Keep bowls and BCS away from college football playoff
College football officials must realize they don't need bowls or the BCS for a playoff system.
In full disclosure, and at the risk of ostracizing myself from seemingly all except those who fondly recall memories of the inaugural 1902 Tournament East-West game in Pasadena — where admission was 50 cents, plus $1 for the family’s horse-and-buggy – here goes:
I like bowl games. I like tradition. I like the idea of an end-of-season reward for two college football teams, players and their families. It probably helped that I grew up in the shadow of the Rose Bowl (which the East-West became) and not the Astro-Bluebonnet Bowl. But there was no urgency for a playoff, and the arguments over rankings were considered part of the fabric and charm of college football.
We’re past charm, of course. I’m not completely past the thought that bowl games serve some purpose, but I don’t want them anywhere near a college football playoff. Do you know what the dysfunctional combination of bowl games and a “playoff” has gotten us in the past 20 years? The BCS. It has created one oft-debated matchup and rendered most other games unwatchable.
College officials and conference commissioners finally agree we’re headed for a four-team playoff. But for some reason they appear unwilling to cut the cord with the bowls, which have contributed to the BCS mess and succeeded only in making money for their occasionally corrupt executives (see: Fiesta Bowl). This was reaffirmed Wednesday when ACC commissioner John Swofford, echoing the sentiments of his brethren, said his conference would like bowl games to be used as sites for playoffs and for the BCS structure to be kept for non-playoff teams.
Why … and why?
It makes no sense that the NCAA, which runs a successful basketball tournament, would allow outside contractors to stage potentially its most profitable venture. Imagine the NFL going through the regular season and then telling a start-up company, “OK, you take it from here. See if you can make the Super Bowl work.”
So here’s my plan. It won’t please everybody, but no plan will:
• The top four teams will be picked before the bowls get involved. Semifinals will be played on New Year’s Day. The championship game the following week.
• The semifinals will be held at campus stadiums of the Nos. 1 and 2 seeds. The thought of a game in Baton Rouge, Austin or Ann Arbor blows away the sterile atmosphere of a neutral-site dome. The home team obviously will have an advantage, but higher seeds should have an advantage in playoffs. I’m also not convinced that the fan bases of two college football teams can afford to travel in consecutive weeks in the postseason. This eliminates that problem. And please, no more whines about logistical issues and there not being enough hotel rooms. I’m in the media and even I don’t care about logistical issues. Every college has hosted major games of national interest.
• The championship game should be put up for bid, just like a Super Bowl. If Phoenix wants in, fine. But the host should be Phoenix, not the Fiesta Bowl subcommittee of “Dewey, Cheatem and Howe.” (Copyright: Three Stooges.)
• There will be no automatic qualifiers, not even from the mighty SEC. Sports are cyclical and with realignment Armageddon ongoing, nobody can be certain where the power structure is headed. All four teams will be at-large berths and can come from any of the FBS conferences. We can’t just assume that Middle Tennessee State can’t inexplicably field a great team in 20 years and eke in as a No. 4 seed.
• Playoff teams do not have to be conference champions. No other sport, college or pro, mandates this. This should be about the best four teams, period. That also means no cap on conference participants. That 1985 Final Four with three Big East schools — Georgetown, St. John’s and little ol’ Villanova — seemed to work out OK.
• The four teams will be picked by a panel. If the NCAA can come up with a tournament selection committee for basketball, it certainly can do the same for football. Wire service and computer rankings will not be part of any official criteria, even if it’s assumed everybody on the panel will be peeking at them.
• The bowls have free reign of participants after the four playoff teams are picked. The Rose Bowl can have its Pac 12-Big Ten matchup every year. The Sugar Bowl can take an SEC school. Let bowl officials scramble for teams again. The games are better. Everybody’s happy. The only mandate: All games must be played by New Year’s Day. Only the championship comes after.
College football gets a true champion. The bowls return to function as they should’ve all along. The BCS gets hit by a wrecking ball. What could be better?
By Jeff Schultz
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
265 comments Add your comment
Jeff Schultz
May 17th, 2012
7:03 pm
Tdawg — I’m not saying winning your conference means nothing. Winning your conference means you won your conference, just like it means that in basketball, just like it means you won a division in pro sports. But in the end, no other sport at no other level mandates a conference title to get into the postseason that I’m aware of, so why should football be different?
Jeff Schultz
May 17th, 2012
7:05 pm
Chi Town — I respect Saban as a coach and a builder of programs but obviously have been on the record as to how to feel about some of his methods (oversigning, running off kids). And he SURE as heck ain’t my Lord.
