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
Raw Dawg
May 18th, 2012
10:37 am
“makes sense so im sure they won’t do it” – bingo! Solid plan, so it has little chance of being implemented.
As much as I would like to see a 16 team playoff, to those who are saying that all you need to do is shorted the regular season to squeeze it in there – that’s great for the teams that are likely to be in the top 16 every year, but I don’t think the other 100 or so schools in the FBS would be too keen on that.
Mike S.
May 18th, 2012
10:39 am
@GTBob – exactly right. The 3 and 4 spots will get just as controversial as the 2 spot is now. Like I said, right now the 3 and 4 spots are dont cares for the voters. They dump teams there as a consolation. When the 4 team playoff starts, 3 and 4 will be the political spots. The consolation will become 5 and 6. Teams will still get skipped over due to politics, just two spots down. An 8 team model where all major conference champs get in plus 2 at large is the only way to eliminate the politics.
Dawg Doo
May 18th, 2012
10:40 am
There’s no question that the method of selecting the four teams will be critical. I don’t pretend to have an answer for that. My point is that the method that finally is agreed to will be doomed if there are any considerations that prevent the four best teams from playing. I’m an SEC fan, but there will be years that the SEC does not produce one of the four best teams in the country. If two of them are from the Big 10, then they should be included and the SEC should be left out that year. I wouldn’t want an undeserving SEC team to be included because of an arbitrary rule that prevents more than one Big 10 team from making the field.
Mike S.
May 18th, 2012
10:42 am
To the people that think a regular season needs to be shortened for a playoff, check out how the FCS division plays. They play 11 games in the regular season and currently hold a 20 team playoff that starts the week after regular season ends. They play into mid December and play the championship after the new year. All the lower divisions are similar. The whole “too many games” excuse is just that…and excuse not to have a playoff.
GTBob
May 18th, 2012
10:54 am
I could get behind your 8-team plan Mike. It doesn’t devalue the regular season, doesn’t make conference championships meaningless, and takes some power away from ESPN and the voters and makes teams earn it. I personally think 16 teams is the best model but the 8 team model is much much better then the 4 team model.
BullDogMike
May 18th, 2012
10:55 am
Thanks for your observations. I have studied them, and they pass muster. I believe that your plan would work without a doubt. Therefore, it is with a heavy heart that I say to you……FORGET about it. Anything that makes that much sense will never get off the ground. Just think of the conference commissioners as Washington D.C. politicians, See what I mean ?
bigben
May 18th, 2012
10:57 am
Make’s to much sense and that is to simple for them. go OU SOONERS.
LawDawg
May 18th, 2012
11:08 am
This is pretty much exactly how this should be structured. Logical and elegant and a marked improvement over the current scheme…which is exactly why the NCAA will do something completely different.
shankit
May 18th, 2012
11:13 am
Four team playoff is fine, determines who is No. 1 and who is No. 2.
How do you determine who finished 3rd and who finished 4th, and
so on, 5 thru top 25?
5150 UOAD
May 18th, 2012
11:24 am
IF you CAN”T win your Conference you have NO BUSINESS playing for a National Championship. Like the Florida v FSU and Bama v LSU jokes. Why does a Team have to beat somebody TWICE? How can teams that Split 2 games call 1 the Champion because they lost the last time the teams met.
Delbert D.
May 18th, 2012
11:25 am
A playoff of conference champions maximizes the importance of the regular season rather than minimizing. Every conference game is critical, just as it is now. The out of conference games become noncritical, but that is a good thing. Fan interest would increase with games against better competition. With a 14-team conferences, 9 conference games should be mandated.
Conferences with multiple power teams still get only 1 representative in the playoffs, but their elimination process has been decided in the regular season and conference championship game like every other conference. I don’t see the logic of 2nd and 3rd chances in a playoff system. Until the playoff system expands to include all conference champions, subjective selection of teams will continue to corrupt the system.
5150 UOAD
May 18th, 2012
11:28 am
MIKE S. the BIG BOYS would be risking NFL careers with a longer season. Most lower division teams don’t have players go to the NFL so WHO CARES.
bullyreb
May 18th, 2012
11:29 am
So, the four teams will be picked by a panel. Hmmm. Did you fall off the cabbage truck yesterday? College football is already an obscenity en masse, it used to be fun and it used to matter, now it only matters to Chick-Fil-A and Cheetos and Pop-Tarts ……it took Cam Newton to pack it home for me, the whole institution, including you Mr. Schultz, is for sale to the highest bidder or the biggest bosom. Such stupidity and violence should not be financed by any Institution of Higher Learning. And I’m not talking about Georgie and Auburn. Period.
shankit
May 18th, 2012
11:31 am
So, an undefeated Big East or weaker conference champion would have priority over say a
one loss SEC team which did not win it’s conference. Got to keep a system which includes
strength of schedule, irregardless of conference championship.
