|
 The debate over whether a playoff system similar to NCAA basketball's March Madness would be beneficial to, or even work in, college football remains in full swing.
With 254 votes casts at the time of this posting, Xtra Point Football readers are in a relative deadlock on the issue split virtually 50 / 50 (for / against) an NCAA Football Playoff System.
If you haven't voted already, please do so. We will leave the poll up through the bowl season.
Both sides have exhaustively presented their side of the argument; but political tools have gotten us nowhere. Congress has even weighed in on the issue, although both sides seem to agree that the final decision should rest with knowledgeable people that don't have special interest groups nipping at their heels-or if that doesn't work then we'll settle for those with sponsors nipping at their heels.
Coaches, former players, analysts, reporters, conference commissioners...they've all weighed in on the subject. And here we are, with two teams from non-automatic qualifying conferences heading to bowls. So what's all this huffing and puffing about? Isn't that what we all wanted? To see schools like TCU and Boise State have their fair shot at a BCS bowl?
Well, to the dismay of pretty much everybody, TCU and Boise State are matched up against each other in the Fiesta Bowl, giving neither a shot at a team from an automatic qualifying conference and thus giving neither a shot at proving they belong in the BCS bowl picture! Ugh. Jason Lockhart, take it away.
The internet, magazines, airwaves and newspapers (those funny looking publications printed in black and white that your grandfather swears by) are inundated with stories and articles covering the BCS/Playoff debate. So please allow me to add another.
Let's start by outlining a few of the pros and cons of implementing a playoff system in college football. I know that there are those who are just dying to poke holes in any pro or con I mention and any input is always welcome in the comments area. So, let's begin.
Pro: No more undefeated schools asking why they weren't given a chance at the title-like the 13-0 Utah Utes from a year ago. This season, we are guaranteed to have at least two undefeated teams when all is said and done. Both Alabama and Texas are undefeated and will face off in the BCS National Championship, and both TCU and Boise State are undefeated and will face off in the Fiesta Bowl. If Cincinnati beats Florida in the Sugar Bowl, we'd have three undefeated teams. A playoff would ensure a maximum of one undefeated team every year.
Con: How many teams do you let in? Eight? Sixteen? Would we encounter the same problems with the 'bubble teams' that we now encounter with the TCUs and Boise States of the world? If sixteen teams are allowed into the playoff, what would teams seventeen and eighteen say? How much of a difference is there between West Virginia (16), Pittsburgh (17) and Oregon State (18)? I bet most would agree that the gap between Texas and TCU is larger. Or maybe not... (And I know West Virginia beat Pitt.)
Pro: Of course, you can look at the previous con another way. Take this year. TCU, Cincy and Boise State are undefeated. Nobody has been able to prove that they are not the best team in the nation. Teams 17 and 18 would have a much tougher time convincing us all that they deserve a shot at a title, especially considering those teams typically have three or four losses at the end of the regular season. The three undefeated teams left out of the championship game this season have legitimate arguments for inclusion in the title consideration because nobody has proven they don't deserve it. Under a playoff system, there would be no undefeated teams complaining that they weren't given a shot.
Con: A playoff would take away bowl week. In a two or three game playoff system, what game do fans buy a ticket for? If they gamble on their team going the distance, buy a ticket for the third round and their team is eliminated in round one, they'll have missed out on their team's sole playoff game. And what is a world without the Rose Bowl, Sugar Bowl, Orange Bowl or Fiesta Bowl? Or without any other bowl for that matter? Not a world I'd like to live in, that's for sure.
Pro: No more subjectivity of human or computer based polls in determining the final rankings. In a playoff, you win and you move on. You lose and you go home. How much more objective could it really be?
Con: A playoff would weaken the regular season. Teams with one, two or even three losses would theoretically get the same shot at a national title as an undefeated team. In the current system, one loss often means the end of any national title hopes and two is a death sentence. But not in sports using a playoff. The Arizona Cardinals lost 7 games last season (.563 winning percentage) and narrowly missed winning the Super Bowl. A 7-5 college football team has a .583 winning percentage. Has this year's 7-5 Oklahoma team earned a shot at the title? What about UConn or South Florida? Idaho? Auburn? Georgia? Okay so maybe a five loss team wouldn't get a shot in a college football playoff system, but 9-3 Virginia Tech, LSU, Miami and West Virginia may. Should they play for the title? I didn't think so. College football has the most competitive and meaningful regular season in all of sports-college or professional. It's one of the many things that make this sport so great. That mustn't be taken away. Of course, there's the flip side of that, where in the current system if a team with national title aspirations loses its first game, the rest of the season is pretty much moot in achieving that goal. So...
