BCS vs. Playoff
| 12
|
Since the Bowl Championship Series, or BCS, was instituted in college football nine years ago, fans have wanted to change to a playoff format. Football in the Division-1A ranks remains the only major sport that does not use a playoff to determine its champion. For the past eight years they have used a combination of human and computer polls to select the two teams which will play for the championship. College football should switch from its current selection process, which only selects two teams to play for the title, to a playoff, which would allow teams to play it out for the championship.
The Bowl Championship Series was started in college football in 1998. It increased the meaning of the regular season, which is the most important regular season in any major sport. The system was started in order to prevent years where more than one team won the National Championship. The BCS is a ranking system that puts the two top teams in the rankings at the end of the season into the championship game. It was created to prevent situations of chaos; however, it has caused a lot of chaos. Besides selecting the two teams that play for the championship, the system also controls three other major games. They put the champions from conferences in which they have tie-ins (Atlantic Coast, Big XII, Big Ten, Pac-10, Big East, and Southeastern Conferences) into other bowl games. They also select two at-large teams to play in a BCS Bowl as well. The two at-large teams can come from any conference, as long as they are a Division-1A team.
Throughout the eight years of the BCS, it has only selected the two best teams in the country to play for the title in four of those years. In 1998, Tennessee and Florida State, numbers one and two in the Associated Press Poll, were selected to play for the title. In 1999, Florida State and Virginia Tech, the only two undefeated teams in the NCAA, were selected to play each other to see who would win the National Championship. In 2002, Ohio State and Miami of Florida were picked to battle it out to be number one in the land. This past year, the University of Southern California and Texas were not only the only undefeated teams in the NCAA, but numbers one and two in the AP Poll.
Since the BCS was established in 1998, there have been four years out of the eight where the BCS has caused total chaos. After two years of success in 1998 and 1999, the BCS began to show flows in 2000. Oklahoma, the only undefeated team in the NCAA, and Florida State, the ACC Champion, were selected to play in the title game. However, the Seminoles were 11-1 and lost to Miami (FL), who was also 11-1, in the regular season. The very next year, 2001, the BCS was total mayhem. Miami (FL) and Nebraska were chosen to play in the championship. Miami (FL) was the only undefeated team in the NCAA. They were waiting on a quality opponent to play. Number two Nebraska had only one loss on the season, but it was to the number three team Colorado. There were six teams who had a shot at playing Miami in the title game at one point. In 2003, the BCS failed again. USC was ranked number one in the Associated Press Poll, but was left out of the title game. The next year, 2004, the season finished with five undefeated teams. USC, Oklahoma, Auburn, Utah, and Boise State all finished out the year with no loss on their record. Even with five undefeated teams, three from tie-in conferences, the BCS can still only pick two teams to play for the championship About the BCS. They chose USC and Oklahoma. Auburn would settle for a Sugar bowl win over number six Virginia Tech.
At the end of the 2005 season, there were only two undefeated teams. The number one overall team, the USC Trojans, would be forced to play the number two team, Texas. The BCS had a great year in 2005, but that was mainly due to the fact that Texas had defeated number three Ohio State earlier in the season. Had the two teams not played, the BCS would have had another awful year. The National Championship game that season was one of the most exciting games in history as number two Texas defeated the favorite USC Trojans.
As the 2006 season came to a close, there was a major controversy, again. The number one team, Ohio State, needed an opponent. Before their final game, the one loss USC Trojans looked prime to take the spot over one loss Florida and one loss Michigan. Michigan's only loss came to number one Ohio State. The game was also at Ohio State and was decided by three points. The controversy became a huge deal as the USC Trojans lost their second game of the season to rival UCLA. Now, it was up to the BCS to decide whether Florida or Michigan would play for the title. Florida did their job by winning the SEC Championship the day before the final rankings were released. The Gators were on an eight game winning streak. The polls were released and it showed Florida would be playing Ohio State for the National Championship. There was a huge uproar from the Michigan faithful. However, all of the talk was hushed after USC defeated Michigan in the Rose Bowl and the underdog Florida Gators defeated heavily favored Ohio State 41-14 to win their second National Championship.
With all the BCS problems, there is a need, or desire for playoffs. With a playoff, there would be more fan support and overall love for the game. More teams would be involved, and more revenue would be shared, especially if the major bowls are used within the playoff. The reason college football should switch to a playoff is to determine a clear cut champion, to create games that would be watched and enjoyed, and to increase revenue that would be shared between the universities.
If college football did switch to a playoff, there would be many ways to determine the seeding, bracketing, locations, and who gets in and who does not. There are multiple ways of doing the bracketing, but only two are worthy of being mentioned. With format number one, there would be a tournament where fifteen the usual bowl games would host playoff sites for the sixteen teams that would make the tournament. The Bowl Championship Series rankings would be utilized to determine the brackets. An advantage of using this style would be that all bowls would be made better. The small bowls, which usually host second tier teams, would then host two of the top sixteen teams in the country. Cooperate sponsors would also be increased because of the games meaning more. With that, teams would make more money and the NCAA would also be making more money.
Another format would use ten of the best teams in the country. The six conference champions from the current conference tie-ins, and then the top four teams that did not win their conference would be considered an at-large team and allowed in to the tournament. All games would be at a neutral bowl site. For example, the Capital One Bowl would be played in its usual home of Orlando, Florida. The seeding would be determined by the current BCS. Numbers one and two would receive first round byes and the other teams would be placed accordingly . The format that college football should go to is format number two. The format uses current conference tie-ins and it rewards the number one and number two teams with first round byes.
The format also keeps the current bowls and keeps them at neutral locations. With this format, it decreases the need for the BCS, but it still uses the system. The BCS was started to determine a clear-cut champion, and it should still be used with the playoff so college football can have an undisputed champion. The BCS system would help more in this format because its role would become limited and would make college football less dependent on it. With the best teams in the country playing each other to keep their season alive, fans would tune into the games to see the great competition. More tickets would also be sold so fans can watch the best teams play. On top of the viewer ship being increased, more revenue would be made because of the television ratings and the ticket sales.
In 1998, as the BCS was created, college football believed they would no longer have to worry about split national champions or unclear endings to their season. Since then, there has been one split national champion, and there has been an unclear ending to the season four of the eight years. College football should switch from its current system to a system that allows the role of the BCS to be limited, a system which would increase revenue to all teams in the NCAA, and a system which names an undisputed champion.
