College Football - BCS or Playoffs

There's a heated debate going on in college football - and it's way more than which rival will win the big game. Many fans are demanding a playoff system, saying the BCS isn't fair, and that the system excludes worthy teams from the top spots. However, there's a reason the BCS is the best choice to crown the college champions. Playoffs aren't the best choice for crowning college football champions - and here's why.

Where would the games go?

To have playoffs, the college football season would have to last at least another month - probably longer. The championship game would be in February or March (or later, depending on how many teams are in the playoffs). Besides being ridiculously long, this creates a whole new set of issues. First, players often play more than one sport. Football players also play basketball or run track. Invading the other sports' schedules would eliminate football players from these rosters most of the season for their second sport. Players might have to quit football if their scholarship is from the spring-schedule sport in order to keep their focus (and their scholarship). Second, ticket sales to football games would inevitably go down overall. Some fans would wait until later games, since they have a chance to see the team later on. Missing a game wouldn't be a big deal. Later games have to compete with the other sports' games, so fans would have to choose. Schools would lose money, since they would have to cover operations of the stadium regardless of how many fans show up.

Players can't play that long

Football is a rough sport. Injuries are already high by the end of the regular college football season. Extending it would raise the odds that players would face injuries. Not only that, but these college athletes would have to play a season as long as or longer than the NFL season. They're professional athletes - college students are not. Their bodies cannot handle the stress and strain of several more weeks of football.

Numbers Don't Lie

BCS numbers and rankings receive plenty of criticism, but the numbers don't lie. It is a mathematical formula that takes into account past and present performances, combined with the statistics of the teams played. Complaints or not, it's correct. That number is the sum of how each team's performance ranked among all the other teams. If a team beats a team with no losses, it should be more important than if they beat a team that hasn't won a game. A win is a win, but some wins are bigger and more important than others.

Where would it end?

If we made it the top 8 teams, #9 would surely complain. Then we'd have to up it to 16. But #17 would be upset. There's never going to be a way that no one complains, unless every team in college football is in the playoffs. And that isn't feasible. To make it so that every team has a fair chance, double elimination would be necessary. And that can't happen

It would change the title

A playoff season picks the best team for the day, not best team throughout the year. Is that what college football fans want? Or do they want the best team based on their record, their performance overall through the season? The Heisman is a trophy awarded for year-long performance. College football champions should be the same. The regular games wouldn't have any meaning, since the playoffs would determine the title.

The bottom line is there is always going to be a loser. Yes, everyone wants to win. And everyone wants to play the big game. The biggest argument is the strength of schedule issue. Yes, it can keep great teams out of the championship game. But if college football is crowning the title for the best team, the BCS is doing that. The truth is, BCS takes into account luck as well as full-season performance. Playoffs would involve much more luck and less emphasis on how the team played all year. How a team performs a single day is far less indicative of a great team than taking into account full-year statistics.