Playoffs VS BCS

Every September a small rumbling starts up surround college football. This rumble grows throughout the season and culminates in late November to early December. This rumble is college football faithful trashing the BCS system.

The BCS (Bowl Championship Series) is a system developed in 1998 uses a complex computer formula consisting of statistics and strength of schedule along with rankings from the Coaches and AP to decide the top teams in college football and pit these teams against one another in certain bowl games with the #1 and #2 teams facing each other for the national title.

The controversy, as most college football fans know, is that each year teams who think they should be in the championship game end up coming in third or lower because of some end of the year poll shift, a weak schedule, or a close loss to a very talented team playing on adrenaline. Almost any system will have problems, but the most reliable system would take into account the conference winners and close runner ups.

In my opinion, the ideal system would be set up as a 16 team playoff. Each Conference would send its champion (which would require a championship game in each conference). This does include the "non-BCS" conferences. However, as we have seen the last couple of years, some of these schools can run with the big dogs and this would give teams like Utah (who finished undefeated last year) a legit chance at winning it all. There are 11 conferences and the independents. The remaining 4 slots would be filled by teams who were ranked the highest in the polls. The teams would be seeded based on record, strength of schedule, and other things similar to the current BCS. Based on this seeding, there will be one round each weekend through December with the winners advancing. The final two teams after this playoff would end up facing each other in a winner take all championship game.

There are many arguments against a system like this. The first is that this could place games during finals week. However, athletes practice all year long. They are used to studying around practices. Maybe schools could schedule finals during the same week so that on that weekend there would be no games. These athletes would find ways to cope and with the tutoring that many schools provide and flexibility that most professors have for athletes as is to allow them to complete their finals while practices are going.

Another downside is that if there was a +4 system (the conference winners plus 4 teams), there would still be some ranking controversies. Teams who would have been the fifth non-conference winner in the rankings would complain that they should have been ranked higher or that teams who won weaker conferences shouldn't have made the playoffs while they sit at home. These teams would face the argument that they should have won the conference or at least lost fewer games. It would essentially mean that teams with only one or two losses shouldn't have lost two games if they are among the best in the country.

The third major argument is that adding four extra games might lead to more injuries. However athletes could be injured in any game and it is a risk that they take every time they put on their helmets. Some athletes will have nothing to lose, knowing that they could be done with football forever after their last collegiate game. Others might be worried about a career in the pros, but these athletes would get a chance to show off their ability as well as acclimate themselves to the 16 game NFL schedule.

For all the downsides to a system like this, there are upsides as well. The first upside is that there would be one undisputed champion at the end. There would be no more split championships. The team who won each conference is probably the best in that conference, or at least the hottest. The playoffs would start with the best of each conference and the next four best teams. This means that the best teams would play and the winner would be the best of the best.

The second is that college football fans would have football all through December. Most conference championships are done no later by the beginning of December. We would see four weeks of great football leading up to the best game of the season in the first week of January. No more of this 4 week lull in the schedule. The best games would close out the season leading to the pinnacle, just as it is in Pop Warner, High School, and Professional football. Every level of football has playoffs with the exception of Division 1 college football. This would provide uniformity to the sport.

Another advantage is that the schools that have a good year would get the extra revenue from having multiple games. There are a number of schools making huge cuts and with a percentage of ticket sales and TV rights going to the school, the schools could greatly benefit from making the playoffs.

Finally, conference games would matter more and just because a team is in a traditionally weak conference, they wouldn't necessarily be excluded from consideration. While there would be a few weak schools playing with the big boys, it would give these teams some chance of making the big game - a process which is virtually impossible now.

Because of all of these factors, we as college football fans would get to see some great games and get to see which team truly is the best if the NCAA would move to a plus 4 system. Maybe in the next few years, after the BCS deal expires, college football fans will get their wish.