Due to unscheduled personal life situations, I haven't been able to grace Sportsline with my gift of gab for a week or so. Sometimes God likes to remind me that arguing Texas and Oklahoma isn't the most important thing in the world, but I still keep attempting to disagree. So upon the return de Teddy, it's time to piss off a bunch of new age thinkers with "Why playoffs in college football wouldn't work." I'll give you the long, drawn out, overused, over simplified, over using the word over in one sentence in blogs model proposed by some self imposed "genius" whilst sitting on the john one day at work and then tell you why it won't work...
As a disclaimer, I'm going at this with a few caveats so zealots won't start pumping ideas in that would NEVER fly in college football, like dissolution of conferences, suspensions of yearly rivalries, absolution of OOC rivalries, and things of that nature. It's cute to say "just put all the teams in @ the beginning of the season and schedule based on that" but that's not realistic, and too much weed makes you think things like that.
1. 8 team model: This seems to be the most neutral one. The "marriage" between the plus one people and the 16 tream, let everyone in other than my kid's high school team people. But like any marraige, there's give and take, both people normally are somewhat unhappy, and in the end there's no sex. The 8 team model isn't forcing anyone to clean the sheets anytime soon. The problem? Once again it becomes a big brouhaha of which conferences get in and which do not. Sure, 2 slots are reserved for the mid majors now, but what to make of Notre Dame? How rediculous does the ND clause become NOW? With 3 or fewer losses in any given year, ND is almost guaranteed to be ahead of at least one mid major champ. Not fair at all. On top of that, teams like 4 loss Kansas State would have gotten in a few years ago while the team they beat, 1 loss Oklahoma, ranked higher and that got to actually play in the title game against LSU? They'd be home. At the mercy of some team not even in the top 15. The 8 team model is stupid because it doesn't guard against that team that loses just enough to not be ranked but still plays in the conference title game (that's you, Texas '96, KSU '03, and FSU '05) and pulls one upset all year after underachieving yet still gets to play for a title? Hogwash. And this model wouldn't have settled much last year either, as UGA, some people's "best team in the damn land" still probably wouldn't have gotten in. Doing the last 2 bids as at larges would cause more mid major constipation than the BCS is currently giving. The 8 team model would be a total joke.
2. 16 team model: The joke of all jokes. That one friend who says she can handle her alcohol, so you tell her there's booze in her hairy buffalo you make her when all along there's nothing in it but punch and she starts stumbling around like Charlie Sheen after 2 sips. That's this model. Supporters will tell you that all 11 conferences would get a crack. And then 5 at larges. Well, not everyone needs a "crack." This isn't a hooker, it's a championship. I find nothing redeeming about a 7-5 Sun Belt champ playing for a title when it couldn't beat 2 SEC teams out of 12 with any consistency. That's not fair. That's just forcing bad playoff games, a long, drawn out season, and pretty much the death of OOC games b/c of the length of the season. You're talking about literally an extra 3 weeks minimum plus the fact that the NCAA brass lies to us about wanting to keep football away from semester changes and finals as much as possible. And thus, college football becomes what we who watch it all don't like about pro sports....3/4 months of somewhat meaningless regular season matchups culminating in a few great moments of playoff action....after about 7-9 lousy conference champs are pounded out. A lot like hooking up with a girl and being all excited until you get her home and realize the bra was padded. It looked good when you started out, but folks, the 16 teamer would just kill the game. You want 80% of meaningless football? Watch the NFL.
3. Plus 1 model: The plus one to me is the closest and best version, but the Sportsline free for all'ers would never let it happen, and we all know this. Once in college football history have more than 4 teams had a claim to play for a title, and realistically that year, only 3 really could take it to court that they had an airtight case. But the powers that be and the fans are more concerned with the injustice levied upon possibly leaving out some 2 loss team that looks good late or a few mediocre conference champs than actually changing the system. The layman's issue with this model is that it rewards teams similarly to the BCS...you can concievably get in with a lousy schedule. But this time friends, that team will have 2, not one game to be exposed. Others say it's not enough because you're singling out conference champs and leaving others in the dust. Still others think that it would further continue to push out the mid majors. I just kinda shrug @ all these notions, because I think once you lose a damn game, you thus lose the right to piss and moan about what you don't end up getting later on. It's sports, not duck duck goose in kindergarten. Not everyone needs to be picked so their egos won't get bruised. The other issue is that truly, it will undermine the bowl system. Rotating bowl games as semis and such will kill tie ins and piss off certain bowls, especially ones named after flowers that you give your wife after you scream at her and run over her cat (accidentally of course). However, this model still would keep the integrity of the regular season.
4. BCS: We all know why it doesn't work. Only 2 teams get in, and if you play your cards the right way...or play teams that fold like wet cards...you have a good shot at getting in. Truthfully, the BCS generally works. My biggest issue with it is that it has no backup installment for situations like Auburn going unbeaten in '04. It's tough to make a system to guard against something that happens once in a blue moon...but let's be honest, it was unfair to the Aubies. The other problem with the BCS is that it delivers what it says it will, a championship game betwixt #1 and #2...but boy does it follow up with a litany of suck BCS bowl games in it's wake. It's like a really crappy 3 course meal followed by a sometimes decent dessert. You end up feeling full, but not because you enjoyed it, mostly because you ate. The BCS games are the same. Yes, I get to watch football. But I'm often terminally bored. The addition of the 5th game to help mid majors in was a joke. It also forces some other team in with no business getting in, espeically since the 3 teams per conference rule hasn't been enlisted yet. If only Auburn coulda played for the title last year. Because it was pretty obvious that no one really deserved getting in, on the whole.
Basically, playoffs can't be done because there is no sane way to do it and keep college football watchable. Maybe we should go all Colin Cowherd and say "that's the beauty of it." Because no one's talking NFL in July. MLB in December. College hoops any month but March. But they're talking college football year-round. Carping, moaning, whining, fighting. It's a 365 day squabble, like a really piss poor relationship. But you keep fighting because the make up sex...well, the juice is worth the squeeze. That's college football. That's why we have no playoff. And ya know what? Maybe we shouldn't. Because if there was nothing to argue about, some of us would actually hafta work.
