When I was in high school, a teacher used the phrase “I didn’t say you stole the money” to show how nuances in human language can completely alter the intended meaning of a statement.
I’d ask fans to sit back from this article, and just say that phrase aloud. Ask some friends to say it aloud. Basically, get a cross-section of humanity to say it to reinforce my point.
Now, housekeeping aside, I have one more favor to ask; namely that you accept that the 2012 BCS Championship Game is the primary impetus for changing the BCS. The other reasons that have been bandied about are a worthless sideshow to that central truth.
Assuming the 2012 BCS Championship Game is the primary motivation to change the college football postseason, there must be some fundamental issue with the system that matched LSU and Alabama in the game. For a quick history lesson, let us take a look at how Alabama went to the game over Oklahoma State.
The BCS is made up of three components that each receive 33 percent consideration in the final BCS number system. There is a single computer component and two human components. After Championship Weekend, the computers voted Oklahoma State No. 2. It was the two human components, the Coaches and Harris Interactive poll, that voted the Alabama Crimson Tide No. 2 and sent the Tide to New Orleans, where they would capture their 14th National Championship.
Given that the majority apparently feel that the Tide playing the Tigers was a travesty, the failure is clear. The human component of the BCS failed in those people’s eyes. Therefore, the BCS must be changed.
Enter the new four-team playoff proposal. On Wednesday, the commissioners of college football agreed to a playoff format that would be built around a playoff selection committee. After doing several back flips and a plethora of cartwheels in celebration (who doesn’t want more football?), I realized I have major misgivings with the selection committee.
The failure of the human component just brought about this change. In order to fix it, the powers-that-be empower the human component even more? The definition of insanity is doing the same thing twice and expecting a different result.
But Thomas, my astute readers may say, they will have guidelines for their selection.
To you, I would simply reply, “I didn’t say you stole the money.”
Follow Thomas on Twitter.