BCS Argument Paper

Picture this; you’re the coach of a #1 ranked in the preseason polls of a Division 1 college football program. You lose the first game of the season, and win 10 consecutive games and are able to play in the national title game. While another team wins all of their regular season games but lose their conference championship game and lose their chance at a national title. Better yet, teams like Auburn in 2004 or Boise State last year finished unbeaten but were still unable to play for the National Title. Controversy like this has loomed in the Bowl Championship Series ever since its inauguration in 1998. The Bowl Championship Series is a computer generated ranking system that is supposed to decide who will play in the national title game in college football. The BCS is combined with the Associated Press, Coaches, Harris, and computer generated ranking polls. The Southeastern Conference, Pacific 10 Conference, Big 10 Conference, Big 12 Conference, Atlantic Coast Conference, and Big East Conference champions are guaranteed a spot in a BCS Bowl. These Bowl Championship Series Games are the Fiesta Bowl, Rose Bowl, Sugar Bowl, Orange Bowl and the newly instated Bowl Championship Series National Title Game. A team such as Boise State last year had to be in the Top 12 of the BCS rankings and unheedingly finish undefeated if they wanted any shot at a BCS game. In recent years the Bowl Championship Series has only solidified why there needs to be playoffs in Division 1 college football. Division 1-AA, Division 2, and Division III all have tournament formats and are thriving off it. It’s time for Division 1 to follow suit. They need a more fair and balanced system, a computerized ranking system to determine a national title game is not the solution.

Times have changed over the course of the last 20 years in college football. The competitiveness is increasing as well as the openness in talent across the nation. Recruiting has provided a better chance for many college football teams to contend in the NCAA. With football being one of the more popular sports in the United States, the more athletes are being found and are able to play Division 1 football anywhere they go. Take a team like Boise State for example; a small team out of Idaho went undefeated last year including defeating #11 Oklahoma in the Fiesta Bowl. Had Oklahoma not lost to Oregon early in the season (On a controversial call), the Sooners would have been playing for the National Championship. However, Boise State was still left out of the picture all because they play in a Non-BCS league. Boise State’s weakness of schedule resulted in them not competing in the Title Game. Instead, Florida, having lost a game went to the BCS Championship Game. Sally Jenkins from the Washington Post brings up a great point:

One of the more fascinating collisions is that between traditional football schools and the come latelys. You can wander through the past with Notre Dame, or celebrate the arrival of South Florida on the scene. Since 1992, 14 new schools have swelled the ranks of the NCAA's division I-A. Among them are some of the teams responsible for this season's thrills: Marshall, Boise State, South Florida, UAB and Central Florida.

More and more teams are becoming more competitive. This season is only solidifying its reasoning for a playoff. Teams like Appalachian State and South Florida have been knocking off national powers. Given South Florida was ranked as high as #2 they would have needed to finish undefeated if they wanted to be in the BCS Title Game. Hawaii, who is undefeated as this paper is being written, is not even being considered for the national title game let alone a BCS Game berth.

Computers shouldn’t decide a national championship game. A thought out playoff system should. A playoff system should be enforced because it allows more teams to vouch for their national title contender claim. If you have an eight-team playoff system you can use the Bowl Championship Ranking System to generate who will play in the playoffs. The teams that do not make this top eight are placed in a “Bowl Pool”, where 30-32 teams play in Bowl Games, like the system they still have in place today. This bowl pool will accommodate the college programs that can still have National TV time and pursue more recruits during the end of the season, as well as postseason practices. There are just too many flaws in the BCS Ranking system. Computers cannot determine a champion, two teams on the field do. In the Dallas Morning Newspaper, Tim Cowlishaw who is on ESPN’s “Around the Horn” wrote an article “All BCS needs is some adjustments.” He states that he wants to bring back the traditional formats of the major bowl games. For example, the old format used to be where the “Pac 10 champion would play the Big 10 champion in the Rose Bowl. The Fiesta Bowl would have the Big 12 champion against the Atlantic Coast Conference champion, and so on.” I disagree with this, because this would then bring everything back to square one. If the Big 10 champion is undefeated and plays the Pac 10 champion who is not undefeated, what’s the purpose? Cowlishaw believes in a plus one format but only when all the bowl games are finished. An adjustment like his would definitely not be the answer.

