Mission [Not Yet] Accomplished

The poor saps who wrote Death to the BCS said their book is bound for the clearance bin. Yes, the Cartel and Presidential Oversight Committee have finally agreed to a playoff, but we still have a long way to go. I celebrate the initial victory by looking at this new system that has yet to see all the wrinkles ironed out.

Other than the fact that they expanded to some sort of playoff, I'm not a huge fan of this new system in terms of how it's implemented. With the system as is currently envisioned I think it is a decent Band-Aid. With 4 teams I can live with the semifinals being played within the context of the current BCS bowls but for the future plan I still want the higher seeded teams in the playoffs to host the games up through the title game.

I'm for a selection committee as well, at least in theory. The scenario I fear has several big conference big wigs on the committee and their potential to be biased towards the power conference schools as opposed to the mid majors who have long threatened the money grab. Everyone deserves an equal shot at these playoffs and the committee needs to take this into account. By design strength of schedule will (unfortunately) tilt towards the bigger schools, but we can't see unbeaten schools get left out without a VERY GOOD reason.

The reason I critique this proposed revamp is because there are still too many holes. I have long been and continue to be for a 16 team playoff. I agree that of those 16, probably only 4 a year would have a realistic shot at a title.

That argument from people in favor of the status quo or the revamp continues to be a big thorn in the side of playoff pundits like me, but their continued argument about the "sanctity "of the regular season baffles me. This past season already ruined the "sanctity" of the regular season. Regardless of whether or not LSU and Alabama were the best two teams (in a vacuum, makes sense), Bama got a shot in the regular season and couldn't take advantage... and because they were so close (plus a tough road double overtime loss by Oklahoma State) they got a rematch.

And that's part of why a playoff is so important. I don't mind a rematch for a national title... as long as the participants earn their way there by playing some of the best teams that season. Take the 11 conference champions and fill the bracket with other deserving teams. Every undefeated team will automatically get in by virtue of the conference champions provision except the Notre Dame's of the FBS, but would get in on my watch regardless for running the table. Most, if not all the at large bids will likely be big conference teams anyway, though not always.

There will be debate and bitterness, sure. But primarily using conference champions means the regular season matters- for everyone. Right now a mid major could go 11-1 and they'd get left out for not beating anyone of significance and for their one loss. In the current system, "Every game counts", except it really doesn't. Even out of conference games will retain importance as they can really help with seeding. And since my ideal system rewards the best teams with home field for one or two or even three weeks, what incentive would teams have for not running the table? Say Ohio State is 11-0 going into its last game against Michigan and no other team has fewer than 2 losses. OSU is pretty much assured of a berth in the B1G title game, but they're playing Michigan. Why throw that game? Why would LSU or Alabama rest guys against each other? Or Texas and Oklahoma? I don't see the NFL pattern of resting guys happening. If you can leave no doubt that you're a #1 seed, take advantage of that opening and guarantee games at your campus for as long as you're in the playoffs until the title game, not to mention likely facing the Sun Belt (or similar conference) champion right away, all but a guaranteed early win.

The revolution is not yet done. We have a rough concept of what we want, but it will take time before it fully takes shape. Support your teams, but yearn for a day when we finally have a fair system to determine a battle tested champion.

A Step in the Right Direction

You would think this would normally be about the NFL Draft tonight. I caught good chunks of it, was surprised by the sheer number of trades, but there were a lot of good picks. Some picks were question marks, but overall it was a good round. As 32 guys have left college to go join the pros, something else is leaving college football as well.

Supposedly a shard of Alabama's BCS trophy. Just like their "championship".

If you are a regular reader of Confessions of a Sportscaster, you know I have a heavy anti-BCS bias. So when I heard early during the college football offseason that there was talk of change to the postseason format, I was a little leery, but hopeful. As we've gone into this week, I've gotten really optimistic. The conference commissioners... plus the ever outdated AD of Notre Dame are all brainstorming and discussing ideas for a fairer and brighter end to the season.


