Bowls vs. Playoffs: A Compromise

by user Drpatriot

I will start this article off by admitting that I am, indeed, a Michigan fan. Luckily, this isn’t going to be an article about how we got completely ripped off this year, how we would have beaten Ohio State on a neutral site, or how Florida is a worse team than Michigan. This is an article about how to fix the BCS system.

The BCS system is flawed. Its rankings are determined by votes and a paltry computer system. Only two teams have an opportunity to play in the national championship, while third teams (to bring up recent examples, Auburn and Michigan) get the shaft. Which teams play in which bowl games are determined by a seemingly arbitrary distribution of numbers and conference wins. Many people would agree that the BCS needs a solution.

Here it is, highlighted in three convenient steps:

1. Keep The BCS Polls

That’s right, I said it. Though somewhat awkward and not necessarily fair, the BCS polls are the way that we currently rank teams. The NCAA is unlikely to accept another way of ranking teams. This ranking system has its uses, and will remain the basis for the collegiate postseason.

2. Create A Twelve-Team Playoff

Though the BCS poll can still have its uses, the current bowl system is broken and favors overhyped, powerhouse schools in the national championship. A twelve-team playoff would keep the necessity for a high level of play throughout the regular season without simply letting every team into the playoffs.

My suggested rules for the playoffs are highlighted below:

A. The BCS Top Four Automatically Make The Playoffs

In addition, these four teams receive an automatic first-round bye, similar to the playoff rules of the NFL. Let the Bottom Eight battle it out to prove themselves worthy of the next round.

B. Champions From Each BCS Conference Automatically Make The Playoffs

As each team has proven to be the best in their conference, they will automatically represent in the playoffs.

C. In The Correct Circumstances, One Non-BCS Team Automatically Makes The Playoffs

This team must have lost no more than one game, must be ranked in the Top 25, and must be the winner of their division.

D. The Remaining Slots Are Filled By Other Top Teams

The next highest ranked team in the Top 25 fills the next spot, and so on until all twelve slots are full.

E. Let The Games Begin

After the eight-team first round, the most highly ranked team will play the lowest ranked team and so on. This format continues until the National Championship Game

F. Integration of Bowl Games

Some bowl games, like the Orange Bowl, Rose Bowl, and so on, can be integrated into the playoff system. For example, in the third round the #1 and #4 teams could always play in the Fiesta Bowl.

3. Keep The Other Bowl Games

This is the most important aspect of the compromise. Bowl games are extremely profitable for NCAA football and can still be a part of this plan. With the bowl games still intact, a fairer national champion can be determined without losing immense profit for collegiate football. Teams that are 8-4 will still get to play in the postseason, and #3-ranked teams will get a fairer shot at the national title.

Pros To The Compromise: -The NCAA Doesn’t Lose Money: This would end up being the most important aspect if this idea were proposed to the NCAA. With bowl games still intact, and a brand new playoff system, the NCAA could actually end up earning more money for its programs. -The Top Teams All Get A Shot At The Title: Teams like #3 Auburn and #3 Michigan all get a shot, and the NCAA avoids controversy like the 1998 Nebraska-Michigan debacle. -The Same Number Of Teams Enter the Postseason: Even though not all teams don’t get to enter the playoffs, 8-4 teams still get to play in the postseason. -Non-BCS Programs Get A Fairer Chance: Teams like 2005 TCU, 2004 Boise State and 2003 Miami of Ohio all get a shot at the big time.

Possible Arguments Against The Compromise: -It Is Against Tradition: The BCS has been the way things have run for a very long time. Changing it could cause a lot of controversy. -Too Many Teams Are In The Playoffs: Only the very, very best teams should be in the running for the national championship. The rest should be satisfied win just a bowl game. -Not Enough Teams Are In The Playoffs: NCAA football needs a system like NCAA basketball for their playoffs. This way, everyone has a fair shot. -The BCS Poll Is Still Used: This outdated system for ranking teams needs to be replaced with something fairer and more objective.

DNLLegend

669 days ago

Score 0

A playoff won't work because then the NCAA has to run a post-season, and it really doesn't want to.

Permalink | Reply

False ProphetAll-Star

669 days ago

Score 0

I like it. I like this the most out of any idea, moreso then mine

Permalink | Reply

TartanVarsity Captain

669 days ago

Score 0

It would kill the sponsorships for the lower bowls. Also, over the years, the same 10 teams would make the playoffs each year, furthering the gap between the have and the have-nots in college football. This would also surely void the NCAA's tax exempt status, which might go down anyway. I don't understand the need for a playoff system, do people need conclusion that much, it doesn't make sense to me.

Permalink | Reply

False ProphetAll-Star

669 days ago

Score 0

Why? Because we want a fair way to determine who is truely the best team in CFB each year? Its the same reason why EVERY SINGLE OTHER COLLEGE AND PROFESSIONAL LEAGUE has some sort of a true championship game determined from some sort of a playoff system

Permalink

TartanVarsity Captain

669 days ago

Score 0

No they don't. There are numerous sports that use judging criteria to determine winners. And lots of sports don't have true championships. Look at the history, years and years have contested national championships, rarely are there absolute outright national championships. Some team some where goes undefeated and doesn't get a shot. College football was never about finding out which team is best, nor should it be. Each school fields the best team it can from the student body, and challenges other schools to a game. Its competition against another school; hence the reason the rivalries are so much better than anywhere else.

This crazy idea that we absolutely have to have a championship game is ridiculous. Why? Take a step back and look at it. Are the games less exciting because there isn't a playoff system? Are the bands quieter because there isn't a "true national championship game?" Absolutely not.

