Anyone that follows college football knows that the current BCS system is one of the most controversial and ineffective postseasons in any sport. Every other major sport whether it's pro or college in the U.S. ends its season with a playoff of some sort to decide it's champion. There are different types of playoff systems, whether they are 7-game series or single elimination. The BCS is the only system that chooses its championship game on a ranking system that takes into account strength of schedule and quality of wins. Computer rankings, the media, and coaches' polls are all taken into account when determing BCS standings. This system has failed continuously and fails to clearly define a true champion. First I will name some previous instances.
1.) We will look at this year. As of Week 13, when I wrote this blog, the top 5 looked like this: Alabama, Texas, Oklahoma, Florida, and USC. Oklahoma will play Oklahoma State this week and is favored to win to send them to the Big 12 Championship Game against Missouri. Next week it is very likely that Oklahoma will jump Texas even though last month Texas beat Oklahoma by ten points on a neutral field and both only have one loss, both to top 5 teams when they played them. Texas has a very good reason to be upset. Also Texas Tech will only end up with one loss, to Oklahoma. Although it was by a very large margin, they beat #2 Texas. We know that one of the teams in the big game will be the SEC Champion, either #1 Alabama or #4 Florida. This is not argued over, but Texas, Oklahoma, Texas Tech, and USC (whos only loss came at #17 Oregon State) all have reasons to complain. Even #6 Utah who is undefeated has a voice to say that they should have a chance to see what they can do.
2.) In 2004, three teams finished the year undefeated and at the top of the charts. USC, Oklahoma, and Auburn all finished with a record of 12-0. USC and Oklahoma was chosen to play in the title game, and USC dominated Oklahoma under the offense of Leinart and Bush. Auburn beat 4 ranked teams throughout the year including 3 in the top 10. This is not taking anything away from USC and Oklahoma but should a team that beats the 4,5,8, and 15 teams in the country not have a chance to play for the title?
3.) In 2003, the #1 team in the Associated Press was USC. Who was chosen for the title game? LSU and Oklahoma. The result was a shared national champion between LSU and USC. A SHARED NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP? In one of the biggest sports in America? This should never happen.
I believe that a playoff system is needed and I believe my proposal is one that would work, and would have very few if any criticisms. Lets go point by point.
1. The BCS Rankings stay as they are. However, there are no preseason rankings which give pre-determined rankings to teams on how they did last year and how they are predicted to do. Rankings will start after week 4. The coaches and media will still have their rankings which will be accounted for.
2. It will be a 16 team playoff system with the champions of the SEC, Big 12, Big Ten, and Pac 10 guaranteed automatic berths. This means that the Big Ten and Pac 10 will institute a championship game to be held at the end of the season. Since the playoff system will result in a total of 4 extra weeks, the regular season will be shortened. Each team will play three non-conference games at the beginning of the season, followed by eight conference games followed by the conference championship. The regular season would begin the first weekend of September and finish the last week of November. The 4 big conference champions will have automatic bids, and the other 12 highest ranking teams at the end of the season will also make the playoffs. They will be seeded they way they are ranked at the end of the year with 1 playing 16 and so on. The higher ranked team gets home field advantage. Round 1 will be the first week of December. Then one week will be skipped in respect of finals for the student athletes. Round 2 will be third week of december, round 3 in last week of december, and championship game help first week of January like it is now.
3. The 16 team system makes it possible for mid-major teams to make the playoffs if they have a good enough record even if they did not have the chance to play any big school. This system allows for upsets which everyone loves and underdog stories. It gives a clear cut champion that no one can argue with. People will still argue about that #17 team that didn't make it, but that happens in every sport and people will come to live with the fact that you have to be top 16 or you are not going to the playoffs. This system also allows for many more amazing games between top teams that actually mean something. You could see 2 SEC powerhouses playing against each other which you would not see in a bowl game. For instance if this was in place this year, the second round could look something like Alabama vs. Penn St., Utah vs. Florida, Oklahoma vs. USC, and Texas Tech vs. Texas. You cannot tell me this would not get better tv ratings than the bowl games.
I think my system works, if you have any thoughts, please let me hear them.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
good shit my man....but just kind of an unrelated comment, do u agree with me that the BIG 10 should add another team so as to form a big 10 west and east thusly resulting in a big ten championship game?
notre dame is the obvious choice to me, but no way will they join. Cincinnati perhaps? or a MAC team?
seems to me a big ten championship game will get rid of a lot of problems.
Maybe ND will join when their NBC contract expires.. I'm not sure when that is though, or if it's even likely to expire.
I think the major issue with your model is the fact that bowl games are massive advertisements. America is all about the dollar, and unless we've got the Gillette® : Fusion™ Second Week Showdown, I'm not sure NCAA would have a shot in hell of getting a playoff system in.
Ok, heres my arguments against this specific system.
1) I will agree with you that there shouldnt be rankings before the season, thats a valid point.
2) BCS should be thrown out. There needs to be a new computer system put into place that takes other things into account. Who knows what it takes into account now, but strength of schedule and quality wins needs to be main factors.
3) Your playoff would take way too long. That is far too much football, and it would get old in my opinion. Playoff systems need to be at the most 8 teams, preferably 6. By making it 16, it takes away from the regular season, since many 2 loss teams would get in, and it takes away from being undefeated or ranked very high. A team could schedule 3 out of conference cupcakes, and go undefeated, such as boise state or ball state, and they would get in under this scenario. While, for instance this year, a team like usc, schedules ohio state, and for what? If they win, they get a higher seed, if they lose they dont get screwed that much.
4) This playoff only extends the season for those 16 teams, the fans of the other 103 college teams get screwed out of at least one game, just so 16 teams can play out a playoff system.
5) Auto Bids are ridiculous. (See: ACC and Big East this year). While this year, giving auto bids to the winner of the b10, b12, sec and pac 10 may work, in other years any of those conferences may be down.
I will agree a playoff is probably the best way to find a champion of college football, but this is not the solution. I agree, for the most part, with the suggested solution on mgoblog:
(http://mgoblog.com/content/playoffs-playoffs-were-talking-about-playoffs?page=10)
No autobids. Top 6 teams. 1 and 2 get byes. 3 plays 6, 4 plays 5, higher ranked teams get home field for first round. Semi-finals and finals are rotated among the sugar, fiesta, rose, and orange bowls.
Thats all i can think of right now, im sure there are other flaws, but its 11:40, on the sunday before finals, so theres a few other things rolling around in my mind right now.
Post a Comment