FOUR IS ALL I NEED

August 26, 2009

Okay, even though I think the BCS gets more criticism than it deserves, I agree with the masses. Change is needed. In my opinion, the team that’s captured the crystal football each of the last 11 seasons has been the nation’s best. However, I too have found fault with the selection of their opponent from time to time. So, here it is… the Voice of Reason’s plan for how to settle the national championship in a realistic fashion. It still emphasizes the regular season while using the current bowl system.

First of all, we need some symmetry to the end of the regular season. Some people believe in abolishing all conference championship games or making all conferences play one. Both ideas are extreme. My solution is this. If you want to play one, that’s fine. If you don’t want one, that’s fine too, but each team in your league must then play every other league team to determine a true champ. While we’re at it, you must end your season the same weekend as the championship games of the other leagues. Big Ten, this means you. Furthermore, all 3-way ties will be broken in the same manner, as determined by the NCAA. That will eliminate the ridiculous scenario we had last year in the Big 12.

At the end of the regular season, an expert panel (similar to the one that chooses the field of 65 for basketball) will select the four teams that will play for the national championship. The BCS rankings can be used as guidelines, but it will not be simply taking the top four the computers spit out.

There will be exceptions that could lead to you being passed over. For example, if you are a top four team, but you lost your league title game on a neutral field to another top four team, you’re out. Last year, Alabama was still ranked high enough to be considered for my playoff. The problem is that they lost to another one of those teams (Florida) on a neutral site in their last game. That should have eliminated Bama.

Along those same lines, in the case of the 2005 Ohio State Buckeyes, they would have been passed over also. Even though most experts had them right behind USC, Texas and Penn State heading into the bowls, the Buckeyes were 0-2 against the other undisputed top three. They had two cracks at those above them and came up empty. Give someone else a chance.

Now for the important question, why 4? Why not 8? Or 16? Well, 16 is just plain silly. I don’t care how talented Georgia was last year. They were run off the field by Bama and Florida and run over by Georgia Tech on their home field. Even with those losses, they were ranked in the top 16. Explain to me why a team like that deserved a shot at the national title.

I’ve said on the air I could be talked into an 8-team playoff. To be completely honest, I’d have to be dragged kicking and screaming. The benefit to an 8-team playoff is that an unbeaten team in any conference should be able to qualify. To me that’s not a plus. Could you really see Boise State or Hawaii or Tulane beating USC, Florida and Texas in successive weeks? Me neither. Show me you’re one of the top four teams and not just top ten, and I’ll give you a crack.

The most popular 8-team plan has the six BCS conference champs and two at large teams qualifying. That will supposedly put more emphasis on the conference season. One problem I have with that is it turns college football into a conference/sectionalized sport.

Think back to the Ohio State-Michigan game in 2006. #1 versus #2. Both teams undefeated. How many of you made sure to watch that one? Now, imagine there was an 8-team playoff that year. How many people outside of Ohio and Michigan watch? With an 8-team playoff, both teams are in already. How many SEC or ACC or Pac 10 fans would have cared which team won the Big 10 and which team was the at-large selection?

Better yet, think back to 2007. “If ever there was a year when we needed an 8-team playoff, this is it.” Hogwash! Remember all the upsets that year? Remember the reaction each and every one generated nationwide? Oh my God! Stanford beat USC? Illinois upset OSU? Arkansas knocked off LSU? No way, Pitt beat WVU? How many of those teams would have made an 8-team playoff? How big would those upsets look then?

What team would have had a legitimate gripe had there been a 4-team playoff between OSU, LSU, USC and Oklahoma? West Virginia? They played in the weakest BCS conference and gagged at home to Pitt. I know. I know. USC lost to Stanford. True. USC lost on a 4^th and 10 jump ball in the closing seconds. Did you watch the Backyard Brawl that year? Pitt outplayed the Mountaineers from the moment they walked out on to the field. If not for the Big East refs making bizarre calls that helped WVU, Pitt would have won more handily than 13-9.

As for getting the bowls involved, the semifinals would be two of the BCS bowls. In order to keep the same number of BCS slots open, the Cotton Bowl would become a BCS game. Remember, we currently have four bowls and one title game for ten teams. This keeps the number of BCS teams at ten. The semifinals would rotate so each bowl would be part of the playoff twice every five years. The other three years, they can keep their conference affiliation if the champ of that league is not in the final four.

The semifinal games would both be played on New Year’s Day, with the winners meeting a week later at a predetermined site. That way, the season is no longer than it is now. The other three BCS games would fill the gap between New Year’s Day and the title game as they currently do.

There. How hard was that? All we have to do now is convince the Rose Bowl the world will NOT end if they have a match-up that is anything but the Big Ten versus the Pac 10.