|The Way it Should Be a College Football Playoff|
Contributed by: homieking
My look at college football and bowl games. WE WANT A PLAYOFF!!!
The Way it Should Be.
As a huge fan of most major sports, the one thing that has always made it hard for me like college football is the lack of a playoff. It is because of this that in my opinion there is not a true national champion. For years the national champion in college football was picked by a bunch of sports writers and/or college coaches.
Let me tell you something, if I can, really quick about both sports writers and coaches. Sports writers are for the most part bloggers with a newspaper. They act like they know a lot more about the subject than they most likely do and hold grudges like bad relationships. I have heard rumors of sports writers that won’t vote for certain players to get into the hall of fame because they never got along, or certain teams because they don’t like the owners or the coaches. Sports shouldn’t be about like or dislike, it should be about whether or not that person/team did the job they were suppose to do or put up the numbers that made them champions.
Coaches for the most part could probably pick a champion or tell you who the best team in their sport is, if they had the time. Do you think Bob Stoops of Oklahoma has time to watch every football game in a given week? My guess is he barely has time to watch the highlights on Sportscenter. It’s because of this reason why I never understood the coaches’ poll. I wouldn't be surprise if most of them are either voting for a) themselves, b) their friends or c) the best team in their conference.
We all know now, or at least most of us do anyways, that the championship is decided with what is known as the BCS. Basically what this is is a giant computer that uses the AP poll, the coaches’ poll, and calculations such as strength of schedule to come up with what it feels are the top teams in the nations. They then pair up the top two rated teams for the National Title. More effective then the AP? Sure. But a good solution? No.
Now I know that one of the biggest reasons that many universities and vendors don’t want to have a playoffs in college football is because of money. College bowl games bring in a lot of money to the cities the sponsor them, the schools that go to them, and the conferences they are affiliated with. I have a hard time thinking that if done right that college playoff cannot be just as lucrative. Are you going to tell me that March Madness is not a cash cow? I didn’t think so. So what I have devised is my version of a College football playoff system.
First, I like 16 teams. I know that a lot of people that are fans of a college football playoff like the number 8 but I like 16 for a couple of reasons. An 8 team playoff only gets you the champions of the larger five BSC confernces (ACC, Big East, Big Ten, SEC and Pac-10) with 3 at large bids. However with 16 teams I can represent all 11 BSC (Division 1 or what ever it is called) conferences and still have room for 5 more at large bids. (Don’t worry Notre Dame, you play well and we will get you an at large bid). You are probably thinking: "why does the winner of the Mid American or the Western Athletic conferences deserve a shot?" I would like to give you two reasons. Reason number 1, teams like Boise State, TCU, and Ball State. These teams were all top 25 ranked teams but have to work twice as hard as the big guy to get invited to the BSC championship. Secondly, and on the same thought, one of the best parts about March Madness is when that small conference team upsets the big dog. We all know as Americans we love to root for the underdog and what better place to watch this is there but in college football? If you don't think these teams deserve to be in there then you need to talk to the NCAA and get these conferences moved down to Division I or IAA or whatever it is called.
Another reason I like 16 teams is because it’s really only one more week of football. So instead of three weeks of playoffs we would have four. I think that most of us could live with an extra Saturday of college football in our lives. This year most teams ended their regular season between November 22nd and December 6th depending on if their conference had a playoff. The BSC tile game is going to be on Thursday, January 8th. That’s 5 weeks to play 4 weeks of football, I think those college kids can handle that. And if you are one of those people that think that this is just too much on a college kid then maybe we should cut out one of those tune up games and no one cares about anyways. I’m sure most of us could do with out Ohio State v. Youngstown State or LSU v. North Texas. These games are the ones that truly don’t mean anything so how about we take them off the schedule?
Now in my mind one of the money problems that can be solved with a playoff is we can continue to use the bowl cities and off-site venues to house the games. The 5 or so cities that rotate the BCS championship game every year can still rotate the championship game of this play off and using neutral locations for the rest of the games. This is a great idea in my mind.
So using my system the college football playoffs for this year would have looked something like this.
- ACC – Virginia Tech ( 9-4)
- Big 12 – Oklahoma
- Big East – Cincinnati
- Big Ten – Penn State
- Conference USA – East Carolina
- Mid-American – Buffalo
- Mountain West – Utah
- Pac 10 – USC
- SEC – Florida
- Sun Belt – Troy
- Western Athletic – Boise State
- Texas (Big 12)
- Alabama (SEC)
- Texas Tech (Big 12)
- Ohio State (Big 10)
- TCU (Mountain West)
(Now sure, some might argue you have Buffalo in this. If you have a problem with this don’t yell at me. Yell at Ball State for not winning its conference like it was suppose to. Or yell at the team that reorganized all of this and made the Mid-American a BSC division.)
The seeds would most likely filter out something like this:
8. Penn State
9. Boise State
13. Virginia Tech
14. East Carolina
7. Texas Tech
10. Ohio State
Is this perfect?
By all means, no.
Will there still be snuffs?
Is it more exciting than what we have now?
I think so.