5150 UOAD
May 18th, 2012
11:33 am
shankit then you are saying that the Conference Games don’t matter cause you get another chance. Screw that.
shankit
May 18th, 2012
11:35 am
Understand the Big Ten and Pac 12 conference champions do not
wish to participate if it interrupts their traditional Rose Bowl.
What if USC and say Michigan wind up 1 & 2, then the national
championship will be determined in the Rose Bowl, leaving out
the NOs. 3 & 4 teams.
5150 UOAD
May 18th, 2012
11:36 am
I know I KNOW I KNOW…………No matter Who wins a Championship if they didn’t play in the SEC then they can’t be good. The SEC is Football GOD so they should just let the SEC Champ play the Playoff Champ to be named the WORLD CHAMP of Semi-Educated Semi-Pro College affiliated Football.
Ray Goof's Hat
May 18th, 2012
11:40 am
So, if Tennessee loses in Gainesville in the third week of the season when FL kicks a field goal at the end of the game, and both teams go undefeated the rest of the way and are determined to be two of the four best teams in the country at the end of the year, but Tennessee is ineligble because it didn’t win the SEC? If they were in the Big 12, they’re in. If they were in the Big 10, they’re in. If they were in the Pac 12, they’re in. If they were in the ACC, they’re in. That makes no sense. Let’s also add that two teams from the same state can’t be in the same field. And teams that have purple in the school colors are excluded. No. You adopt methodology for determining the four best teams, and that’s it.
Delbert D.
May 18th, 2012
11:41 am
The Big Ten, the PAC 14 and the Rose Bowl have publicy agreed on the playoff scenario. The Rose Bowl will include a team or teams from those conferences that are not in the playoffs.
shankit
May 18th, 2012
11:44 am
5150 UOAD – Best solution would be three strongest conference champions and one at large team in the event
Georgia TEch does not win their conference, but is in the top four, they still would be eligible to
participate based on their strong ACC strength of schedule.
shankit
May 18th, 2012
11:46 am
Notre Dame wins their conference every year??? So, they will
be perennial top four.
Delbert D.
May 18th, 2012
11:47 am
That’s right, Tennessee is eliminated under that scenario. Following the model of every conference game is critical, they didn’t make it. If you can’t win your conference, you are not in the playoff. No free passes. If that is a problem, join another conference and try there.
GTBob
May 18th, 2012
11:50 am
So, an undefeated Big East or weaker conference champion would have priority over say a
one loss SEC team which did not win it’s conference.
Yes it would. The reason being that a 1 loss SEC team that was not the best team in its conference has already proven that they are not the best team in the country.
shankit
May 18th, 2012
11:51 am
Got to include one at large team in scenario based on strength of schedule
irregardless of conference championship. Can’t tell me the two best teams
in the country played for the NC last year. Everything is cyclical, sooner or
later even the ACC might have two teams competing.
Delbert D.
May 18th, 2012
11:53 am
For the conference champions playoff system, nothing matters except winning the division and winning the conference championship game. No strength of schedule, no BCS selection nonsense, no votes. People may cry about Cincinnati being in the instead of 11-1 Tennessee, but Tennessee wasn’t left out on some subjective vote; they were left out because they failed to advance out of the conference. They can still get their big-payout bowl game invite.
GTBob
May 18th, 2012
11:54 am
All of the sudden SEC fans are realizing that having the strongest conference with the strongest teams won’t be a positive thing in the long run. If you guys want to disband and create your own championship that you think is more fair then go for it.
shankit
May 18th, 2012
11:56 am
Scenario – Florida State goes 10-1, beats Oklahoma, Florida, USC, Virginia Tech, Clemson, loses to
Miami by a field goal. Miami goes 11-0 wins conference.
Temple wins Big East or whatever with 11-0 against weaker opponents.
So Temple and Miami play for the NC?
5150 UOAD
May 18th, 2012
11:59 am
Lets add the COLLEGE part into the mix too. Well since this is about Institutions of Higher Learning & Football then All the Teams competing in the Play off will have to Take a SAT type test and Score a Team minimum of 80% before they can be Selected to play for the title of Best COLLAGE Football team.
