Well, we have a college football playoff, or will have soon enough, the 2014 season.
And we'll have a committee to determine the four teams.
The reason for the committee approach is clear: It's different. If we had been allowing a committee to select the two teams for the BCS' Big Bowl all these years, sure as shooting we'd now be going to some kind of BCS formula, complete with polls, computers and whatever other gadgetry someone could imagine.
Anything to get as far as possible from the BCS stench. That system, for better or worse, had soiled in the public view.
So we have a committee, and eventually we'll have to name committee members.
Lots of volunteers for that one. They say the NCAA basketball committee is the most prestigious in college sports. It's about to be second.
Football trumps all, as we learned in conference realignment and as we knew already here in God's Country.
So plenty of people will be itching to decide whether Georgia or Wisconsin, Texas or Oregon, make the Football Four.
Already, coaching icons from Barry Switzer to Bobby Bowden, from Lavell Edwards to R.C. Slocum, have offered their services.
Here's what we should tell coaches, ex- or otherwise.
Yes, coaches know football far better than the rest of us great unwashed. Yes, coaches know who's blockable and who's not. Yes, coaches see weaknesses and tendencies the rest of us cannot see. Yes, coaches know the game.
But the football committee doesn't need members who decipher football. The football committee needs members who decipher results.
Switzer, and Pat Jones, and every other football coach you know, bless their souls, talk about what they see when they study teams.
Usually starts with defensive tackles and foot speed at every position and quarterback play, be it arm strength or having the good sense not to throw the ball just because it's in their hands.
But the committee's job is not to judge talent or to judge execution or even to judge who would win a game between a certain two teams.
The committee's job is to judge what you have done, not what you will do.
Think back to the mantra we hear from the basketball committee in recent years, as it tries to be more and more transparent on why it selects the teams it selects.
It comes down to three things: 1. Who you played; 2. Where you played them; 3. How you fared.
The rest doesn't matter.
College football's curse for a century has been its style-show format. In what fashion did you win? Beat Indiana by 60 points, rise in the polls. Struggle against Vanderbilt, drop.
Style points need to be in college football's past, not in its future.
How good you look in your uniform, how strong and athletic are your defensive tackles, how many points you beat Kansas by, should be irrelevant.
And frankly, that's where coaches eliminate themselves from committee qualification. A football coach can't look past those things. Their minds are trained to see football in a certain way. Their minds are trained to analyze football games. They are not trained to analyze football results.
Coaches would look at the 1995 Northwestern Wildcats and see a squad that had no business beating Notre Dame or Michigan or Penn State. Coaches would have been hard-pressed to include 10-1 Northwestern in a final four.
Coaches would dismiss a 2007 Boise State or a 2008 Utah or a 2010 TCU, not because of strength of schedule concerns, which might be legit, but because of a talent discrepancy to the naked eye.
The committee should not evaluate talent. It should evaluate results. Sorry, coaches. You're not needed.
Berry Tramel: Berry can be reached at (405) 760-8080 or at email@example.com. He can be heard Monday through Friday from 4:40-5:20 p.m. on The Sports Animal radio network, including FM-98.1. You can also view his personality page at newsok.com/berrytramel.