I hate (hate hate) the BCS college football system for choosing a national championship. And I think a lot of other folks do to. And in response, the BCS is talking about going to a limited BCS playoff system but it's still going to be based on BCS rankings which, frankly I don't understand (e.g., how can Boise State be undefeated yet not in contention for a national championship?).
So I'd like to see a full blown playoff. There are eleven conferences in BCS football. (I guess the independents would have to join a conference to participate, sorry BYU). Take the winning team from each conference and the two highest BCS ranked teams that are not conference champions as "wildcards." You now have 13 teams. Give the #1 ranked team a bye, play six games, and you have six winners. Play three games and you have three winners. Plug in the #1 team (against the lowest ranked team still standing), and you have four teams. Two more games and you have your BCS championship match.
That's twelve total games (and there's 35 bowl games right now). If we can't fit 12 playoff games into 35 bowl games, we've got a problem.
This would make bowl games mean something other than bagging rights. This would up the excitement level for BCS football. This would make winning a conference more important than ever. And this would mean a team like Boise State could prove themselves outside their weak conference. The only downside is that could mean a lot of games for some teams, potentially four post-season games for a 16-game season which is a lot for college ball.
It also means we'll probably have to tighten up bowl eligibility beyond a .500 season. Which isn't a bad thing.
Post a Comment