Sack the BCS? Not Like This

by corn blight on Dec 7, 2006 1:14 PM CST in Football Comment 6 comments

Sack the BCS is a web site where you can give your input to the NCAA about getting rid of the BCS and coming up with a playoff system for Division IA college football. (HT: My Opinion On Sports)

Nice idea, but very very wrong.

Here's their reasons for wanting to sack the BCS:

There are too many deserving teams - year after year there are 3 to 4 other teams that realistically deserve a shot at the national title. A playoff system would allow the teams to play for the championship on the field.
The ONLY sport that doesn't have a playoff - College Football Division I-A is the only college sport that doesn't have a playoff system to decide the nation champion. The other college football divisions of Division I-AA, Division II, and Division III all have a playoff system.
Fans want it - there is wide public opposition to the current BCS system. Fans are getting frustrated with the lack of fairness with the BCS beauty pageant.
It shouldn't be about the money

We've already covered the idea that unless it's done properly, a playoff would be a total disaster. I have yet to see someone come up with a system that doesn't somehow involve the existing bowls.

Some would say that Division IA football is unique (and make some excellent points) because of the fact that we don't have a playoff system, that this means the bowl games mean more. I like the bowl system for one simple reason - it provides us with MORE college football, not less (more on this in a later article).

It's too bad that more people don't pay more attention to how the other divisional playoff systems work instead of just using them as an example.

Post-season Division IA play isn't about satisfying the egos of college football fans, either. This isn't the NFL, and it's not Division II or III. The requirements to play at Division IA are massive, and a playoff adds to those requirements for kids that are students first, athletes second. If you don't like that, give up on college football and watch the NFL.

It shouldn't be about the money.... and we should all try to get along in peaceful harmony, regardless of race, religion and size doesn't matter. Money makes the world go around, whether you want to admit it or not. Steve Spurrier got a half million dollar raise because someone mentioned him coaching at Miami - the money for that doesn't just fall from the sky. I know that some wish they were in an alternate reality, you have to deal with the real world. It is about the money, not entirely, but money is a huge factor. It's why the bowls exist - because the universities have negotiated contracts with the bowls.

The biggest problem with "Sack the BCS" site is the fact that University presidents and chancellors - are the people who control what happens in post-season NCAA Division IA football. (NOT the NCAA, folks, the NCAA has nothing to do with post-season play.)

You want to sack the BCS? Come up with a different reason and direct it at the right people, not the NCAA. Maybe you could go set yourself on fire at an annual meeting of the University presidents, that would certainly bring some media attention.

Sack the BCS's proposal for a playoff is as follows:

Conference Champion System
- The top five conference champions would receive automatic bids and the next top three teams, according to the BCS rankings, would receive the remaining three bids.
Top 8 BCS teams

The regular season would end on Thanksgiving Weekend
There would be an 8 team playoff
The 8 teams would be chosen using the BCS model
The games would be played at neutral locations and could be former bowl game sites

There's a wonderful contradiction at work here. The regular season ending on Thanksgiving weekend implies that Conference Championship Games would be eliminated. Instead, we'll be choosing conference champions the way that the Pac-10 and Big 10 choose their conference champions where the two best teams in the conference may or may not play each other, depending upon the season. That sounds contradictory to the emphasis on having a playoff, doesn't it?

Insert here the argument that if we had an eight team playoff that the ninth team would be screwed, and we'd all be complaining about that instead. Fans need to decide whether or not the purpose of a playoff system is to decide who has best team OR just crown a champion. If you want to crown a champion, have a playoff but don't kid yourself that the best team may emerge.

The games would be played at neutral locations and could be former bowl game sites? What is it with those that want a playoff that continue to patronize the existing bowl system? Do away with the concept of bowl locations for the teams in the playoffs if you're proposing a new playoff system, please.

Sack the BCS is a popular theme, perhaps set up with the best of intentions in made. Unfortunately, it won't make much difference. If you want a change, college football fans must focus on the people who run the system.

0 recs | Comment 6 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

One thing....

I have noticed about you is that when someone makes a comment about a playoff or how to do it or just says the BCS sucks that no matter what the reason you say it is stupid. But if someone is in favor of the BCS they have great points as to why. Kind of one sided I would say.

If the NCAA is not in charge of post season play how can they say that teams who fail to graduate a certain % of players cant go to bowl games? How can they put teams on probation and tell them they cant go to a bowl game? Why do you have to go through the NCAA to get a new bowl game established? The NCAA may not decide who plays in what bowl but believe me they are in charge.

