Playoffs?!?! Don't talk about Playoffs?!?! Are you kidding me?!?

In this world nothing is certain but death and taxes--Ben Franklin

When Big Ben famously penned this quote, he clearly had not yet experienced the certainty of the first week in December for college football fans. See, about that time is when you stop hearing arguments about who will beat whom and start hearing arguments about who would beat whom. You stop hearing about rivalries and traditions and start hearing about computers and fantasy odds. Coaches morph from being their usual, tight lipped selves spewing pre-fabricated comments to the media filled with cliché and obfuscation into other people. Some become seasoned politicians, lobbying voters while making their teams' cases; some become balls of rage, decrying a system or team done wrong and calling for change; some become strangely aloof, acting as if the fate of their team really doesn't matter to them all the while being betrayed by their wanton eyes; and some just become whiners, finding creative ways to say that it just isn't fair.

Ah such is life in a BCS-world.

But does it have to be? Every year, it seems commentators, coaches, sports fans, and now a certain president-elect all clamor for what, to college football fans, has become the El Dorado, the hidden treasure…one word, eight letters immortalized by Jim Mora



P-L-A-Y-O-F-F-S

Though they may not agree on the format, everybody seems to want a playoff. And every year, just as the clamoring is certain, they are swiftly rebuked by the wizards of our Oz, the men behind the curtain, who no one knows, but who seem to pull all of the stings in college football--FBS version.

So I've decided to add my voice to the calls for a playoff, and in doing so, I hope to have answered some of the biggest issues that those who like the same, uncertain, semi-corrupt system that we currently employ. So before giving you my ideas, let's examine some of the common issues that the mighty wizard has told us prevent a playoff from happening:

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

Please ignore the fact that in reality only a few games count, and they only count if you're ranked high enough in pre-season polls AND are from one of the big 6 conferences or Notre Dame.

Reason 2: Our players are "scholar athletes" and they have to take finals.

I swear, I'm not laughing. I'm not. I mean forget the fact that basketball players play throughout finals. And forget the fact that every other division of football is able to do a playoff and be "scholar-athletes." And forget the fact that most of the teams involved in the playoff have dismal graduation rates with most of their players occupying made-for-athlete majors. Forget all of that. We care about our STUDENT-athletes… at least during December we do.

Reason 3: Our fans won't travel with only a week's notice and more than one week.

Basketball fans travel, but that's not the same. NFL fans travel. But that's not the same. Our fans are unique.

Reason 4: The Bowl is a well earned vacation for a lot of teams. Take them away, and you don't have that.

College football--a competitive sport? No. We need to reward our teams. That's why we let 6-6 teams go to bowls and we have more bowls than Brittney Spears has melt-downs. Bowls are for the children….the children I tell you.

Reason 5: The BCS stimulates discussion. Discussion all year.

Never mind it's universally negative. Never mind that it undermines the integrity of the sport. People talk about it before, during and after the game. And that's a good thing.

Reason 6: The money. The money. The money.

We won't actually say this. But the bowls pay a lot. Especially to the BCS conferences. Like 13 million dollars good. Do you know how many recruits … I mean textbooks we can buy with that money? And we BCS conferences really don't want to share with all of the lesser conferences of the world, like the WAC and the Mountain West. Could you imagine letting a team like Boise State share our money? So beneath us.

I'm sure there are more, but these are the highlights it seems. I'll go ahead and outline my 2 ideas and then explain how it solves each of these issues.

My Playoff (version 1):

If anyone knows how the West Coast Conference (a no football conference) sets up its basketball tournament, that's my first proposal. Here's a blank visual of it. http://grfx.cstv.com/photos/schools/west/genrel/auto_pdf/2009WCCTournamentbrackets.pdf
In parentheses, I'll put what the dates would be this year. But I think you could easily push one of these weeks back and be done by Jan 17, which would make it end the same week the new "plus 1" format would.

How would it be populated
Start with 8 teams. BCS conference champions get seeds 1-6 as long as that champion is in the top 15 in the BCS. (I'll explain later why I would do that). If they're not, then the conference can send another team that is in the top 15 or it forfeits its pick (this number would be flexible). 2 wild cards based on BCS standings. Non-BCS schools in the top 8 get automatic bids as wild cards.

How the rounds would go
All playoffs played on Saturdays

First round (December 20): 8 plays at 5 and 7 plays at 6.

Second round: (December 27): Winners are re-seeded with the lower seeded winner playing at 3 and the higher seeded winner playing at 4.

Third round (January 3): Winners are again re-seeded with the lower-seeded winner playing at #1 and higher-seeded winner at #2

Championship (January 10): Championship at a neutral site, rotating bowl site.

Other details

• Teams (or conferences) would split the gate receipts.
  
• Home team would allocate tickets by offering double what is the NCAA standard for a regular season game to opposing fans. That gives the home team an actual home field advantage.
  
• Bowl games happen for all of the teams not involved in the playoff. The 2nd place conference team still goes to the bowl of choice. Those games played during the week. The old BCS bowls played on January 1. Nothing changes for the bowls other than losing these 8 teams.

