hopeful that the move will lessen the incentive to run up the score against an overmatched opponent, but it won't entirely eliminate that possibility. Half of the computers still do credit a sizeable win, and it would be naive to think that human poll voters won't continue to be influenced by big numbers.

2000 Scoring Margin
BCS Rank	Team	W-L	Scoring Margin
2	Florida State	11-1	32.2
3	Miami (Fla.)	10-1	27.2
4	Washington	10-1	9.7

The biggest controversy last season, though, was not the slight advantage Florida State gained in the rankings from its impressive scoring margin. The real outcry came from the fact that the No. 2 team in the polls (Miami) was jumped in the BCS Standings by No. 3 in the polls (FSU) -- a team it had beaten on the field just eight weeks earlier. And there was even more outrage on the West Coast because No. 4 Washington was ranked behind Miami, leaving the BCS no choice but to revamp the formula.

Here is their solution to the head-to-head issue. Each week, a team will get "bonus points" for the victories it has over any teams ranked in the BCS Top 15. A win over the No. 1 team is worth 1.5 points, a win over the No. 2 team is worth 1.4 -- all the way down to a tenth of a point for beating No. 15. These points are subtracted from that team's total score to give an adjusted score (Remember, the lower the score, the better).

The bonus points for a given win will fluctuate as that opponent moves in the overall rankings, meaning that the final week of the standings is still the only significant one. It is irrelevant where a team ranks at the time you beat them; it only matters where they rank at the end of the regular season.

This measure alone would have moved Miami into the No. 2 BCS position ahead of Florida State last season. The Hurricanes finished .32 points behind the Seminoles in the actual standings, but would have been almost a full point ahead with the new bonus. Miami had wins over No. 2 FSU and No. 5 Virginia Tech, which would have taken 2.5 points off their final total. Florida State would have accumulated only 1.3 bonus points for wins over No. 7 Florida, No. 13 Georgia Tech and No. 15 Clemson.

New Bonus Points Application to Last Year's Final Standings
Team	Fianl pts.	Bonus pts.	Adjusted points
1. Oklahoma	3.30	1.90	1.40*
2. Florida State	5.37	1.3	4.07
3. Miami (Fla.)	5.69	2.5	3.19*
4. Washington	10.67	2.3	8.37

* Two lowest scores (Oklahoma, Miami) play for national title.
Note: Oklahoma only gets bonus for one win over Kansas State.

According to Swofford, these new revisions to the formula would not have changed the championship matchup in either 1998 or 1999.

The approach of awarding teams for wins over top-notch competition should affect non-conference scheduling in the coming years, which means more exciting games for the fans of college football. But for this season and next, it could work against a contender like Virginia Tech, which has only one projected top-15 team on its schedule.

Two special scenarios to keep in mind, though: a win over a top-15 team in an "added" August game will not render bonus points; nor will a second victory over an opponent in a conference championship game. A conference title game win over a new opponent, however, will get bonus points.

The BCS has certainly made a strong attempt to remedy two controversial issues from a year ago, and for that, they should be commended. But could there still be another situation that needs to be evaluated?

"We don't see anything on the radar screen right now," said Swofford. "But at this time last year, the two items we are now addressing were not really on the radar screen either."

Brad Edwards is a college football researcher for ESPN and one of the few people who actually understands the BCS. Edwards will provide a weekly analysis of the BCS rankings during the season.