Saturday, June 16

Another Playoff proposal from the college media

Well, summer is coming into approach, and before it lands next week we figured we needed to have posted on the News Stand an article that answers the question on every college football fans' mind -- the Playoff system.  All right, only some fans' minds, but every marketer and ad execs mind.  After all, college football is all about the '$' these days.

Anyway, here goes.  By the end of this article we think you'll be calling for the abolishment of the Bowl game system and the initiation of a 'January Madness' tournament.  Or, you'll be saying, "I wish they'd give this whole thing up and just put more games on TV."

The Playoffs.

First, let's lay out the common attitudes about the process for naming the National Champion in college football.  On the one extreme are views such as this: "the game still has not embraced a legitimate process for determining the Division I-A national champion that is beneficial to the healthy proliferation of the sport" (excerpted from the article below).  On the other end, ones such as the following: "What happened to doing it the old way, where the teams fought it out all year to try to move up in the polls, and your fate was determined by how -- and who -- you played in your Bowl game."  Between these two extremes there is the BCS; numerous polls and indices the combination of which calculates the ratings that tell us who the two most deserving teams are for the chance to compete for the title.

The question now is, Are we satisfied with this 'compromise' presented by the BCS, or do we want to move further to the one or other extreme?

The first reason given to not go for a full-fledged Playoff system is the exploitation of college athletes for financial gain of the universities and television and advertising companies.  Honestly, we have no argument against this one.  You can not deny that a Playoff system means more money for the schools that participate (or get a share of the profits) as well as the television companies that broadcast it, the ad companies that get paid to help the television companies profit from it, and so on ...  You also can not deny that these profits are not shared with the students, in any real manner.  Yes, exposure which can mean higher draft pick position for the few.  Yes, the few can greatly benefit from the toils of the many.  But this is surely no justification.  Score:  Playoffs 0,  Bowls 1.

The first reason given for expansion of the college football National Championship field is, simply, "everyone else is doing it."  I-A Football is one of the few sports where the National Championship process is not expanding its field.  Basketball has 64 teams entered, and this has made for the "March Madness" phenomenon that has become a fixture for many sports fans at the end of the winter.  Baseball has the College World Series, and even other football Divisions have their playoff systems in place with a large field of teams.  I-A football, on the other hand, is making entry into the National Championship ring more and more exclusive. 

_______________________________________________________________

[   More news   ]  |  [   College Fantasy Football Central   ]
_______________________________________________________________

With the current arrangement, only two teams have an opportunity to play for the National title. Only the two teams invited to the BCS game have a shot at winning it all.  Before this new arrangement, three or four or more teams could have had an argument made for them as to why they should be considered MNC teams that year going into the Bowl season.  Then, each has a chance to show off its strength against their Bowl game opponent, and convince writers that they were indeed the most deserving of that title, National Champs.  Likewise, with expansion into a Playoff system, more teams have a shot at winning it all.  Put a string of games together at the end of the season, and you win it all.  

If you like the idea of 'Cinderella' seasons, like those that have made Gonzaga and other teams household names after their Sweet 16 runs in March Madness, you'll be for this expansion to (at least) 16 teams for a playoff.  We'll give this point to expansion: Score, Playoffs 1, Bowls 1.

Now, the tie breaker.  Unfortunately, it's money.  And the reality that money presents to us.  

Those of us who prefer the tradition and pageantry of college football Bowl games are behind the idea of keeping the Bowl system alive and instead of more games arguing for more (and more objective) writers/voters for the polls.  This way, there is a better chance that personal preferences and regional favoritism don't influence poll position too greatly.  The best teams alive at the end of Bowl season get considered by voters for the MNC.  Yes, there will be arguments about who got 'screwed over' by the voters, and why.  Happens every year.  Again, though, tradition!  It keeps this game one for the fans to discuss, debate, and get defensive about.  Ahh, tradition...!

The one thing our method of determining the national champ does not account for, though, is cash.  Money is not made by these discussions, debates, or this voting procedure.  In an age where money talks much louder than tradition, our system is becoming obsolete.  Tradition and memories have to fall by the wayside to ticket sales and monies.

A playoff system will bring in the funds necessary to keep I-A football alive and well.  As much as I hate to say it, it seems the only way to keep things afloat.  (I know many out there, including others on the staff will argue with me at length about this conclusion, but it seems to follow from my perspective.)  

The debate should now center on how best to set up a Playoff system.  To me, the best way is to invite the Conference champions, and strongest Independent team.  Then, through a strength rating of the conferences, give a bye week to the teams that have managed to win the stronger conferences.  Such as this:

11 conference winners (Big XII, ACC, Big Ten, Big East, Big West (now, Sun Belt starting 2001), Conference USA, MAC, MWC, PAC 10 , SEC, WAC) plus one Independent are eligible;  the four strongest Conferences that year (determined, e.g., by the ratings procedure that determines strength for BCS entrants) have their winner receive a bye week, with the other eight teams playing week 1.  (Note: Independent team always plays week 1.)  

Week 2 would have the four winners of week 1 and those teams that had a bye week, ranked by their strength (again, perhaps using the BCS ratings procedure as evaluator of position).  Playoffs would then proceed from there, with a best-playing-worst system of establishing opponents.  

This would give more teams the chance to play, and recognize the relative strengths of the eligible teams (and reward the stronger teams and conferences by allowing them one week off).  Perhaps the greatest benefit of such a system would be increased interest from the fans of the "lesser" conferences.  Perhaps the chance to win the Big West, e.g., and automatically go to the Div I-A Playoffs in the national spotlight would have been enough to keep fan interest (and ticket sales) high enough to support the conference.  Likewise, with new teams coming into the MAC, and Sun Belt starting its Div I-A life, the draw of a shot at being front and center in the nation's football stage would be enough to legitimize the conferences' standings in more fans' minds and bring more of them into the seats.   

As much as I hate to say it, I think a Playoff system would work best.  It would, though, have to be a hybrid of the Bowl and Playoff systems.  It could look something like this:

December -- 2nd Saturday:  Round One of Playoffs
December -- 3rd Thursday:  Round Two
December -- 4th Thursday:  Round Three (after which 2 title contenders remain)
Other Bowl games (generally) start as usual, near Christmas, with the final Bowl Game pitting the 2 contenders, and other bowls set up to automatically have the losers of Round 2 and 3 slotted in.

In this set up, college football fans would have a Playoff starting in mid December, ending early January, with a full slate of Bowl games in between.  The best of both worlds.  (Or, as I like to call it, "the Big Money-Bowl Games Compromise.")

Let me know what you think.  Like it or hate it, if you have an opinion on it tell me what it is.  I'll publish a follow-up story at the end of the summer, discussing some of your feedback.
[   Feedback   ]

_____________________________________________________________