On Platonism and National Championships

Texas lost the National Championship game. Congratulations to Alabama.

What is going to be discussed for a long time here in Texas is "What if?" Specifically, what if Colt McCoy wasn't knocked out of the game after only four plays? And so the question will be asked, was Alabama truly the better team?

Here's my take on that question.

The question about who is the better team is a Platonic question, a metaphysical question. It's a question that asks what if we could get the perfect expression of Texas and Alabama to play under perfect conditions in some heavenly realm--the Platonic ideal of the BCS Championship Game--who would win that game? Texas or Alabama?

The trouble is football isn't a metaphysical dispute. The categories of better or worse don't apply. Football is a game. That means it generates winners and losers. Not better or worse. That might be dissatisfying, but a Platonic search for the perfect is futile. Call it the sports version of the problem of evil. Alabama won. Are they better? That's a religious question and, of course, true believers on both sides will have their answers.

In short, football isn't a Platonic competition. It isn't played on Olympus by demigods who can't get injured. It is, rather, a game played with human bodies and minds. Bodies that can feel pain and get injured. Minds that can get confused or rattled. In short, football is drama. Not philosophy. And the drama that unfolded in the second half was pretty riveting.

So, congratulations to Alabama. They won the game.

But I still think Texas is the better team...