Jeff Schultz
May 17th, 2012
7:07 pm
War Eagle Every Day (and others) — Yep, Auburn in 2004 makes it into the field in this plan. Georgia also possibly makes it in a few years ago.
Jeff Schultz
May 17th, 2012
7:08 pm
JSS — I’m totally with you. Would love to see an warm-weather (SEC) school have to play in snow, as opposed to vice-versa.
athensdawg
May 17th, 2012
7:11 pm
sounds great to me. once the dollahs start rolling in and the ncaa institutes some kind of revenue sharing plan, you’ll see this thing get as many teams as the market can bear…..cause folks, it aint about “college” or “student athletes”….
Hillbilly D
May 17th, 2012
7:19 pm
But in the end, no other sport at no other level mandates a conference title to get into the postseason that I’m aware of,
Baseball used to and it’s a damn shame that they changed that.
Bill
May 17th, 2012
7:23 pm
As a true college football fan, I think you are spot-on with your plan. Many casual college football fans that have never been to a big time college game are chimming in with all the playoff senarios that would kill what is the beauty of this sport.
Beast from the East
May 17th, 2012
7:50 pm
I wouldn’t mind seeing how our SEC teams did playing in one of those northern venues. While it would be different and they would probably need a few series to adjust to really cold temperatures, I still think the best team would win.
Delbert D.
May 17th, 2012
7:51 pm
First, Death to the BCS. Famous book; everybody get a copy and read it.
Second, no other major college sport has only a 12-game season.
Third, the conference championship game *is* (meaning should really be) part of the playoff. You lose, you are out. Beyond that…
Fourth, it is absurd to include multiple teams from one conference until enough games are played to include *all* conference champions. With these 16-school conferences that are forming, that means 64 teams vie for 4 spots automatically in the near future. The NCAA had better open up 4 more spots, or conferences like the Big 12 Left-behinds, the Big East Unpopulars, and the mish-mash of C-USA, Conference Everybody Else and the League of Independents will cry, “Fowl! (as “You turkeys.)
GTBob
May 17th, 2012
7:58 pm
Many casual college football fans that have never been to a big time college game are chimming in with all the playoff senarios that would kill what is the beauty of this sport.
College Football has by far the worst postseason in all of sports. Some of us would like to see that change but I guess the super hardcore fans like you would rather it not.
GTBob
May 17th, 2012
8:01 pm
But in the end, no other sport at no other level mandates a conference title to get into the postseason that I’m aware of, so why should football be different?
In every other sport, winning your conference does get you into the playoffs though, meaning there are no conference champions that are left out because some other undeserving team passed Kirk Herstreit’s eye test.
Delbert D.
May 17th, 2012
8:02 pm
“The beauty of the sport” has become 6 win, 7 loss teams returning home from a meaningless exhibition game with their tails tucked in humiliation.
Paul in NH
May 17th, 2012
8:17 pm
Not to mention a 6 win, 8 loss team returning home from a meaningless exhibition with a loss.
Mediocre Bowl
May 17th, 2012
9:11 pm
6-8 UCLA
over1861
May 17th, 2012
10:33 pm
I’ll take the 4 team playoff to start. Anything is better than the BCS. I have been waiting for a playoff since 1966 when Georgia and Alabama finished 4th and 3rd in the polls and either could have beaten 1 and 2. When they see college football bolt ahead of the NFL in popularity and the money starts rolling in then they will start increasing the number of teams involved.
gene
May 17th, 2012
11:17 pm
Wishful thinking. The NCAA and many college presidents are as corrupt and greedy as the bowl officials. Money will win over logic.
ukmark
May 18th, 2012
1:39 am
Good idea, Jeff…But more teams need to be involved. Will never be picked b4 bowls, though.
JayInAtlanta
May 18th, 2012
2:29 am
“Wishful thinking. The NCAA and many college presidents are as corrupt and greedy as the bowl officials. Money will win over logic.” – gene
This is true. The ideas that are realistically being entertained are simply pathetic. The BCS and to an extent the NCAA want you to think “what is THAT BS? We might as well keep what we have.”
I like Jeff’s idea fine as an initial push, though like many posters, I’d prefer more teams in the playoff and we haven’t solved the inherent problems with voting for the “top teams” anyway.
