BCS to eight-team playoff pitch: We’ll get back to you

 

 

Every April the major players that make up the Bowl Championship Series meet in the city that will host their next national championship game. The commissioners of the 11 Division I-A conferences (plus the Notre Dame athletics director), representatives of the four participating bowls (Sugar, Orange, Fiesta, Rose), and the television partners (FOX, ABC, ESPN) hold a series of meetings to determine how the BCS is doing and what, if any changes, need to be considered for the future.

While I didn’t make it to Pasadena for this year’s meetings, which started yesterday, I’ve been to most of them. So I pretty much know how it went on Tuesday when Commissioner Craig Thompson of the Mountain West Conference made his proposal for an eight-team playoff.

At the behest of his presidents, Thompson has been pushing the issue since Utah went 12-0 last season but was not selected to play in the BCS championship game. Oklahoma and Florida, each of whom had a loss, were selected. Thompson has gone to the nation’s capital to lobby lawmakers, and he’s found a sympathetic ear or two, especially Utah Senator Orrin Hatch. No surprise there.

Congressman Joe Barton of Texas says he’s going to have hearings on the BCS. Barton also said in a recent radio interview that if he can get a bill passed to dismantle the BCS and replace it with a playoff President Obama has promised, on more than one occasion, to sign it.

With that as a backdrop, Thompson presented his plan to the other BCS commissioners. It would select 10 teams to participate, which is the case now. It would do away with the BCS formula and use a selection committee to pick the 10 teams and seed them. The bottom two teams would be placed in a BCS level bowl (with BCS level money) and the other eight teams would participate in a three-week tournament to decide the national championship.

Not surprisingly, Thompson’s proposal would call for a restructuring of how the revenue of the BCS revenue is distributed. The six original conferences in the BCS (ACC, SEC, Big East, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-10) are guaranteed a spot in a BCS championship game and the $18 million payout that goes with it. The five Coalition conferences (C-USA, MAC, WAC, Sun Belt, Mountain West) collectively are guaranteed about $9 million each year with another $9 million if one of the teams qualifies for a BCS game. In four of the past five seasons, a Coalition team has made the BCS and picked up the additional check.

Remember that at last year’s meetings down in South Florida the commissioners heard a proposal backed by the SEC and ACC that would have called for a “Plus-One” model, which is essentially a four-team playoff. The response then and the response to Thompson’s proposal on Tuesday was the same. They listened politely, had a thorough discussion and then said, in so many words: “Thanks for dropping by. We’ll take it under advisement.”

I know Craig Thompson. He’s a smart guy and has done a lot to raise the profile of the Mountain West. He knows this is an uphill climb. Change in something as big and rich as the BCS does not happen because there is a new resident in the White House or because a couple of politicians wanted to do a little chest thumping.

 But like SEC Commissioner Mike Slive did a year ago, Thompson put something on the table yesterday to get the conversation going. So with five years left on the contracts for the current model (one with FOX and the next four with ESPN), a four-team playoff and an eight-team playoff have now been put into play. The commissioners promised Thompson that they would take his idea to their annual spring meetings in order to get comments from their members and their presidents.

If the past is a guide, there will be very little support from the Big Six presidents. Georgia’s Michael Adams and Florida’s Bernie Machen have publicly supported such a playoff. Florida State’s  T.K. Wetherell has been in that camp for a while. But that’s about it in the South. The Big Ten and Pac-10 don’t even want to discuss it. They have threatened to walk away from the BCS if such a thing is forced upon them. They are making a ton of money from the Rose Bowl and want you to believe they could survive just fine without the BCS.

When I sat down with ACC commissioner John Swofford, the current BCS coordinator, he said that making significant changes in the BCS is like turning around a battle ship. It comes very, very slowly.

So was Thompson’s sales pitch and exercise in futility? Not really. Getting these ideas out for public discussion is always good.

Is the BCS going to switch to a playoff anytime soon? Nope. The current contracts are in place through the 2013 regular season.

Remember that President Obama told Congressman Barton that he would sign the bill IF IT GOT THROUGH CONGRESS and gets to his desk.

Based on what I’ve seen out of Congress lately, they couldn’t organize a one-man parade. I doubt they could get this one right.

