NCAA Basketball Tournament Proves that College Football Needs a Playoff System
After a full weekend of upsets and buzzer beaters, the NCAA Basketball Tournament once again has proven to be the best college sporting event on this planet. March Madness is truly a dream come true for many sports fans. In just four days, the NCAA bracket dwindles from the field of 64 to the Sweet 16, and with plenty of raw emotion and drama along the way.
However, every year I watch the madness unfold and I begin to wonder why the NCAA does not capitalize on the success of their basketball tournament and implement a similar playoff in Division I college football.
This year’s Sweet 16 includes mid-major conference powers like Bradley, Wichita State and George Mason. All three of these programs are being praised for their so-called upset victories over teams from the major conferences like Kansas, North Carolina and Tennessee. But some could argue that their wins were not upsets at all. Bradley, Wichita State and George Mason have excellent basketball teams and to some it is just too hard to realize that they actually have athletic programs that are equal to or even better than those athletic programs from the major conferences. And this is exactly why the major conferences do not want a playoff in Division I football.
If a playoff were to be implemented in college football, major upsets would happen just as frequently as they do in the NCAA Basketball Tournament. College football has already seen a superb Utah football team from the Mountain West Conference destroy Pittsburgh from the Big East Conference back in the 2005 Fiesta Bowl. Utah also defeated Georgia Tech from the Atlantic Coast Conference in this year’s Emerald Bowl and Texas Christian, also from the Mountain West, defeated Iowa State of the Big XII.
The BCS conferences control Division I football, which means they take in the most money by securing up big television contracts and by controlling the major bowl games with the formation of the BCS itself. By securing more money, BCS schools have the advantage of better facilities and coaches, which in turn means better recruiting. Its not to hard to see why they do not want to have a playoff…they would not benefit financially. BCS schools know that with a college playoff system mid-major conferences would eventually catch up and even the playing field…just as they have done in the NCAA basketball tournament.
This year’s basketball tourney has shown everyone once again that it doesn’t matter if you have the big name coaches and the big money facilities; you still have to win the game on the field or on the court.
The NCAA claims that its core purpose is “to govern competition in a fair, safe, equitable and sportsmanlike manner, and to integrate intercollegiate athletics into higher education so that the educational experience of the student-athlete is paramount.
- The Sports Mouth's blog
- Login or register to post comments
- 537 reads
NCAA Football Playoffs
For the most part I agree with what you are saying. I would like to see a playoff system implemented in college football. I don't think teams should be given a free ride into a championship game because a computer decided that they were the best team from a major conference.
I disagree with you when you say that major upsets would happen just as frequently in football. Football is a simple sport in that the team with the bigger, stronger, faster athletes is gonna win 99 out of a 100 games. So if a playoff were implemented it would take some time before we start to see these major upsets. You brought teams like Utah and TCU as examples, but I would argue that these are two schools with long standing traditions of being good football teams.
Also, how would a playoff system be implemented? Football isn't like basketball, where you can play every other day. So obviously there can't be a 64 team football tournament (that would double the length of the season almost). The most viable system I can think of is the 4 plus 1 system. This is where they play the four major BCS bowls and then pick what they think are the best two teams out of the eight and have them play for the national championship. The problem here is that there are only eight teams in the mix, and I'm sure there would be a lot more than eight teams with legitimate arguments for why they should be included.
Playoffs can work
The fact of the matter is that BCS schools get the great players because the have the big money to pay the top coaches and build the best facilities. Some of the most recent college facilities rival those of NFL teams! This is how the Florida's, USC's and Texas' of the world get all the great athletes.
They get all this money primarily from the BCS bowl payouts and television contracts for the bowl games, which they control. Therefore if the BCS was gone and some kind of (monster) playoff system was implemented, the big money would be more evenly spread across ALL NCAA conferences.
We have already seen teams from small conferences beat the big boys in football (i.e. Utah over Pitt in the Fiesta Bowl). Can you imagine how more frequent that would happen if all the money that is put into the BCS is up for grabs for everyone! If all conferences were guranteed a spot in a 16-team playoff system (like in Division I-AA, II and III), everyone would have a fair and equal opportunity to the big money, which is going to lead to better facilities and better players...the NCAA claims they support this type of system in their mission statement, yet they sit back and let this crap go on.
The biggest thing that bothers me is that at the beginning of the season a Division I football player at Miami knows that if his team goes undefeated they will be in the hunt for the National Championship, whereas a Division I football player at Utah State can not say the same thing. The NCAA calls them both Division I football players, but are they playing on an equal playing field?
It is time to make the system fair. I don't care how they do it, but things need to change.
"For whom the bell tolls...time marches on!"
college playoff
I dont normally like to, but I got to agree with Weezy on this. If memory serves me correct Utah was like 11-1 that year and they had the number one pick and Hiesmann finalist as their starting quarterback. Further TCU was 10-1 this past year. After Iowa State beat Iowa they imploded. TCU was clearly a better team and actually should not have even been matched up with Iowa State. Maybe a playoff system would be okay, but you would not see the upsets that you see in basketball. USC, Texas, Michigan, Notre Dame dominated long before the BCS was ever in place.
You Sound Like Billy Packer
Billy Packer said the same thing about Wichita State and Bradley this past weekend and look what happend. Packer said Bradley didn't deserve to be in the tournament and that the best basketball teams come from the major conferences...which we all know is not true.
Other football programs have never even had the chance to prove it on the field. Utah was undefeated that year and did not get a chance to play for the National Championship. And that is the bottom line.
You both are missing my point. How would we know if USC, Texas, Notre Dame would dominate every year if they had to get through a 16-team bracket like Divison I-AA, II and III have to? You don't...there would be upsets every year...just like in basketball.
TCU and Utah win games because their teams are good and they can beat teams from the major conferences. They've proved that, but the BCS still keeps them out. It is a scam for the big schools to keep the mid-major conferences from the big money.
"For whom the bell tolls...time marches on!"
You got me all wrong Mouth
I do not agree with Billy Packer. We have watched sports our entire lives. We know that these upsets occur all the time in the NCAA tournament. There is a reason all 4 number 1 seeds have never made it to the final four. The best teams from the WAC and Mountain West are not mid majors in my mind. Witchita State does not have a top five pick and a player of thre year candidate on their team. And neither does Bradley or George Mason. You want to consider them to be mid majors because they dont get an automatic BCS bid, but that is about politics and tradition and the fact that Notre Dame is not affiliated with a conference. The reason I mentioned that these teams dominated before the BCS was in place is because you said they are as good as they are because they have money from the BCS, but like I said the BCS is relatively new and these teams dominated prior to this. I was not saying it as a reason to leave certain teams out of the mix.
My Big Mouth
Sorry for the confusion, I ASSumed you were defending the current system. However, even before the BCS was in place the big conferences dominated the big payout bowls with their automatic bids to those bowl games, and Notre Dame has had a huge tv contract with NBC for years, which it doesn't have to share with anyone because they are not part of a conference.
I remember back in the day the Big 8 champ always went to the Orange Bowl while the Rose Bowl was always the Big Ten Champ vs. the Pac-10 champ. Don't get me wrong, I loved watching those games, but when you look at what kind of excitment the NCAA hoops tournament can produce and the fact that it actually crowns a champion on the field of play and not by a media/coaches poll or studpid computer rankins, how can the NCAA not live up to its name and get this thing right.
"For whom the bell tolls...time marches on!"