Every year it’s the same. As soon as the college football season starts, the talking heads start clamoring for a playoff, as if on cue. Well, I say they are wrong. While I would not shout and scream if a playoff were implemented, I feel that a college football playoff would not choose its champion as well as the BCS does.
Under the current system, whoever the two teams ranked at the top of the BCS poll at the end of the regular season play in a championship game. In a playoff format, the top four or eight teams would have a playoff. They say it makes more sense because many teams can make a case for being ranked number two. But what about that team who is ranked fifth or ninth? They could probably make a case for being fourth or eighth. The problem has not been fixed; it has merely been relocated.
Another scenario is to take the champions of the six BCS conferences and two at-large teams (those who did not win a BCS conference, but whose play still reflects the attributes of a high-quality team) and put them in a playoff. In this scenario, the problem would be if a particular conference had an off-year. A conference champion could conceivably lose five games, like Pittsburgh did in 2004. If a team puts together a couple good games in a row, they could win the national title. Let’s take an example from this past NFL season.
The Patriots were the most dominant team by far last year. They went undefeated and made it to the Super Bowl. The Giants didn’t even win their own division and had already been beaten by the Patriots in the regular season. The Giants, a 10-6 team mind you, pulled off the upset in the Super Bowl. Under a more rational system, the Giants would not have had a shot at the Patriots.
That’s the beauty of college football – one loss devastates a team’s national championship hopes. You have to be nearly perfect to win a college football championship. In every other sport, there is room for error. Last year was the exception to the rule. In 2007 a two-loss LSU team made it to the national championship game and won. It was the first time a two-loss team had ever made it to a championship game, let alone won. I think LSU was the best team last year. They had the toughest schedule in the toughest conference and managed to manhandle an Ohio State team that was ranked number one.
Article comments
1 - El Bicho
Playoffs appears to work just fine in every other NCAA sport, especially March Madness which appears to be a slightly successful endeavor for all involved.
"Under a more rational system, the Giants would not have had a shot at the Patriots."
So what? Did it not make for a great game? There was a system in place and they came out the victor for the NFC. In fact, the wildcard was installed to "provide more football for fans who psychotically glue themselves to a TV every holiday season."
"It provides teams who played well enough in the regular season a chance to end their season on a high note."
So this is about feeling good? Why not treat it like t-ball and don't keep score so everyone can end on a high note?
"No way BYU handles Texas, Texas Tech, Missouri, Kansas, Oklahoma, and anyone else who would challenge for the conference title."
We all saw what happened to Boise State in the 2007 Fiesta Bowl. If you didn’t, Oklahoma got beat 43-42.
I am glad it works for you and I don't see the BCS going away, but you haven't made your argument. Plus, you seem to miss out on one of the great appeals of sports: the underdog getting a shot. Under your system NC State, Buster Douglas, and the 1980 Men's Olympic Hockey team never would have had a chance to be champs. Thanks, but no thanks.
2 - Matt Wright
"We all saw what happened to Boise State in the 2007 Fiesta Bowl. If you didn't, Oklahoma got beat 43-42."
That was one game. Perhaps I should have made this clearer, but my argument is that a mid-major wouldn't be able to handle those teams week in and week out. Mid-majors generally only have to handle quality opponents two or three times a year as opposed to week-in week-out like the SEC or BIG 12.
"So what? Did it not make for a great game?"
The point is not to have a great game, although that helps. The point is to determine a true champion. If you want a great game, you don't have to watch the Superbowl. You could have watched last week's Buffalo-Army game that went into OT.
"So this is about feeling good?"
Yes the bowl games are about feeling good (except for the championship). Is it wrong to want to end the season well?
3 - Matthew T. Sussman
"Playoffs appears to work just fine in every other NCAA sport"
True, but, well, how would a playoff "not" work? What constitutes a broken playoff system, EB? Or are playoffs just inherently the way to crown all champions and don't ask questions?
Fresno State won the baseball championship after a 32-27 regular season record this year. Is that a sign it works, a sign it doesn't, or just an aberration?
4 - Darin
The argument rest on whether you want to reward the team that has been the best all year.....or the team that is the best at a given moment in time....essentially being around Jan 1. I believe a team spends the entire year developing talent until the end of the year when they should be at their peak, so a playoff is the real answer of who is the "best" team because they've worked all year to get to that level.
5 - reamon
"Under a more rational system, the Giants would not have had a shot at the Patriots."
That's an opinion-based approach. One based on terms like "deserving" and "beloning." The rational system, which the NFL playoffs are, reward the teams that win the right games.
"That’s the beauty of college football " one loss devastates a team’s national championship hopes."
No it doesn't. If it did, why in the world is USC still in the hunt then? Yes, teams ahead of them must stumble too, but USC's title hopes are not dead. If one loss, or two, is "devastating" then why did you have to list an exception in your article?
"That was one game." (OU vs. BSU)
Yes, that's always the response. Win, and it was a fluke. Lose, and you proved you don't belong.
None of the championships, except regular season champions, are about "who had the best season." They are about who can make it to the post-season and then win from there on out. The "national championship" of CFB is a sham. A myth, based predominantly on the opinions of a select few (relatively speaking).
"The mid-majors who go undefeated don’t deserve a berth in the title game either. Sure they go undefeated in the Mountain West or Western Athletic Conference, but put them in the Big 12, SEC or Big Ten and they’re no better than number three in the conference"
There's that "deserving" word again. This is pure speculation which can never be proven one way or another. A playoff would *objectively* determine whether or not a team can compete.
"It provides teams who played well enough in the regular season a chance to end their season on a high note."
Right. And now we've tried to turn them into something they were never intended to be--a mechanism for determining the NC. They are all, including the BCS "title" game, exhibitions.
6 - Matt Wright
"No it doesn't. If it did, why in the world is USC still in the hunt then? Yes, teams ahead of them must stumble too, but USC's title hopes are not dead. If one loss, or two, is "devastating" then why did you have to list an exception in your article?"
I apologize for misusing the word. My point is that a team that loses a third of its games will not make it to the championship and that is how it should be. Giving an 8-4 team a shot at the title makes no sense. It devalues the regular season.
You not longer look at the full body of work, but limit your definition of a good team to the one that plays well at the end of the year. Shouldn't they play well all year?
"Yes, that's always the response. Win, and it was a fluke. Lose, and you proved you don't belong."
I am going off of the evidence that exists. As of yet, not mid-major has played a schedule that is tough week-in and week-out. A case may be made for the winner of the MWC this year, especially if Utah goes undefeated. However, up until this point, there is no solid body of work for any team to meet that criterion.
7 - BCS/Playoffs?
Oh no...not another one of these guys...
Matt, stop writing about your opinion on an online forum indicating if there should be a playoff system or keep the BCS rankings.
All you are doing is feeding the flame, basically stirring up more arguments about including a college football playoff system. It's like talking about politics...
You're not cool because you had the chance to post stupid statements like these...
Don't even bother responding to this post because I'm not even going to read it. Just go outside and do something else besides sitting around at your computer and writing something just to make a scene.
Merry Christmas to you, and enjoy the College Bowl Games.