Bowl Championship Series? Arguments for a College Football Playoff

As the 2010 college football season heads into its final weeks in November and December, I would like to revisit one issue that the heads of the major football bowl subdivison universities would just like to forget: a playoff system.

Detractors of a playoff system will point to several reasons why it would not work.  They would argue that a potential playoff system could not possibly bring in more money than the current bowl system. Another reason a playoff would not fly is that it would overlap with the current NFL playoff system. 

Still others would wonder how a playoff system could be any more objective than the current BCS system.  Finally, the biggest issue that opponents have with a playoff is that it would unnecessarily interrupt the lives of many student athletes.

Proponents of a college football playoff system would argue that the biggest reason to have a playoff is that it would settle the dispute of a national champion on the field, rather than let the champion be decided by a series of polls. 

That a majority of the polls are conducted by individuals who have no team or conference affiliation, writing a series of complex computer algorithms, does not mean that the system is  objective. (For more on my thoughts about computer rankings, please visit the link: http://jarrodssportsview.blogspot.com/2010/11/college-football-101-why-computer.html.)  Allowing teams to compete in a playoff on the field to determine the national champion would help to reduce this subjectivity.

Monetarily, it really doesn't make sense as to why schools are not in favor of a playoff, especially when major conferences such as the Big Ten are losing so much money they have to add more schools. 

Instituting a playoff system doesn't necessarily mean that the current bowl system has to be eliminated.  In fact, a playoff system does not preclude that the Bowl Championship Series (BCS) be eliminated at all, but rather tweaked to better determine the top team in the nation.

So just how would a college football playoff work?  I am glad you asked.

In my proposed plan, the four BCS bowls (Rose, Sugar, Fiesta and Orange) remain intact, while the BCS championship gets the ax.  The winners of the four respective bowl games would then meet in the national championship semifinal (where the two lower ranked winners would play the higher ranked winners).  The winners of the national semifinal would then meet in the national championship game.

The payouts for each of the four BCS games would remain the same, and this proposed game would not change anything for the other 25-plus bowl games held each year.  The schools who advanced to the national semifinal, and then national championship game, would receive additional payouts at the discretion of the BCS. 

This is all hypothetical, however, as an independent study might conclude that  this system would not yield any more money than the current one.  But just as expanding the basketball tourney has yielded higher revenue for the NCAA, I cannot see why expanding the BCS into a playoff would not.

Who would get invited to such a playoff format?  In the system I propose, the winners of the six major conferences would get automatic bids to the BCS bowls, while the two remaining highest ranked teams in the BCS would get the two at large berths, regardless of affiliation.  This is certainly to cause debate among the non-AQ schools such as  Boise State, TCU and Utah, who may feel their schools are necessarily left out.  And they might be.  But this would not be the year for that argument, as any of the three schools that win out have a chance to end up in the BCS top five and qualify for an at large berth.

The argument that a playoff system would overlap with the NFL's current playoff system would be easy to dispel, too.  The four BCS games would take place between January 1st and January 2nd.  The winners of those games would then meet in the national semifinals on the following Friday.  Finally, the national championship game would be held on the Saturday preceding pro football's conference championships, thereby avoiding any overlaps with the NFL.

Critics would argue that this plan unnecessarily drags out the college football season, but I believe that ship already sailed when they decided to move the BCS championship game to January 8th.

Finally there may be concerns about the welfare of the student athlete, with these potential playoffs cutting into their semester or quarter exams.  However, there does not seem to be the same type of concern when it comes to basketball, and we're only talking about two more games and four teams, right?  I am sure exceptions can be made.

The time has come for the university presidents and chancellors to disband the BCS as we currently know it. Adopting a playoff system like the one I have not only settles things on the field, but it would also bring in more money than the current format of the BCS does today.

N.B: This is a revision of a blog I wrote earlier this year in response to the proposed expansion of the NCAA Men's Basketball tourney from 64 to 96 teams.  To read the original article, please go to:

http://jarrodssportsview.blogspot.com/2010/04/arguments-for-college-football-playoff.html