The biggest thing I’d pick on in Jeff’s article was the fact that mega-sponsors shouldn’t be allowed to supplement a tourism bureau to get a championship game in a certain city. Throw the corporate supporters a bone. If it takes an AT&T Tostitos Pepsi Dell Shell alliance to get a championship game in New York or Chicago, etc., then go for it.
gt fan
May 18th, 2012
2:49 am
All major sports have there division winners in the playoff with the addition of wild card spots. If you are only allowing 4 teams in you should have the top 4 ranked conference champions. This will take some of the bias in the ranking out of the playoff field. If that means number 1,5,7,14 so be it. The overall goal is to find the number 1 team. If you didn’t win your conference, then you are not number 1.
Gator Mike
May 18th, 2012
7:30 am
Mr. Schultz, I totally agree with your solution. It makes sense, but greed will prevent common sense from prevailing.
Goober Dawg: Your assessment of the state of college football is totally accurate. Well said!
gbal
May 18th, 2012
7:41 am
GT if you win your weak confrence with 2-4 losses and can get no more respect from the ranking system than a #14 ranking you do not deserve a spot in a 4 team playoff. The objective is get the best 4 teams in a playoff.
Across the Wide Missouri
May 18th, 2012
7:56 am
Missouri 45, Georgia 17
It’s coming, you know it is.
Bianca
May 18th, 2012
8:01 am
Jeff’s idea for a four-team playoff isn’t bad, but I just don’t see it happening. Too many people have a vested interest in keeping the status quo. A playoff is definitely coming, but it will involve the BCS and some of the bowls.
Wallis the dog
May 18th, 2012
8:12 am
Your plan is ridiculous. There is no problem with the current system except that some people believe the winner of the BCS “Championship” is actually the most deserving team. They might be, but there’s no way to know for sure. Playoffs dilute the regular season action.
Big Dawg
May 18th, 2012
8:27 am
Just my two cents, while I like most of what you say Jeff, IMHO a 4 team playoff is to few and 16 is too many. The top 8 teams- with Conference Champs getting higher consideration over a non-conference winner from a conference; Independents would be considered on their own merits. This would have in my humble opinion given us a true National Champion in most disputed years i.e. 2003 with USC being left out, 2004 with Auburn being left out, 2006 Michigan left out, 2007 when Georgia and USC were left out and this past year when LSU and Alabama played for the BCS Championship leaving other teams out and other years throughout the history of Division 1- BCS or what other term you want to use for big time college football. Anyway this is only my opinion.
Go Dawgs
David C
May 18th, 2012
8:27 am
Most of what you say makes sense. Really hope they do not Mandate Conference only Champions in 4 Team Playoff. Perfect example was last. If LSU would have lost to Georgia in SEC Championship Game they would have been out. While a 9th Placed Big Ten Team would have made it in? It should be the Best 4 Teams Period. Keep it simple.
WnE
May 18th, 2012
8:36 am
Mr. Schultz, with all due respect the college Bowl system deserves NOTHING, that system is outdated and corrupt and has been corrupt for many years.
Remember when CFB Fans could have had a GT vs. Colorado MNC-Game on the field but the corrupt Bowl System “cut a deal” with Notre Dame as early as Halloween Weekend that put ND in the Orange Bowl vs. Colorado regardless of how the rest of their season played out, not to mention with no regard to how the rest of the top teams had their seasons play out that year also.
I can point to about 15-20 years of similar bowl shenanigans where the fat-a$$ Bowl Committee guys in ugly blazers repeatedly tried their best to ruin CFB each season between Halloween and the 2nd week of Nov. when back-door deal for bowl slots were made without any regard to the CFB fans nor to the teams that merited the best bowl slots.
The Bowl games have such a crappy track record I could care less about any of the Bowl games.
The BCS should have a 6 team playoff with the top 2 seeds getting byes, and the Top-4 conference champions (based on Strength of Schedule/BCS poll rankings) being guaranteed 4 of those 6 slots, but not necessarily the top-2 seeds.
After that allow the next 24 teams in term of BCS ranking be allowed to play in 12 bowl games.
This will make bowl games actually mean something once again.
As far as those 12 bowls, have the NCAA accept bids from communities that will actually support bowls so only the stronger bids/bowls will survive and that way the Colleges won’t be on the hook for as many tickets & hotel rooms as in past years.
For the NCAA teams that do not qualify for the BCS playoff or a Bowl Game, the NCAA should allow all teams 15-20 practices during the bowl season so Athletic Departments won’t have to intentionally LOSE $500K to $750K to go to a crappy lower tier bowl just so they can qualify for 3 extra weeks of practice.
This is how you “fix” the BCS level of CFB.