Unfortunately for football fans, the conference commissioners think that an 8-16 team playoff "diminishes the regular season" while completely forgetting that they gave a team that lost to the #1 team in the nation last year a second chance to beat them. They don't seem to understand the idea that not only would a larger playoff make money, it's a much fairer system for deciding a national champion.

As of right now, it seems like the committee wants to go with a "plus-one". Having 4 teams play for a title is certainly much better than having only 2, but it's still heavily flawed. Even if we only go with conference champions for the new postseason, there's still too heavy a reliance on coaches polls (biased due to politicking and best-interest voting rather than honest thoughts on the best teams in the nation) and computer formulas that don't even take margin of victory into consideration.

Don't get me wrong; a plus-one is an improvement over the current BCS system. But it's not enough. I'm still advocating the 16 team playoff (the 11 conference winners plus 5 at-large teams, usually 1 or 2 loss teams). By bringing in the conference winners, you still have importance of the regular season, while having a loss or 2 doesn't necessarily kick you out. And we get an exciting conclusion to the season.

The biggest questions that remain revolve around host sites and the big bowl games. Personally I'm still of the opinion that they either become part of the playoffs in the final round (3rd place game on down the line for the BCS ones) or keep them separate but wait for the title game pairing to be announced so games like the Rose Bowl can keep their traditional matchups as best as possible.

As for playoff sites, I'm okay with the neutral site idea if it comes down to that, but I still believe having a higher seed host would make things so much more interesting. For example, having a playoff game at the Horseshoe in Columbus to mix tradition with a great system? Love the concept. There may be some logistical things to work out, but I can't imagine it being unrealistic. The biggest problem with hometown is making sure out of town visitors have hotels to stay at (which, given how big game days are as it is, I can't see it being that much of an adjustment).

The biggest obstacle I continue to see from fans who want to keep the status quo (seems to be largely SEC people, but I'm sure there's more beyond just that conference) is how some schools don't deserve to go to the title game. It either stems from a bad loss (see Oklahoma State's loss this year to Iowa State) or a "weaker" schedule (see every Boise State season it seems like). These are the people that should be most in favor of a playoff. Think a team lost a game they should have won, or didn't play a tough enough schedule to play for a title? You shouldn't be scared of them. After all, they're an inferior team and you'd beat them en route to a title, right? What are you afraid of?

I'll admit; no system is perfect. Not even the 16 team playoff is perfect. I think it's the maximum number of teams we can include before it becomes diluted, but probably the best possible way to really decide a national champion, something the current system does not do. A plus one is a step in the right direction, but not a total victory. So, my fellow revolutionaries, the fight must go on. But we are making strides and making a real change for the good of college football.

Create-A-Bowl

Yeah, I know, I know. The BCS is done for the year so I should stop complaining. Confessions of a Sportscaster is starting to turn into an anti-BCS sounding board more and more every day.

I know that currently the BCS has a cap of 35 bowl games by virtue of a temporary moratorium, meaning as of right now, 70 of the 120 teams will play a postseason game. But why not one more to share the wealth (i.e. line some pockets)?

I've mentioned Death to the BCS on this blog before, even recommended it personally to a few people. One of the people who's picked up the book is my old friend Geoff Clark, he of the Grabbing the Bull Horns blog that is covering Da Bulls fairly in depth. He texted me this morning about his experience in reading it. We occasionally have awesome brainstorming sessions, and this turned into another one. Everything in parentheses that follows is thoughts I had at the time we were discussing this or notes about things related to what he or I say.

Geoffy: "Reading that book now. Can't believe they act like bowls profit everybody."
Me: "They want to keep up the idea so they can get richer. Told you it was eye-opening."
G: "If this is what happens to D-1 schools, I can even imagine what [North Central College athletic director] Jim Miller would be going through if it happened here."
Me: "We'd be out of competitive sports. Hell, we'd probably have been out after a few years."

