I'm sure I'm in a minority when I say that the current BCS system in college football is a success and should stay in place.  For one thing the sports media is full of arrogant head cases who all think that they have the answer for all of sports problems.  Since most of these narcissists can barely read I'd like to think that I could lay out an intelligent argument to keep the BCS in place.

First of all before the BCS you had a classic Bowl setup.  PAC 10 versus BIG 10 in the Rose Bowl, etc...  That wasn't good enough for the sports media, so then it changed to the BCS.  In my opinion this change was good as it allowed a fair chance for a decisive National Champion while still remains true to the Bowl traditions that made college football what it is today.  Yet that is still not good enough for the sports writers who then pressured the BCS to change it's ways.  I think part of their disdain came from a fear that a computer might actually be able to rank teams better than they could which of course is an insult to their neanderthal like intelligence.  Be that as it may the current BCS system works and the sports writers need to shut up.

Secondly, those who are in favor of a playoff system need to look no further than to the college football season itself.  From September to November there is a 12-13 game playoff making every game a must win, and equally as important as the next regardless of opponent.

Thirdly, time and costs are definite factors.  You can't play two football games in three days as they do in Basketball.  In fact you can only play once a week.  On top of that you will not know who you are playing the next week until six or seven days out.  Which means travel arrangements are done at the last minute and are more costly to the universities.  A team like Boise State is a good example of why you don't want a playoff system.  They would most likely be the lowest seed which means the longer they win the more it costs because they would have to travel every week.  Although I'm not certain I would guess that Boise State's budget is not quite as big as USC's which would lead to less profit for them and in the long run make it harder to compete with the OSU's and USC's in the future.  In addition to these factors (and maybe as a direct result) you most likely will add several weeks onto the schedule and now the NCAA will be forced to compete with the NFL Super Bowl.  The bottom line is that more time equals higher costs and that is not in the interest of the Universities, the NCAA, the fans (higher ticket costs, etc..), or the game itself.

Fourth, having a true playoff system will not eliminate controversy and year in and year out we'll have to listen to the media blow hards complain about why their team was not selected to be in the playoffs.  Every year during the NCAA Basketball Tournament Selection there are teams left out and for one reason or another the sporting community has to criticize why that team(s) did not make the Tournament and why they got jobbed and so on.  To think that there would never be any controversy with a playoff system is media hype.

Fifth, more teams can take place in the current Bowl system then in a playoff system.  This is a win/win/win for college football, the Universities and all fans. 

Keeping the BCS system in place is the right thing to do.  It maintains the integrity of the game while upholding it's traditions.  It is profitable and more teams can participate then just a relative few.  Those who believe in a true playoff for Division IA would effectively end any hope that the little guy could ever reach the big show.  It would definitely be for the big schools with the big budgets who would get their every year.  Thus, making recruiting an even greater challenge for the Boise States of the NCAAF world.  Say what you want about how the BCS accounts for "Cinderella," but this year they will be going to Glendale to play in the Fiesta Bowl.  If this were a playoff they would be on their way to Columbus, OH or Southern California where they most likely would lose and effectively end a great season with nothing.  I don't know about you but I would rather have a chance to finish on the big stage than to lose on a lopsided one with everyone saying "I told you-you couldn't play with the big guy's."

RightBright

With Republicans being fed an early Thanksgiving electoral dinner by Democrats this year, the question is what's next? 

This election was a definite set back for Republicans, but by no means is it the end of the Republican party.  In fact, this could be a very positive election for our nation's conservative agenda.  It may sound contradictory to common sense to maintain that position yet there are several key reasons why this might be very accurate.

The first key reason is that Democrats are under the impression that their victory was due to anti-Bush sentiment.  As was stated on RightBright in "The Big Vote" people were not voting against Bush, they were voting for clear, strong, and true conservative leadership.  An example is that Democrats think that this election means Americans are against the War on Terror.  That is dead wrong, and if they try to pull out or continue to play politics on this they will lose everything in 2008 and more.  Why?  People wanted better leadership, not cut and run.  They want to see results, not negotiations.  Americans and conservatives are tired of dealing with a corrupt UN who placates to the rogue nations trying to murder our citizens.  They're tired of North Korea and Iran flaunting illegal nuclear capabilities without repercussion.  What Americans want is a leader that will take significant decisive action with results that everyone will respect including our enemies.

The second key reason is immigration.  Republicans simply need to take a tough conservative position regarding our borders.  Again, most of our Country wants strong border security keeping illegal aliens, illegal drugs, human traffickers, and terrorist out of our country.  If Republicans fight for this they can win the next election.  It really could be that simple.