Highlands
May 18th, 2012
8:48 am
College basketball is in the worse shape of its life because of their ever-expanding tournament (whose viewership was down itself 11% in 2012 over previous year). Even schools like Duke are having to release student tickets to the general population. Be wary of inclusion, it creates apathy.
Vince
May 18th, 2012
9:02 am
Jeff—Some excellent ideas overall except for one thing—-95% of all college football games would be over and done by early, early January. Having those two weeks of college football heaven for the first part of January is the ONLY thing that makes my visiting inlaws tolerable !!!
HighTech
May 18th, 2012
9:15 am
I think this is still the best CFB playoff plan…
http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/blog/dr_saturday/post/introducing-the-official-dr-saturday-playoff-plan?urn=ncaaf,wp58
Basic Structure
• Ten teams, selected according to final conference and BCS standings. Yes, we’re keeping the BCS — essentially, with the rare exception, the 10 teams in this system will be the same 10 teams selected for BCS bowls under the current structure.
• Four rounds consisting of nine total games, staged from the second or third weekend in December through the second weekend in January. Ideally, I’d allow for a “Christmas break,” a bye week between the second round games and the semifinals, and stage the semifinals on New Year’s Day.
• The first round consists of four teams playing two games. The other six teams receive automatic byes to the second round.
• Rounds one and two are played at the home site of the higher-seeded team. The semifinals and championship games are played at current BCS bowl sites. (The championship game rotates among the sites each season, as it does now. That leaves one site out every year — three games for four sites — but the bowl that doesn’t get a playoff game can still select two of the eliminated teams for a sort of consolation game. Which, let’s face it, is basically what the non-championship games are now.)
• The winners of the two first-round games advance into the second round; the eight remaining teams are then matched so that the lowest-ranked team visits the highest-ranked team, etc. Second-round winners advance to the semifinals.
Automatic Bids
• Automatic bids go to:
— The champion of each of the “Big Six” conferences — the ACC, Big East, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-12 and SEC — regardless of ranking. (NOTE: The existing, meritocratic BCS formula for selecting which conferences earn this distinction will remain in effect, leaving the door open to the Mountain West, WAC, Conference USA, etc., to earn “Big Six” status, and keeping, say, the ACC and Big East from becoming entrenched if they fail to perform on the field.)
— The top four at-large teams in the final BCS standings (limit one at-large bid per conference).
Buckeye
May 18th, 2012
9:37 am
Can you imagine the SEC! SEC! traveling to Columbus and Ann Arbor to play on Jan. 1. Bring your long johns boys!
HighTech
May 18th, 2012
9:39 am
Buckeye…they’re called long handles down here.
PonGT
May 18th, 2012
9:40 am
It’s got potential. Not bad; as good as any I’ve read or heard thus far, and better than most. Got potential. I do like the part about all games being through by New Year’s Day. Definitely would vote for that.
Andy
May 18th, 2012
9:48 am
Those of you who think that only the top 4 conf. champions should be in the playoff, you need to think about what you are saying. Almost never are the top 4 schools from different conferences. Last year Wisconsin would have made the playoff and they were no better than the 10th best team in America last year. Alabama clearly proved they were the best team last year and yet under that format they would not have made the game. In some years it would work out fine, it would have been good to have this in 2004 when Auburn got screwed. Take the what most reasonable people think the 4 best teams are, not just conf. champs.
Let's Go
May 18th, 2012
9:50 am
Just put the damn bowl games back the way they were before the BCS and then after the all the games are played (NLT news years day) you come up with the best 2 teams and they play each other the week before the Super Bowl. Simple and for the first time in the last 15 or so years the Bowl Games will actually mean something.
Scout
May 18th, 2012
9:57 am
You can’t have a panel decide who the 4 best teams are. Panel (pure human selection) works fine for the NCAA Basketball tournament because many teams are selected and there can be no dispute that the best teams are covered and in the dance. But you’d have civil unrest if you let a panel select the 4 best NCAA college football teams at the end of the season. Everything you say sounds ok as a first phase movement, except for the panel selection. I would put your plan up against present bowl and BCS system plus 1, and let the coaches vote on it.
GTBob
May 18th, 2012
10:01 am
GT if you win your weak confrence with 2-4 losses and can get no more respect from the ranking system than a #14 ranking you do not deserve a spot in a 4 team playoff
If that happened there is no chance that GT would get in the playoff. Everyone on here acts like if we use conference champions the a 5 loss ACC team is going to the playoffs. Use a little common sense and you will realize that that would never happen. Only one ACC team would have made it in the past 5 years.
