In the mess commonly referred to as the Bowl Championship Series, aka the B.C.S., college football teams compete in a season long struggle with the hopes of making it to the championship. Only the strong survive and a single loss can, and has been, devastating to schools with national championship aspirations. In no other sport does every game of the regular season matter so much.
Since its inception ten years ago, the B.C.S. has brought about its fair share of controversy. This season is no different. Just ask the University of Texas. While the BCS committee stands firm that their system, a combination of computer rankings, coaches polls, a few Rubik’s cubes, a voodoo doll and some sudoku puzzles on acid, is the most effective way to determine a true national champion, critics clamor that the system is flawed and that the nation’s champion is not settled on the field. Even our new president-elect has advocated a playoff system. So much for separation of sports and state.
While college football’s post-season remains mired in controversy and confusion, college basketball’s, on the other hand, is pure. It is inarguably the most entertaining way any sport determines its champion. But regular season games hold considerably less meaning.
A team can win basketball’s national championship after having lost ten or twelve games in the regular season. Only once has football had a national champion with as many as two regular season losses. Traditionally, teams have either had to go undefeated or lose just once. And sometimes, that’s not even good enough.
When a college basketball team runs through the bracket, surviving upsets and buzzer-beaters, the tournament leaves little doubt as to who is the best team in the nation, or at least the hottest. With college football, we crown a national champion based on whichever team is voted into and wins the title game. While Florida and Oklahoma will play in that game this year, there’s no telling that either of those teams could beat USC or Texas. We don’t know because they won’t play.
At the end of each and every football season, there is invariably one school that claims to have a legitimate beef about being excluded for a title shot, this year included. For example, Texas beat Oklahoma, one of the teams playing for the championship. Both schools have the same overall record and play in the same conference. But because of a later Texas loss to Texas Tech, who ALSO had the same record, the BCS vaulted Oklahoma to their conference championship based on their standing. Fair? In Norman, Oklahoma… absolutely. In Austin, Texas… not so much.
Nearly all college football fans oppose the BCS for one reason or another and would like to see some type of playoff that matches the best teams in the nation on the field, yet we still have no effective alternative. Scheduling, academics, the current bowl system and the sheer brutality of the sport stand in the way of extending the college football season and incorporating a playoff, single-elimination format.
There is no chance for a Cinderella in college football like there is in college basketball. Teams like Boise State or Utah can go undefeated, but since they’re not in one of the major conferences, they are ineligible to play for a title. The powers that be rule the castle. The BCS is clusionary, March Madness egalitarian.
While it is unlikely that college football would ever incorporate sixty-four teams like college basketball does, some proposals have included four, eight or as many as the top sixteen teams in the nation to settle things ‘on the field’ rather than relying on computers, coaches who don’t watch all the games and a little bit of fairy dust to tell us who’s best. Either way, we’re stuck with the BCS for now, so enjoy it, or feel free to submit any playoff suggestions to the editor-in-chief. We’ll be sure to forward them along to the NCAA.
