Update [2007-11-13 14:13:34 by Dave]: Bumped from the diaries. This topic is just too provocative not to give a feature spot to.--Dave

This season is once again going to end with a clusterf*%& at the top of the rankings with multiple teams claiming to have been shafted out of a shot at the national title.  This will invariably renew calls for a "+1 playoff system" or some other sort of one-and-done tournament for some of the top BCS teams.  When this discussion comes up it seems the pundits allow us but two options.  Tweak the BCS formula, like they do every year, or completely re-haul the BCS to include a playoff format.  To be straight here, I've always been a proponent of allowing conference winners to play in traditional bowl matchups and let the various poll voters of America decide who the best team is.  I think money and egos are what drove the creation of the BCS and wrecked and overwrote what was a 100+ year tradition.  

Some of the rational arguments in favor of a playoff system make sense.  In particular, I'm drawn to the argument that says it allows the Boise States and Utahs of the world a chance to compete against the big boys and play Cinderella.  In the previous and current systems, these guys had no chance at national titles and the only way to remedy that would be to allow a playoff.  This is the one valid point I admittedly have no defense for, especially since I don't have a vote in any sort of meaningful poll.  Had I a vote, Boise State might have been ranked higher last year.  

This one smaller point doesn't override the real reason behind a playoff system: the crowning of a true, undisputed national title winner.  I believe the affinity for this comes from what NCAA basketball has created with March Madness.  Four weeks of exciting basketball with everyone playing for their tourney lives.  On any given night, a highly ranked team can lose to a lower ranked team.  Upsets galore, abundant intrigue and a four week window where the only thing that matters is NCAA basketball.  You have to believe that NCAA football is envious of this, especially with the plethora of utterly meaningless bowl games.  But one description of the NCAA tourney jumps out at you: "upsets galore."  How are we really producing an undisputed national title contender if we're putting teams through another one-and-done tournament?  We already have something similar.  It's called "The Regular Season."  Think about what the playoff format has done to the NBA, with teams in the both sides of the bracket angling themselves for a favorable first-round matchups, or angling to get out of the Spurs bracket for as long as possible.  Think about the NFL, where we have games like Seahawks v. Packers in 2005.  The goal for NFL teams is to become one of those top six in your conference.  Think about a scenario where we're guaranteed our spot and seed in a playoff.  How conflicted would you feel if we benched Stewart and Dixon in Autzen against the Beavers because we'd rather they're ready to go against Va Tech in the first round of the playoffs?  

I'm not saying that the playoff system should be universally scrapped in sports.  It makes some sense to take the best teams and have them compete against each other because, as I said, it allows intrigue, upsets and excitement and then crowns a champion.  But the bowl system has long been something characteristically and uniquely College Football which brings up another one of my issues with the BCS.  The Rose Bowl has lost all of its prestige in today's system.  I'm not old enough to pine for the 50 years when we got to see Big Televen-Pac 10 in the Rose Bowl but I am old enough to long for the 10 years I got to see matchups like Washington-Michigan, Oregon-Penn State or Arizona State-Ohio State.  As a Duck fan this season, my worst nightmare is for the Ducks to earn "just" a Rose Bowl berth.  I say give us back our traditional bowl matchups.  

Another problem that will have to be dealt with when/if a playoff system is implemented is the issue of selection.  The whole system will have to be revamped to not allow things like #4 Ohio State (9-2), #6 Notre Dame (9-2) and #7 Georgia (10-2) being selected in favor of #5 Oregon(10-1).  In particular, the Notre Dame clause will have to go.  But do we then simply go with the top 6 or 8 or 10 or 12 teams?  As we know, it's pretty hard for those mid-major teams to crack the higher ranks of the BCS, all but eliminating the one argument in favor of the BCS I agreed with.  Boise State finished 8th last year.  Does anyone believe that college football would allow for 3 weeks of playoffs, which would allow for a full 8 teams to complete?  No, last year Boise State would have most likely been shut out of the most discussed playoff system, which would only feature the top-4 teams.  

The old system of poll voters declaring a national title winner had/has its own flaws and most are rooted in the error of human perception.  The SEC is better, so 7-3 Florida is better than 9-1 Boise State.  Kansas has no losses and is from a "BCS Conference", so has played superior competition when compared to, say, Hawaii (not necessarily so, when all is said and done).  I say rather change the system you need to try and change the way voters use their votes.  Let's stop ranking teams in tiers based on their W-L and instead incorporate W-L into your thinking of who is a better team.  Every year we read articles about how so many teams are essentially knocked from the race for a national title because they lose late in the year as opposed to early.  Guess what, as a writer you have the power to change this.  If you really believed that Ohio State was better than Arizona State but worse than West Virginia before they lost to Illinois, that shouldn't have changed.  Obviously this argument runs both ways but that's what has always made college football unique.  The title winners in this particular sport have always been decided through a combination of opinion and win-loss records.  The BCS changed this by first turning it into a calculation rather than a vote and now by trying to turn it into a playoff system.  I feel that before we make the headlong push to follow the format adopted by all other major sports, we should take a moment to consider what we're quickly leaving behind.  I doubt we'll ever return to the old system, no matter how many national title controversies we have to endure but we should keep in perspective what we're running from when we're deciding what we should be running to.