[Roger Kaputnik]

I have been anti-bcs for, oh, say about 10 years. A playoff system makes sense on the surface, but I may have changed my mind after reading the column this morning. I refer the Gentle Reader to the ND, pg. B1, "BCS is fine the way it is," by Michael Gluskin. This guy is a new writer for the award-winning ND sports and does a very good job.

Administrator, if you could quote and post the article, I would appreciate it. I still can't get the quote thing to work for me.

[JHeath]

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?Sectio...amp;TM=36851.72

12/3/2007 11:00:00 AM
Solving the BCS Insanity

Nick Dettmann
The News-Dispatch

Up until Saturday, I was convinced the Bowl Championship Series was the right system for college football.

But after No. 1 Missouri and No. 2 West Virginia both lost, adding themselves to a long, undesirable, but unheralded list, there's no question a playoff system should be instituted in the Football Bowl Subdivision.

Missouri became the fourth No. 1-ranked team to lose a game this season, and West Virginia became the sixth No. 2 team to lose to an unranked opponent this season.

In all, more than a dozen top-10 ranked teams have lost to unranked opponents this season.

The BCS was the right system for college football because of something television broadcaster Brent Musberger said on ESPN Radio a few days ago.

He said the best team doesn't always win the NCAA men's basketball tournament. He eluded to the 1983 North Carolina State squad and the 1985 Villanova team. Heck, mid-major George Mason reached the Final Four in 2006.

To say that we need a true national champion in the FBS and it should be left up to voters and computers is idiotic. There's just no way of knowing who the best team is, unless it is settled on the field and a playoff settles the argument.

It's aggravating to hear people say that if USC, for example, is healthy, it would beat Missouri without a problem. Who in the world knows that for sure? Weren't the Philadelphia Eagles a 25-point underdog to the New England Patriots last week? Yes. How did that game turnout? 31-28 Patriots. If it weren't for a couple of bonehead plays, the Patriots would have lost.

That's why you play the games. You can't assume teams are going to win on paper. Games are won and lost on the field and this year's college football season proves just that. The FCS and every other sport has a playoff system. Why doesn't the FBS?

Opponents will say even if you go to a playoff, the best team still won't prevail. They may be right, but at least a champion is crowned on the field and not through computers and biases by sports writers.

No longer a supporter of the BCS system, here is my proposed plan for a playoff system:

• The Field

It would be a 12-team field. It would consist of the conference champions from the ACC, the Big East, the BIg 10, the Big 12, the SEC, the Pac-10, the Conference USA, the Mid-American Conference, the Mountain West Conference, the Sun Belt Conference and the Western Athletic Conference. Why? Because those are the conferences which are eligible for an automatic BCS bowl bid under the current system.

The last spot would be either for Notre Dame if it is ranked in the top eight (which is the rule now) or an at-large spot will be given to the highest-ranked team from any conference that didn't win its conference championship.

So if you go by this, the field would consist of Virginia Tech, West Virginia, Ohio State, Oklahoma, LSU, USC, Central Florida, Central Michigan, BYU, Florida Atlantic, Hawaii and Georgia.

• How would they be seeded?

By the teams' strength of schedule, just like college basketball. Then, out of the 12 teams, pit the highest team against the lowest out of the 12-team field and so forth.

• Where would the games be played?

Easy. You play them on neutral sites at a bowl game field. For example, one playoff game could be played at the site of the Capital One Bowl, the Gator Bowl or the Sugar Bowl. That way, the NCAA doesn't lose the revenue it normally gets from the bowl games.

• What about the other bowls?

The system doesn't change. You play those games just like how it's done now, with non-conference champions playing against other teams in bowls like the Emerald Bowl or the Motor City Bowl.

There you have it. A fool-proof playoff system for the FBS.

[Southsider2k12]

I have been anti-bcs for, oh, say about 10 years. A playoff system makes sense on the surface, but I may have changed my mind after reading the column this morning. I refer the Gentle Reader to the ND, pg. B1, "BCS is fine the way it is," by Michael Gluskin. This guy is a new writer for the award-winning ND sports and does a very good job.

Administrator, if you could quote and post the article, I would appreciate it. I still can't get the quote thing to work for me.

I can't find the article!

[Roger Kaputnik]

This is Not the article I referred to. Is it on the ND site yet?

[Southsider2k12]

I could not find it.

[Roger Kaputnik]

It is the column he writes, not an article.

[JHeath]

It is the column he writes, not an article.

I just checked--it's not posted yet.

[Roger Kaputnik]

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?Sectio...amp;TM=61291.85


Could you try this?

[JHeath]

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?Sectio...amp;TM=61291.85

As usual this time of year, there's outrage over the Bowl Championship Series and the college football national championship.

Sports columnists and pundits are wasting their time, suggesting new formats and playoff systems that should be implemented. The fact of the matter is that a playoff is not going to happen. Not next season, not within the next five years and maybe never.

The majority of university presidents and athletic directors are against some form of playoff system, and since they control the power and money involved in major college football, they usually tend to get their way. Plus, any sort of playoff system would have complications and would prove to be very difficult to initiate.

You may call me crazy, but I'm a fan of the BCS. Sure, there were and still are some flaws within the system, but it's been tweaked and improved over its 10-year existence.

With the current format, the BCS makes college football's regular season the most exciting in sports. Each Saturday's games carry such heavyweight and importance to the teams involved, and the ripple effect from a win or loss is tremendous.

One loss could end a team's chance at playing in the national championship, meaning each game takes on a Super Bowl-like mentality. And with the parity that's emerged in the sport, any team can win any game, which wasn't the case a few years ago. (Remember the Appalachian State-Michigan game?)

The regular season for the NBA has become so unimportant, with more than half of the league's teams making the postseason. And although college basketball's regular season is crucial to making it into the NCAA tournament, teams can lose several games during the season and still make it into the 65-team field.

Even if an eight-team playoff was implemented, it would still hurt the regular season. Although the games would maintain a level of importance, one loss wouldn't be as devastating as it currently is, which does take away from the regular season games.

One of the most exciting things about the BCS and college football is the debate that's created each week. After the slate of games is played, there's constant discussion about which team belongs where, and which ones are the favorite to get into the national championship game.

This level of conversation is good for the sport and gets more casual fans interested and involved. It's arguable that college football is now more popular than ever before, in large part because of the amount of quality teams and the unpredictability each week brings.

Adding any sort of playoff system decreases this level of excitement by dilluting the regular season. The only realistic system that could be implemented within the sport is the so-called "plus-one model", which would feature an extra game after the BCS games were played. This game would become the national championship game, and would pit the two highest-ranked teams after the original BCS games were played.

Even this model could create some controversy because there would be arguments as to who the top two teams are. Any new system created wouldn't alleviate all of the controversy, as that's a part of sports. For example, the NCAA tournament selection committee always gets criticized for leaving "bubble teams" out of the field.

It's become clear there's no perfect system for college football. But the one currently in place creates the most excitement for the sport and does end up rewarding the best teams. This year's national championship game features two excellent teams and will eliminate any uncertainty over who's the most-deserving champion.

Just the way it should be.

[Roger Kaputnik]

I think the guy has a point.