Why A LSU-Alabama Rematch in the BCS Title Game Is Just Wrong
It is certainly possible that LSU and Alabama are the two best team in the nation. However, we don't know. And that is the problem with the current BCS system - we just don't know. Our collective perception of teams is very often quite accurate, but we've all been wrong before - like in 2006 when Florida beat down Ohio State. Which is why we should base our voting and BCS title matches on what we do know.
What we do know is that Alabama is not the better than LSU, is not the best team in their conference, or division. If we're going to use the regular season as a playoff, as nearly all BCS supporters do, then Alabama has been eliminated. We do know they are not the best. This doesn't mean they aren't the second best team in the nation, but we know they aren't the best and therefore don't deserve a chance at the BCS title.
What we don't know is whether or not Oklahoma St, Virginia Tech, Houston, or heck even Michigan State or Wisconsin - all highly ranked likely conference champions (you know, winners of the regular season "playoff") are better than LSU.
These unknowns are what still need to be solved. As unlikely as it may be that any of those teams may be better than LSU or be the best team in the nation, it has yet to be proven whether or not they are. However, we do know that Alabama isn't. That is why a LSU-Alabama BCS title rematch is the incorrect matchup. We shouldn't use the BCS title game to re-prove what we already know. It should be used to find out what we don't know - and that's whether LSU, the nation's #1, is better than their next challenger.