rumors but nothing official? If they are playing a boycott, I think that would be cutting off your nose to spite your face.

You're right - they were invited to play the game you mention. But they can't make it to the championship game

select Alabama in, FSU out..based partly on FSU not having a QB healthy enough to compete. Too, Alabama fresh off beating Georgia..my two cents..

Just pick the top 4 money makers and play two games.

Even with their best QB hurt they have backups, real shame a 13 & 0 team gets no bowl game.

I would have thought Georgia also deserved a spot, but there's only four spots, so some are going to feel they were screwed.Expanded playoff next year will fix all that.

That was apparently the rationale for keeping FSU out of the playoffs; they are not the same team without him.

As I understand, they are playing Georgia in a bowl. Although undefeated, the loss of their QB a few games back affected their final ranking.

Which we won for the ACC championship.

The BCS committee's prognostications about which teams would have beaten other teams are nonsense. Let the teams with the best records play. If the committee can predict wins and losses, why even bother to have a playoff? That's why they started the playoff system, and why the playoff system is being expanded: so a biased committee could no longer select a national champion.

Both are BS. We beat the two SEC teams we played. We also won against the 14th ranked team for the ACC championship with our 3rd string quarterback.

The real reason? Money and Alabama.

They should be ranked #1. Be great if the winner of the bowl game they thought they would
be in would agree to play them a week or two later. More money for everybody.

is that the committee legitimately thought there were 4 better teams. And I completely understand FSU feeling like they got hosed - but at the end of the day, were they going to beat Michigan or Bama - neutral field, on the day the selection was made? I don't know the answer to that (and neither does anyone else) - but that is the decision the committee is charged with making. And won/loss record is only part of that determination.

Sorry, Canes. It might blow - but I don't necessarily think it was a big 'fix' or conspiracy.
NCAA has its problems (and its history) - but in this case ... Chances are you just weren't the best team at the end of the season.

Edit: and as several have pointed out - they did get a nice bowl bid. Just not the bowl playoffs.

They are the "Seminoles"
The U of Miami are the "Hurricanes"

As my alma played both (and cordially hated each by turns) - - - - - - - - - - - - -

WU had a far lower strength of schedule than FSU, but it feels like they git picked because they were undefeated.
So, undefeated in the PAC12 means a #2 ranking, but undefeated in the ACC means "tough luck"? The Math isn't matching.
In addition, I get that because Texas beat Alabama they had to slot them higher, (i guess, but SEC vs. BIG 12 makes that iffy) but why Alabama at 4? Any realistic belief that WA would beat AL?
Michigan got a secondary punishment in this. And, I would think an Alabama/Texas rematch would be bonkers ratings.
Actually, I think this committee just bungled their way through this.