The dust has been kicked up and where it will settle is still not known.  However, the current leadership roles that have been filled by Republicans have indicated that the party has not learned and is content to stay the course.  If this holds true Republicans will lose more seats in the House and Senate and the Presidency in 2008.  If they decide to go back to advocating strong conservative values and leadership Americans will easily see a new swing towards the Republicans in 2008.  It really is not a complicated formula for Republicans and is why this past election could be a positive outcome for the Republican Party's future.

RightBright

There is no down playing the significance of this mid-term election.  No matter what your political ideology the stakes are high.  The common values that once brought us together during WWI and WWII are now threatened as a result of constant liberal erosion from the 1960's to the present.  Republicans of all degree must understand that a Democrat win this mid-term will be the beginning of a steady decline of American values, a black-eye on our image internationally, and a loss of hope for countries whose citizens depend on U.S. intervention as a means to survival.

These consequences are just the tip of the iceberg.  Also at issue are right to life issues concerning embryonic stem cell research, judicial appointments, continuing tax breaks that have fueled an economy to some of the highest points in history, and most importantly at hand is the 800lbs gorilla in the room, Homeland Security.  Make no mistake about it, this gorilla represents the War on Terror and securing our borders, and if Republicans don't take care of business in this area first, the consequences will be dire.

With all this on the line many would think that Republicans would carry the day.  However, it is Republicans that are faced with an uphill struggle.  The looming question is, why?  The answer, unfortunately, is not so looming.  In fact it is quite clear and obvious.  Republicans have allowed the Democrats over the past couple years the ability to dictate conservative policy.  For worse, Republicans have caved to political correctness, "politics," and negotiating away our presence as keepers of principle.  As a result, Republicans are now standing dazed and confused during this 11th hour hoping for Democrats like John Kerry to make another mistake.  All of this begs the question, what is the solution?

The solution is simple.  It's called "not worrying about the liberal media."  It's called "standing up for principle," but mostly it's called "leadership."  The liberal media today boasts about how 60% of Americans are now against the war in Iraq.  They have screamed about countless scandals, how bad the economy is, and therefore, this Administration and the Republicans who serve under it, are incompetent.  The truth of the matter is that the public is not buying those positions either.  The reality that is so obvious to most of us in the "dregs," is that we citizens want someone to be a strong leader that doesn't pander to rhetoric, and will stand-up above all costs to protect American interests, even if it means acting alone.

The reality is In fact most Americans do support the war.  When asked why they are unhappy it's because the Administration has failed to be more aggressive.  Most citizens polled are also happy with the economy, and likewise trust this Administration.  What people are voting against in general is a lack of leadership.

With all of this said, the problem with this position is that two wrongs don't make a right.  If Republicans have a weakness it's that they are more principled then their Democrat counterparts.  Many "red" voters this year want to stay home, or worse yet vote "blue" because they are mad at the lack of positive results in the last few years under current conservative leaders.  Unfortunately these individuals (and there are many) have fallen into the liberal trap.  Just because there have been some failures, doesn't logically fit the standard that one can make a point of not voting for the party that best fits their own beliefs.

Think of it in sports terms.  If your team loses frequently, do you stop cheering for them?  Of course not.  Instead you stop going to games, or supporting the owners and coaches.  In essence your position becomes "I support my team, but we need new direction."  Republicans across the country this 2006 mid-term election need to remain loyal to their team.  Getting out to cast a vote for Republicans is the best way to show that loyalty.  Once Republicans win, then you demand that your leaders uphold the values and standards that make up the Republican party.  If they still don't get the message then you vote for the next Republican in line behind them.  Not voting, or voting for the Democrats will bring a much quicker, more painful end to core values, morals, and leadership that most Americans have a common vested interest in supporting. 

At present there is strong momentum in favor of the Republicans.  Republicans should continue the rally and take the day.  To not do so would give Democrats license to appoint liberal judges that will endanger our right to life and marriage between man and a woman (amongst other key issues).  It will give Democrats license to dismantle the War on Terror which will endanger the security of us all.  It will give Democrats the license to raise taxes for everyone which will lead to a slower economy.  It will give Democrats license to continue to allow illegal immigrants into the country which will take jobs away from our own citizens and will also make us prone to another September 11th style terrorist attack. 

So what becomes more principled?  Staying home to prove a point that by losing we are all going to suffer, or to get out and vote for Republicans so that Republicans can prevent things from getting worse and effectively maintain control of the values Republicans represent?

This answer is clear.  THE BIG VOTE is this Tuesday, November 7th.  To stay home and not vote, or get out and vote Democrat is to show defeat, and there is no principle or honor in that.

RightBright

Welcome to the Inagural posting of RightBright @ Townhall.  Our Mission Statement is simple: We will provide a voice for conservatives who believe first and foremost in the values of the party of Abraham Lincoln and Ronald Reagan.