I figured it would be a good time to throw out my brilliant and one hundred percent unfeasible playoff plan. It’s not complicated, but it will never EVER happen because people might get their feelings hurt, and you’ll see why in a moment.
First, it’s only eight teams, which means three rounds of playoffs. Issues arising from this? Well, first, it adds three games to the schedules, making the entire season for the eventual champion or runner-up 15 or 16 games long. In my view, this is not a viable argument. If these guys are gonna go pro, they’re gonna have to play a minimum of 16 games a year. Don’t give me that crap that they can’t handle it. Secondly, you can’t expect a team’s fans to travel to three neutral sites and still sell out 90,000-plus seat stadiums. I actually kinda get this argument. My solution is as follows. The eight teams which are selected are seeded 1-8, with the top four teams playing home games for the first round. Home field advantage should count for something, in my opinion. It adds revenue to the schools with the higher seeds. And yes, this can happen logistically. Third argument: a playoff inevitably interferes with finals. Not necessarily. The first round of playoffs would be played the week after the regular season ends, second round on a neutral site (perhaps two of the large BCS bowls) on New Year’s Day (or thereabouts), and the championship game the next week (just like it is now). This gives athletes a break to finish finals, and only four teams would be affected.
Now, why won’t it ever happen? Simply, to facilitate this in a fair manner, tried and true traditions will have to go. First off, divisions within conferences need to go…and with them, conference championship games. No more Big XII North or South. No more ACC Atlantic or Coastal. No more SEC East or West. Gone. Peace out. Why, you ask? Remember 2003? Oklahoma was selected to play in the BCS Championship Game against LSU without having won their own conference (they lost to Kansas State in the Big XII Championship Game). They lost to LSU in the final, who was then forced to split the National Championship with USC, whom the AP poll voted the number one team. This is precisely the issue the BCS was created to prevent. And let’s not forget what happened in the Big XII this year. There were three teams who’d all beaten each other, all from the South division, all of whom would have beaten Missouri in the conference championship game. A true conference championship game should have pitted two of those teams against each other, rather than trotting Missouri out there like a lamb to the slaughter for the eventual coronation of one of the three more deserving teams from the South. A much more compelling game would have been an Oklahoma-Texas rematch, but thanks to the arbitrary divisional system, we didn’t get to see it. A non-divisional conference seems to work just fine for the Big Ten (11) and the Pac-10…say what you will about them being ‘lesser’ conferences than the mighty Big XII or the SEC, but they almost always produce a clear champion.
No, under my plan, every single team in the FBS plays 12 games. They all begin their seasons on the same day, they all end their seasons on the same day, just like the NFL. Their conference schedules rotate as much as possible to preserve annual rivalry games, and are mandated by the NCAA or the conference, which means no more beating up on Citadel the week before the season ends, Florida. All teams play nine (yes, nine) conference games, which should, at a minimum, preserve non-conference rivalry games like UGA-Georgia Tech, Florida-Florida State and USC-Notre Dame.
AND WHILE WE’RE AT IT, NOTRE DAME MUST JOIN A FREAKING CONFERENCE. I don’t care if it’s the Big Ten (12), or the Big East, or CUSA, or the ACC…in order for them to remain in the FBS, they must join a conference and get on board.
Selection of the top eight is as follows: prior to each season, the NCAA appoints a committee to select a certain number of ‘power conferences,’ champions of which will be offered an automatic bid, just like basketball does it. As of now, six conferences get automatic BCS bowl bids, but really…is anyone going to argue that the champions of the ACC and Big East deserve it over Texas Tech this year? No, there could be as few as four power conferences, as many as six. And it could be any conference in the FBS. The MAC was strong this year…I’d be willing to stand up and say that Ball State was a stronger team than Virginia Tech this year (sorry, Di, but a four loss team doesn't have a whole lot of business in a BCS bowl when a one loss juggernaut like Texas Tech gets left out). The remaining bids would be awarded on an at-large basis, just like in basketball. Just off the top of my head, my top eight for this year probably would have looked something like this:
Florida (SEC Champs)
Oklahoma (Big XII Champs)
USC (Pac-10 Champs)
Texas (at-large)
Alabama (at-large)
Penn State (Big Ten (11) Champs)
Texas Tech (at-large)
Utah (Mountain West Champs, but received an at-large bid)
Yep, only four automatic bids this year, based on last year’s conference records, coaching movements, recruiting classes, etc. Some guy much smarter than me could come up with a formula for this.
