Like their professional bretheren before them, the heads of college football traveled to the nation’s capital last week to defend the integrity of their sport against the verbal tirades of our nation’s lawmakers.
As Rep. Joe Barton (R-Texas) took on the heads of college football this past week in a House sub-committee meeting, the debate over college football’s postseason once again became a hot topic issue among sportswriters and fans of college football nationwide.
The congressional sub-committee argued with Bowl Championship Series (BCS) representatives about what needs to be done to fix college football’s postseason. They went to great lengths to berate Atlantic Coast Conference (ACC) commissioner and BCS coordinator John Swofford, even comparing college football’s lack of a playoff to “communism” in the sense that it just flat out doesn’t work
The current system involves computers using a complex formula to decide who the top two teams are at the end of the season and allowing them play the national championship game. As a native of Eugene, Ore., I can tell you from firsthand experience how unfair this system is. In 2001 my beloved Oregon Ducks were ranked No. 2 in both the AP and the ESPN/USA Today Coaches Poll at the end of the regular season.
However, the computers decided that No. 3 Nebraska, who had just lost their conference championship game a week before, was the better match to take on the vaunted top-ranked Miami Hurricanes. This is one of many examples that fans of college football could cite as evidence to why the current system doesn’t work. Simply put, everyone with half a brain knows that the system is, as representative Barton said, unable to be fixed.
Over this last week more and more critics in the blogosphere have blasted how college football needs to scrap the traditional bowl game format and install a playoff system. While it is true that college football needs some type of playoff, these critics present the problem as an “either, or” situation, in that we fix the current system or we completely scrap the bowls in favor of an eight team, free for all-last team standing wins, playoff. Channeling my inner Henry Clay I boldly ask: why can’t there be both?
And so I propose my compromise of college football’s traditional bowl postseason and its need for a playoff:
At the end of the regular season, the top four teams (not eight), as determined by the BCS computers play each other in a single elimination playoff. The No. 1 team will play the No. 4 as is normal in traditional seeding with the No. 2 playing No. 3 as well. The semi-final games would take place the week after the conference championship games so each team will have its normal break that occurs during bowl season only one week less.
Naturally the winners will go on to play in the National Championship game but here’s where my plan changes from other playoff proposals. After this game, the normal BCS bowl selections will take place in which both losers of the semifinal games would participate in the bowl that they would normally play in if it were the current system that’s used today. After that, the long, mundane and boring beginning part of bowl season would happen. This would allow the heads of college football to still rake in all their sponsorship and ticket revenues that they are so desperately trying to hold on to. After that the BCS bowls would take place and everyone would be happy.
It is well publicized that those in power want to keep the system the way it is so they can continue to make ridiculous amounts of money. My playoff compromise will still leave the bowl season intact while only adding two more games that will take place during a week when there isn’t any college football games going on normally.
Besides wanting to make their money, those in power do have some legitimate reasons for wanting to keep things the way they are.
College football’s unique postseason is exactly that — unique. In no other sport do half the teams, players and fans get their own Super Bowl, giving each team a chance to end its season on a special note. The heads of power believe that in this amateur sport it is necessary for all fans to have a chance to see their team win the last game of the season year after year. If an eight-team playoff was adapted those in power and fans alike would be worried about losing this special part of college football. Yet in my playoff format, the losers of the semi-final games would still get to go to a bowl (most likely a prestigious BCS bowl) so this becomes a non-issue.
However, there are fans on the other side of the spectrum who feel that the entire BCS system needs to be scrapped and want college football to adapt this proposed eight-team playoff. This system appears to make sense on the surface but a couple of problems arise with deeper observation.
The most important part of college football is the regular season. In no other sport is each game so valuable. In no other sport will one slip-up cost you a chance at the ultimate prize.
Just ask Texas who was a miracle catch away from an undefeated season and had a shot at the national title. In some extreme cases a perfect season won’t even get you a ticket to the big dance (Auburn in ’04). This makes every game of the season a must watch for the fans of every perennial contender. This heavy fan-interest leads to higher revenues for the NCAA, a fact of which they are very aware.
More importantly though this creates a season that is unequaled by anything else in the world of sports. My playoff system though would still ensure the importance of a regular season because unlike a giant eight-team playoff with four-teams, the entrance fee to the playoffs would still be a perfect or one-loss record.
Secondly, football is a violent sport. I mean, a really violent sport. The average life for a NFL player is 55 years, which is more than 20 years short of the national average. By putting in an eight-team playoff the NCAA would ask these players to extend their already draining season by two extra games essentially wiping out the month long rest that comes between the end of the regular season and the bowl game. My hybrid four-team playoff only extends the season by one extra game and essentially gives the teams the regular lay-off that they’d normally experience.
At the end of the season the debate always seems to be over the much-scrutinized decision of who actually gets into the championship. Imagine how much controversy would ensue over who the six, seven and eight teams would be to get into the playoffs especially when you have twice that many in worthy candidates.
Who decides between 12-0 Boise State and 11-1 Texas Tech? How do you seed eight different one-loss teams (which is how many one-loss teams there were entering the bowl season this year)? In my four-team playoff the debate would be a little simpler with less teams to choose from. This year as in other years, the selection process would be easy as you would choose the two teams that would normally have a gripe with not getting into the national championship (like USC and Texas this year.)
All in all, my proposed playoff system would add the one or two teams that normally don’t get the chance to participate in the championship game. It would still keep the traditional bowls and the importance of the regular season intact. In stark contrast I think that the eight-team playoff would ruin the beautiful bowl season and regular season that makes college football so great. It’s time for sportswriter and BCS coordinators alike to take heed and give college football a true national champion.