Now, before you start pounding on your keyboard and cursing my name: assume every logistical issue with a college football playoff has been resolved. Magically, there are no problems with scheduling, academics missed and every hypothetical fan could travel to every hypothetical game. Money is not an issue.
Answer one question for me: who/what would determine what teams made the playoffs?
I can guarantee you that teams and fans who feel they were treated unfairly by the BCS will find new (or the same) fault with any ranking system that comes in to play. There is no way that 120 teams of varying schedule, geographical location, conference affiliation, revenue generation and media exposure are going to be ranked equally/fairly enough to produce a fool-proof Top 16. Changing from a BCS Champion to a Playoff Champion will not change the fact that there is no way to absolutely fairly rank teams.
I’ve also heard the call for 30 team mega-conferences and the champion and next top three teams from each conference go to the playoff. Again, there’s always that fifth team – a team who theoretically could be ranked higher than the fourth ranked team in a different mega-conference. Now we are outraged that the 17 highest ranked teams are not in the playoffs. Also, what if a team in one of the mega-conferences is ranked higher than the ‘champion’ of that mega-conference due to a championship game upset?! How does that work for seeding?
As for the ranking themselves, the biases will still be the same: favoring schools that play in 'tougher' conferences or teams that get more TV coverage...though I guess if every team was affiliated with one of the Big 4 conferences, these conferences would likely level out pretty evenly as far as toughness.
Maybe a league with eight or 16 conferences each sending their champion (and only their champion) to a playoff would be quasi-reasonable...until you have a situation like in the Big XII in 2003, when the #13 ranked Kansas State Wildcats knocked off the #1 Oklahoma Sooners in the Big XII title game.
One start to end the ranking madness would be to get rid of pre-season polls...but even that isn't going to solve our issue. How are we going to properly rank an undefeated University of Central Florida or Rice when the pollsters can't even watch their games?! These teams would get less press and respect than an undefeated Michigan.
Can you imagine making every AP Voter watch every game? "Bwah ha ha...! No time for hair and makeup, Kirk Herbstreit! You've got 60 games to watch before you can rank teams this week!!"
Get rid of the human polls! They're subjective! It's not fair to the schools not in major media markets and is biased toward more storied programs!
Get rid of the computer polls! We need humans to factor in things like underdogs and rebuilding teams! June Jones is a genius!!
I think we need to start letting hybrid robot/humans do the voting. Here are my top choices:
Johnny-5: He’s alive, you know
Data: He installed his own “emotions chip”
The Terminator: Infractions violations? “I need your clothes, your boots and your motorcycle”
C-3PO: He is an excellent Odds-maker
Optimus Prime: Also an 18-wheeler
Wall-E: He’s been isolated on a trash heap planet forever – so really he has no biases at all.
Ray Liota: I’m pretty sure he’s a robot
The Mystery Science Theater 3000 Robots: Always plenty of sarcastic comments
 |
| "I am a ro-bot" |
Look, it's obvious the BCS isn't the ideal situation for defining a college football champion - but at least the #1 and #2 teams play each other for that title under this system...the problem comes down to the the rankings, not the institution itself.
I can see why people want a playoff system, or rather, want to get rid of the BCS. I get the appeal of it. But I can't see how it will solve the root of the issue, which is to figure out who gets to play.
It's going to be the same old tears. we'll just be drying them off with a different handkerchief.
No comments:
Post a Comment