Dear Alabama,

I still don’t believe your team deserved to play for the crystal ball over Oklahoma State, but the positive-minded man that I am has found something about the LSU-Alabama rematch for which to be thankful.

I know Rammer Jammer Nation will surely argue that their team’s dominant (yes, I certainly admit that it was a one-sided evening) win in the BCS Championship game is evidence enough that they belonged in the game. While I agree that they won convincingly, that win only proved that they performed well enough in that game, not that it performed well enough to deserve to play in it.

However, this game, and your win, did a wonderful job of shining the spotlight on a flawed system. It leaves two teams with identical records in the loss column and a tied head-to-head match-up, each having won in the opponent’s home state (although only LSU having won in the in the opponent’s home stadium). Alabama brings home the crystal ball simply for having won last — not most. LSU had one more win and a much more impressive resume than its opponent as it walked out of the stadium, however will be without a title simply because it was required to beat a lower-ranked team twice while only having to lose to them once.

Alabama head coach Nick Saban celebrates after winning Monday.

I thank you for that.

I thank you because while there have been several years in which the call for change seemed loud and obvious, I don’t see one any louder or more obvious than this one.

The ridiculousness of this rematch and the system which allowed — or rather, caused — it, surely will lead to changes to the way a champion and championship contenders are determined.

One needs to look no further than the final human polls (2/3 of the BCS formula) to see the system’s ridiculousness. One can look at how each coach voted in the Coaches Poll (1/3 of the BCS formula) which makes it easy to see that it’s a broken system. Four coaches had Oklahoma State ranked fourth and one coach had them ranked fifth. A team that has a logical argument to be ranked second, is ranked fourth and fifth? One coach who ranked them fourth admitted earlier this season that he doesn’t watch very many other teams around the country play and had a big stake in where Oklahoma State fell — Nick Saban. Do we still think the human voters are taking the ranking of teams seriously? One coach didn’t rank Georgia, SEC East Champion and 10-3, in the Top 25 at all and one had them ranked as high as seventh! Four coaches had Arkansas State in the Top 25.

There’s a reason why the AP removed itself from the BCS formula in 2005: it didn’t want to be associated with such a terrible system. A system which goes out of it’s way to have six computers rank teams free from emotion or bias and even removes the highest and lowest rankings of those six computers in an attempt at fairness, gives human voters 66% control of where teams are ranked. 33% of the BCS formula come from votes cast by coaches who don’t have the time or inclination to become informed about teams outside of their realm of interest. I don’t think any of us really understand the Harris Poll.

However, change is coming. I know it.

I thank you for that.

I don’t know when or exactly what the changes will be, but I foresee at least one, if not several, of the following changes in the future:

1. A playoff system of some kind to determine a champion. The FBS is the only level of college football that is without one and is the only major sport that doesn’t have one.
2. Removal of bowl allegiances to specific conferences allowing bowls to choose from the best teams overall rather than being limited to conferences.
3. Removal of the automatic qualifying system. This has been considered for a while, and I think it’s time to happen. It’s time to stop these conference biases and let teams that have great records, regardless of conference, have an opportunity to be rewarded for it. It’s easy to mock them, if you don’t have to play them.
4. Changes to the BCS Bowl selection protocol. Firstly, let’s remove the two teams per conference rule. Arkansas was punished for having a great season in a division that had a great year just because there is a rule that only two teams per conference can play in a BCS bowl game. Furthermore, there will be changes to the way at-large selections are made. There’s no logical explanation why Virginia Tech or Michigan played in the Sugar Bowl over Boise State, Kansas State, and Baylor outside of money. Fairness was clearly not a consideration, nor was ranking.
5. Removal or change in the BCS formula. At the very least, we have to either remove or drastically change the Coaches Poll. Coaches don’t seriously evaluate enough teams to fairly assess the top 25 teams, nor do they have the time to do so. Additionally, they are naturally biased voters. What good do the impartial computers do for the system if the results of their rankings can be so easily overridden by a human majority?

(I’d love for there to be a change to the number of bowl games we have, but given that this is a money-driven business, I don’t see it. With 35 bowls, mediocre teams are being rewarded for being mediocre. Teams that have won the same amount of games as they lost get rewarded. This year, a team (UCLA) that lost more games than it lost, got rewarded. I think we need to reduce the number of bowls significantly and raise the bar of bowl eligibility. Yes, I’m aware my Buckeyes were 6-6 and played in a bowl this season, and that’s a prime reason for me to feel this way. They did nothing to deserve being rewarded despite fighting through a suspension-riddled season. I realize we live in an age in which participation trophies are given out like Halloween candies, but there shouldn’t be participation bowls and that’s where we’re leaning when we let 70 of 120 teams play in them.)

I know the BCS committee is meeting this week and I’m sure they are considering these changes. Yes, they meet every year and discuss changes. However, this BCS bowl season was a disaster. One could make the argument that at least four teams were given unfair circumstances and three teams were given undeserved opportunities. LSU, Oklahoma State, Arkansas and any two of the three aforementioned teams that were excluded from the Sugar Bowl belong in the former category, while Alabama, Virginia Tech, and Michigan in the latter.

So I congratulate you, Alabama, on another Tidal title (hmmm, I should trademark that!) and on a terrific game on 1/9/12. It was the first BCS bowl game shutout. You are the first team to win a national championship without winning your conference since Minnesota did it in 1936. You should be proud of yourself, not only for being champions for the second time in three seasons, but for also being a big reason change is coming.

Thank you!

Sincerely,
Christopher R. Williams — A Passionate College Football Fan
@Cdubisms