If a playoff is enforced the format would either a plus-1 format or a format consisting of eight teams. A plus one format would be in place for one of the four major bowls, the Rose, Orange, Fiesta, or Sugar Bowl. Two of those games would decide who would play in the BCS National Title Game. These games would also be decided from the regular season BCS rankings. For example, the #1 BCS team against the #4 BCS team would play in the Fiesta Bowl, and the #2 BCS team would play the #3 BCS team in the Sugar Bowl. The winners of those two games would advance to the Bowl Championship Series National Title Game. This format seems to be more logical since I believe it would be just too difficult for the time being to have an eight team format, however, with an eight team system it would be spread over a month beginning sometime in mid-December to early January. The selections would also be based off the Bowl Championship Series rankings. The number one team in the BCS Poll would play the number eight team in the BCS. Followed by number two playing number seven, number three playing number six, and number four playing number five. If number one beat number eight, they would play the winner of number four and number five. However, if number eight beats number one they would play number two if number two beat seven. The reasoning for this format creates a tougher road for the top five to top 8 teams, if they are going to make a case on being the best team in college football, they’re going to have to knock off their top opponents as they go.

It seems as if the BCS is more worried about making money that it is of focusing on a competitively balanced system. Bowls such as the Rose Bowl, Fiesta Bowl, Orange Bowl, Sugar Bowl, and as well as the new BCS Championship Game ring in millions of dollars giving the BCS committee reason to not have a playoff system. However, teams who don’t make these top five college bowls lose out on the opportunity on a championship, and they lose out on a lot of money. Take the Oregon Ducks in 2005 for example. They finished #5 in the nation but Notre Dame passed them because they have exclusive rights to if they finish in the top six of the BCS rankings they automatically go to a BCS bowl game. Notre Dame was then allowed to play Ohio State in the Fiesta Bowl while Oregon dropped out of the BCS Bowls and ended up playing in the Holiday Bowl a second tier bowl. This resulted in the University of Oregon losing 10 million dollars on Major Bowl money as well as their pride since they were a Top Five team unable to make a legitimate case in playing for a national title. Better yet, in 2004 the Auburn Tigers who play in arguably one of the toughest conferences in football (Southeastern Conference) went undefeated (13-0) and still didn’t get a shot at the National Championship. Oklahoma ended up playing Southern California in the National Title Game leaving Auburn to dry. The argument that claimed to decide Auburn’s fate was decided by Auburn had playing a weaker regular season schedule during the course of the season compared to Oklahoma’s regular season schedule. Coincidentally, Oklahoma ended up being destroyed to Southern California 55-19 in the Rose Bowl while Auburn beat a solid Virginia Tech 16-13 in the Sugar Bowl. The total payouts for these games are between 14 million and 17 million dollars. Not having a playoff system not only hurts college programs mentally, but some teams are missing out on a lot of money coming from revenue in these games.

In Skip Rozin’s Wall Street Journal article “National College Football Playoffs?” from last December illustrates on why there shouldn’t be College Football playoffs, for example:

A playoff pushes universities farther from the collegiate model of athletics and closer to the professional model, and in the process more de-emphasizes academics," coalition co-chair Virginia Shepherd told The Wall Street Journal. "And it will continue to spiral. As the stakes get higher, there will be more postseason games and more revenues, and there will be more and more pressure on the schools to move to the top and reach for that championship.

I believe this is far from the truth, College Football in the past 15 years have been nothing but unfair for many collegiate programs. The major bowls have stirred in more money but more great college football teams have been left out because of the current format. College Football can look at the NCAA Tournament in basketball, there seems to be absolutely no flaws in their 65-team tournament. The NCAA Basketball Tournament uses a Rating Percentage Index (RPI) to pick out “at-large” teams that deserve to go to the Tournament. An at-large bid is granted by an invitation and not by a right. Hence the RPI plays a big role in determining an “at-large” bid. It is something very similar to the Bowl Championship Series rankings. It’s the most perfected tournament in sports. No controversy whatsoever and is potentially one of the greatest three week spectacles in all of sports. What Virginia Shepherd said is a contradiction, Division 1-AA, Division 2, and Division III all have playoff formats. How can it de-emphasize academics? It hasn’t for those three divisions in college football so why would it now? In fact their playoff formats are similar to the NCAA Basketball Tournament. Where are the flaws? I don’t believe there are any. Also, collegiate sports lost their “innocence” years ago. Money has played a major role in collegiate sports for quite some time now.

In college football a change definitely needs to be made. Too many teams are being left out from national title contention. There are more than two teams at the end of the season that can make a claim of who is the best team in the nation. The current format isn’t working and needs to be changed. The playoffs are the best way to do it. Besides, a tournament or a plus one format would make NCAA Division 1 Football more exciting to watch at the end of the season. The current format already provides excitement right now, but it blends in with too much controversy with the BCS. Every year has only solidified why there needs to be playoffs in college football. The only thing missing in the BCS is a playoff system. Every single sport in the NCAA has a playoff system, and it’s time for Division 1 college football to step up to the plate and join the crowd.