Football Parallels/Contradictions

I've pointed out at least one interesting contradiction in the past, which had a mixed reception...

Particularly in Utah, there is a huge percentage of the predominantly Mormon population, which is vigorously opposed to Socialism of any sort, and yet the ideal society in Mormonism is one which is essentially Socialist in nature. I found it interesting!

Another interesting one I've noticed, but have yet to blog about is Illegal Immigration. An equally large group, perhaps mostly the same people are also vigorously opposed to Illegal Immigration, and yet a year or two ago, an LDS Church delegation of higher ups, was sent to the Utah State Legislature to 'encourage charity towards our fellow men'. As the lead delegate said, the intent was to send a message, and that the message had been received. While not stated, the message was... The LDS Church has a large contingent of members who are illegal aliens. Legislation opposing illegal immigration and increasing enforcement would effectively destroy local congregations, and the associated income from those congregations.

The parallel/contradiction I would like to point out today actually has nothing to do with Mormonism, although again, I think it is likely the same group of Utahn's with the problem.

Before I begin... I know precious little about Football (American Grid Iron), the BCS (Bowl Championship Series) or the NCAA (National Collegiate Athletic Association). I do however, think I understand enough to see what is going on, but if I've missed any key pieces of information, please correct me...

The NCAA is an administrative organization which oversees college/university sports in the United States and Canada. From what I can tell it is not a government entity.

The BCS is an organization which was formed by 6 of the major athletic conferences in the US, and 4 of the other conferences are admitted into the series to a lesser extent. A conference is basically a collection of schools, generally in the same geographical area, but there are other factors which are applied here as well.

Basically, based on who you play and what the outcome is, and then the subjective input from various sources, football teams are ranked in the official BCS rankings. Based on how you end up ranking (and sometime revenue potential), your team may be invited to a particular Bowl Series Game, and based on the outcome of that, you may qualify for the Championship Game.

Part of the system is score based, but part is subjective. Since the original 6 conferences have the majority of the influence, often teams in those conferences will rank higher than teams who may be better on paper. The bottom line is that while the better teams usually end up on top, it's not a playoff system by any stretch of the imagination, and can often end up being rather unfair.

A classic example occurred last year. The University of Utah fielded a phenomenal team, and ended the season undefeated. They were ranked high, and invited to a bowl game, but due to how it was setup, the Championship game ended up being between 2 teams who had both suffered 1 loss during the season. I like Utah, and it was tough to see them not win, but I'm not the worlds biggest football fan, and to be completely honest, I didn't lose any sleep over it whatsoever.

Many fans however were pretty upset and started demanding that the government take action to make the series fair. Senators and Congressional representatives were written. President Obama has even offered his opinion that a fairer system needs to be sought.

Like I said before though... The BCS is not a government entity, nor is the NCAA. In addition to those facts, and while many likely consider football in a manner of equal or greater importance than religion, at the end of the day, it's a GAME!!!

Yes, it's unfair, yes, it should probably be changed, but it doesn't really affect anyone's lives.

Yet still the crowd in Utah want change, and they want the government to initiate that change to make it fair...

Health care has been a hot topic lately. I'm not going to deny that the fact that America was founded on the principles of Capitalism has helped advance health care immensely.

In an article I read some time ago, it stated that every nation needs to ration it's health care in some form. In countries with socialized systems of health care, the rationing is provided by some kind of formula and a governmental oversight board. In the US, rationing is done by money. If you have money or good insurance you can get care. If you don't, tough!

Rationing by money is a very efficient way of doing it, but it does introduce an element of unfairness... Let's say I develop cancer, but I don't have insurance or any financial reserves... I'm pretty much screwed. But lets say I'm a middle aged woman with self esteem issues and a wealthy husband... I can get my nose, boobs and stomach all fixed, and I don't have to wait or anything!!

Is that entirely fair?

Here's my take on the matter...

The BCS in unfair, and part of that is due to the fact that it's a private organization, and the stake holders have an interest in skewing things a certain way. It's legal, but it sucks if it comes out against you.

Proponents of change to the BCS recognize the power that the government has, and it's role in making things fair.

And just so you know where I stand... I'm not in favor of the government getting involved in this fight - For goodness sake people, it's a game!! Get some sponsors and start up your own series, buy more influence in the BCS or something like that... It's not going to be easy, but you can effect change if you want to!

Health care... Well, the Declaration of Independence, written by Thomas Jefferson mentions "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness".

As US Citizens (My apologies to my foreign readers for excluding you, but hopefully you'll see why...), we're all part of a great machine which, fueled by freedom and opportunity has helped to create a health care system which is quite excellent. Medical advances have created a opportunity to create a higher quality of life, and I would argue that as we are all part of the society which has generated this, that higher quality of life is a right to all of us.

I'm not advocating cosmetic surgery for everyone, but I do think basic preventative care, and treatment for illness and diseases should be something which each citizen should have ready access to.

Like those advocating BCS changes, I recognize that the government is probably the best body which can effect this change in a timely manner. I also recognize that by virtue of them being a democratically elected entity, they would likely create a system which is fairer than most.

There are far more facets to this, that I'm hesitant to discuss, just by virtue of the fact that this post is probably far too long already, but the interesting thing is...

Proponents of changes to the BCS, are more often than not, opposed to the Government meddling in health care. They're also generally the same people advocating that Government prevent same sex marriage, while at the same time, adamant about the government staying out of their lives and their homes, but that's a whole other topic and can of worms right there.