As for other bowl games, let ‘em stay. If you’re not in the top eight at the end of the season, you can go to a lesser bowl game…they’re just not gonna be played on New Years Day anymore (like any of them are anyway).
Now, the two biggest issues I've raised here are a) the elimination of divisions and conference championship games, and b) the selection of 'power conferences'. I will argue with anyone that says conference championship games are necessary. However, I see the problem with the 'power conference' selection. Even if we take into account the previous season's record of all teams within the conferences, number and quality of players graduating/declaring for the NFL draft within the conferences, the relative strengths of recruiting classes within the conferences, and number and magnitude of coaching changes within the conferences, there is clearly no way to tell what kind of season a conference will have. Therein lies the problem with my formula (oh, and there's more...just wait). Would any of you out there have picked the Titans to win the AFC South this year at the beginning of the season? I certainly wouldn't have. So yes, there will be mistakes made in that process, but that is why the at-large selection process exists within my system. If, say, at the beginning of the season, the formula eliminated the Big East from the 'power conference' selection, and Rutgers came out, played like an NFL team for twelve weeks and won their conference with an unbeaten record, they'd have a solid shot to be seeded within the tournament. Since, under my system, all teams would play nine conference games, teams from non-power conferences would be more greatly judged by their non-conference schedules. Granted, there's only three games in the non-conference schedule, but it would encourage (almost force) teams to adopt the USC/Oklahoma scheduling philosophy—face the toughest non-conference teams you can find (traditional rivalries notwithstanding; see USC/Notre Dame), and duck no one.
I think the effect of such a philosophy would be twofold. One, since those teams in non-power conferences that are ready to make The Leap would be clamoring to get the games against top teams, they'd produce some very intriguing matchups. Two, recruiting for those schools about to make The Leap might see an influx of high school players who relish the underdog role. It's a win-win-win for the schools, the fans and the players.
Now, unfortunately, the biggest reason this will never ever work is that the only group we haven't considered is the group of stakeholders holding the purse strings...corporate sponsors. No major bowls means no naming rights. No Chick-Fil-A Bowl, no Meineke Car Care Bowl...you see what I'm getting at. But honestly, that would be a huge plus for fans. There are 34 Bowl games in the NCAA postseason currently. That means 68 of 119 teams make the postseason...well over 50 percent. The biggest complaint that people have about a playoff system is that it reduces the significance of the regular season...how much does the regular season mean if well over 50 percent of the field makes the postseason??
The last little wrinkle I'd throw in there is the most radical, which is yet another reason that it'll never fly. It's an idea that I absolutely love, and that it blows my mind that it's not already in place in Major League Baseball...and it's relegation. The same process that selects the power conference can also select the least performing conference in the FBS and kick it down to Division 1-AA, as well as promote the best performing conference in the FCS and promote it to the big leagues. It could absolutely work—who wouldn't love to see JMU play ALL FBS teams in their non-conference schedules? They may actually surprise a few people.
Of course, it'll never happen. We're going to suffer through bowl after bowl after bowl, and we're going to have this conversation year after year after year. And not even Obama's going to be able to change it. So you might as well enjoy the Meineke Car Care/Husqvarna/Sears/Wendy's/Joe The Plumber/Williams Sonoma Bowl brought to you by Dairy Queen and Memorex, featuring Miami of Ohio and Idaho State.
Here's hoping the powers that be pull their collective heads out and realize that this could work. But they're not interested in that. Because you'll watch anyway.