 

172 comments Add your comment

Kiffinisatosser

April 22nd, 2009
8:35 am

Plus one is the answer. The bowls and the magnificent regular season are retained in its full glory and the mad dogs get their playoff. Just don’t turn this beautiful sport into the NHL please.

People are already salivating for various regular season matchups next fall. Who can name any early regular season game in any other sport that will be as meaningful as Va Tech vs. Bama or Ohio St. vs USC?

LSWho?

April 22nd, 2009
9:07 am

Good post Tony. BTW, what’s up with ESPN College Gameday? I read that Fowler & Corso are out. Will you be back this fall?

Mikey

April 22nd, 2009
9:09 am

As long as Fox goes away it’s all good…
One more excruciating year and we are done with them.

UGA'er

April 22nd, 2009
9:12 am

Leave ALL politics out of it. Plus if Obama has anything to do with it, it would turn out just like Marta,Grady,Harsfield, and the city of Atlanta. I’m just saying.

UGA'er

April 22nd, 2009
9:13 am

In addition, you’re never going to please all the people. As soon as TV gets involved they will be dictating who the matchups should be. Then some teams will cry because their game was harder etc. I say leave it alone.

GeoffDawg

April 22nd, 2009
9:14 am

Of course the Big 10 and Pac 10 don’t want any part of a playoff. With the exception of Ohio State, their best shot at beating a an SEC or Big 12 team for the national championship is in a one-shot, winner take all deal. If they had to actually go through a series of tough games (similiar to the SEC regular season), we may not see another titleist from one of those conferences for who knows how long. For their relative quality of competition against the rest of the college football landscape, it sure seems that the Pac 10 and the Big 10 especially hold way too much leverage. If we see no significant changes after the next tv deal is signed, maybe we should follow the example of Governor Rick Perry and secede from the BCS.

lakerat

April 22nd, 2009
9:20 am

How come Florida has 2 presidents? I believe you meant to say “Florida State’s T.K. Wetherall…”

But, as I have proposed before, there is nothing wrong with letting all 119 teams participate , while cutting back the “regular season” to 10 games. Everybody gets at least 11 games (the number one ranked team gets a bye the first week), while the final 16 (the highest ranked team that loses in the 3rd round to a lower ranked team also gets a 2nd chance). The eventual top two play a total of 6 or 7 games, which would make the time from the week before Thanksgiving (still incorporating all of the bowl games, but now they mean something) to the time of the championship game in January much more enjoyable for everyone who loves college football – and you have a “real” champion rather than a MNC!

bigdawg01

April 22nd, 2009
9:23 am

Tony,
Whats up with Game Day? I have not heard anything about it. If Fowler and Corso are gone, who will do it, Herbstreit? God Help us, because then you can call it GAME-Ohio State-Day. Plus, who else will kiss USC’s arse?

Colin Lord

April 22nd, 2009
9:24 am

T.K. Wetherell is Florida State’s president, not Florida’s

Miles

April 22nd, 2009
9:27 am

The “battle ship” example always comes to play when there’s really no impetus for change, i.e., the television contracts are in place for a while and thus the BCS will “hold its course.” When, however, the contracts expire, we’ll have some form of a playoff. Though Congress may not be able to organize a one man parade, the commissioners will certainly have to grab this inevitable bull by the horns – a playoff will make college football better.

MiltonDawg

April 22nd, 2009
9:29 am

If the committee can take out PAC-10/Big 10 teams, i say let those 2 clown conferences keep playing each other and the other “real” conferences can go for the playoff format. This is so pathetic, Rose Bowl every year will feature USC vs OSU, Penn, or Mich. Lame & Boring. Now if they were to use the Rose Bowl as a playoff game, a winner moves to the next bracket, then i would be interested.

JB

April 22nd, 2009
9:31 am

National Championships need to be won, not crowned by third parties.

bama12titles

April 22nd, 2009
9:34 am

If you go back and look at it historically a plus one would have solved the controversy every time. Usually when there is controversy at the end of the season its usually a 3rd team that gets left out like Auburn in 2004 and sometimes but very rarely there may be a 4th team that also has a very legit argument for being one of the top 2 teams to get into the title game. Its usually the 5th ranked team where the argument gets very weak that they should be one of the 2 teams in the title game.

