The 2014 College Football Playoff Debacle It’s no surprise that the college football playoff system is a complete failure in its inaugural year. For what else do you expect when you only half way commit to a project instead of going “all in”? The playoff system was envisioned as a mechanism to vanquish the injustice that had been created by an out-dated polling system. Unfortunately, we have ended up with a system that creates more prejudice in favor of widely popular teams. Do you really think that an undefeated Boise State team would be able to make the playoff when an undefeated FSU team is poised to drop from the top four? What else do you expect from Washington style politics in a popularity contest? It’s time that the NCAA and the Committee of “experts” take a lesson from both High School and Professional football. There is absolutely no way the system will work with only four spots available for five power conferences. And where is the room for the little guy when the five top dogs are fighting over four spots? The only way a playoff will work is to have eight teams invited. Some will argue that eight will turn into sixteen, then thirty-two, then so on. Such an argument would be designed purely to deprive this country of a real solution. If eight doesn’t work, then why should we stop? However, I believe that an eight team playoff would significantly reduce the drawback and prejudice of a four team playoff. Let’s examine. First, we need to start putting a premium on winning your conference title. If the SEC really deserves to have a two loss team play for a national championship, then they should start by winning their conference. This way, the winner of every conference gets a spot, which leaves three spots open for at large bids. Taking the “experts” out of the equation for the first five spots will greatly reduce the notion that somebody was treated unfairly. For this to work there can be no “co-champs” of a conference (I’m looking at you Big 12). There is only one spot per conference, unless of course they are deserving of an at large bid (You’re welcome SEC). Second, whatever happened to winning as the only way to rank a team? The number one seed should be the team out of the power five with the best record. Now I hate FSU just as much as any other red blooded American, but I cannot understand why they are not the Number 1 team in the country. The “experts” tell us that their “body of work” is not as good as other teams in the country. I’m sorry, but nobody else’s “body of work” includes a zero in the loss column. If I get into a playoff, I want my team to be battle tested, and not used to running up the score. Third, if there is a tie within a conference, then the head to head matchup should be the deciding factor, just as it has always been. When examining who should be the district or division champ, the first question has always been, “who had the best record?” If there were two teams with the same record, the second question would be, “who won the head to head matchup?” The answer to the second question would be the champion. This only makes sense. There is no need to see who played harder or who put up more points. It’s simple and predictable because it removes the human element. If you want to win your conference over that other big team out there, then you know you have to beat them. No more back doors and loopholes that lead to illegitimate champions. Fourth, the big four bowl games fit perfectly in this playoff schematic. Eight teams for four bowls. Sounds like it was made to be. They can even rotate the order of importance as they see fit, which leave three games that can be played at places like Jerry World or the University of Phoenix Stadium. I can’t see why the NCAA would be upset about having more games to charge people through the nose for. I hope this sheds a little light on the playoff picture, and who knows, maybe somebody out there will start thinking with their head. - My brothers take on the CFP
Posted on: Sat, 06 Dec 2014 17:24:09 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015