Longing for old BCS remains after another playoff semifinal round

Another College Football Playoff Semifinal round has come and gone, and once again the big boys have dominated.
On New Year’s Eve, we got something that was completely expected in Alabama and Georgia advancing to play each other, yet again, for a national championship.
I’ve got no issue with a playoff system. I frankly think it’s the best possible solution for college football at large to determine it’s national champion at the end of the season.
Furthermore, I also don’t think there was an issue with allowing Cincinnati the opportunity to break the Power Five barrier and make the playoff.
In my opinion, here is nothing but good that can come from inclusion.
What we’re going to talk about today is a debate as old as well, the BCS.
I’m hoping to enlighten, and not offend, when it comes to the following take I will have.
It goes very simply. Conference superiority is a sham. It’s a way for fans to feel better about themselves. Nothing more, nothing less.
You still with me? Good. Let’s talk about it in detail then.
I’ll start by saying that I believe that the Southeastern Conference is the strongest conference in America. It regularly has two of the five best teams in America in Alabama and Georgia. Those programs regularly compete for national championships and they’re from the same league. So, it stands to reason that any conference that has those feathers in its cap should be acknowledged as the best.
That isn’t the argument here.
The argument from my perspective is the talking down on other conferences. For example, there are some fans who believe that the sixth or seventh best team from the SEC could go into any other conference and just run over it.
I don’t think that’s the case. In my opinion, the SEC is a top-heavy conference just like any other conference and what makes it the best is the fact that its best teams are simply better.
You cannot reasonably say a team like Kentucky, who finished 10-3 but certainly had flaws, to go into the Big 10 and roll over a Michigan or Ohio State. Or, to go into the Big XII and just dominate an Oklahoma or Oklahoma State.
The bottom line is this: talent is still talent. Conferences are all similar. There are normally two or three teams in every league that are heads-and-shoulders above the others.
Were Alabama and Georgia much better than Michigan and Cincinnati? Absolutely. Does that mean that Michigan and Cincinnati couldn’t compete in the SEC? Absolutely not.
What I think it means is that Alabama and Georgia would win in most leagues. They’re that good.
It also means that programs like Cincinnati, Michigan, Ohio State, Oklahoma and other prevalent programs would be able to build very competitive national programs that would occasionally challenge for the SEC.
As an example, Ole Miss was a 5-5 program last year and won 10 games this year? Did that much really change for the Rebels? Or did they just use their resources more wisely?
A winning program isn’t a product of its conference. It’s a product of the work coaches, administrators, players and others put in to make that program more successful.
Vanderbilt is still Vanderbilt in any conference. LSU with all its flaws this year wouldn’t magically win 10 games in any other conference. That’s evidenced by it getting beat handily by UCLA and struggling with UL-Monroe later on in the season.
You are a product of your program’s inner workings. Not your conference alignment.
It’s time as fans that we accept and embrace this.