A defense of the BCS

In case you missed it, Chummy posted his idea for a college football playoff system yesterday. I have to say, I liked the first scenario. He addresses a lot of the issues often cited with the implementation of a playoff system. Too bad it’ll never happen. So, seeing as we’re stuck with our current BCS system for the foreseeable future, and because John Saunders isn’t around to defend it, allow me to come to the defense of the BCS.

Let me preface this whole thing by saying that I’ve been a big proponent of a playoff since they created the Bowl Alliance back in ‘95 (and now I just feel old). But, I’ve recently developed an appreciation for the BCS. Don’t get me wrong, I’d love a playoff, and Chummy’s plan is maybe the best I’ve seen. But, the BCS isn’t all bad. For example: I have friends from all over the college football landscape. Florida, Ohio State, Notre Dame, Nebraska, Stanford, and many more. I’ve been in some pretty spirited debates about the BCS, conference supremacy, Tim Tebow’s mortality…and there is only one thing that we can find common ground on. We all loathe USC. That's thanks to the BCS.

In fact, I propose a new slogan: The BCS – Uniting College Football Fans Everywhere Through Their Hatred Of USC. I like it.

Anyway, let’s talk about Chummy’s plan. My main criticism with the plan itself is the idea that the 6 BCS conferences all get home games. I know it needs to be that way to make the money work, but that could lead to some controversy. Let’s say a non-BCS school like Boise State (or Notre Dame if they weren’t awful) puts together a nice schedule, and goes undefeated. They finish a unianimous #1, and sit atop the BCS standings at the end of the year. The reward for their accomplishment is first class travel to Cincinnati to play at the Big East Champ in the first round of the playoff, and a giant “Tough Shit, You Should Have Played in a BCS Conference” Trophy. On second thought, I kind of like that idea.

Chummy was very helpful and provided a fairly comprehensive list of reasons why a playoff won’t work, then attempted to rebut them. I’m with him on Reasons 2 and 4. Those excuses are just dumb. Academics and Bowls as vacations? Please. I’ve heard people use these, and I’ve never bought them either. He was right on the money with these. Reason 3 used to be a valid issue, but I think his plan effectively eliminated fan travel as a concern. If the games are at home, the fans won’t have any problem traveling. Easy enough.

But, I would like to say that you can’t really compare college football with college basketball as far as fans are concerned. Basketball arenas hold maybe 25,000 people. You’re looking at anywhere from 80 to 90,000 for college football. Also, a lot of the people going to the March Madness games aren’t even fans of the schools playing. They’re people from the host city or surrounding area who’ll go to the games no matter who’s playing, because they’ll get to watch as many as 4 games in one day. I’m sure you’ll get some of that with a college football playoff, but again, you need to fill a lot more seats for football. Apples and oranges. But, again, I don’t think this is an issue under his plan.

Okay, let’s talk money. Again, I think Chummy did a pretty good job explaining this one. With each conference hosting a game, they’d have a lot of gate receipts to divvy up. This would work, that is until one of the conferences had a very shitty year and got left out of the playoff. What would happen to their cut? Given how bad a few of these conferences have been lately, this could worry some of them. It might work if the conferences agreed to divide the revenues by six and distribute equally, even if one of them gets shut out. That may placate the ACC and Big East. But, one thing his plan didn’t address is the bowls themselves, or more specifically the cities that host them. You think New Orleans is going to be happy about losing their big event every year? Sure, they may get the national championship game every 4 years, but I don’t know if that’ll make up for the loss of a marquee Sugar Bowl every year.

[Speaking of marquee Sugar Bowls, how about that Alabama–Utah matchup? How thrilled do you think the New Orleans tourism folks are with the selection of a team from Utah to come down to the Quarter? Les a le bon ton roule!]

Moving on. The two best arguments in favor of the BCS, in my opinion, are Chummy’s reasons 1 and 5. Let’s address number 5 first.

Reason 5: The BCS gets everyone talking about college football.

People do talk about college football more nowadays than they used to. Back in the day, there were arguments every few years whenever there would be two indistinguishable teams at the top. Like 1991 when both Miami and Washington went undefeated. But, that was pre-BCS, so Washington played in the Rose Bowl, and Miami played in the Orange Bowl. Once they both won their games to finish undefeated, we’d argue about who was better. One got the AP national championship, and the other was awarded a national championship by the coaches. We basically had one single argument at the end of the season. But that was then.