GTBob
May 18th, 2012
10:09 am
Alabama clearly proved they were the best team last year and yet under that format they would not have made the game.
How was Alabama clearly the best team? Because they finished 2nd in their division and beat LSU 1 out of 2 times? Or are you talking about Kirk Herbstreits eye test where he just randomly picks a team he thinks is good?
Sid
May 18th, 2012
10:14 am
Hard to agree or disagree. I’m still stuck at “teams would be picked by a panel”………? Who is on it and how is that determined? Bipartisan relationships? What is their selection criteria? Conference championship carries no weight? SOS carries less weight….? Undefeated teams carry same weight across the conferences?
Dawg Doo
May 18th, 2012
10:18 am
The blind assumption that no more than one team per conference will be among the four best teams in any given season is asinine. We can debate how you go about determining the four best teams, but if you place artificial restrictions on that determination from the outset, then your new system of determining a champion will end up being just as flawed and unpopular as the BCS is today.
GTBob
May 18th, 2012
10:25 am
then your new system of determining a champion will end up being just as flawed and unpopular as the BCS is today.
So you think the playoffs would be more popular with 2 SEC teams and 2 Big 12 teams then it would with an SEC, Big 10, Pac 12, and Big 12 team? This years horrible TV ratings showed that nobody wants to watch useless rematches decide championships.
Dawg Doo
May 18th, 2012
10:29 am
Are you interested in a system that does its best to put the best four teams on the field to determine a champion, or are you interested in putting together games that will draw the biggest television ratings in order to generate the most money? If you want the best four teams to play, then their conference affiliation is irrelevant.
Cdpridg
May 18th, 2012
10:29 am
Dawg doo…..it, is asinine but that is how we do things in this country now days. We dont achieve to be the best…we all need a pat on the back and a freebie without earning anything. If we had to do 4 conf ch as mps….we have to take the 4 traditional power conferences…Pac…Big 12..Big 10 and the SEC…
Mike S.
May 18th, 2012
10:30 am
4 teams is a mistake because spots 3 and 4 will now replace the #2 spot as being highly political. You cant look back in past years and assume the top 4 will remain the same because voters weren’t worried about who was in them. They were a good landing spot for teams that probably should be in the top 2, but weren’t as big a name as those in front of them. There is no guarantee those same teams now won’t land at #5 and get skipped by other power program names.
Rags
May 18th, 2012
10:33 am
If you do 16 teams might as well discount the whole regular season. You have college basketball where only one month matters. NCAA will have nothing to do with this. Conferences run college football (scheduling, money); NCAA runs hoops. Other conferences are going to fight to make it league champions only because the SEC is only conference strong enough to put two teams in top four. Do NOT use a panel. Polls and one super computer (strength of schedule). Mother Teresa would get death threats if she was on panel that kept Tide out of NC
Mike S.
May 18th, 2012
10:34 am
The only way to keep the politics out is have an 8 team playoff (6 major conf champs + 2 at large). Everyone then controls their own destiny. If you dont win your conference, you had better be good enough to be in the running for the at large. These would be your BCS teams. They would play round one right after the conference championship games. The winners would play on Jan 1 or 2 in two BCS bowls for a spot in the championship a week later. The loser play in the other two BCS bowls. Everyone else gets an invite as usual. Its not rocket science and completely eliminates poll politics.
GTBob
May 18th, 2012
10:34 am
If you want the best four teams to play, then their conference affiliation is irrelevant.
If you can come up with a fair way to pick those 4 teams then I will stand behind your plan. They way they pick teams now is a joke, and will continue to be a joke in a 4 team playoff. It is very sad that College Football determines its champion by the opinions of people who can’t possibly watch enough games to know who is best and not on the actual field of play like every other sport.
Dawg Doo
May 18th, 2012
10:36 am
Cdpridg – can’t argue with you on that.
Mike S.
May 18th, 2012
10:36 am
@Rags – they already discounted the regular season when they rematched LSU and Bama last year. Also, college basketball has over 30 conferences. Half of that NCAA tournament field is conference champions. The other half are teams that had better have very good seasons. Its a cash cow and one of the most enjoyable experiences in sports. I agree 16 is too much for CFB, but 8 would be just fine.
GTBob
May 18th, 2012
10:37 am
We dont achieve to be the best…we all need a pat on the back and a freebie without earning anything.
Amazing that an SEC fan considers winning some random guys opinion to be earning it but they don’t want to have to earn it on the field.