You saw it. You saw it last month, it wasn’t pretty and you most certainly do not want to see it again.
No, I’m not talking about Herman Cain waxing professorial on Libya or the inability of the congressional “super committee” to do, well, anything to stem the perpetually growing national debt. I’m talking about what really matters. I’m talking about LSU-Alabama.
On Nov. 5 the whole world saw the two best college football teams in America play, and it saw one team—the visiting team, no less—prove that it’s in a class by itself.
Why then, one might ask, would it be necessary to see these two teams play again for the National Championship, especially in what would amount to a home game for LSU? In the age of the BCS, when the title game is debated and scrutinized for five painfully long football-free weeks, we want something to look forward to, not the second helping of a 9-6 good defense/bad offense jugger-not that led to more naps than excitement. Right?
The BCS, as has been the case since its inception in 1998, has presented itself as a system predicated on having the two best teams, regardless of conference affiliation or a previous meeting that season, compete in its biggest game. Unfortunately for the spread offense and vertical passing geeks out there, the two best teams this season are clearly LSU and Alabama. If the BCS were a popularity contest, it would produce a more attractive matchup—with Oklahoma State or Stanford opposing the Tigers perhaps, a classic Offense vs. Defense tussle that fills America with what-ifs for a month—but it isn’t. It’s going to churn out two SEC West rivals, only one of whom even played in its conference championship game, and it will probably generate as much scoring as a fanny pack-clad virgin. And that’s just the way it should be.
If you disagree, then let’s measure Alabama’s resume against those of the other “contenders,” those against whom LSU hasn’t already proved its superiority.