Playoffs? Playoffs?
Today the first of the BCS Bowls will be played. The BCS looks bad every year, but this year is the worst I have ever seen it. Hawaii, Oklahoma, Virginia Tech, and LSU/Ohio State could all make a claim to be National Champions if they win.
Most BCS detractors say they'd be happy with a +1 change. 1v4, 2v3, and the winners play for the championship. But if we're going to fix things, let's fix them right. The only way to compare two teams is to have them play. You can't speculate across conferences. You can't even speculate within conference where teams don't play everyone else.
We first need to reorganize the conferences. Every conference needs to have 10 or 12 teams, split in two divisions. The Big 12, ACC, SEC, Conference USA, and the MAC are already there. Notre Dame has to finally join a conference; if not the Big Ten, then the Big East with Rutgers or Louisville switching over. Each team plays everyone within their division, plus a few from the other division, plus non conference games. There will then be clear division winners, who will play each other for the conference championship. There are 11 Division I-A conferences. The winner of each, plus 5 at large picks, go into a 4 round playoff. Sure, the winner of the Sun Belt probably isn't that good. But there are years when the winner of the WAC, or the MAC, or any of the smaller conferences are better than winners of larger conferences. The only fair way is to let them all in. Whatever team wins out would be the clear National Champion.
A 4 round playoff would also fix a few other problems I have with the current system. For the second year, the Buckeyes will go into the Championship game 50 days after their last game. A playoff would ensure that both teams entered the final game playing at their best. Also, one loss late in the season would not cripple a team's chance of playing in the National Championship the way it does now. Once a team has it's division clinched, it can play back-ups for the final game. Rankings would still have use to determine seeding. Non conference games would be as important as they are now. There would be less need to schedule easily winnable games like there is now. A non conference loss wouldn't matter to the team that won its conference, and the 5 at large picks would go to teams that showed they deserved to be included.
But the Bowls aren't about determining an undisputed champion, they're about making money. I would think, though that the 15 games would generate more combined viewers than the 32 bowls that we have now. (Or was I the only one who missed watching New Mexico beat Nevada in the New Mexico Bowl?) The games would be held at Bowl sites. And nothing would stop Chik-fil-a from hosting a bowl for two teams that didn't get in. Sure, it would be a meaningless game, but it's meaningless now. I do not understand why there would be any objections to having a playoff. So why does it seem like Jim Mora is running the NCAA? (at 0:44)
Most BCS detractors say they'd be happy with a +1 change. 1v4, 2v3, and the winners play for the championship. But if we're going to fix things, let's fix them right. The only way to compare two teams is to have them play. You can't speculate across conferences. You can't even speculate within conference where teams don't play everyone else.
We first need to reorganize the conferences. Every conference needs to have 10 or 12 teams, split in two divisions. The Big 12, ACC, SEC, Conference USA, and the MAC are already there. Notre Dame has to finally join a conference; if not the Big Ten, then the Big East with Rutgers or Louisville switching over. Each team plays everyone within their division, plus a few from the other division, plus non conference games. There will then be clear division winners, who will play each other for the conference championship. There are 11 Division I-A conferences. The winner of each, plus 5 at large picks, go into a 4 round playoff. Sure, the winner of the Sun Belt probably isn't that good. But there are years when the winner of the WAC, or the MAC, or any of the smaller conferences are better than winners of larger conferences. The only fair way is to let them all in. Whatever team wins out would be the clear National Champion.
A 4 round playoff would also fix a few other problems I have with the current system. For the second year, the Buckeyes will go into the Championship game 50 days after their last game. A playoff would ensure that both teams entered the final game playing at their best. Also, one loss late in the season would not cripple a team's chance of playing in the National Championship the way it does now. Once a team has it's division clinched, it can play back-ups for the final game. Rankings would still have use to determine seeding. Non conference games would be as important as they are now. There would be less need to schedule easily winnable games like there is now. A non conference loss wouldn't matter to the team that won its conference, and the 5 at large picks would go to teams that showed they deserved to be included.
But the Bowls aren't about determining an undisputed champion, they're about making money. I would think, though that the 15 games would generate more combined viewers than the 32 bowls that we have now. (Or was I the only one who missed watching New Mexico beat Nevada in the New Mexico Bowl?) The games would be held at Bowl sites. And nothing would stop Chik-fil-a from hosting a bowl for two teams that didn't get in. Sure, it would be a meaningless game, but it's meaningless now. I do not understand why there would be any objections to having a playoff. So why does it seem like Jim Mora is running the NCAA? (at 0:44)
posted by Dorshorst at 01:25
2 Comments:
Are you retarded? Seriously.
Every Bowl game matters.
So what does USC do now that they have beaten Illinois? Sit around and hope to move up to 5th? How did the New Mexico Bowl affect the national standings?
My position here is fairly consistent with my position regarding primaries. Every team from every conference should have a chance to get to the National Championship provided that they win the games on their schedule. Discussions about which team is better should be decided on the field and not by sports analysts. A game between Ohio State and Michigan should have no bearing on West Virginia.
I can only assume you are childishly reacting to my comments on your blog and that you do not actually support the current Bowl system (One would have to be *retarded* not to see any flaws in it). If so, you need to learn to accept criticism better. If you are not mentally retarded, then then you should not have been as offended by the phrase as you are. If you are mentally retarded, then you should not have been as offended by the phrase as you are.
Although if you truly do have any reason to oppose my plan here, I sincerely invite you to express your opinion. It is only through critical examination and reappraising our beliefs that we may grow.
Post a Comment
<< Home