BCS Championship Could Leave More Questions Than Answers

In putting together a preview of Monday’s BCS Championship tilt, each word felt redundant. Perhaps that’s attributable to the entire week of previews SaturdayBlitz.com devoted to Alabama vs. LSU Ver. 1.0, played just 65 days ago. Everyone knows that both Alabama and LSU have played quarterbacks more noteworthy for something other than their on-field performance. Both teams have Heisman Trophy finalists. The two head coaches are opposites in their demeanor, but similar in their successes. There may not be two more talented defenses ever in college football than those lining up opposite one another in New Orleans.

There’s so much we know about the BCS Championship, but what we don’t know is what makes tonight’s SEC-only affair so fascinating.

These teams were evenly matched when they met on Nov. 5. There are certainly those who say Alabama was actually the aggressor, and the Tide have the statistics to prove it. Therefore, it’s not unreasonable to suggest UA wins. A Crimson Tide victory gives Nick Saban his third crystal ball and second at UA in just three seasons. As SaturdayBlitz.com Podcast guest Tony from BamaHammer.com said, that crystal ball is all that matters.

But eight years ago when Saban led LSU past Oklahoma in the same venue where the Tide and Tigers meet, his championship wasn’t without controversy. LSU took home the BCS title, but an Associated Press vote declared USC its national champion. The split championship remains the greatest contradictions to the entire concept of the BCS, a system implemented to prevent such occurrences. Every other BCS champion since the format began in 1998 also took home the AP trophy, but that one instance remains as a glaring reminder that the system’s imperfect.

And while the BCS title maybe “The” championship, but its lineage goes back just 13 years. The AP title dates back to 1936.

Past seasons have ended with a team staking claim to a split championship. Just last season, TCU had its advocates for an AP split, but ultimately there was nothing in Auburn’s 14-0 finish that could be contested. Utah had the most reasonable claim to a split in the years post-LSU/USC, finishing with the best record in college football and as many top 25 wins as BCS champion Florida. Utah lacked name recognition and conference respect coming out of the non-AQ Mountain West, however. That’s not a problem LSU has. Thus, a ‘Bama victory tonight ensures controversy, barring a Tide roll. That’s most unlikely given the depth and ability of the LSU defense. The uncharted waters we are in tonight prove little, because if UA wins by a single possession margin, the two teams are just even with no tiebreaker.

Rematches occur in sports with a traditional postseason, with no recourse for a split. The tournament winner is the champion, end of discussion. Villanova’s 1985 Final Four is not discredited because Georgetown won the regular season series. But ‘Nova played its way to the rematch. In a system where championship match-ups can be determined in such an arbitrary fashion as computer rankings and the votes of “experts” like this, a split will incite backlash.

Should a score of say, 21-20 in ‘Bama’s favor greet the final zeroes at the Superdome, the case for LSU to stake claim to the AP trophy is there. But the controversy doesn’t end with LSU. Oklahoma State can and should lobby AP voters for its share of the trophy should UA win a close one. The Tide get the rematch past contenders like Notre Dame (1993) and Michigan (2006) were denied (and we’ll jump into the 1993 championship further in a moment). OSU has to ask, Why with double the wins over top 25 teams does it not deserve the shot Alabama’s already had?

As discussed when the rematch was set, BCS voters chose to reward losses rather than wins. An Alabama win tonight will give it a resume boasting two wins over double digit-win teams: LSU (13-1) and Arkansas (11-2). OSU finished with four such victories: Stanford (11-2), Baylor (10-3), Oklahoma (10-3), Kansas State (10-3). OSU also won its conference, a feat that eluded Alabama — and a fact that negates one of the more boisterous pro-BCS arguments against March Madness, whose reigning champion also failed to win its conference.

In reference to ’93, Alabama vs. LSU is hardly the most egregious match-up imaginable. There is a precedent for rewarding losses: Notre Dame’s defeat to Boston College somehow meant more than the Irish beating FSU, a situation that would repeat itself in the logic-defying 2008 season when Oklahoma trumped Texas for the title game bid. ‘Bama’s position in New Orleans is argued against more as a principle than via tangible evidence.

Furthermore, an LSU win solves any potential headaches without fuss. As has been so vehemently argued by those who voted in favor of a rematch, this is probably the two best teams in college football. However, LSU has proven it. Alabama’s place is based purely on conjecture.