MY CONFERENCE COULD WHIP YOUR CONFERENCE WITH ONE HAND TIED BEHIND ITS BACK

NCAA football from Wikimedia

When we sit down to watch a sporting event, unless we have a rooting interest in one team, we hope for a close, exciting game.

Of course the truth is, sometimes when one team plays another, one team is clearly better and opens a can of whoop ass on the other, beating it soundly. I know, I'm a New England Patriots fan. Zing! Bet you didn't see that coming.

That brings us to the college football playoffs. For years, Division 1 college football decided its championship in a quaint way. Teams played a regular season, then the best teams played  bowl games, then some media folks voted on who would be awarded the national championship, or in today's parlance, the "natty." I really, really hate today's parlance. Since rarely did the number one team play the number two team, this system allowed as many as three or four schools and their fans to proclaim each year that they were the rightful champions.

So the powers that be, seeing the inefficiency of this system, as well as its failure to milk every last dollar out of the fans, TV networks and anyone else involved, came up with a new, improved system. A four team playoff. One plays four, two plays three and the two winners square off. Finally, an undisputed national champion. Would that be an "undi natty?" The new system would use existing bowl games as playoff games. What could go wrong? Glad you asked. Three playoff games and approximately 97 bowl games no one gives a damn about any longer. Nine bowl games drew under 20,000 people last year.

Only four teams, you ask. How are we going to decide which four? Easy. Computerized sorcery, combined with TV network and conference politics. This is gonna be easy. We'll take the three undefeated major conference champions, and.....what? Sorry, we'll take two of the three undefeated major conference champions, plus Alabama and Texas. 13-0 Florida State, sorry, maybe next year. But why?

Because the SEC and its legion of obnoxious fans fancies themselves the home office of college football. Why, we're the conference of Alabama, Georgia, Home Depot, Sonic and Fansville, for God's sake. You can't leave us out! The ACC? A bunch of Dukes.

So the powers that be, seeing the problems with this system and blind to the problems of any system they could possibly dream up, came up with a new one. 12 teams! All the major champions get in. Look, Clemson is in from the ACC. Sorry, Florida State, can you forgive us? Arizona State is in. I think they were the Big East champ, hard to keep track. Boise State, in. Hey, Indiana, great season, come on down. SMU, the Southwest Conference champ (or not.) OK, is there anyone who could possibly have a gripe about this? Wait, who's that spraying Dr. Pepper all over the bracket? How dare you leave out fourth place Alabama from the SEC? We beat all kinds of good teams, plus Mercer and Western Kentucky. This is an outrage! Next year? The top 11, plus the entire SEC.

Then, they played the games. See second paragraph. Tennessee got waxed by Ohio State, but bragged about how many fans they had at the Shoe. (See, SEC and legion of fans above.) Indiana tripped on the glass slipper and fell into a snowbank.

Cue sports media, led by an impassioned Kirk Herbstreit rant about how the selection committee blew it by allowing the likes of Indiana and Tennessee in. I like Herbstreit. I think he made one of the greatest athlete to broadcaster transitions of all time. Problem is, he, like everyone in major TV sports, works for a network that is involved in business transactions with the teams and leagues they cover. When a commentator's opinions align with what's in the best business interests of his employer, one must wonder.

Here's my radical suggestion. Let me say in advance I know all the things that are wrong with it, but hear me out.

Since conference alignments mean less than they ever have, blow them up. Let whatever experts are up to the task come up with four 13-team leagues. The top 52 in the country. Try to balance those leagues so they would be of roughly equal strength. 

Each team plays each team in its league once. This takes strength of schedule off the table. Everyone plays a schedule of about equal strength. The top three in each league go into the tournament. A 12 team tournament. Twos play threes, ones get a bye. Determine a formula of which league faces which, so seeding is not an issue.

Include soccer-style relegation every year, two years, whatever. Mississippi State 2-10, you're out next year, Army is in.

Of course, none of this matters, because North Carolina is going all the way next year. Light blue hoodies will be all the rage.

THOUGHTS ON THE PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE

There are two angles a reporter could have taken following Thursday's Biden-Trump debate hosted by CNN. One, "Biden has poor debate." The other, "Trump makes dozens of false statements." I'll leave it to you, dear reader to determine why every single reporter in the United States chose the former. Perhaps it's that left wing media bias I hear about every day from the 12 straight hours of right wing hosts who follow my show.

Before debates, campaigns work the refs and attempt to lower expectations. Any competent reporter knows this. So why did so many reporters repeat the GOP talking point that if President Biden had a good debate, it meant he had been given performance enhancing drugs beforehand? Competent reporters would behave one way, but actual reporters behaved differently? Why, I think we have our answer!

After Thursday's debate, we finally know for sure that 81 year old, relatively fit and trim Joe Biden is physically and mentally unfit to be president, while 78 year old Donald Trump, who is obese, subsists on a diet of Burger King and Milk Duds and who shows actual, clinical signs of dementia, is ready to rock.

CNN, we have one candidate who is a serial liar. Whatever will we do? Let's just not mention it. After all, determining and reporting the truth isn't our job, right. We don't report, you can't decide.

Joe Biden should have agreed to a pre-debate drug test, in return for Donald Trump agreeing to step on a scale and shoot a round of golf with a camera crew following him.

Unasked question Thursday: Mr. Trump, you complained repeatedly about your New York trial for falsifying business records, saying that the judge was a Democrat who was biased against you, yet in another of your legal cases, the judge was appointed by you and is clearly doing everything in her power to delay your trial until after the election. Is it your contention that only judges appointed by you can be fair and unbiased?

Republicans have been saying for months that Mr. Biden should step aside and let someone else gain the Democratic nomination. What is the only possible reason one would call for an opponent's removal from the ticket? The fear that they can't beat him. Have you heard a single reporter in the United States make this blindingly obvious point? Why not? 

The Democratic party is an embarrassment. The bed wetting, pants pissing whining of so many Democrats after the debate was pathetic. The Democrats don't need a better candidate, they need better Democrats. 

It's June. In June, 1992, the presumptive Democratic nominee was third in a three way race at 25%. He won. On election day 2016, the polls gave his wife a 60% chance of winning. She didn't.