Preseason college football = the beginning of the election cycle
In the beginning, God created Ohio State, then Texas, then USC. So because of that, the writers feel it is a necessity to put them as the frontrunners for the national title. That means to start the season, they're the ones who will likely finish the year in the championship game. That's fine, the prognosticators are probably right. However, it normally limits the field to around 10 true, legitimate contenders.
This is much like the beginning of the election season, pre-cauci (caucuses?). During this time, the usual suspects like Clinton, Edwards and Obama send out feelers (not the male Clinton, he was constantly sending out feelers), and Mr Puppet Tim Russert make prognostications about who is likely to put their foot forward and run, who has the best chance to make it through their respective caucus relatively unscathed. This is normally limited to at most 10 real contenders, 5 for each side.
Regular season = the Election cylce/caucus
Teams play who they can (unless you're West Virginia, where you avoid it at all costs), but ultimately, they're limited to only a subset of teams they can play, mainly those in their conference and those willing to play them. So to make the best of it with over 100 teams, we have polls and computer ratings to try and pare down who we truly think are the best teams. As the season progresses, teams drop off and we start to argue over who would be best in the championship game, but eventually the polls and the numbers (aka money) win out.
Much in the same way, politicians move from state to state, only go against their own party, and the cauci(ses) decide who is the best candidate for each party (aka, the one who has turned the least number of pages). The American people, the people who "control democracy", don't really decide this, but money and political activists do.
The championship game = The election
We're here. The top two teams get to play it out on the field (except and team not from the 5 BCS conferences... I mean 6), or at least the top two as decided by a small minority of people and overly used complex algorithms/monkeys.
We're here. The top candidate from each party (except any party not named Republican or Democrat) gets to slug it out on the field, even though they were picked to face eachother by a small minority.
So you see, John Kincade, that the BCS is really the most American thing we could come up with. Why do you and so many others hate the BCS? Is it because you hate democracy? Do you hate the American way of life? So I say, God bless the BCS, and if you don't like it, well then go out and donate more money to your team and conference so they can buy their way into a better conference. Its the American way!
OK, so perhaps I was the only person listening to ESPN Radio on Wednesday at around noon EST. I happened to hear John Kincade, who was filling in for Colin Cowherd, talking about the BCS. In keeping with the fine tradition of ESPN radio hosts, and their fill-ins, his sole purpose seems to be to generate as much controversy as possible over completely idiotic statements. Well John, mission accomplished, as we politicos would say.
The crux of Kincade's argument was that the BCS is a flawed system and that the flaws of this system would be called out and noticed in any other walk of life. For some reason, he seems to pass this off as an original thought, as though the whole of America believes that the BCS is the greatest system known to mankind. This notwithstanding, He goes on to compare it to our system of voting, saying there is no way we would let this happen in our democracy.
Well John, you're completely wrong. We would let it happen, and we do let it happen. Let me elaborate: