I wasn't really sure about writing this article because there are thousands out there tonight and tomorrow and really all season long, lauding or loathing the BCS, arguing whether or not they got it right. I will say this: I loathe the BCS and this year wasn't so bad. Florida vs. Oklahoma will be a great game and the case for each team is strong enough for me to be someone content.

However, that won't change my opinion of the BCS.

College football is one of the most colorful, dynamic, and exciting games we can observe. There is great pageantry, tradition, and fanaticism. Each season, there are exciting story lines and classic games. Just when we expect this sport, like other sports, to reach its most dramatic peak, we arrive here, on a cold Sunday night in December when 10 polls combine to form the BCS bowl lineup - and the other bowls wait in line for sloppy - I mean - the remaining teams. Now we wait. The proverbial season-long DVR is on pause. Teams go home, players take exams, players practice, and we, the fan, just wait.

Therefore, since all I have right now between the annual BCS buzz kill and the major college bowl games, I am going to drift off to fantasyland. Over the course of the next couple of weeks and because I am a certified football dweeb, I am going to present an alternative to the BCS - and cover them, with the help of my EA Sports NCAA Football 09 (I'm not sponsored). Oh yes, I just said that and oh yes, I am lame. If you care to leave a comment that I am a loser, I've already taken care of that for you, please, as always, feel free.

So what are these alternatives to the BCS? Well, the first is what we will call the "NCT" or National Championship Tournament. Before we dive into the brackets, let's take a look at the reasoning behind the NCT as an alternate to the BCS.

The main goal of the NCT is to provide a system that:

• Produces an undisputed National Champion
• Maintains the tradition of the college
  bowl games
• Utilizes the current BCS rankings
• Gives equal opportunity to ALL
  Bowl Subdivision Teams
• Continues to emphasize the importance of
  the regular season
• Ensures that academics are valued
  throughout bowl season

An Undisputed National Champion

Despite its best efforts, the Bowl Championship Series (BCS) has failed in multiple seasons to produce an undisputed National Champion. While one team can claim to be National Champion by winning the National Championship game, the road to that game is often undefined, confusing, and unfair. Since its inception during the 1998-1999 season, only once has the BCS produced an undisputed National Champion as Texas defeated USC in the 2006 Rose Bowl. Both Texas and USC entered the championship game undefeated after going wire-to-wire as the No. 1 and No. 2 ranked teams in the nation. This, however, has been the only exception to the BCS enigma.

Using a 16-team tournament format, my system will guarantee an undisputed National Champion by allowing all teams deserving of a tournament bid to compete for the crown.

Maintaining the College Bowl Tradition

Any fan knows that bowl games are the cornerstone of college football. These games, whether it is the now defunct Oil Bowl or the "grand-daddy of them all" Rose Bowl, have provided some of sports' most historic and exciting moments. Any college football post-season scenario without bowl games is unacceptable.

That said, bowl games would remain a prominent part of the post-season under this system. Each of the 15 games included in the National Championship Tournament (NCT) will be a bowl game. The remaining 17 bowl games will also remain intact, featuring teams eligible for post-season play, but not qualified for the NCT. All traditions, television contracts, and sponsorships will remain intact with the addition of the tournament.

Utilizing the BCS Standings

Despite heavy criticism, the NCT will continue to utilize the BCS standings in their current format. While it will no longer determine who plays for the National Championship, the BCS will be used to "seed" teams in the 16-team National Championship tournament. Most importantly, the BCS will determine the five at-large bids available for the NCT.

Giving Equal Opportunity to All Bowl Subdivision Teams

During the 2006-2007 season, Boise State put BCS supporters on the ropes by defying the odds and not only reaching a BCS bowl, but winning one with a heart-stopping victory over Oklahoma in the Tostitos Fiesta Bowl. The Broncos and their victory become the prime example for inclusion of all Bowl Subdivision teams in the National Championship process.

That said, the NCT provides an opportunity to the champion of all Bowl Subdivision conferences to receive a bid to the National Championship Tournament. The tournament will include 11 conference champions and 5 at-large teams for a
total of 16 teams.

Emphasizing the Regular Season

With heavy emphasis now placed on the NCT, critics will immediately draw a line of comparison to the NCAA basketball tournament and its arguably disastrous effect on the importance of the regular season. The NCT ensures that the college football regular season will remain as relevant as ever, despite the existence of the NCT. Teams will need to win their conference championship to make the tournament or maintain a strong record to receive one of the five at-large bids. In addition, teams hoping to qualify for the tournament must meet minimum win and maximum loss requirements. In addition, only 16 of the 119 Bowl Subdivision teams will make the tournament - compared to a 64-team field for the NCAA tournament.

Valuing Academics throughout the Extended Bowl Season

Critics of a tournament-style playoff system often point to interference with academics, particularly final exams, as a primary deterrent. Under the NCT, student-athletes will be accommodated by intelligent scheduling, the cooperation of bowl committees, and the utilization of modern day technology to ensure that academics are handled prior to kickoff.

There you have it. The NCT. Over the next couple of weeks, I will continue to outline this plan and provide details. I will also simulate the games to determine the TRUE champion - at least in my own little world. Stay
tuned.

  (Photo: ESPN.com)

Prior to the season, I was one of those Bears fans that was
happy Kyle Orton chose "heads" in the pre-season coin toss to become the Bears'
starter. At this point, the Orton-backers look right. However, I can say that I
was dead wrong in how I wanted Kyle
Orton to be the starter: I supported the proverbial "maintenance quarterback"
mentality. I told people that Orton will not make mistakes - he will keep them
in the game. I told anyone who would listen that Rex Grossman was a loose
cannon, despite is calm demeanor, who made up for his lack of size and patience
with desperate - and most often - disastrous downfield heaves. Yes, I said,
Kyle Orton can keep this team in games and give the Bears a chance to win every
week. 

Now, after three consecutive stellar performances capped off
by a masterful performance in a 48-41 victory against the Vikings on Sunday, we
have realized that, yes, Virginia (McCaskey), there is a Bears quarterback that
can win games too. 

This newfound confidence in Orton was evident in the third
quarter following the Bears third interception of the afternoon on a seemingly "ho-hum"
play. With 6:45 left in the quarter, Orton wound up and struck Greg Olsen with
a pass over the middle. Now, this seems rather insignificant - it was only a
12-yard gain and two plays later Orton fumbled the ball away - but it painted a
striking contrast between the Bears offense we grew to tolerate and the Bears
offense we are beginning to love. If you have watched this team at all, you
know that following the interception, the Bears would have been resigned to
dish Minnesota a healthy helping of Matt Forte, pounding the defensive line,
squeezing the clock for all the seconds it was worth. Orton would have gone
into that "maintenance mode" where we would praise him for not screwing up. Maybe
it would have worked, but that's not the issue. Orton is no longer the
maintainer; Orton is the accelerator.

With that, the way teams approach the Chicago Bears has
changed. A confidence in Kyle Orton has a trickle-down effect. Notice how
Minnesota avoided kicking to the Bears' returners during the game. This was
always due to the fact that those returners, most notably Devin Hester, was the
greatest offense threat the Bears could brandish. Now that defenses are having a
hard time stopping the Orton-Forte-And-Whoever-Feels-Like-Catching-a-Pass-Today
trifecta, teams may start kicking more directly to Hester and it seems only a
matter of probably that he will rip one off to dazzle us once again. This team -
like any good team - works well when each part is helping the other phases of
the game. How refreshing is it to watch a Bears team with a legitimate
quarterback?  

Barack Obama signs an autograph at the 2005 White Sox Championship rally downtown. (Flickr - Therese Flanagan)

He had to go there, didn't he? He had to dig into that scabbed-over wound that Sox fans love to irritate and play the "Cubs fans-are-drunk-idiots" card, didn't he?

Democratic Presidential Nominee Barack Obama recently told ESPN's Stuart Scott that he would be rooting for the White Sox if they squared off with the Cubs in the fall classic. Here is a portion of the transcript:

Scott: “If the Cubs and the White Sox both make it to the World Series?
Obama: “I would be going.”
Scott: “Who would you root for?
Obama: “Oh, that's easy. White Sox. I'm not one of these fair weather
fans. You go to Wrigley Field, you have a beer, beautiful people up
there. People aren't watching the game. It's not serious. White Sox,
that's baseball. Southside.”

Cubs fans have reacted with a ferver over the remarks. MLB.com and other major websites featuring baseball-related blogs are bursting with comments bashing Sox fans and Obama alike.

However, was Obama wrong in his statement?

As a lifelong Cubs fan, I can't say that I disagree with the Illinois senator.

I have attended hundreds of Cubs games in my day - including 39 when I lived near the park in 2003 - so it is safe to say I have a large sample size for my observations. Many people at Wrigley Field are fair weather fans. Many Wrigley Field patrons are there for a good time - whether it is as a tourist or to get sloppy drunk and give your number to some 40-year old woman from Iowa. When I go to the games, these people frustrate me because I'm the guy with the scorecard, often yelling "down in front", shooting darts with my eyes at the guy squeezing through my row every half-inning to use the can. I'm that guy. I consider myself a true Cubs fan.

The biggest problem I have with the Obama remarks aren't the remarks themselves, but rather the reaction to those remarks.

It is important to distinguish between the terms "Cubs fans" and "Wrigley Field patrons". There is a tremendous difference here. The Wrigley Field patron was the target of Obama's slam, not the Cubs fan. White Sox fans pride themselves on being the "anti-Cub" of anything - they are proud of their shopping mall-like ballpark and minor league-like in game antics. Perhaps most important to all Sox fans is the way they differentiated themselves from the Cubs in 2005 by winning the World Series.

Having said that, as a true Cubs fan, let us worry about what really matters - winning. Screw the Wrigley Field patrons. If you aren't tired of the "lovable loser" credo, go pop a squat in the bleachers with the drunk guy in the cargo shorts. I have no use for you. And if Sox fans and others want to judge "Cubs fans" as a whole based on their actions, let them be. Would you be as upset if a Mariners fan said the same thing? If Wrigley Field patrons want to go to the game and spend $100 for a seat to buy $6.50 beers all night, please go right ahead. I'm just fine over here with my HDTV, my pooch, and a mean sixer of Diet Cherry Pepsi.