Also, while I personally like the 8 team format better its not realistic for the simple reason that it takes too much money away from the bowls and the money made from the bowls is the entire reason we don’t have a playoff of some sort to begin with. Some people will start suggesting a 16 team playoff but again it will never fly in a million years because of the money made in the bowl system.

griffdawg1

April 22nd, 2009
9:36 am

Blah, blah, blah, blah…….they are not going to change their cash cow or give up any control no matter how loud and right the people are!!!!

Tide4u2c

April 22nd, 2009
9:39 am

A playoff would not make college football better. You would ruin college football and turn it into the NFL or college basketball and all for nothing.The top teams, the big named schools would still win in the end just like in college basketball.Even in the NFL the Giants were put at a big disadvantage compared to the other teams that made the playoffs.The Giants had just beat there rival the Eagles then turned around and had to play them again in the playoffs.So we ruin college football and change it and yet we get the same out come – the big named schools win in the end eventhough the little teams get a chance to lose.Is it really worth it? I mean sure 1 out of 10 times a little named team might get lucky but it would not be worth it.Florida was the best team last year and won the NC a playoff would not have changed it.

Mad Dog

April 22nd, 2009
9:41 am

I thought that Bobby Bowden was president of FSU.

CLTDawg

April 22nd, 2009
9:44 am

For all the flaws of the BCS, there is no reason that any idiot politician should be involved. There are too many other important issues that they need to address prior to worrying about how a National Champion is crowned. Boo hoo Utah, you got left out last year because of your schedule, UGA got left out 2 years ago despite playing better than anyone else in the country, Auburn got left out after going undefeated (in the SEC no less). The system is never going to be perfect.

Maybe FSU should petition to have the goal posts widened so that they didn’t miss so many FG’s in the past. The system isn’t perfect, and it is likely that no system ever would be.

Phildo

April 22nd, 2009
9:49 am

D-1 football is the ONLY NCAA sport not to have a true champion. It’s OK to drag basketball on and on, but oh no, not football because this would rob the greedy bowls and some greedy conferences of their payola. What B(c)S.

Here’s the answer.
1. 8 top final BCS poll teams to play it off (No freaking committee)
2. Top 8 chosen by giving the computer rating 2/3 of the weight factor to minimize the human polls beauty contest (Otherwise, ND wins their last game, ends up 1-10 and ranked 6 or higher)
3. Quarterfinals at highest ranked host schools starting the second week of December
(Their fans deserve this. Screw the bowls)
4. Losing 4 teams still eligible for other bowls
5. Semi-finals on New Years at 2 bowl sites submitting highest bids to NCAA
6. Final one week later at bowl site submitting highest separate bid to NCAA
7. All other bowls still played for also-rans.

This puts more money in the schools, NCAA, TV, and bowl pockets, gives fans a break, and it eliminates the never-ending drama with the current system.
Win-win-win-win situation.

Atlanta Gator

April 22nd, 2009
9:50 am

bama12*titles is right. The simple way to get this done initially is either a true plus-one format (a post-bowl, single-game playoff, with the participants determined after the January bowl games), or a four-team, three-game playoff (with participants selected by similar means to the current BCS).

Sorry, but a fifth or sixth-ranked, one or two-loss team would have very little room to whine. In college football, the regular season has always mattered a lot, and the regular season win-loss records will continue to determine the teams’ post-season fates.

An 8-team playoff would be too large to swallow initially, but could follow a plus-one or four-team playoff. A 16-team playoff is even less likely to ever happen because it would have the finalists still playing in late January or even February in competition with the NFL playoffs and the Super Bowl.

Saint Nick

April 22nd, 2009
9:51 am

I don’t know why we keep hearing these stories about non-BCS Commissioners pitching playoff plans!!! The six BCS commissioners are saying “Mountain West????” and laughing at this guy when they walk out of the room after his “proposal”. IT IS NOT GONNA CHANGE!!!! The only way this will EVER change is if ALL the networks bidding for the BCS games want a playoff before they buy the rights to the BCS!!!! Until then shutup because it doesn’t matter what ANY fan thinks!!!!!! ROLL TIDE!!!

[...] don’t see anything coming of the proposal.Neither does ESPN.com’s Ivan Maisel.And neither does Tony Barnhart of The Atlanta [...]

