Damn...Someone Has to Write About the BCS!

So, I am sitting in DC watching the excruciatingly long BCS Selection Show (Redskins-Ravens hasn't started yet), and I began to think that I should stop complaining about the BCS and embrace it.

What did he just say?

Yep, you heard me right. I am embracing the BCS. Understand that I am still hoping for a playoff system -- I even have a format developed. I just recognize that it is not going to happen.

Now, Pepster would be the first to ask how I arrived at this new place in my life. I will tell you that it was not easy. I actually had to do some research. And I hate doing research when I am not in the office. I would much rather just wing it and likely be wrong.

Anyway, here is how I got here:

1. The Big 12 South. Okay, it bugs me to no end that Texas was left out of the Big 12 Championship. And I was the first person screaming about the f&*king BCS screwing me out of a chance to see what I think is one of the three best teams in the country compete for a mythical National Championship. Only, it isn't the BCS that is at fault here...It is the f&*king Big 12!

What kind of conference finds itself in a position to let sportswriters, AD's, and computers determine who had the better regular season in division?

Well actually all of the major conferences do to some degree.

Damn!

And I thought I was onto something here. But come to find out, every major conference with a championship game has a tiebreaker step that goes to the BCS standings. I understand the reason for this. A conference would always want to put a team with the best opportunity to play in the BCS title game in it's conference championship.

Seriously though, could you ever imagine the NFL letting sportswriters determine who gets into the playoffs? No, they go to a coin flip -- you know, like real men.

2. The purpose of the BCS. Here is what really flipped me. I always forget that the sole purpose of the five game arrangement that is the Bowl Championship Series is to ensure that the #1 and #2 teams in country (based on polls and computers) play each other in a bowl game.

You know what? I can get with this.

It is not so long ago that we suffered with bowl games that were rigidly tied to conference affiliations. If Oklahoma and Florida were one and two in 1991, we would never know who was the better of the two since one would have been in the Orange Bowl and the other would have been in the Sugar Bowl.

Those days really sucked.

Quite honestly, prior to 1998, you had to hope that USC or Ohio State or Michigan wasn't any good because you wouldn't have seen them either. The Rose Bowl hadn't joined yet. So a Texas - USC match up could not have happened and those Fantasy Football bitches -- better known as Leinart, Young and Bush -- could never have put on the show they did.

So I embrace what the BCS for its intended purpose. I didn't care that Utah finished #6 in the country and neither should you. It is only important for those soon-to-be sun poisoned Utes fans that they get a slightly bigger payday than they would have gotten by excepting that Music City Bowl bid.

So now that I have established why I am embracing the BCS, let me tell you what I hate. I hate that the two best teams in the country will not be playing for the mythical national championship.

This is my opinion. It likely differs from most all "experts." And I will not argue about it.

In my opinion, the three best teams in the country are --in no particular order -- Florida, USC and Texas. Period. Note that I did not say Oklahoma. That's right. I think Oklahoma is a fraud and I will lay that case out at a later date.

So, my problem isn't with the BCS per se, it is with college football administrators that have accepted a system that penalizes one of the best defenses I have EVER seen because it plays in the PAC 10. My problem is accepting a system that does not reward your regular season; it rewards your last game.

Consider this: Why is losing to the 4th ranked team in the country worse today than in week 2 of the season? I am told that it is better to lose early than late (and the polls bear this out), but why does that make sense? Don't we know more about a team later in a season than we do at the beginning? Aren't you losing to better teams later than earlier?

I would argue that Alabama losing to Florida in the SEC Championship Game is a better loss than Florida losing to Ole Miss at home in September...Ole Miss Sucks!

So please...Tell me again why we don't want a college football playoff?