Now wouldn’t that be a HOOT. I bet it will be Decades before a Special Education Conference team ever sniffs a national championship unless VANDY is involved.
GTBob
May 18th, 2012
12:00 pm
So Temple and Miami play for the NC?
If Temple and Miami are two of the top 4 conference champions then they should. FSU had their chance, and they blew it. They proved they were not the best team in the conference or the nation.
Delbert D.
May 18th, 2012
12:00 pm
This “best 2 teams meeting in the championship game” is not a predictable scenario. It doesn’t always happen in the other sports, such as basketball. The seeding process is based on decisions by a panel. All 4 number 1 seeds don’t make it to the Final Four every year.
Delbert D.
May 18th, 2012
12:02 pm
“So Temple and Miami play for the NC?”
Yes, if they win the respective semifinal games against, say the SEC and PAC 14 teams.
shankit
May 18th, 2012
12:06 pm
Scenario – USC goes 11-0, Michigan goes 11-0, Alabama goes 11-0, Temple goes 11-0.
Notre Dame goes 11-0, BYU goes 11-0. USC plays Michigan in traditional Rose Bowl, loses by one point. Alabama plays Notre Dame in bowl, loses by one point. Temple beats Nevada in Dirt Bowl. BYU beats Utah State in Snow Bowl. Thus, top four teams to play for NC is Temple (conference
champion), Notre Dame (No conference), BYU (No conference) and USC.
Hate to be on the comittee to sort all of this out.
A person SMART enough to know......
May 18th, 2012
12:06 pm
Thomas Brown & WnE announce their pending nuptials.
They will join in a Civil Union the Friday after Thanksgiving and Honeymoon will follow the GT v UGa game.
They will be a prefect match. It will be History’s first ever Self-Loathing Interracial Homosexual GT UGA marriage. WnE is a Tech fan that hates Tech like Thomas Brown is a Dwag fan that hates UGa. They should live happily ever after.
GTBob
May 18th, 2012
12:07 pm
That statement about Temple really shows the SEC arrogance also. Is it really that unthinkable that Temple might have a really good football team one year and might deserve a shot, especially if they earned it by going undefeated? If your conference is so much better than every one else and always will be then do what I said earlier, and disband and create your own subdivision. You are just wasting time by playing the other teams in college football.
5150 UOAD
May 18th, 2012
12:08 pm
shankit……..if those 2 weak teams can beat the other 2 strong teams to make it to the Championship game then YES. They PROVED to be not as WEAK as you are making them out to be if they are the Last 2 standing.
Delbert D.
May 18th, 2012
12:08 pm
If, for instance LSU loses to Miami in the semifinal, do they deserve to be in the national championship game? Nobody gets a do-over, or a free pass in this playoff system, whether they lost in week 3 of the regular season, the conference championship game or the playoff semifinals.
BooBoo
May 18th, 2012
12:10 pm
The meaning of a “bowl” football game comes from the Rose Bowl game, the “Granddaddy of them all.” The word “bowl” meant nothing more than the shape of the venue a meaningless exihibition of some sport would be played before a large crowd. The “bowl” configuration allowed for more people, as opposed to stands only along one side of a field, or stands along opposite sides. Additionally, the Rose Bowl was on New Year’s Day, which was a cold winter weather time of year. Because California had mild winters, which could allow for flowers to be grown year-round, they celebrated that warmth with a parade and a horserace (the Tournament of Roses). Thus, other games soon began in the beginning of winter, in warm weather cities, like those in Texas, Louisiana, and Florida; and it stayed that way for 40 years (or so). Then anyone with a circular stadium and hopes of making a buck began getting involved and “bowl” games blossomed like mushrooms. The only tradition is greedy people wanting to make money on meaningless exhibitions of college football teams. None of them have any bearing on any real standings, not even the Rose Bowl, but sports writers began ranking teams in some arbitraty fashion for fun, games, and more money for them. The BS-BCS is just greed heaped upon greed. College football has never had a true champion, the way all other NCAA athletics have, through a tournament system. The reasons have been: its too cold and the weather is too bad to have a team from most of Amercia play at home; there are not enough fair weather sites for 64 teams to be split up among; the regular season ended at Thanksgiving, so to have a playoff would mean the players would be missing their Christmas vacation time; and (least important) playing more than ten football games a year would be too hard on a young student-athlete’s body. So, there has always been the resolution that there would be no way to determine a true national champion for college football, division 1. Everyone would just have to pretend one was better than the others.
shankit
May 18th, 2012
12:15 pm
Scenario – BYU (no conference) finishes 11-0; Notre Dame (no conference) finishes 11-0 ( no conference), eliminated because Temple 8-3, Duke 7-4, Boise State (10-1) and Hawaii 10-1) finish undefeated and conference champions and eligible for NC participation.