Dean

April 22nd, 2009
9:59 am

There has to be a playoff. How can anyone argue that we don’t deserve a natinal championship determined on the field instead of by subjective votes? If the Big 10 and Pac 10 don’t want to do it then leave them out and let in two of the smaller conferences. They probably have better football teams top to bottom anyway. I bet after the first year those two conferences would be begging to get back in. College football, as much as I love it, is a joke untill they get a playoff to determine the champion.

Tide4u2c

April 22nd, 2009
10:00 am

Phildo,

The problem with your idea is that you have ulterior motives that have nothing to do with with making college football better.Your issue is about money which is a totally different agenda.And yet even with your system Florida still wins the NC and Utah loses in the system you would like to have.

Huh?

April 22nd, 2009
10:04 am

The Big 10 and Pac 10 know what the score is. They aren’t dumb. In every year that they have won a national title this decade they have done so by avoiding an SEC opponent. 2002 OSU did not have to play Georgia. 2003 USC did not have to play LSU. 2004 USC did not have to play Auburn. Obviously they don’t intentionally avoid the SEC, but they aren’t going to intentionally put themselves in a position where they have to play them with a playoff either.

If you think the SEC dominates the BCS now, wait until there is a playoff. An SEC team would win the whole ball of wax darned near every year. It would get pretty boring actually.

Brock

April 22nd, 2009
10:05 am

“UGA got left out 2 years ago despite playing better than anyone else in the country..” HA! Didn’t even win their division.

Atlanta Gator

April 22nd, 2009
10:08 am

BTW, for everyone who advocates an 8 or 16-team playoff, may I remind you of the physical status of the Alabama and Florida football teams after the 2008 SEC Championship Game? According to Urban Meyer, neither the Tide nor the Gators were in any shape to play another SEC-caliber opponent the week after the SEC game last year. Meyer said, point blank, that the Gators would have struggled with any SEC opponent the following week because of the physical and emotional exhaustion and the number of injuries. Meyer also suggested Nick Saban had said something similar to him regarding the Tide’s post-game status, too.

Having these 17 to 23 year-olds play four additional back-to-back games after the end of a 12 or 13-game season is too damn much. This is a college sport, not gladiatorial combat. When the kids are exhausted, they are even more injury-prone. The champion following a 16-team playoff would be more of a survivor, and less of a winner, because the original starting line-ups could be decimated. This would make the regular season results even less meaningful.

Joel In ATL

April 22nd, 2009
10:14 am

Well since the BCS, Big 10 and Pac 10 don’t want to budge then the Coalition should add another conference(like combining the MEAC and SWAC for example or heck adding a strong “FCS” conference like The Southern) so they have a total of 6 conferences and have their own “Coaliton Championship Series” and then you will have a “College Football National Championship” with the BCS vs The Coaliton. Will it ever happen no but hey the higher up the corporate ladder you get the more common sense you lose and that is especially true of the BCS, NCAA and it’s people.

OR

I would love to see the Big Ten and Pac 10 leave the BCS, that would be wonderful and they could have the “Rose Bowl Championship” and it’s winner could play Notre Dame (who can only schedule 6 games vs Big 10 and 6 games vs Pac 10 opponents in the regular season) every year no matter how bad ND is and that winner would play the winner of the BCS(w/4 conferences,SEC,ACC, B12 and BigEast,and they cannot schedule anybody from the Big 10, Pac 10 or Norte Dame during the regular season)/Coalition Championship (who can only schedule BCS or other non-conference Coalition games). Problem solved, everybody gets the money and the right to say “we got a shot at playing for the national championship” TV rights could be spewed all over the place, people would watch, advertisers would buy and ratings would fight amoungst the TV people. I thought I never say this but all I care about are the Conference Championships now, the BCS is a wash, I don’t like watching anything where the players don’t have control, and I’m talking about more POSTEASON control for you nitwitts out there that will say “the regular season is their shot” becasue as we see that’s “BS”, PUN INTENDED, also.

SOUTHSIDE DAWG

April 22nd, 2009
10:15 am

IF YOU WANT A PLAYOFF ND NEEDS TO BE IN A CONFERENCE AND THEN AND ONLY THEN WILL YOU HAVE A PLAYOFF. REASON BEING YOU WOULD TAKE ALL CONFERENCE CHAMPS AND HAVE YOUR PLAYOFFS. SET THE ORDER OF WHICH CONFERENCE PLAYS WHO AND CHANGE THE ORDER EVERY YEAR. THAT IS THE BEST WAY TO DO IT BECAUSE YOU SHOULD HAVE TO WIN YOUR CONFERENCE. TO PLAY FOR THE NC.