Now, we argue all year. Which conference is better? Who plays the toughest out of conference schedule? Who won the more impressive road game? It’s a debate, week in and week out. The teams are constantly jockeying for position. Because, unlike in 1991 when Washington knew that no matter how impressive they were, they’d end up playing the Big Ten champ in the Rose, and Miami knew there was no way they were getting out of playing in the Orange, the teams today are fighting to get into that one big game. Sure, it might be somewhat maddening having all these debates, instead of just enjoying the game. But who are we kidding, people love arguing about sports. It’s as American as cheeseburgers and war.

Now, maybe Chummy is right, and a playoff would illicit the same type of arguments throughout the season. But, come on, using the NCAA basketball tournament as your basis for the idea? Lame. Yes, if Syracuse goes 19-11 and gets left out of the Big Dance because some shitty mid-major team unexpectedly won their conference tournament, there would be a discussion about how it was a travesty that they were left out. But, you know how long that discussion would last? Until tip-off of the first game. Maybe. And that would probably happen with a playoff in college football, too. Let’s say Alabama got the shaft this year, and ended up in the dreaded 9 spot in the 8 team playoff. There would be a small outcry for a second, and a mini-debate about how they might have been more deserving than Texas Tech. But, that would all be forgotten once the games began. When Florida and Oklahoma end up playing for the title, you really think anyone would be bitching because the 9th place team didn’t get a shot at it? Please.

With the BCS, we have arguments, we have controversies, we have excitement. We have Florida State playing for the 2000 title instead of the Miami team that beat them in the regular season. Controversy! We have Nebraska playing for the 2001 title despite getting blown out in their Conference Championship game. Ridiculousness! We have USC getting left out of the 2003 title game. Paper Champions! We have Auburn getting left out in 2004. Outrage! We have the 2006 Michigan – Florida non-argument. Speed wins! And last year, we had the great, “which crappy two loss team do we want to let kick the shit out of Ohio State” argument. Geaux Tigers! Finally, this year we have the Big 12 South ménage-a-trois. Sexy! That’s some exciting stuff there. But, my guess is that this is the point where Chummy would start crying about how we wouldn’t have had any of these situations if we’d been able to settle things on the field with a playoff. Well, that brings us to Reason number 1.

Reason 1: Games lose their meaning. With the BCS every game "counts."

With a playoff, the games will still matter. But, only your team’s games will matter. As an LSU fan, I’d only have to worry about the teams in the SEC West. Any teams outside of that don’t really matter as far as I’m concerned, because as long as we won our division, we’re in the playoff (the SEC Championship would be a de facto play-in game). And, that’s pretty much how it would be for every team in the BCS conferences. While you’re wondering if that’s a good thing, ask yourself how many Auburn fans were watching every time Oklahoma or USC played back in 2004 to see if maybe they’d trip up. How many Florida and Michigan fans were cheering as UCLA knocked off USC in the last weekend of 2006? Okay, I’m sure people all over the country were cheering for that one. Hell, I became a Dave Wannstedt fan for a weekend last year (and instantly grew a mustache), because I knew the only way LSU was making the Championship game was if Pittsburgh pulled the unthinkable. My point is that with the current system, fans are interested in games that they wouldn’t give a rat’s ass about if there was a playoff.

Actually, that Pittsburgh-West Virginia game wouldn’t have mattered at all with a playoff system. West Virginia had already won the Big East, and LSU had already locked up a berth in the SEC Championship. Both teams were already getting their shot at the title, no matter the outcome of that game. But, instead, college football fans everywhere were watching that game because they knew it would decide the title game participants. Fans of LSU, Georgia, Virginia Tech, and USC were all locked into the Backyard Brawl, living and dying with every first down. That experience disappears with a playoff. Also, you think Stanford knocking off USC last year would have been a big deal? It would have been a nice story, the Cardinal winning on the road as a 41 point underdog, but it wouldn’t have kept USC from making the playoff. Instead, that loss pretty much knocked them out of the discussion.

With a playoff, SEC teams will only care about SEC games, Big 12 with Big 12 games, and so on. Sure, there might be some interest in what's going on outside the conference for teams trying to get one of the 2 at large spots. But, again, nobody really cares about the team that didn’t make it once the playoffs get started.

Personally, I don’t think we’ll ever see a playoff system in college football. But if we ever did have one, I’m sure it would be an amazing event. It would most definitely bring new and exciting elements to college football. But, the point of this post is that it would also take away some of the excitement that has driven college football to its recent meteoric rise in popularity. The BCS certainly isn’t a perfect system, and I’m sure the “wizard” will tinker with the formula every year in a quest to get it just right. But, it’s still a pretty good system, and one that I can live with. But, then again, this could just be the 2 Crystal Trophies talking.

On a scale of one to Gus Johnson, I give this a Verne Lundquist.