As a disclaimer, I believe our college football system is set up to entertain those who are "sold out" to their school, but not so much to those who love competition. I am a lover of true competition, thus I do not credit any of the previously claimed NC's. Therefore, I propose making a smaller group for the elite college football teams, and introducing a playoff system............where we would have a real winner. As far as I'm concerned, Valdosta State is the real champion right now. I've noticed at this site as well as others that there's a lot of mixing fact and opinion. I have to include myself in that as well. For instance, I was in a debate yesterday trying to "prove" that Florida State's offense was at least of the same level as the 2005 Southern California Trojans. The problem with these types of "arguments", which somehow turn into one or the other being called stupid or ignorant, is how we qualify our stats, our FACTS. My argument was that FSU led the country in all sorts of categories, and had a Heisman trophy winner as QB. I also established that the 2000 FSU team was playing their third BCS Championship in a row. To which this other person replied that USC had way more of ANYTHING FSU had. In fact, the other person scoffs, look at who they played!! They are in the ACC for heaven's sakes, and USC is in the POWERFUL PAC-10, the home of NO DEFENSE. I was defeated, FSU obviously was not that good, for most of their stats.....offense, defense, individual games, individual players, season stats, career stats, mean NOTHING.........all because of their inferior competition. See, when you use that argument, you can make your team great, and the others SUCK.......as long as your team wins, of course. A short time later, in my defeated state I realized something. My opponent's argument was slanted from a particular view. See, the better USC's 2005 team looks, the GREATER UT's 2005 Championship looks. And the worse FSU's 2000 team looks, the less good OU's Championship looks. Now the argument can be clearly made that OU's dominating performance by their defense was against a so so FSU team. How convenient. And that's how we all form our arguments.............like Barry Sanders versus Emmitt Smith. Well, clearly Barry was better because his offensive line was not as good as Emmitt's. Or, look at all the weapons Dallas had, that way Dallas' opponents couldn't key on Emmitt. The purists look at Emmitt's yardage, others will say he can't be the best because it took him so many games to get that amount of yardage...........blah, blah, blah. Thus the bar room arguments go. That being said, the more you drink, the better your own side appears. Let's get back to the most important thing here, the Texas Longhorns winning championships. If you remember from earlier, I don't think any of these championships are valid, including those our Beloved 'Horns claim. Hell, one of those was given to us BEFORE we lost in the Cotton Bowl. Ah, who cares. We get to say "WE'RE #!" And those cheating SMU Mustangs shouldn't have been the national champion after their undefeated season in 1982, even beating the Pittsburgh Panthers at the Cotton Bowl, a Panthers squad fielding one of the best NFL quarterbacks ever. No, SMU doesn't deserve to be crowned, they are cheaters and TIED Arkansas. And the years where other teams finished undefeated but were not awarded the title......you know, teams like TCU in 2010, Utah in 2008, and Boise State in 2006. Who cares about them, you say, they didn't play anyone. But I digress. First and foremost, until we have a more competitive group of teams playing against each other, none of this matters, except for those arguing about this crap at the bar....which is ok I spose. But our dilemma at hand right now is that we see a Texas Longhorn football team that, to most rational people, is in disarray, and quite frankly stinks.......or at least is nowhere close to our expectations. Expectations. I would fare to venture that most here EXPECT this team to, at the very least, compete in every game.......that means no blowouts to OU. To go from expectation we head to reasonably hoping for another NC. And lastly, from hope we'll SETTLE for a win against A&M, OU, and a conference championship. Please allow me briefly to shoot a whole in that. Would we be HAPPY had we beat Alabama in '09? Hell yeah!!, most would say. Does anyone realize that had we beat Alabama, they would've been the ONLY team for us to have claimed victory against that FINISHED in the AP top 10 that year? I know, I can already hear the scoffing...........Lefty, don't you know that those who are in the AP were there because they were VOTED in? My bad, you're right.....kind of leaves room for speculation. So, for those who poo poo Boise State's record over the last decade because they haven't played a tough schedule..............SCREW YOU!! Neither have we, nor has Alabama, or OU, or any of these "great teams." Look, Boise State, Utah, and TCU have all shown us in recent bowl games that they can compete with the "big boys." Not just compete but win. Do I want championships? Hell yes I do. And I want them the right way.....played against good competition, and being crowned victor after winning several games from a playoff format. Back to Valdosta State. I looked at how they got to the Division 2 final. They were one of the number one seeds. There were 24 teams who made the playoffs. The top 8 received byes, and the bottom 16 played a first round. Five rounds is all it took. Five weeks. We can start a system like that, having the top 24 teams making it. In the event we did this in 2013, and the regular season ended on Dec. 8th..........the first round would be on December 15th........and the last round, the real championship would be played on January 12th. Let's see, when is the NC scheduled for the 2012 season? January 7th. For true Orangebloods...........this would've been our road to winning a title this year had the top 24 bcs teams been involved: 1st Round - South Carolina 2nd Round - Georgia 3rd Round - Alabama 4th Round - Florida Final - Notre Dame What round would we bow out, or would we win it all? I guess it depends on whom you ask.