A rant on the BCS bowl system

A friend of mine (my former officemate) sent me a link to this article yesterday: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/stewart_mandel/01/22/cardinals-bcs/index.html ... and ?defied? anyone to challenge the logic in it. This is my reply, which grew long enough that I decided to post it at here given the wait for meaningful news, the recent discussions of playoff parity, and all the college football fans that hang out around here.?? Here?s why the logic in that article is incorrect. It assumes that what is bad for the NFL (a 12 team playoff) means something similar (a 4-8 team playoff) would be bad for college football. First off, I agree with the starting point of the argument: that the Cardinals (and last year?s Giants and the St. Louis Cardinals in baseball a few years back) have the potential to be crowned champions by playoff systems, and that this devalues the regular season. However, that doesn?t mean playoff systems are bad. In my opinion, the issue is with overly-expanded playoff systems. In the NFL, 12 of 32 teams make the playoffs - that?s 37.5% of the teams! Even if college football expanded the field all the way to 16 (something I?m against for a variety of reasons), that wouldn?t even put the percentage of teams into the playoffs at 15%. This means that a team as mediocre as the Arizona Cardinals would never have a shot at the college football championship if there were a playoff system. They wouldn?t be in it, period. It also means the ?de-valuing? of the regular season wouldn?t be nearly as significant - if it would be present at all. The assumption here is that college football would degrade into a ?playoffs or go home? mentality, which I don?t think would happen unless the bowls stop altogether in lieu of the playoffs? and that just simply won?t happen because there?s too much money tied up in the bowls to dismantle them completely. Furthermore, the teams at the top would have plenty to play for. I don?t know how this would work in any given year, but this year the top 10-12 teams all would have had a shot at the playoffs going, making that last week pretty damn meaningful. If PSU loses to MSU in their last game? Out. OSU loses to Michigan? Out. Florida/Alabama would have lost a little luster, but that?s about it. And there?s always seeding and (depending on the system) home-field advantage to play for, which would lead to more competitive games given the long rest before the playoffs would likely start (bowl season). Now, here?s my rant on the system as is? The issue here is the BCS/college football should either do away with the ?crowning? of a national champion, or go to a playoff system. The problem is that the current bowl system wasn?t designed to crown national champs - it was designed as a way to reward teams and fans that had great seasons (and make a little money on the intrigue). Did Penn State, Ohio State, Alabama, and Oklahoma all have a great year? YES! And USC, Florida, Texas, and Utah had even better ones! But which of those last 4 was the best in the country? I can?t say? And I have serious problems with the logic used to select Florida amongst them. Computers are disallowed from having margin of victory built into their models (even if it makes them better at predicting the outcomes of games), and yet the main reason Oklahoma got into the championship game over Texas was the way they BLEW OUT the competition for much of the season. To make matters worse, the two main groups of people in control of who makes it to the title game are coaches - a group that has an absurdly clear bias in the matter - and sportswriters - perhaps the largest collection of stubbornly, belligerently, and proudly stupid individuals this side of Dover, PA. Many times, the ?tiebreaker? is the impression of how good the team is ?supposed to be? heading into the season. In other words, it?s a system that rewards expectations instead of performance. If the system weren?t so inherently flawed I wouldn?t have as big a problem with it. As it stands now, it?s a farce. The words ?national championship? are borderline meaningless to me. How is Utah not deserving? Texas? USC? Florida, for that matter? In a playoff system, any team would have a shot at winning out and winning the title, and all ties are broken. That?s a far site better than letting a bunch of egotistical morons reinforce their own biases, pat themselves on the back, semi-randomly crown a winner, and then complain at the stupidity of it all? OK, rant over.