Delbert D.
May 18th, 2012
12:18 pm
The playoff I’ve described does not depend on the bowl games. If bowl games host the playoffs, well that is one scenario to be included. All must be conference champions. Hey, Notre Dame; y’all better pull the trigger and join a conference. Seeding of the teams? It doesn’t really matter. Alabama has to win out to be national champions, just like everybody else. Lose to Notre Dame? Oops. Guess we weren’t as good as we thought.
It won’t be objective until all top-division conferences are included. One alternative for the NCAA (and this is controversial) is to designate 4 conferences as the “Premier Division.” A better alternative is to not limit the playoffs to 4 teams.
shankit
May 18th, 2012
12:22 pm
The best alternative is to host the strongest three conference champions,
and one at large team to be determined by strength of schedule. Last year
it would have been LSU, Oklahoma State, Stanford, and at large Alabama based on
strength of schedule. This would be the fairest alternative to determine who
is truly deserving of the NC>
Delbert D.
May 18th, 2012
12:23 pm
“there are not enough fair weather sites for 64 teams to be split up among;”
I have really enjoyed watching Montana play their home games in the playoffs the last 3 years in Missoula. Nope, they didn’t make it all the way last season.
shankit
May 18th, 2012
12:25 pm
If four conference champions are selected, last year it would have been
LSU, Stanford, Oklahoma State and Wisconsin. Do you really think
Wisconsin would be more deserving than at large Alabama?
shankit
May 18th, 2012
12:28 pm
For the past six of seven years, the NC has been played in Atlanta.
5150 UOAD
May 18th, 2012
12:33 pm
Shankit……..If Wisconsin were to Win out and be the national Champ the HELL YES they deserved a shot at LSU over Bama getting a 2nd bit at the apple.
The Country did care much for the Bama v LSU rematch just like they didn’t care for it when it was FSU v UF for the 2nd time.
Delbert D.
May 18th, 2012
12:33 pm
“LSU, Oklahoma State, Stanford, and at large Alabama based on
strength of schedule. This would be the fairest alternative to determine who
is truly deserving of the NC”
That means the playoff is part deterministic (based on who won their conference championship) and part probabilistic (computers determine prior to the playoffs that Alabama *should* win the national championship, or voters subjectively decide the same.) Last year Alabama got a do-over. The top 4 rankings were subjective + probabilistic. Is everybody in the country satisfied that Alabama won the “BCS Championship”? No, because they got a do-over and in fact played a team they had already lost to.
5150 UOAD
May 18th, 2012
12:35 pm
Only cause you think the SEC is the best. On ANY given Satu.day Any Team can win. If USC were not on probation last year do you think they could have Won against Bama or LSU? I think USC would have beat LSU for sure.
5150 UOAD
May 18th, 2012
12:36 pm
Shankit………..last year the national championship was not played in Atlanta cause UGa would never be mistaken for a top 10 team last year.
Delbert D.
May 18th, 2012
1:00 pm
shankit, and 51 – I’ve got to go out and do some stuff. It has been an interesting discussion.
harold
May 18th, 2012
1:24 pm
WE NEED TO LEARN FROM BASKETBALL. LET’S DON’T GUESS OR LET A COMPUTER PICK THE CHAMPION ANYMORE. GO BACK TO 10 GAMES A SEASON. NO CONFERENCE PLAYOFFS.
DO A “16 TEAM PLAY OFF” BEGINNING THE FIRST WEEK IN DECEMBER AT VARIOUS BOWL SITES. THEN DO “THE EIGHT TAEM PLAYOFF” BEFORE CHRISTMAS DAY.
THEN YOU DO THE “FINAL FOUR TEAM PLAYOFF” ON NEW YEARS DAY.
PLAY THE NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP GAME AT THE SAME TIME WE DO NOW.
THE CURRENT BOWL SYSTEM CAN SURVIVE BY PAIRING TEAMS RANKED 15 AND ABOVE.
Alex
May 18th, 2012
1:31 pm
This is absolutely right on… there is no better way to handle it. And that’s exactly why it won’t happen.