Then Geoffy gets totally brilliant.

Paper Champions

I know, I'm a day late to the party. Yes, Alabama won a football game yesterday. Yes, they embarrassed LSU on the field yesterday. Are they national champions? Absolutely not.

I did not watch any of the "national championship" game yesterday. I didn't even watch any highlights. Any information I got out of it was gleaned from Twitter or Facebook pretty much. I had no interest in watching the game, and some people were the same way, with the ratings going down 8 percent from a year ago. There were still a large number of TV's tuned into the game, but I do have to wonder if the people who chose to tune it out had the same reasoning as I did.

About half an hour to an hour before kickoff, I was checking my Twitter and saw a number of tweets about the upcoming game, and that prompted me to tweet, "Too many tweets about the BCS Championship Game." I was a little more detailed on Facebook.

"LSU-Alabama is not a national title game. It's an exhibition rematch between two SEC teams decided by greedy conference commissioners, biased coaches' polls, and poorly written computer formulas. Call me when there's a playoff to decide that these two teams should play for a real title as opposed to this sham of a paper championship. Death to the BCS!"

Shortly after, I was asked by a friend who I thought belonged in that game. Don't get me wrong. Based on the current system, LSU deserved to be here. Alabama had a case, but so did teams like Oklahoma State or Oregon. I know both teams lost a game as well, but both won their conferences. Alabama didn't even play for the conference title. Yes, their one loss was to LSU in overtime. But I can't support a championship game decided the way it is.

I noticed last night that the NCAA and the BCS were in talks about possible changes to the postseason format. I thought I saw something earlier today about the committee deciding against even a plus-one. Big mistake. Even a plus-one is an improvement over the current system. Here's my favorite quote from BCS executive director Bill Hancock:

"Whatever we do, we have to protect the regular season. I think the larger the playoff field, the more damage to the regular season."

So, let me get this straight. You want to preserve the regular season, yet totally disregard it with your decisions for the national champion? They BCS wants to claim that "Every game counts", except LSU-Bama I didn't seem to count because they got a rematch. Rick Reilly argued, "How does winning 1 of 2 make you a champion?" and "They're going to play a rubber game of this best-of-3 LSU-Ala thing, right?"

As far as I'm concerned, the Tide won a glorified exhibition game. By all indications, they looked impressive in doing it. They might be the best team in the nation. I don't know that for sure though. Had they gone through a gauntlet of teams like this one or this one, then beat LSU or whoever, yes, you could call them a champion.

Simply put, if you want to have the best two teams play for the real national title, you need a playoff. Include the teams that win their conferences, and add in deserving "at-large" teams that usually will end up only losing a game or 2 all year. Have them go at each other for four weeks until only one is left standing. If it brings two SEC teams together again, fine. They will have earned it. But don't crown a "national champion" based on the current system.

NCAA Pipe Dream Playoffs: Death to the BCS Edition

I finished off my version of the playoffs here earlier today, but I did admit in an earlier post that yes, there are flaws to the system. After I finished reading Death to the BCS, I realized I left out a crucial detail in that I didn't give all the conference champions a chance to play for the national title, instead taking the top 16 teams from the BCS rankings. This left out a number of teams that should have stayed. To correct this injustice, I will redo the playoffs quickly with an adjusted bracket. The playoff teams are as follows:

1. LSU (13-0, SEC champions)
2. Oklahoma State (11-1, Big 12 champions)
3. Oregon (11-2, Pac-12 champions)
4. Alabama (11-1, at large berth)
5. Stanford (11-1, at large berth)
6. Wisconsin (11-2, Big 10 champions)
7. Boise State (11-1, at large berth)
8. TCU (10-2, Mountain West champions)
9. Houston (12-1, at large berth)
10. Virginia Tech (10-2, at large berth)
11. West Virginia (9-3 Big East champions)
12. Clemson (10-3, ACC champions)
13. Southern Mississippi (11-2, Conference USA champions)
14. Arkansas State (10-2, Sun Belt champions)
15. Northern Illinois (10-3, MAC champions)
16. Louisiana Tech (8-4, WAC champions)

