Read the debate intro and the opposing argument from Loyal Homer about whether or not President Obama should invite Boise State and the BCS champions to the White House.
The more debate and press college football receives, the better. While professional football’s season and offseason are now a full time sporting event worthy of several full time staffers to cover the many goings on in the sport year ‘round, college football struggles to share the spotlight. While football is hands down the favored sport in the US, college football takes a backseat to the professional ranks. For this reason, any coverage and ongoing debate that can be created about college football is viewed as a positive thing. After all, any news is good news, right?
The above is one of myriad reasons why the BCS is great for college football. But, this debate is not a referendum on the BCS. It is a discussion around potentially inviting two teams to the White House to reflect the spoils of winning the crown of college football after the 2009 season. One team earned it, and one did not. Alabama won the championship game, Boise State won a secondary bowl.
The question I propose to the esteemed judge of this debate – and to President Obama – why bother? Why invite Boise State to the White House? Here are some compelling reasons to avoid the insistence of Utah Senator Orrin Hatch in inviting Boise State and Alabama to the White House.
First, there is no precedent. Sure, in 2004 President George Bush invited both BCS champion LSU and Associated Press number one team Southern Cal to the White House in honor of their undefeated, championship seasons in college football. That circumstance qualified as a bonafide split national championship where legitimate arguments for the credentials of both teams can plausibly be made. This past season, Boise State did not finish number one in any of the polls to further the dispute. Boise State finished fourth. It is true the team went undefeated, but the competition it played is not deemed strong enough to vault them to a more respectable status in any significant – or insignificant – poll.
Second, there is not one valid political reason to extend an invite to the team from Idaho. Sure, President Obama has voiced displeasure with the current system, but with persistent economic instability, a necessary health care overall that gets increasingly complicated with each passing day, the escalating situation in Iran, the crisis management in Haiti (donate to help the situation in Haiti if you can, by the way), etc. no good political reason exists for President Obama to make the call. It is simply a distraction to what needs to be a routine ceremony that is part of our culture. Complicating it makes no sense, and probably makes the President look politically weaker with strange priorities. I know. Can you imagine that we live in a country where college football is not the most important part of society??
Plus, the White House already released a statement late last week declaring its intention to invite only Alabama. Under the current system in place – the BCS – Alabama is the winner. That is the team that deserves going because there is not legitimate, plausible reason or rationale to invite another team.
Proponents of inviting both teams argue that the dual invitation sends a message that both teams are excellent and both should be invited to the White House, thereby proving that the BCS national championship game – and the system in general – is incapable of determining the best program. Perhaps that argument is legitimate, but it is wasted on the wrong team. As good as Boise State was this season, they are not the example needed to bring the BCS system down. They simply did not play a difficult enough schedule and do not have momentum heading into the offseason on a national scale to move the needle on this topic.
The most damaging sentiment about this issue comes from Boise State head coach Chris Peterson who was quoted by the director of the BCS, Bill Hancock, that he does not wish for his team to go to the White House. Peterson is a smart guy. He does not want his team to enjoy the spoils of victory before they have earned it. He must continue to coach and teach that hard reward yields high reward, that the spoils of victory are sweeter when they are well-earned and widely accepted. Those are not the current conditions, therefore Peterson is wise to avoid even entertaining the idea of crashing the White House party that Alabama legitimately earned within the confines of the current system.
I respect the many sports writers and reporters (yes, there is a different) that have favored the idea, especially guys like Pete Thamel of the New York Times. But while this might be a noble idea, the Broncos are not the right team to base the argument around, and they are not even on board themselves.
I love college football and I love debating. But, in this case, there simply is no good reason for President Obama to invite Boise State to the White House right now. Perhaps when the wars are over, the economy is fixed, health care is affordable for all, and everyone is employed a discussion about the merits of the invite can happen. Until then, the champions earn the rewards of victory. Good or bad, the system picks, and the President and every other fan must respect that.
man I still can’t understand that boise were defeated against nevada this week. if you ask me they are still the best team in the BCS.