After watching Alabama beat up LSU on Monday, many around the nation were wondering what might have been had Oklahoma State played the Crimson Tide.
While clearly flawed, the BCS matched the two best teams in college football to play for the national championship. Despite the overwhelming evidence, there were many who wanted to see Oklahoma State play LSU.
Some believe that a playoff system would eliminate a scenario where two teams from the same conference played for the national championship, but that simply isn’t true.
In fact, the likelihood that two teams from the same conference meet in the national championship game actually increase in a playoff format.
Even if there was a playoff system that resulted in an Alabama-Oklahoma State championship game, the Crimson Tide would have rolled just like they did against LSU.
Complaining about the lack of a playoff is fruitless considering that such a system could have easily led to the same Alabama-LSU title matchup.
All of this talk about a playoff isn’t about two teams from the same conference, it’s about two teams from the SEC playing for the national championship.
The bias against the SEC is at times humorous. But now that the conference has won six straight BCS national championships, some of the league’s critics are becoming absurd.
The L.A. Times Bill Dwyer provided a particularly asinine view of Monday’s title game, bemoaning the low-scoring affair by suggesting that Oklahoma State, Stanford, Oregon or USC would have fared better against the Crimson Tide.
“This was to be a showcase game for the mighty Southeastern Conference. Now that the entire country got a second look, before grabbing the remote for something more compelling, such as “Antiques Roadshow,” millions are left to wonder what all this SEC noise and Southern drooling and drawling is about. If Alabama and LSU are No. 1 and No. 2, where does one rank Oklahoma State, Stanford and Oregon? Even USC, had it not been banned from the club the last two years?”
Dwyer got one thing right in his inept analysis; the Southeastern Conference is indeed mighty.
The Oregon team Dwyer suggests could have given Alabama a run for their money got beat by 13 points in the season opener against LSU – the team that couldn’t score a point against the Crimson Tide on Monday.
The Ducks had their chances this season, as did Oklahoma State. The other 117 teams in the FBS had their chances and they all failed.
In the end, regardless of what anyone believes, it wouldn’t have mattered who Alabama played. And it doesn’t matter that the Crimson Tide play in the SEC.
Had Alabama been a member of any conference in college football, they would have played for a national championship because the Crimson Tide was the best team in the nation.
A playoff system wouldn’t have changed that.
With the BCS likely on the verge of making major revisions to the current format, it will provide the system’s detractors some measure of satisfaction.
The end results won’t be much different though.
A playoff system will prove incapable of eliminating the bias against the SEC because one or two teams from that conference will be in the mix to play for a national championship.
But a playoff system would prove to people like Bill Dwyer what some of us already know.
It doesn’t matter what system is used to crown college football’s national champion because a team from the mighty SEC has a better than 50 percent chance of winning.
And if the thought of seeing a team from the SEC win a seventh straight BCS national championship irks you, there’s bad news on the horizon.
LSU will be better next season than they were this year. Alabama will be strong again next season. Georgia, Arkansas, Auburn, South Carolina and Florida will have good teams as well.
Playoffs? Go ahead.