Cubs fans - yes, Cubs fans - should be concerned about one thing right now: winning the World Series. Do not lose sight of the fact that we have the best team in the National League, if not all of baseball. Do not lose sight of the fact that we have a better chance of winning this year than I can remember at any point in my lifetime. Sox fans will talk. Presidential candidates will talk. Wrigley Field patrons will drink. As Cubs fans, dial it in and enjoy.

Green Bay fans viewed Favre in a God-like fashion. (Photo by Tommcmahon.com)

In my last blog, I issued a welcome back message to Brett Favre, specially delivered from Bears nation. Much like he has inconvenienced the Bears during his Hall of Fame career, he has made my blog post completely irrelevant now that he has been traded to the New York Jets, thus ending his storied career as a member of the Green Bay Packers.

That said, I have to applaud the sheer (hmm, what's a nicer word for "balls") grit it took to make this move. They shipped away the face of their franchise - someone as iconic as Lambeau - off to NYC in an effort to look forward.

Could Lovie Smith and Jerry Angelo borrow some of this gusto? If Packers GM Ted Thompson and Head Coach Mike McCarthy could bottle and sell what it took to ship Favre away, I would personally buy some and have it shipped directly to Halas Hall. The Bears can't even decide on who is number one at several positions on their depth charts. Our number one slot at quarterback contains a "slash" - and I don't mean Kordell Stewart (although, he seems mildly intriguing right now - yikes). It contains this: "Kyle Orton/Rex Grossman". Has Lovie Smith found a new rule that allows us to play two quarterbacks? Shocking. I had never heard of this before. More on that later...

But to conclude this post, I'd like to say goodbye to "Lord Favre" who has been dubbed as a God in the State of Wisconsin and throughout the national media. The truth is that he has held a franchise hostage. I mentioned in my previous post that I respect Favre, but in the aftermath of this trade, I respect the Packers franchise even more.

Pre-game warmups at the Green Bay Packers vs. Philadelphia Eagles game,
9/9/07 at Lambeau field. Brett Favre taking the field for practice. Photo by silwanae.

Editor's Note: Welcome to Monitor of the Midway, a member of the
Windy Citizen blog network that will focus on the Chicago Bears, their
fans and season, edited by Jeremy Shermak. Here's his first post.  Enjoy! -Brad

As a card-carrying, die-hard Bears fan, I must say that the Green Bay Packers are about as tolerable as a parking ticket or generic-brand Q-Tips. The mere sighting of green and yellow mud flaps or any foam cheese hat is enough to make me cringe.

But if there is anything I have learned from my long hatred of our north woods rivals, it is that respect for one's enemy can co-exist with hatred of one's enemy. No one has personified this theory more than Brett Favre.

Through 2007, Favre is 22-9 versus the Beloved Bears. This is certainly no reason to like him, but the way he has carried himself throughout his career by playing through injury and personal adversity is, at the very least, admirable.

Recently, Favre has been the subject of great scrutiny after retiring and then unretiring and retiring and then unretiring and...ah, I lost count. His indecision has caused turmoil within the Packers organization and sent rumor mills into overdrive as to his 2008 whereabouts.

As a Bears fan, let me be the first to say: PLEASE COME BACK TO THE PACK.

"What? With that 22-9 record? Why would you want him back?"

Despite reaching the NFC Championship Game last year, Favre's play has suggested a downward trend. I can immediately hear from up over the border some heavy mouth-breathing by Packers fans, saying "well, where were the Bears in the playoffs last year?" or "you'd love to have him as the Bears quarterback."

First, the Bears' poor 2007 season was not a direct result of their play against the Pack. They played one of their better games of the season on October 7 in a 27-20 Sunday night squeaker, before smashing the Pack 35-7 on the Lakefront in December.

Secondly, Brett Favre will offer nothing more than a weak Band-Aid for the Bears quarterbacking wounds. It's a pipe dream. End of discussion.

For the sake of the Bears, Favre is a great fit for the Packers at that quarterback position. Over the course of his Hall of Fame career, Favre's record against Chicago is sparkling, but that is fading. From 1992 through 2003, Favre was 20-3 against the Bears, including a 10-game winning streak from 1994 through 1998 and an 11-1 record at Soldier Field. This 12-year span saw Favre throw more than twice as many touchdown passes as interceptions versus the Bears as the Packers outscored the Bears by an average of more than 10 points per game. This is pure dominance.

But in 2004, things changed. Favre is just 2-6 versus the Bears during the last four seasons. He has thrown three times as many interceptions as he has touchdowns and his quarterback rating versus the Bears has fallen from 93.4 during the previous 12 years to 68.2 from 2004 through 2007.

Beyond the numbers, each day that Favre tosses in the bed of indecision is another dagger in the stability of the Packers franchise. He is holding his replacement, Aaron Rodgers, in a constant state of limbo in a season that would have been an adjustment period even without the Favre distraction. For a bitter rival and a team we play twice each season, the turmoil is nothing but beneficial.