Dean

April 22nd, 2009
10:17 am

Okay, I know it’s a pipe dream but here is an idea I’ve had. Shorten the season back to 10 games and get rid of the non-conference cream puffs. Then, force the 3 Independent teams to one of the 11 remaining conferences. Then you let in every conference champion. So that is 11. then you let in 13 other at-large teams. Teams ranked 9-24 play while the top 8 get a first round bye. After that round you have 16 teams left to fight it out. The absolute most that any team could play would be 17 games if they had to play the Conference championship game and a first round game while going all the way to the NC. That’s 4 (more liekly 3) more games than we get currently and this would only be for the best of the best. You get rid of all that dead time between November and January and have great football every weekend. I know it will never happen but it sure would be entertaining and alot more satisfying than what we have now.

Huh?

April 22nd, 2009
10:18 am

Atlanta Gator, I think its pretty much well settled that there wouldn’t be 12 or 13 regular season games if there were a full fledged 16 team playoff. It would be more like 10. Moreover, can you explain how those 17 to 23 year olds in the lower divisions are able to shoulder the load of a playoff? They seem to be doing just fine.

A 16 team playoff will never happen in a million years anyway. It will be more like a plus one or a 4 team playoff. Again, if those lower divisions can handle it I see no reason why the BCS big boys can’t.

On a more sarcastic and smacky note, Meyer’s comments are not surprising. Florida very rarely has to play tough SEC opponents in consecutive weeks during the regular season. Look at their schedules over the years. I am not making this up. They just aren’t used to it. I’m sure your AD would push for plenty of off weeks and time off if there were a playoff. No worries my friend.

GeoffDawg

April 22nd, 2009
10:18 am

Brock – if you think anyone in the country would’ve preferred to play Georgia over LSU for the 2007 MNC, then you’re either a liar or delusional.

Gutrake

April 22nd, 2009
10:21 am

LOL! If you think the BCS is a mess now…Wait til the Democrats get a hold of it. Anyone ever heard of the U.S. Postal Service????

Bull Gator

April 22nd, 2009
10:23 am

If the Big Ten and Pac-10 are threatening to walk away if a playoff is implemented then the other conferences need to call their bluff. After the last 2 Rose Bowls and the complete debacle that was Ohio State getting their brains beat in by UF and LSU, it’s become very apparent to everyone involved that the Big Ten is a joke, and the Pac-10 is basically USC. Let them go. The Big Ten is ruining college football anyway because they continue to put crap on the field and then whine when nobody gives them any respect. Could you imagine if Penn State had not lost to Iowa last year? They would have been demolished by anyone that played in any of the BCS bowls. The Big Ten is awful and the Pac-10 is a joke. Let them have the Rose Bowl, nobody cares about it anyway.

Phildo

April 22nd, 2009
10:25 am

Tide4U2C, actually, my proposal is not about making money. It’s about determining a true nationial champion, but I realize that money is a driving factor for everyone involved, and to get what is needed, the money also has to come into play. Hint: the word greedy in my comments. As to who would win in your scenario, you can only speculate. Anyway, wouldn’t you love to have one of the play-off games in Tuscaloosa in front of the Bama fans who deserve it?

PTC DAWG

April 22nd, 2009
10:26 am

A 4 team play off at the minimum. College Football shouldn’t be like Ice Skating…where a VOTE determines who wins.

Gen Neyland

April 22nd, 2009
10:28 am

This subject is like talking religion or politics. As a very simple minded layman, I’ve a question for our resident attorney we keep on retainer in the blogosphere…

Atlanta Gator: You see a case for colluded behavior somewhere down the line using the above mentioned format..?

Saint Nick

April 22nd, 2009
10:29 am

PLAYOFFS???? DON’T TALK TO ME ABOUT PLAYOFFS!!!!!

Capitol Hill

April 22nd, 2009
10:35 am

Seriously, it’s nice to get some political analysis with my football in the morning.

Obama

April 22nd, 2009
10:43 am

Hey Capitol Hill -

Are you related to Dorsey?

