I Can't Believe I'm Saying This. . .

I'm a College Football fan. I love it. The Pros just don't seem to have as much at stake when compared to these young men. There's always plenty of drama and more than enough excitement on the fields of play. I repeat, I'm a College Football fan.

I am NOT a fan of BCS. Yes, there is a difference (by the way, I think the acronym should stand for Biased Championship Series instead of Bowl Championship Series). First, when it comes to College football, the results are undisputable. The scores are what they are. The records are what they are. When it comes to BCS, it seems the teams who got those records and scores aren't taken seriously. We have several panels of "experts" who "choose" who gets ranked what, and all of that is based (supposedly) on computer statistics. I'd really like to see what those experts and stats say. I'd bet anything it would confirm my desire to take the "C" out of BCS.

Isn't an undefeated season a good thing? Isn't it also hard thing to come by? Utah certainly thinks so this season. So why, I ask, is Florida the National Champions? A team who lost a game during the regular season?

Ok, I know the lame answers to the last question. Utah had a weaker schedule in weaker conference, no one has ever heard of them, blah, blah, blah, blah. You know what, I think I'll remove that "C" now. BS! Utah did NOT have a weaker schedule. They beat 4 ranked teams for crying out loud (teams that were still ranked when the final AP came in earlier today)! And what's all this about the Mountain West Conference being weak. How many of those quality non-conference teams played a Mountain West opponent this season? Do you know how well they did ? (I'll wait while you look up the results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . found them yet? Surprised?) Do you know how competitive it is amongst the Mountain West teams alone? Utah fought well and went undefeated in its own conference.

Why is Florida being given the #1 spot? Is it because they have more national coverage, a former Heisman winner, a previous National Championship (that was also decided by the BS)? Is it because they are a team from a BCS conference and Utah is team from a non-BCS conference? Who the Sam Hill determines who gets to be BCS and who doesn't? If we're going to be fair, shouldn't ALL teams have a chance at the BCS?

I won't deny the Gators had an admirable season. . . a season with 1 loss. Utah didn't have any losses, and yet they are behind them in the final ranking. I thought the purpose of playing college football was to determine who the best team is? So it seems to me that the best way to determine who is the best should be the best play each other, not a bunch of BS officials voting on it or biasly choosing who is even eligible to have a chance at it.

That is my exact proposal. Let the 2 best teams play each other. If Florida deserves to be #1, then they should be able to beat Utah, making the Utes undefeated season terminated by a worthy opponent. If Florida's fate turns out like Alabama's (who, by the way, have a new found respect for a MWC team), then the argument is laid to rest in favor of Utah. And, heaven forbid, we just might stop all the BS.

By the way, I'm a BYU fan. I know it's against my beliefs to be rooting for the Utes (by the way, if I hear their fight song one more time I'm going to vomit--it's that bad). But I also believe in fairness. The Utes beat BYU and every other Mountain West team fair and square. Why shouldn't they be given the same chance with the rest of teams out there? With a slight wince but a passionate voice, I say "Go Utes! Stop the BS!"