How it solves each of the issues

Games don't matter:
They do. With only 8 teams making the playoffs. Every game matters. Let's take this year for instance. Other than possibly Alabama, any team that loses their conference championship this year would've been left out. Teams with one loss will be left out occasionally. Teams with 2 losses almost definitely will. Sounds like the BCS right now. All 1 loss teams are in--anything more and you're out. Every game counts. What's more. Now we have bowl games other than the BCS championship that counts. Now we have more games for teams trying to get into that top 8 that count. You can certainly drop out of the top 8 with a loss, so every game for each of those counts too. What's more, getting a home game actually gives you an advantage. So those games matter too. And the games that are just normal "bowls," Well, ask how many of those bowls matter now.
"Scholar-Athletes"
Athletes have 2 weeks to take finals. There are only four schools that play on the 20th and all of the rest are on the 27th. Almost all schools are out until the 10th anyhow. No more class missed.

Fans won't travel
They don't have to. Every site is determined almost a month in advance, the same week that Bowl games are announced. The final is at a neutral site--and I don't think you'll have any problem getting people to travel to that one. Ask the Final Four.

Bowl games are vacations
Yes. They are. And they will continue to be for all but 8 fan bases. Funny, but I don't think any of those 8 teams would trade their "vacation" for an actual shot at an actual national championship.

People talk about the BCS
And they'll talk about the 8 team playoff. You think Texas Tech or Alabama wouldn't talk about the 8 team field, since one could likely be left out. You don't think Ohio State or the mid-majors would talk about it? Do people talk about the last four teams out for the NCAA basketball tournament? I think so. Now people can talk about seeds too, as well as who's in and who's out. And since the BCS standings would determine at least to some degree, people would still talk.

Money
Each BCS conference would still get an additional home game. They could justify raising their ticket prices for each. They could still get the bowl game money. And the TV. rights alone would be staggering. Plus, the bowl game that hosts the championship could still give out 17 million bucks to each team or conference. Conferences would make more money using this than the same bowl money now, as the playoffs would be on top of any other money. That's why we have to have the 6 BCS conference winners. If it were up to me, I'd just take the 8 best, but the BCS conferences will never relinquish their control of the pot. This helps them retain control unless their conference is as bad as the ACC/Big East recently.

This model would give teams that perform better a significant advantage (home field and byes), but still give more teams a chance. That's all that teams are asking for. A chance.

How it would work this year:
Just for one last glance, here's how it would play out this year based on the recently released BCS standings.

Round 1: #8 Utah (in the top 8) at #5 Cincinnati; #7 Alabama at #6 Texas (Virginia Tech would forfeit their automatic bid because they were ranked 19);

Or, if the ACC chose to send their highest ranked team (which I would assume they would)

Round 1: #8 Utah (in the top 8, so automatic) at #5 Cincinnati; #7 Texas at #6 Georgia Tech (replacing Virginia Tech since they were ranked in the top 15);

Regardless of the first round, the next one would be.

Round 2: Lower-seeded winner at #3 USC; Higher-seeded winner at #4 Penn State

Round 3: Winner at #2 Florida; Winner at #1 Oklahoma

Championship: In Miami

Does anyone think that Alabama (in the first scenario) or Texas Tech (in both scenarios) fans would say that every game doesn't matter anymore?

An Alternative

How it would be populated:
For those that want a bigger tournament. Take 12 teams and do it in 4 weeks. 6 of the top 8 seeds are BCS conference winners (so they each get a home game) but we'll extend the cut-off to top 20. Other 6 are at large teams based on BCS standings. Top two Non-BCS teams get an automatic bid if they are in the top 12.

How the rounds would go:
Round 1: #12 at #5; #11 at #6; #10 at #7; #9 at #8

Round 2: Lowest-seeded winner at #1; 2nd Lowest at #2; 2nd highest at #3; Highest seeded at #4

Round 3: Two games either at neutral sites or at the highest seeded winner

Round 4: Championship.

Here's a visual:

Advantages of this as opposed to the other:

• This model allows for more teams and more non-BCS teams that go undefeated.
  
• More games = more money.
  
• More teams given a chance in the same amount of time.
  
• Gives a team like Texas this year a home game and doesn't make them play four road games in a row to win.
  
• Still gives BCS conference winners a home game, but doesn't give teams like Cincinnati and Virginia Tech too big of an advantage

Disadvantages of this as opposed to the other

• Two rounds of uncertainty as to where the games were. Perhaps you'd have to build in a bye weekend between rounds 2 and 3 to allow for more time to schedule travel.
  
• Might get some two loss teams. Might not. A loss late isn't necessarily going to knock you out so people might be able to argue that "Every game doesn't matter."
  
• Fewer teams get their bowl "vacation."

Same payouts; same fan allocation; neutral site tickets are split 50/50; home team gets most of the tickets.

Here's how it plays out this year:

Round #1
#12 Ohio State (Because there are already 2 non-BCS teams in the field, TCU gets left out despite being in the top 12 and tOSU being ahead of them) at #5 USC; #11 Boise State at #6 Penn State; #10 Texas Tech at #7 Cincinnati; #9 Utah at #8 Virginia Tech (since it's now in the top 20)

Round # 2
Lowest-seeded winner at #1 Oklahoma; 2nd Lowest at #2 Florida; 2nd highest at #3 Texas; Highest seeded at #4 Alabama

Round # 3 and #4: Would play out the same way as the previous model.

Whichever of the two models you prefer. It sounds like a lot more fun than arguing about what computers and pollsters that rarely watch any of the games think.

It's time for a change. Now, I challenge the Wizard or any of you readers (if there are any of you) to come up with reasons why either of these don't or won't work.

I must be honest, on a scale of one to Gus Johnson...I'd give my idea an Al Michaels.