Tide4u2c

April 22nd, 2009
10:44 am

Phildo

Somebody else will just get all that money atleast now it is divided up.I am against a play-off system, I once was for it but after I sat down and thought it through and paid ttention to college basketball I realized nothing would change with a playoff and tht college football would be ruined for nothing. The big-named schools would win 9 out of 10 times.In basketball who won in the end this past season? It was a big-named school – North Carolina.

the real deal

April 22nd, 2009
10:57 am

As a coach I just cant imagine walking into
the locker room and telling my team at the start of the season that no matter how hard they played and if you win every game there is no way to win the Championship….. its really unbelievable!

Billy Bob

April 22nd, 2009
10:59 am

There can never be a playoff, ever – period. How dense are you people? Few colleges are in big cities, like Northwestern in Chicago. So most don’t have a fixed fan base like NFL teams. Their fans are transient. You will never-ever see a college football game in December (between semesters) played in empty stadiums. Who do you think are going to fill those stadiums, alumni? Presidents will never let college football be a two semester sport – ever. So, there you go. It will never happen.

Dave R

April 22nd, 2009
11:15 am

I’m in favor of real playoffs (I like sixteen teams, 11 conference champs + 5 at-large, but 8 teams with no autobids is workable; 4 teams is not, though it’s better than 2 — there are more than 4 legit contenders far too often). But the ‘pure plus one’ idea — playing the traditional bowls and then picking the BCS title game participants — would have been useless every year but one from 2001 to 2008. I wrote about this last year at http://cusefaninsocal.blogspot.com/2008/11/why-pure-1-playoff-model-is-bad-idea.html

Gatorzone

April 22nd, 2009
11:19 am

Gutrake, you mean the same service that for less than $.50 will deliver a letter mailed from LA to New York in 3 days? What is wrong with the post office? Seems like a pretty good service to me.

Obama

April 22nd, 2009
11:19 am

Billy Bob -

Football is already a 2 semester sport – the regular season is played in the fall semester and the MNC is played in the spring semster. And, basketball is a 2 semester sport, too. And, take UGA for example – 15000 students get tickets for each game, yet 77,000 “other fans” show up, too. Iguess those 77,000 would not show up in December!!!

What bridge are you living under, North Avenue?

Munson

April 22nd, 2009
11:28 am

Tide4u2c, the point of a plus one or a playoff is not always to allow the smaller schools a chance. Sometimes the big schools all finish the season with the same record and we need a better way to determine the champion in that scenario. A plus one format would have been perfect in 2004 so Auburn could have their shot at the NC.

As for your basketball argument, UNC may not have even played in the championship game with a BCS type formula for basketball. The final AP poll going into the tourney had Louisville #1 and UNC #2, the final ESPN/USA Today poll had Louisville #1 and Memphis #2 so UNC may not have even made it into a BCS championship game for Basketball. On top of that, UNC did not win their conference tournament, and as us UGA fans are reminded often, you cannot play in the championship game if you did not win your conference. Not saying a big name school would not have won it, but it would probably have not been UNC under a BCS type system.

Phildo

April 22nd, 2009
11:34 am

Tide4U2c, aha, your real position is that you are simply against the playoff system, and you certainly have a right to your opinion. But, as to money, everyone is getting a taste anyway. With my system including the initial playoff at a school site, your school, assuming you’re in the top 4, gets a little more, which is good for your school. If everyone else gets a little more, too, fine, but let’s a least stop the hyprocisy by the BCS.

P-Man

April 22nd, 2009
12:00 pm

I, too, favor a 16 team playoff with ALL conference champions getting in and 5 at-large teams, seeded 1-16. A true champion. Also, shorten the regular season to 10 games.

Otto

April 22nd, 2009
12:07 pm

Keep it the way it is. If anything add more weight to the computer ranking and add more to SOS recalculating it every week.

Who were the 4 yeams in the Final 4? I can only remember who the team were tht played for the title. How much have NCAA tournament ratings fallen? We’re not even talking about the snoozer of a regular season. Lets not turn the magic of the Football regular season into the bore of basketball.

Otto

April 22nd, 2009
12:07 pm

Keep it the way it is. If anything add more weight to the computer rankings and add more to the SOS recalculating it every week.

Who were the 4 yeams in the Final 4? I can only remember who the teams were that played for the title. How much have NCAA tournament ratings fallen? We’re not even talking about the snoozer of a regular season. Lets not turn the magic of the Football regular season into the bore of basketball.