Paper Champions

I know, I'm a day late to the party. Yes, Alabama won a football game yesterday. Yes, they embarrassed LSU on the field yesterday. Are they national champions? Absolutely not.

I did not watch any of the "national championship" game yesterday. I didn't even watch any highlights. Any information I got out of it was gleaned from Twitter or Facebook pretty much. I had no interest in watching the game, and some people were the same way, with the ratings going down 8 percent from a year ago. There were still a large number of TV's tuned into the game, but I do have to wonder if the people who chose to tune it out had the same reasoning as I did.

About half an hour to an hour before kickoff, I was checking my Twitter and saw a number of tweets about the upcoming game, and that prompted me to tweet, "Too many tweets about the BCS Championship Game." I was a little more detailed on Facebook.

"LSU-Alabama is not a national title game. It's an exhibition rematch between two SEC teams decided by greedy conference commissioners, biased coaches' polls, and poorly written computer formulas. Call me when there's a playoff to decide that these two teams should play for a real title as opposed to this sham of a paper championship. Death to the BCS!"

Shortly after, I was asked by a friend who I thought belonged in that game. Don't get me wrong. Based on the current system, LSU deserved to be here. Alabama had a case, but so did teams like Oklahoma State or Oregon. I know both teams lost a game as well, but both won their conferences. Alabama didn't even play for the conference title. Yes, their one loss was to LSU in overtime. But I can't support a championship game decided the way it is.

I noticed last night that the NCAA and the BCS were in talks about possible changes to the postseason format. I thought I saw something earlier today about the committee deciding against even a plus-one. Big mistake. Even a plus-one is an improvement over the current system. Here's my favorite quote from BCS executive director Bill Hancock:

"Whatever we do, we have to protect the regular season. I think the larger the playoff field, the more damage to the regular season."

So, let me get this straight. You want to preserve the regular season, yet totally disregard it with your decisions for the national champion? They BCS wants to claim that "Every game counts", except LSU-Bama I didn't seem to count because they got a rematch. Rick Reilly argued, "How does winning 1 of 2 make you a champion?" and "They're going to play a rubber game of this best-of-3 LSU-Ala thing, right?"

As far as I'm concerned, the Tide won a glorified exhibition game. By all indications, they looked impressive in doing it. They might be the best team in the nation. I don't know that for sure though. Had they gone through a gauntlet of teams like this one or this one, then beat LSU or whoever, yes, you could call them a champion.

Simply put, if you want to have the best two teams play for the real national title, you need a playoff. Include the teams that win their conferences, and add in deserving "at-large" teams that usually will end up only losing a game or 2 all year. Have them go at each other for four weeks until only one is left standing. If it brings two SEC teams together again, fine. They will have earned it. But don't crown a "national champion" based on the current system.