I actually LIKE the BCS

Disclaimer: I am an unabashed U of M fan and recent alum.

The latest BCS Standings have just come out, in case you didn't notice. A number of things jump out at me, the first being that Michigan has a near-perfect score from the computers. That's right, 5 of the 6 computers have Michigan in first, with the other one having Michigan a close second. There are two reactions to this discrepancy with the human polls, in which Ohio State has all but one of the 63 first place votes in the coaches poll:

1) Omigod, the BCS is B.S., why do we have stupid computers deciding who goes to the Championship game? Just let humans pick them, I don't trust computers to decide the champion, even though I trust them for virtually everything else in my life.

2) No one may want to admit it, but the coaches poll and the AP poll are biased, and the computers, are not (to my knowledge)

Why do I think this? And why will no one else say this? First of all, computers are an easy target, as they cannot respond to criticism. If a team like Rutgers is number 2 in the polls but doesn't play in the title game, their coach and fans could blast computers, and there will be no response. It is an easy excuse. When they are the victim of a biased pollster, they are less likely to bash it, but are more justified to do so, since while the computer formulas are not perfect, they at least are applied equally to every team.
So let's run down some of the ways in which the human voters let emotions, prejudices, or just plain stupidity get in the way that computers do not:

1. "It's better to get your loss in early than to lose in November." I'm so sick of hearing announcers say this. Why should it matter when you lose? If Michigan loses to Ohio State, is that loss any worse than when Texas lost to them? Of course not, but in the current system, pollsters appear to slot teams and move them up or down each week by comparing the last week's ranking, so if you lose early, you have an advantage as you can move up each week after that loss. Teams that lose in the last week are bound to drop a few spots, and have no time to catch back up. Michigan is guaranteed to drop a couple of spots if they lose to Ohio State, but if there is no other undefeated team, and they have only lost to the number one team on the road, shouldn't they be the number 2 team? Especially considering they are the team that gave Notre Dame and Wisconsin their only losses this year?
2. Pre-season polls matter too much. This is related to point number one, as a team that starts off the season high in the polls has an advantage over the other teams before a game is even played. If Michigan had been the number one team going in, they would be number one right now, no question in my mind.
3. Emotions get in the way. Any Michigan fan can tell you that they were robbed the undisputed championship because coaches were sentimental about it being Osborne's last year. Sometimes they play politics and put teams lower than is reasonable to try to influence the results.
4. Name Recognition. Teams like Notre Dame and Texas are sometimes ranked higher than the Arkansai of the world because they have been dynasties. This is not fair.

What would I do to fix it? For starters, I don't think a single poll should be released until the non-conference season is over. This will help to mitigate the bias towards teams at the top. Also, I think the voters should start with a clean slate every week, and not be afraid to move a team up too high after a big win or down too low after a big loss. Or in the case of this year's U o M/OSU game, not at all.

Why do people keep complaining about the BCS? In the absence of a playoff, this system is as good as it gets in my opinion. The polls are a factor, along with unbiased computer formulas. It is a system of checks and balances, much like our federal government. Sure, it seems ridiculous that someone like Katherine Harris can have a vote in Congress, just like it seems ridiculous that Ohio State is number 5 in one of the computer formulas, but for every Katherine Harris there is a John Conyers, so it all balances out.