A playoff system would ruin the pageantry and fierceness of the college football season. It turns it into nothing more than a mini NFL, except without salary caps. Do you think these players can stand a 16 game season? This isn't professional sports, and the majority of the players even on big time teams will never sniff the NFL.

And who says a playoff system is fair? Were the Cardinals the best team in baseball last year? No, they got hot at the right time while other teams cooled at the same time. The Steelers last year? Absolutely not, as evidenced by their performance this year with many of the same personnel. The only true way to decide a best team is a round-robin tournament, every team plays every other team, best record in the end wins. Oh yeah, and in this imaginary world, there can't be injuries, or home fields, and all the games have to take place under the same weather conditions.

Quit being ridiculous, people are up in arms about something so great. Debating who was better, the 1997 Wolverines or 1997 Cornhuskers is what makes the whole package so wonderful. A playoff system is far from fair. And more broadly, why do you need to determine who is the best team, what does that serve?

Permalink

DrpatriotAll-American

669 days ago

Score 0

In response to Tartan:

There are numerous sports that use judging as a criteria. However, these sports are all based on an individual effort. Sports like Olympic figure skating, ski jumping, and freestyle snowboarding, all of which use judging as points of scoring, are not based on a group effort. The only way that a "team" wins is when the best players are all from the same country; this is evident by the fact that individual winner of Olympic medals, not teeam victories, are presented at the Olympic ceremonies. No team sport where players are interdependent other than college football use a judging system. Furthermore, all of these sports have specific criteria for their judging systems. College football, on the other hand, does not. For these reasons, better college teams often get the shaft for teams that are not necessarily as good or at least not as deserving (see Michigan, Auburn).

I can understand why you would make your point about a sixteen-game season. However, the bowl games go from December 19th to January 8th. This time span goes exactly four weeks, the amount of time that my playoff system would take. Though teams only play one game during this time period, they still have to practice, and the only two teams to practice for this four weeks are, coincedentally, the two teams playing in the BCS championship, which is exactly how it would be in my system. Though teams would play more games, I doubt anyone would be complaining. As a football player myself, I would be more satisfied to play our way through to playoffs to a championship than to wait, then play in the championship. I suspect most college players would express the same sentiment.

Is a playoff system always fair? No. But the current system isn't fair either. With #3 teams that are equal in talent repeatedly getting the shaft for the national championship game, and non-BCS teams never getting a fair chance, it is far more debatable that a playoff is MORE fair than the BCS system.

In addition, it is less likely that either the Pittsburgh Steelers debacle or the Cardinals problem would occur in this system. This system takes the top 12 teams out of 119 teams, which is roughly the top 10%. In both baseball and football, the top 10% of teams only includes three teams, and neither the Cardinals nor the Steelers would be included in that number. As there are more college football teams, there are proportionately more good football teams. I would argue that every team in this year's Top 12 would be good enough to play for the national championship.

As a Michigan Wolverines fan, I am sure that I don't even need to explain my feelings about the 1997 national championship. As for why we need to determine the best team, perhaps we should scrap the entirety of the postseason and not rank teams. The entire purpose of sports is the competition: to see whose team wins, whose team is the best. A playoff system is a much fairer way of determining the truly best team than a biased ranking system based on the completely arbitrary criteria of whoever votes in the polls.

Permalink

False ProphetAll-Star

669 days ago

Score 0

First, I said Pro sports and college sports. All of which have some sort of playoff system. Those teams were the best when it mattered, which is how a team should be judged for the champion, who was the best when it all mattered, where everything they had been playing for all year. The BCS is great when it denies an undefeated Auburn the chance to play for the National championship? Explain that one. A mini NFL would be great, then we wouldn't have idiots running their mouthes(cough*Tambi Hali*cough) or acting like their the shit when they can't even start on a mediocre team(cough*Troy Williamson). Years like last year when there are only 2 teams with legitimate claims, but in years like this or 2004 when 3 teams have legitimate claims, it doesn't work. And, again, if it isn't about playing for it all, then why do the games get shown on National TV. Why rank teams? Why even care?

Permalink

TartanVarsity Captain

668 days ago

Score 0

You lumped all sports, not team sports, which is incorrect. 3 teams aren't worthy either. There are only two teams worthy of the national championship game, Ohio State and Boise State, but that is a different debate. The system is the way it is, and you have to understand the outlying forces that guide it. Players don't practice for the entire time they're off, they have two weeks of exams and then a break for Christmas, time which cannot be spent practicing or preparing for a first round playoff matchup. C'mon, what do you guys expect out of these kids? The games get shown on National TV because they make money, they're entertaining, and people care about them. The bowls exist because they are a reward for a winning season, and they make money for everyone involved. Every playoff system proposed yet has major flaws because they refuse to take into account who runs college football and they place each team in a vaccuum, which is hardly correct.

Permalink

False ProphetAll-Star

664 days ago

Score 0

I'll add BST to the list, the 2 undefeateds and the best two one loss teams with their logic being they're better than Boise. Next, thats why you play the playoffs right after the regular season, or a week after. I'd set it up so that this weekend would have been the semis, then the finals are right after the new year's eve bowls

Permalink

Anonymous Fanatic #1

570 days ago

Score 0

false prophot yours is pretty good but I have to go with tartan arguement BCS is traditional you take that away from college football you just might as well take out college football itself. I am a Iowa fan which is a BCS team but I still think that the smaller schools still need a chance at some bowl what would be the point for them to play if we just have a playoff system they'll never get into it. Even if they did out of that one team that team wouldn't last long facing the bigger schools. So what are you gonna do with the smaller schools. Another thing its still a championship so why does it matter its still that one trophy that everyone goes for the rest of the bowls just gives other schools chances to win something to so quit complaining the system is fine.

Permalink | Reply