BCS Controversy: Why an 8-Team Playoff Is Ignorant and Shortsighted

The BCS controversy will more than likely end in a college football playoff, especially if numerous teams complete the 2011 season undefeated without the chance to play in the 2011 BCS National Championship. 

Many pundits, even President Barack Obama, have called for an eight-team playoff. 

Unfortunately, an eight-team playoff is both ignorant and shortsighted.  The idea of an eight-team playoff fails to provide a comprehensive solution to the many problems in college football and it’s based on multiple failed assumptions.

Here are the reasons you’ll know that anyone suggesting an eight-team playoff either has a superficial understanding of college football or simply can’t comprehend abstract thoughts past those offered by other shallow-thinkers.

To Assume Makes an Equally Unfair "Solution"

The eight-team playoff assumes that it pits the Top Eight programs in the nation against each other.  The Top Eight programs would be determined by the Coaches’ Poll, AP Poll and a computer ranking system that doesn't factor in margin of victory.  There are multiple problems with this scenario.

First, the AP Poll and Coaches’ Poll are subject to the whims of the voters.  Those polls enjoy an element of human bias that ultimately skews results in favor of traditional BCS programs.  Furthermore, no voter can watch every single game and make a true judgment about the merits of every team that plays on Saturdays.

Next, without margin of victory, a team in a “lesser” conference struggles to separate itself, proving that it belongs in the Top Eight discussion when its schedule requires it to play much weaker opponents.  Without separating itself, the team struggles to move into the Top Eight. 

The supporter of an eight-team playoff, or even the BCS, will point to Boise State as the example of a program that has risen above its peers without margin of victory, but a closer analysis shows that Boise State is the exception, not the rule. It has taken years for the program to enjoy a regular ranking in the Top 10 that its peers cannot attain. 

The Broncos are one of a handful of programs among over 60 non-BCS programs that have attained notoriety, while a disproportionate share of BCS programs can easily attain that notoriety and access in a single year by merely winning.

An eight-team playoff relies too heavily on the subjectivity of the polls and not enough on an objective approach.

Without Access, No Recruiting; Without Recruits, No Wins & No $$$

Proponents of the eight-team playoff ignore the injustice in college football of the haves and have-nots.  While BCS programs enjoy access to grand bowl games, non-BCS programs are relegated to a lesser stage. 

In order to build a program, a university must have a good coach and retain that coach with money they often don't have.  After obtaining a good coach, the program must have good talent, or else it must find a way to be the exception like Boise State.  How does one recruit?

Recruits enjoy, among other things, good facilities, the opportunity to play early, and the opportunity to play in meaningful games, like BCS bowls or the national championship.  When they look at a program, they aren’t simply looking at the coach, they’re looking at the probability that they’re hard work will be rewarded at the end of the season.  Going to the Motor City Bowl or GMAC Bowl is hardly a reward for a five-star recruit.

Without the ability to recruit, a coach is already behind the eight ball when he takes over a non-BCS program.  If the coach can’t recruit, the probability of winning against a BCS opponent is low.  If the team can’t win or is relegated to a lesser paying bowl, he can’t find money to improve facilities.  Without facilities, recruiting is difficult.  And so, the cycle continues.

An eight-team playoff fails to solve this catch-22 for non-BCS programs.  The system is still oppressive, and the suggestion of an eight-team playoff comes off as ignorant as the BCS system it seeks to replace.

The Sweet Sixteen, Not the Innate Eight

The solution is a 16-team playoff that provides automatic bids to each conference champion while providing five at-large bids.  This gives equal access to all conferences, while ensuring that top programs from harder conferences also have additional access.

Detractors argue four weeks is too long for a playoff, but it’s only one more week than an eight-team playoff.  Basketball plays four weeks, and basketball teams often play two games in a weekend.  The first two weeks would be played at the home field of the higher-seeded program.  To satisfy the BCS bowls who don’t want to lose their standing, the last two weeks would include two semifinal games, a final and a consolation game.

Any team who was not invited to the playoff could play in an exhibition, i.e. the current bowl system minus the BCS bowls.  Today’s bowls are meaningless anyway, so it doesn’t hurt to maintain their presence outside the playoff.

Yes, the champions from lesser conferences will struggle to compete in the playoff at first, but after five or six years, the playing field will level as 4- and 5-star recruits begin to choose non-BCS programs where they can start early and have a chance to enjoy the 16-team playoff. 

As non-BCS programs begin to enjoy revenues from their playoff appearances, their ability to upgrade facilities and retain good coaches increases.   Life would be good and all would be fair in terms of the same opportunities being offered to everyone.  What each program does with those opportunities is up to them...

Special Thanks to Our Leaders

Despite the answer sitting in front of everyone, talking heads and political leaders add to the injustice by suggesting shallow solutions.  In a society where everybody is out for their own selfish greed and leaders fail to provide well-rounded answers, no one can expect to find fairness from the current leadership.

BCS presidents will not allow a 16-team playoff that maintains many of today’s college football traditions while providing a system equally accessible to everyone who out-performs their conference peers.  The tradition that trumps all in college football is money. 

A 16-team playoff would actually be more lucrative than the current system, but not for the BCS schools who’d have to share their revenues with the other half of college football.  So, a correction must be made.  Money isn’t the tradition that trumps all.  Money for BCS conferences only is the tradition that trumps all.

Many thanks to our political leaders who fail to offer real solutions to the injustices perpetuated by BCS institutions because our leaders simply don’t care or quit pursuing a lawsuit after being offered a position at the table (Utah).  Suggesting an eight-team playoff says on its face, “I care,” when it really means, “I want the college football constituency to vote for me, but I don’t have a real solution, nor do I truly care.”