We must find a middle ground, people! I think that much is clear. Want more pros and cons? Check out ProCon.org's college football page for a longer list of pros and cons. Or if you feel like giving yourself a headache, check out the BCS's PlayoffProblem.com page for a politically charged assessment of the playoff system.
Personally, I'm a big proponent for a playoff system that would utilize the current ranking system while preserving the bowl weeks. It may sound difficult, but with a little effort, I'm confident it could be done. Here's how:
- To reduce the number of games played, teams would dock one regular season game from their schedule each year-likely a non-conference opponent.
- Conference championship week would still be alive and good, but would not determine the participants in the BCS bowls.
- The top eight teams, as determined by the BCS rankings, participate in a playoff so that two teams remain. Home field advantage goes to the higher ranked team.
- The two teams left standing will play in the BCS National Championship-hosted by the Rose Bowl, Fiesta Bowl, Orange Bowl or Sugar Bowl on a rotating basis. There would not be a separate game for the national championship.
- The remaining six teams in the playoff would play in the other three BCS bowls. They would be distributed to the different bowls by BCS ranking, by how they finish in the playoff or by some combination of both.
- The remaining bowl games would choose their participants in a similar fashion to how they choose them now. Certain bowls would still be affiliated with certain conferences and would fill any vacancies with at-large bids.
The eight team playoff would reduce the number of games needed to determine a champion and would limit participation in the playoff to the very best teams in the nation. Regular season competition would be alive and well since most teams in the top eight by season's end typically have only one or two losses. Any team that drops an early game will not see their championship hopes shrivel up and die. The playoff would promote competition among the nation's best teams, giving nobody an easy path to a championship. All bowls would go on as normal in the bowl weeks.
To reduce the number of games, teams could dock one game from their regular season schedule, likely an out-of-conference opponent. As most teams have contracts with out-of-conference schools already in place, this would have to be reconciled.
Instead of the usual 12 game regular season, teams may begin implementing an 11 game regular season and teams lucky enough to play for their conference title will have played 12 games before the start of the playoff. The eight teams participating in the playoff are likely to be the same teams playing in their conference championship games, unless you're the ACC, so let's assume that most teams have played 12 games going into the playoff. Add two more games to get to two final teams and you're at 14 games for the four teams participating in the semifinals. Plus their bowl game and that's 15 games-14 for teams eliminated in the quarterfinals.
To satisfy the logistics of the whole thing, the regular season may be moved up by one week, so that the free week is still in place (remember we're docking a game from the regular season)-the Army/Navy game can maintain its place as the only game on television for the week.
To put this all in perspective, let's take a look at this year's final shakedown and see how it would all pan out under this system.
I went ahead and assumed the winners of the games for the sake of presenting an example. I realize that the prospect of seeing Alabama vs. Florida Part 2 would be frightening or unacceptable to some, but it's just an example so cool those retaliatory jets.
In this scenario, Alabama and Texas would play in the Rose Bowl for the National Championship. Let's say the Orange Bowl grabs the next highest finishers this season. That would mean Cincinnati and Florida would go head to head in the Orange Bowl because they were eliminated in the semis. The remaining four teams-Ohio State, TCU, Boise State and Oregon-were eliminated in the quarterfinals. They would be sent to BCS bowls based on their final ranking. This season, let's say the Fiesta Bowl takes the third grouping, which would be #4 TCU and #6 Boise State (ha!) and then the Sugar Bowl would take the next, which would be #7 Oregon and #8 Ohio State. Of course, how the games unfold would be completely variable.
Okay, so there you have it; there are economic, contractual and legal concerns to be considered and worked out before any playoff system is put into place. But I'm confident that all of these issues can be resolved.
Bring on the hole punchers! - Danny Hobrock
Danny is a sports journalist who primarily covers college football and professional baseball. He is a contributor for several sports related blogs and is the former editor of a political and current events website.
If you haven't voted in our poll on the site yet please do so. We are trying to get a feel for how our readers are looking at the game of NCAA Football so we can write about things they want to hear. The poll question is, "Do you think the NCAA should have a Playoff to determine the National Champion rather than the BCS / Bowl System?" - Please vote.
Have a Fantasy Football or Baseball question? Want to know who to pick up, who to activate and who the hot prospects are? Ask Dr. Roto. Let Dr. Roto guide your team to a league championship.
 
 |
I say 24 teams seeded. Top 8 get a bye, next 16 a play-in game at high seed stadium. Next round at Top seed stadium to get to a final 8 like you have above.
As for your bracket above, no need to have a playoff system if their are no upsets and the polls are right. As for our Ducks. We will play and beat Texas any time or place. They won't play us, ask Michigan why. We destroyed their program a few year ago and still haven't recover. Tennessee next year and we'll do the same.