Dear President-Elect Obama, BCS Change We Need

OK, this may just be cathartic for me, but after President-Elect Obama brought up the inequity of the BCS, I felt that I needed to put my personal argument to bits and bytes (if for no other reason than to spare my family from my rantings).

Let's start with an indipustable fact: The current system is inherently unfair because a team can go undefeated for an entire season and not win a championship. There is no other sport on the planet where this is true.

That is a fact that cannot be argued. It's already happened (Auburn) and it will happen again.

This in effect means that winning is not the most important factor in the current system. In any fair competition it's about winning. If you beat everyone that you play and you don't win, something is wrong.

OK, now that I've established an indisputable reason why the current system is inherently unfair, let's look at a few of the virtues of the current system (used as arguments to keep it).

1. Every game in the regular season is a playoff game.
2. Bowl traditions and pageantry.
3. More than one team goes home a winner at the end of the season.
4. (the unspoken one), The Big Conferences control who goes where

If a system were able to achieve the goals of a playoff by rewarding winning AND either match or improve the four virtues listed above, it should be a no-brainer right? Right.

So I'm going to blatantly steal Dan Wetzel's playoff formula and articulate why it's better than the BCS, even better when using the BCS's own virtues.

So to set the stage here is the basis of Wetzel's eight team playoff format. I use the eight team format because we want to impose as little change as possible and still meet our main objectives. It's just easier that way.

An eight team playoff format arranged as follows. The winners of the following six conferences get automatic bids plus two at-large teams:

1. ACC
2. Big East
3. Big 12
4. Big 10
5. Pac 10
6. SEC
7. At-Large
8. At-Large
   

Then two at-large teams are picked from the BCS rankings (we can use the current system, again to limit change). If a team that is not from one of those conferences finishes in the top eight, they would get the at-large bid.

Those eight teams are seeded 1-8, again using the current BCS rankings, and play the first two weeks of the tournament the weekends immediately following Thanksgiving. This year that would be December 6 and 14.

Those games would be played at the home field of the higher seeded team, both in the first and second rounds. The last, or championship game, would be played on a neutral field a few days after New Year's, alternating between the Orange, Sugar, Fiesta and Rose much like it is today.

At the end of the second round of the playoffs, all teams that are not in the championship game (including teams not in the original top eight) are eligible for Bowl games including the Orange, Sugar, Rose and Fiesta which now can be played on New Year's Day.

To clarify here is how the eight team playoff would work if the BCS standings remained exactly how they are today, November 19, 2008, and the current conference leaders remain.

1. Alabama (SEC)
2. Texas Tech (Big 12)
3. Texas (At-Large)
4. USC (Pac 10)
5. Utah (At-Large)
6. Penn State (Big 10)
7. Cincinnati (Big East)
8. Maryland (ACC)

So Maryland plays at Alabama, Cincinnati at Texas Tech, Penn State at Texas, and Utah at USC. Note: The first and second rounds of the playoffs are held at the higher seeds for reasons I'll explain a bit later.

Assuming that the higher seeds all win, the Bowls can now offer bids on December 15 to any of the remaining teams. Traditional tie-ins can also be reset. If we used this year's data we could have Rose: USC vs. Penn State, Fiesta: Texas vs. Boise State, Sugar: Florida vs. Oklahoma, Orange: Cincinnati vs. Maryland or whatever.

OK let's go back to the BCS virtues and address them one by one.

1. Every game in the regular season is a playoff game.
2. Bowl traditions and pageantry.
3. More than one team goes home a winner at the end of the season.
4. (the unspoken one), The Big Conferences control who goes where

Every game is a playoff game. This is probably the most common argument for the current system.

In the Wentzel system, regular season games are important because of seeding. Playing the 1st and 2nd rounds at home is a huge advantage. If you finish first or second, you're guaranteed of playing at home throughout the playoffs. That is arguably as important as making the current championship game PLUS you get home field revenue for those games.

Bowl traditions.

The Wentzel system allows for the old Bowl affiliations to come back and by taking them out of the BCS system, allows them to schedule their games whenever they want (like back on New Year's Day).

More teams end the season as winners.

Again, because the traditional Bowls are re-established, more teams end the season as "winners" again, just like the old days.

Big Conference control.

There's actually more control now since the winners of the conferences are guaranteed a spot. In addition there are now six playoff games played in home stadiums where revenue doesn't need to be shared with a "bowl committee".

All in all the biggest no-brainer of all time. Much easier than the Economy, Health Care or Iraq. There you go President-Elect Obama, take a easy win...