RE: College football doesn't fairly name a national champion
Agree with both sides. The national champion is not fairly determined, and conferences aren't created equally. There are potential solutions but they are all unreasonable.
As a Boise St fan, I would definitely be in support of as much inclusion of the non-power conferences as possible. However, I recognize that a schedule that annually includes the likes of New Mexico, Utah St, San Jose St, Hawaii, UNLV, Nevada, and Wyoming is not the same as one that annually includes schools like Alabama, LSU, Georgia, Florida, Auburn, Texas A&M, and South Carolina.
I'm not saying the Mountain West schools aren't competitive from time to time or couldn't beat an SEC school. In fact, I love our conference and if we went to 16 would love to have BYU and some Texas schools join. What I am saying, and what I think Wedge and others are saying, is that equal representation to determine a champion requires similar resumes.
A good example is the electoral college (whether you like it or not.) Texas has 38 electoral college votes and around 28 million people. If all eligible voters voted and the majority voted for Candidate X, then Candidate X gets the 38 electoral college votes. On the other hand, Rhode Island has 4 electoral college votes and around 1 million people. If all eligible voters voted and the majority voted for Candidate X, then Candidate X gets the 4 electoral college votes. It would be patently unequal in this voting system to give Rhode Island and Texas the same number of electoral college votes because, theoretically, millions more people in Texas would be voting than in Rhode Island.
|