Unhappy about the Bowl Championship Series? Join the club.
The playoffs vs. BCS debate has been going on for years and still it’s no closer to being settled. Yet we will be hearing much more about it in the next few years as the BCS’s contract ends after the bowl games of 2006.
Members of the BCS committee met Sunday at Tulane to discuss the situation. Tulane’s president Scott Cowen heads the Coalition for Athletics Reform.
Now of course, the reasons Tulane wants to change the current system is very different from reasons of an LSU fan. Tulane and other small schools are upset because in the current system, the BCS games go to schools from the top six conferences, including the Southeastern Conference. A team from Conference USA (such as Tulane) has a very remote chance of making it into a BCS game. For example, Florida, who has three losses already this season, is ahead of Miami (Ohio), who only has one loss, and sits at No. 16 in the BCS poll.
I’m sure several TCU fans are upset because they’re undefeated and Texas, who has two losses, ranks just above them at No. 5. You can argue for either side, but all I care about is that men sitting on a committee chose who is better instead of letting the teams play it out.
LSU also is at the mercy of the committee. The Tigers currently are No. 4 in the BCS standings. Ahead of LSU is No. 1 Oklahoma, No. 2 Ohio State and No. 3 USC.
Oklahoma is the only undefeated team in the top four at this point, so the BCS has to try to determine who played better against more difficult teams when comparing Ohio State, USC and LSU. This is entirely random, which leaves the door wide open for argument especially since this determines who goes to the national championship game.
ESPN reported that nothing really occurred at the four-hour meeting at Tulane except that the idea of going to a college playoff system was ruled out. This is not a total surprise because a move to the playoff system would mean an entire revamping of the college football system. However, there are people (including myself) that are unwilling to give up on the idea.
The BCS guys in suits thought they had it figured out when they started generating the polls using a computerized system that compares wins/losses to strength of schedule, but this possesses all sorts of problems. For one, when a school devises its schedule years in advance, there is no way of knowing what teams will add to the strength of schedule.
In my eyes there is no way of knowing who deserves to be in the national championship game unless the teams play each other. How can you truly compare USC, Ohio State and LSU without seeing the three teams go head-to-head? It’s impossible.
Currently, university presidents and chancellors are brainstorming for the easiest solution to the BCS debate. Some people have come up with ideas such as having a national championship game after the bowl games.
I am in favor of anything that promotes results on the field over opinions of various university officials and calculated systems.
But because of the big bucks made in the BCS games, (ESPN reported its approximately $110 million a year) it is unlikely for spectators to see much departure from the system currently in play.