A Playoff System for the NCAA
November 28, 2007 by Allison Boyer
Filed under Football
It happens every year around this time – people begin to argue that the top ranked teams are really not the top teams. They argue that a playoff system is needed to find the true champion of college football. They argue that the BCS is not fair.
I tend to agree.
That said, with so many teams vying for that title, I don’t think that any of the proposed systems would be more positive. They all have strong disadvantages that I personally think should throw them out of consideration. I don’t like the current BCS rules, but until someone shows me something better, I’ll support it over what is being proposed.
The main idea for a playoff system is the 16-team tier system that is currently used for other college football divisions. In this one, the top 16 teams battle it out for the national title. 1 plays 8, 2 plays 7, 3 plays 6, 4 plays 5, 9 plays 16, 10 plays 15, 11 plays 14, 12 plays 13. The winners than move on to the next tier where they play again. Simple enough to understand. Some people propose that the BCS ranking continue as they are currently and the top 16 teams are invited. Others argue that the winner from EVERY conferences (including the WAC, Sunbelt, etc) should play and then the rest of the slots should be filled with top ranked teams.
The problems with the first idea, using the top 16 ranked teams, is the same problem that we currently have - many people don’t consider those rankings to be fair, since they don’t give room for “lesser” conferences to join in the fun. It’s like saying that because these conferences weren’t good when the BCS was first created, they’ll never produce good teams. It’s a vicious cycle though, because that means the country’s best players and coaches don’t want to be at these schools, which in turn means that they never do get to be very good.
The problem with the second idea, using the top team from every conference and then a few at-large teams, is that it’s not always going to be fair. Even after using this system for 20 or 30 years, what if some of the conferences still suck? Let’s say that your team lost in triple overtime and wasn’t the top SEC team, but that you’re ranked like, 12th in the nation. Wouldn’t it be unfair to deny that team a playoff spot and instead give it to a mediocre team from another conference who played an easy schedule and simple floated to the top. You team could have gone all the way. They will, on the other hand, most certainly lose out during the first round. So, if we’re talking “fair” here, this system doesn’t do it for me either.
However, my overall problem is not with choosing the teams who would play in the final tournament. My gripe is about adding games to the schedule. For 8 teams (the losers from the 16 in the first round), you’re adding just one game. That in and of itself I don’t see as a big deal. For 4 teams (winners from the first round, but losers from the 8 in the second round), you’re adding two more games. Not optimal, but I guess NBD. For 2 teams (winners in the first two rounds, but losers from the 4 in the third round), you’re adding three games, and then for the top two teams, you’re adding four games. That’s four extra weeks – a month – of travel, play and practice. I’m sorry, but I don’t think that’s fair to the athletes. For the top players, adding an extra month to the season is awesome. The more exposure the better. But you have a lot of players on the team who do not have NFL dreams. To them, their academics mean much, much more than football. Being a student athlete is already tough. I wouldn’t want to be a top 16 team while trying to study for finals as well. Some have argued that the tournament could all take place rather quickly, instead of during 4 weeks, but that’s also a disadvantage if you ask me. When players are tired, they are more prone to injury, and to expect the two two teams to play four tough games in just a week or two would be murder.
So, give me a playoff system. I’m begging you. Find something that works. But until the 16-team tier problems are ironed out or a new system altogether is proposed, I’ll continue to support the current ranking/bowl system because I simple think it is the best option for athletes.
There’s a couple of problems with ANY sort of playoff system in the NCAA … for starters, the strength of schedule is vastly different amongst various teams. Take Hawaii for example … Boise State was the ONLY ranked team that they’ve played all season long, so if you base the playoff seeding on record, undefeated Hawaii would have the #1 seed … if you base the seedings on a ranking system, then you have the same gripes that we have now.
The biggest reason that you’ll never see a playoff system, though, has nothing to do with the inability to create a fair system. It has everything to do, though, with the revenue created from the end-of-the-season Bowl frenzy that happens every year. The NCAA puts on over 30 Bowl games per year now, and I’d venture to guess that almost all of them are always at least near-sellouts. The two teams that play in the annual “Gator Bowl” may not be playing for a National Championship, but as long as it’s a “Bowl” game, in theory these guys are still playing for a championship of sorts. You lose that prestige when you turn that Bowl game into a Playoff game, which means that you also lose hype, attendance, and the biggest killer … money.
I think the main argument to the money issue (not that I agree), is that the conference championship games would mean more in every conference. I agree with you that the mentality most people have is that being in a “bowl” means something. Heck, the everyday person doesn’t even understand that MOST teams make it to some kind of bowl game. At the same time, you’re looking for more revenue with a playoff system because they could charge more for tickets, sell playoff gear, etc. They could even still call them “bowls”. The addition of a ton more games alone would bring in lots of revenue.
So I don’t know if that makes it worth it to the NCAA. But I definitely agree with you that they’re more concerned about being profitable than they are about being fair.
First off, the main issue here is deciding the BEST team in the nation. Not who can bring in more money. Take the current BCS system with a heavier emphasis in strenght of schedule. Use this to rank the teams accordingly and create a playoff system. You can stagger the games over a one month schedule to keep it as quick as possible. But as for the school part, finals are usually held at the beginning of December, and the kids have 2-3 weeks off right now until most of the BIG bowls are played. If you still gave them this2 weeks off for finals, then started the tournament say the 3 week of December, then you would finish about 1-2 weeks later than the way it currently is set up. Take possibly (optional) a 4 team wildcard system to give a chance for undefeated team from lesser conferences a chance to prove themselves and you have your playoff system. The thing is that I don’t understand is how every other sport college or pro can have a playoff system and people actually argue that this level of college football cannot have one! That is ignorant! And for the fairness, NO system is 100% fair considering the argue points many use when they are attempting to justify a lesser teams validity.
I don’t understand why the added games issue is somehow larger in the bowl subdivision, when it works just fine in the championship subdivision.
While I agree that a 16-team playoff with 11 Conference champions and 5 at-large berths might still leave some deserving teams out, gone would be the days of an undefeated Auburn team not getting the chance to play for the title. And by including teams in the lousy conferences, those will have a reason to play football, by giving them one invitation to the “big dance”, as they do in College Basketball.
The problem isn’t adding games to the schedule. The problem is the amount of plays College football has per game. If they would manage their clock more like the NFL, then adding playoff games wouldn’t matter. With regard to the scheduling, something can be worked out. Perhaps bye weeks should be eliminated and all schedules could be completed by the weekend before Thanksgiving. Then we can be treated on Thanksgiving weekend to Conference Championship games, in addition to the NFL games. Finally, on Thanksgiving Sunday, we can have a committee pick the 5 at-large teams and seed the field. What a great football weekend that would be. But I appear to only be dreaming (sigh….)