Monday night's great game found a great ending to an otherwise lousy book --the Bowl Championship Series ("BCS").
In its long and mostly controversial history, the BCS had produced a handful of memorable games --among them Ohio State's double-overtime win over Miami in January, 2003, Texas triumph over USC there years later, and last night's incredible contest. It also produced an aura of greatness around SEC football, especially concerning Alabama, and though the Ohio State Buckeyes made the most BCS Bowl appearances of all with 10, no one in Columbus or anywhere outside of the south is shedding a tear for the demise of the complicated system that killed off key traditions and allowed computers to determine who qualified for the one game that really mattered.
Now there will be three games that matter, and may that number grow in the future. Playoffs --event the shortest, two game series-- is the best way of deciding "best"-- and a champion will now have had to win consecutive huge games with attendant pressure and hoopla under the lights while tens of millions watch. There are a few --including the estimable and deeply experienced Jeffrey Anderson writing in the Weekly Standard-- who do not like where college football in heading, but if the goal is clarity about which is the best team in the land, the new College Football Playoff ("CFP") if a vast improvement over the BCS chaos.
Which of course brings me to the presidential nomination process. The 2016 edition of that demolition derby is already underway, and if anyone doesn't believe me, he or she should watch yesterday's edition of CNN's The Lead with Jake Tapper and then read my interview with Tapper about he and his guests' discussion of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. (The transcript of my interview with Tapper is here. The Daily Caller's take on my take of Jake's panel's take is here. See what I mean: Begun.)
NYT Journalist Wonders: "Free Speech Aside" Why Would Anyone Hold A Contest to Draw Muhammed? | Katie Pavlich