Denied Again: BCS Rejects Playoff System Yet Again
It seems that BCS presidents have their fingers in their ears when it comes to a playoff, because they certainly aren’t listening to popular demand.
According to ESPN, BCS presidents have rejected a Mountain West proposal that would form an eight-team playoff that would give conferences outside of the “Big Six” (Pac-10, Big 12, ACC, Big East, SEC, and Big Ten) a chance at the national championship.
Here’s what Oregon president and outgoing committee chairman David Frohnmayer had to say on the issue:
“In the last six years, I’ve read pundits, heard the pronouncements of broadcasters and collected several cubic feet of e-mail printouts from advocates of an NFL-style playoff system. Even those that go beyond sound-bite certitude share two intertwined and fatal deficiencies: They disrespect our academic calendars and they utterly lack a business plan.”
I have two big problems with his argument, which, like most arguments from the BCS, are pretty flimsy anyway:
The first big problem is a problem that most athletic programs have, and that is the so-called “disrespect” of academic calendars. There are two big problems with this argument.
First, most postseason games are usually played during most colleges’ winter breaks, which are a couple months anyway. If the bowls, which start sometime near Christmas and don’t end until just after New Years’, don’t severely affect academic calendars, what on earth makes you think that a playoff will do any worse?
An eight-team playoff, which the Mountain West proposed, would take, at its longest, three weeks if you played a game every week.
It would definitely take less time than the current bowl system, which makes this argument against a playoff system absolutely ridiculous and completely without merit.
The second problem with Frohnmayer’s argument is the supposed lack of a business plan, which seems pretty ridiculous anyway.
I realize that college football is, was, and always will be a business, but that certainly isn’t why most players play the game.
I also realize that the current system gives money to the schools, so that they can improve their facilities; however, the system is so flawed, it’s not even funny.
For example, last season, Utah (which is, ironically enough, from the Mountain West Conference), should have been admitted to the national championship, and reaped the financial benefit of such an invitation.
Unfortunately, because of the current system, they not only missed out on the attention that came with the chance at a national championship, they missed out on all of the financial and media attention they would have gotten.
Granted, they still made it to a very prestigious bowl (the Sugar Bowl), but one wonders what would have happened if they had had a shot at the national championship.
It’s crazy to think that the BCS committee will make up any flimsy argument that will keep the current, confusing, and certainly convoluted system, but the sad thing is that is exactly what they are doing.
One day, although it probably won’t be soon, I hope that the BCS will take their fingers out of their ears and listen to all arguments. Who knows? Maybe it’ll be better and we can finally achieve parity that the NCAA is always so proud of.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?