nova97jacket
Varsity Lurker
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2004
- Messages
- 23
I think I\'m against a football playoff now...
I was strongly in favor of a playoff system in college football. Now I’m not so sure. I feel instead of possibly arguing over an undefeated team (or one of several one-loss teams if there are no undefeated teams) not playing in the championship game, multiple other arguments would occur instead.
The first argument a playoff may spur is over which teams do not make it into the playoff. Whether it is a four, six, or eight team playoff (12 or 16 would probably add too many games) you still have to exclude that next team. In fact, it is even more likely the team excluded from a playoff would have the same number of losses as the lowest ranked team that got in. For example, this year, many polls (including the BCS) have Ohio State with 2 losses at #4, while Oregon with 1 loss is at #5. #6 through #9 in the BCS poll all have 2 losses. On the other hand, this year the only two undefeated teams are playign eachother.
While you can try to point to the quality of some of those losses (or wins) compared to the others, their merits are all very much in the eye of the beholder. Further, none of that even touches scenarios where a team with a lower ranking–because of perceived strength of schedules or the lone loss was near the end of a season or the margin of each team’s loss(es)–has one loss whereas a team that makes the playoff has two.
Once the arguing of who makes it into the playoff is finished, what if a 2-loss team gets lucky and wins it all? We could have a 2-loss national champion over one or two 1-loss teams after the playoff. While those teams will have settled it on the field, people may still be wondering, “Did the best team really win it all?”
In the end, Division 1-A college football has the largest ratio of teams and attention and money to actual games played for very many people to be happy regardless of how a champion is chosen. As much as I can’t believe I’m saying it, perhaps the tradition of the bowls is best. Perhaps we should even regress them somewhat to allow the bowls more freedom in choosing teams instead of being forced to match up Conference C #x vs. Conference D #y. (As long as they can’t choose teams until after the regular season’s games are complete.) This would allow them to adapt more freely to changes in conference alignments, changes in how many teams qualify for bowls, and fan support.
Does that sway anyone? Anyone see a monkey-wrench in my monkey-wrenches?
I was strongly in favor of a playoff system in college football. Now I’m not so sure. I feel instead of possibly arguing over an undefeated team (or one of several one-loss teams if there are no undefeated teams) not playing in the championship game, multiple other arguments would occur instead.
The first argument a playoff may spur is over which teams do not make it into the playoff. Whether it is a four, six, or eight team playoff (12 or 16 would probably add too many games) you still have to exclude that next team. In fact, it is even more likely the team excluded from a playoff would have the same number of losses as the lowest ranked team that got in. For example, this year, many polls (including the BCS) have Ohio State with 2 losses at #4, while Oregon with 1 loss is at #5. #6 through #9 in the BCS poll all have 2 losses. On the other hand, this year the only two undefeated teams are playign eachother.
While you can try to point to the quality of some of those losses (or wins) compared to the others, their merits are all very much in the eye of the beholder. Further, none of that even touches scenarios where a team with a lower ranking–because of perceived strength of schedules or the lone loss was near the end of a season or the margin of each team’s loss(es)–has one loss whereas a team that makes the playoff has two.
Once the arguing of who makes it into the playoff is finished, what if a 2-loss team gets lucky and wins it all? We could have a 2-loss national champion over one or two 1-loss teams after the playoff. While those teams will have settled it on the field, people may still be wondering, “Did the best team really win it all?”
In the end, Division 1-A college football has the largest ratio of teams and attention and money to actual games played for very many people to be happy regardless of how a champion is chosen. As much as I can’t believe I’m saying it, perhaps the tradition of the bowls is best. Perhaps we should even regress them somewhat to allow the bowls more freedom in choosing teams instead of being forced to match up Conference C #x vs. Conference D #y. (As long as they can’t choose teams until after the regular season’s games are complete.) This would allow them to adapt more freely to changes in conference alignments, changes in how many teams qualify for bowls, and fan support.
Does that sway anyone? Anyone see a monkey-wrench in my monkey-wrenches?