If the current bowl games aren't about satisfying fans egos why do fans care so much and brag about what bowl their team is in. It is about the fans and their egos, or bowls wouldn't care so much about which teams bring the most fans. They know which fans will come to their bowls and they try to get those teams. If fans didn't care they wouldn't go.

You wouldn't have to end the conference championship games, just get rid of the twelth game and have the championship games on Thanksgiving weekend. The top 8 teams could go to the playoffs and the rest could go to the bowl games. The minor bowls would still get the same teams (ranking wise) they are getting now so why would they have to change.

by taflorom on Dec 7, 2006 9:54 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

you asked some darned good questions

that i don't have answers to - specifically about where the NCAA control begins and ends.

So - early next week, I'll be getting some answers from the NCAA about this issue.

I'll post them as a separate article. Thanks for the thought provoking stuff....

With regards to "egos" of the fans, you're right, the bowls are about ego as well. They're a reward for hard work in the season, or at least the players probably see them that way. The thing about the bowls, though, is that they don't require a change from the way of doing things.

By that, I specifically mean they won't require any more work or time out of the athletes than they're already doing. Playing in a playoff system would add extra games (possible injuries) and time away from studies (because most likely they'd be on the road).

If you're a warm-weather team, and the playoff consisted of the existing bowl games, you're going to be away for two or three weeks. That's the argument against the playoffs.

Go Big Red!

by corn blight on Dec 8, 2006 5:54 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

finals

are this week I believe so if you took this week off and then started playing again most wouldn't miss anytime in school. Thats why they play the bowls over christmas vacation.

by taflorom on Dec 9, 2006 2:22 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

maybe...

you should read some more on the Sack the BCS blog. It has an article from a Florida newspaper about the presidents of Fla. and Fla. St. getting together to end the BCS and start a playoff. They say 8 teams but are not opposed to 16. They also say to get rid of the twelth game as many of them were bad games and should not have even been thought of let alone played (NU vs. Nichols ST. being one?). So not all presidents are against it. When does the current BS contract run out? I would look for a bigger push this time for a playoff.

One last thing. If you say a playoff wouldn't give you the best team does that mean you think the BS does? Far from it my friend. How about the year that USC and OU played in the BS "championship" game? Wasn't Auburn undefeated that year too? The only reason they were left out is that they started the season ranked lower in the human polls then OU or USC. What about when OU and LSU played and LSU won but the voters in one poll felt USC was the better team and we had a split MNC? Who was really better? Wouldn't a playoff at least answered some of the questions when teams actually had to play each other instead of relying on someones opinion? Thats all the BS is, is someones opinion on who is the best.

by taflorom on Dec 7, 2006 10:31 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Controlling the Playoffs

My understanding us the NCAA has nothing to do with the BCS, but they do run every playoff in every NCAA sport. Hence if there is to be a playoff, they're the one's who'll do it.

(It's similar to the way the NIT was not under NCAA purview until the last year or so. But once the NCAA tournament took center stage, around the admittance of more than one team from a conference in the '70s, the NIT withered to its current unimportance.)

by TH on Dec 8, 2006 9:41 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

plus one?

i can honestly understand the thought of a playoff system for the top eight teams and bowl games for the rest. if you omit one game from the regular season schedule, then the teams that make the championship game only end up playing one more game.
but what about those teams that don't make the playoffs or bowls? they're losing a game, which means their institutions aren't getting paid. i don't know if the ncaa would be willing to sacrifice taking games away from the majority of the schools in order to appease the top eight.
for me, the ideal situation would be a four-team playoff. have the regular bowls, but put #1vs#4
and #2vs#3. then, have the winner of those two games play in an extra bowl game. the rest of the teams could keep their regular season schedules, and the two teams that made it to the championship game would be playing the same number of games in the eight-team playoff picture.
and i know there would be a figth over who is #4 or #5 or #6....but the reality of it is this: if you're #5, your chances of beating the #1 team aren't that good. then, the next game would be against another higher-ranked opponent.

bottom line of the situation: people are going to complain no matter what you do. look at the ncaa tournament. they have 64 teams, and still....people bitch about their team not being allowed in the tourney. not everybody is going to like whatever is going to be implemented (if anything) in the near future.

by colbeagle on Dec 9, 2006 8:06 AM CST reply actions 0 recs