Kevin Blackistone of AOL Sports writes that the Missouri Tigers should cancel their plane tickets and hotel accommodations for the Big 12 Championship Game this Saturday and allow one-loss Texas to do battle with Oklahoma instead.

So I phoned the Big 12 office on Monday to see if it could get the Tigers to cancel their bus or plane reservations — however they figured this week to make the two-hour drive from Columbia, Mo., to Kansas City — for the conference championship. After all, the Tigers, with three losses and hanging on to the Top 20 by their claws, could win the Big 12 game by 100 points and still not get a certificate of appreciation from the organizers of the national championship game, let alone an invitation to participate. The only people who would benefit would be those who bleed Burnt Orange.

But the Big 12 office informed me there was nothing it could do. NCAA rules bound the conference’s championship procedures.

So it is up to the Tigers to voluntarily step aside and let Texas and Oklahoma settle the Big 12 crown. And everybody would win. I bet Texas and Oklahoma would even agree to give Missouri a little more of their title game loot.

Above all, the Tigers moving aside would further demonstrate the ridiculousness of how the highest level of college football decides who plays for its championship — with voters, computers and hocus pocus. Every college sport decides its champion with a postseason tournament except for D-I (that’s right, I said it again, so sue me) football. Every college team that goes undefeated in its sport can play for that sport’s championship except D-I football, where this season three undefeated teams — Utah, Boise State and Ball State — are locked out.

I know Blackistone is being facetious with most of this, but it’s not MIZZOU’s fault (or concern) that Oklahoma and Texas play in the same division. They won the North and therefore deserve to play in the Big 12 title game. That’s the bottom line.

But it is a novel idea. Outside of MIZZOU fans, most of the college football world would love to see Texas and Oklahoma settle this debate on the field once and for all. (Settle the debate on the field again, that is.)

I used to have a friend in college named Paul. He was a great guy – loved football, although he couldn’t care less about the NFL. He was a college football fan through and through.

Paul and I used to get into heated debates over which was better – college or pro football. One time we almost came to blows in his living room, although it’s important to note that there may have been some alcoholic beverages involved that contributed to the debate growing into a fight.

His main points were that NFL players only cared about money and essentially weren’t playing for the love of the game. Conversely, since college players weren’t being paid, they played more for the competition and the love of football. He also noted that the game-day atmosphere in college football was way better than in the NFL and that the regular season games had more meaning because if a college team lost, than their season could essentially be over.

His first point about college football players loving the game more because they’re not being paid is a bit flawed. Some NFL players only play for the money. But some college football players are only playing so that they can make it to the NFL…so they can make money. I really don’t see the difference.

But Paul had a point about the atmosphere being better in college – I would rather tailgate with a bunch of rowdy college kids than some stuffy executive types that got their NFL tickets for free at the company picnic.

However, after Oklahoma leapfrogged Texas in the BCS standings this week despite the fact that the Longhorns beat the Sooners earlier in the year, I refuse to agree with anyone who says regular season games in college have more meaning than in the NFL.

Jason Whitlock of the Kansas City-Star reacts to Texas getting the shaft after Oklahoma leapfrogged over them in the BCS standings.

AP and Harris voters could comprehend a simple, unavoidable fact: On a neutral field, Texas beat Oklahoma 45-35 this season.

There’s nothing left to debate. It doesn’t matter that Oklahoma’s nonconference victories are more impressive than Texas’. It doesn’t matter that Oklahoma is playing “better� football at the end of the season.

Texas beat Oklahoma.

And I don’t care about the three-way tie, and the fact that Texas Tech beat Texas. We’re allowed to use common sense when deciding a complex situation.

The Red Raiders lost a game by 44 points this season. The Red Raiders barely beat Baylor this season.

The Red Raiders needed a last-second touchdown to slip by Texas.

Tech had a magical year, beat up a bunch of cupcakes early and hung on for an 11-1 season. It’s a fluke. Oklahoma exposed the Red Raiders and Mike Leach’s gimmicky offense.

Look, my main point is that it’s criminal Oklahoma will get to play for the Big 12 crown and not Texas.

Everybody allegedly wants a playoff system, but it appears we reserve the right to ignore what happens on the field when it suits our purpose.

As Whitlock points out, there really is nothing to debate. Texas beat Oklahoma on the field. Texas beat Oklahoma on…the…field. Texas beat Oklahoma on the field. TEXAS BEAT OKLAHOMA ON THE FIELD!

Only in the BCS system could a team beat another team on the field and not benefit from it. It’s a complete crock of crap, but unfortunately not even something as ludicrous as this will force a change. I’m of the mindset now that we’ll never see a college football playoff.