It's definitely a change from the Pipe Dream playoff system, but I like this one just as much. Only 9 of the 16 teams from those made it here (which we can attribute to adding in the conference champions and changing around at large bids). The at-large decisions were very tough to make. Alabama, Boise State, Houston and Stanford were the easiest picks since they all only lost once in the regular season. Virginia Tech was the toughest decision to make with how many 2-loss teams there were, but I felt they had the best argument (both losses came to teams in the playoffs).

NCAA Pipe Dream Playoffs: Bowl Semifinals

For Round 1 results, click here.
For Round 2 results, click here.

I'm switching the scheduling around this weekend because of Christmas. Normally I would have held the games on the Saturday, but given that it's Christmas Eve and I want the players and coaches to be with their families, and also because the NFL moved its games to that day, we're doing 3 games on Thursday and 3 on Friday in this round. With only 12 teams left, we can do one game from each set of semifinals on Thursday and one on Friday to allow players, coaches, and fans to catch possible opponents.

There are some fun matchups this week in all 3 groups of semis, especially the championship bracket. With a lot of OSU fans feeling snubbed, this is their chance to prove they belong in the title game over Alabama. And LSU doesn't have an easy task ahead with Oregon's strong offense.

With the bowl games being next week and still being held at their traditional sites, this is the final week of home field advantages. Higher seeds host, with local weather taken into account. And again, thanks to WhatIfSports.com for the simulations.

Losers Bracket

(16)Georgia vs. (12)Baylor                  (10)Wisconsin vs. (14)Oklahoma
Game 1: BAY 34, UGA 27                      Game 1: WIS 44, OU 36
Game 2: BAY 45, UGA 17                      Game 2: OU 27, WIS 13
Game 3: BAY 31, UGA 23                      Game 3: WIS 37, OU 26
Final: BAY 37, UGA 22                          Final: WIS 31, OU 30

Georgia and Oklahoma are eliminated from the playoffs.
Baylor will play Wisconsin in the Rose Bowl.

Consolation Bracket

(8)Kansas State vs. (4)Stanford         (7)Boise State vs. (6)Arkansas
Game 1: STAN 35, KSU 18                   Game 1: BSU 40, ARK 19
Game 2: STAN 31, KSU 10                   Game 2: BSU 39, ARK 24
Game 3: STAN 44, KSU 17                   Game 3: BSU 55, ARK 48
Final: STAN 37, KSU 15                       Final: BSU 45, ARK 30


Kansas State will play Arkansas in the Fiesta Bowl.
Stanford will play Boise State in the Sugar Bowl.

Championship Bracket

(1)LSU vs. (5)Oregon                           (2)Alabama vs. (3)Oklahoma State
Game 1: LSU 40, ORE 13                      Game 1: ALA 47, OSU 17
Game 2: LSU 34, ORE 9                        Game 2: ALA 41, OSU 40
Game 3: ORE 20, LSU 13                      Game 3: ALA 47, OSU 31
Final: LSU 29, ORE 14                         Final: ALA 46, OSU 29


Oregon will play Oklahoma State in the Orange Bowl.
LSU will play Alabama for the national title.


LSU finally lost a game in the simulations... after getting 2 blowout wins, and they still end up facing Alabama for the national title, but both teams earned their way back there. I love the Rose Bowl and Sugar Bowl matchups as well. See what a playoff can bring?
_____________________________________________________________

I just finished reading Death to the BCS today, and I can tell that my system has a couple flaws. I do exclude some conference champions that I should otherwise have in there (though LSU was the lone unbeaten). My system kind of made me a hypocrite in that I didn't include everyone. MWC champ TCU is out despite winning its conferece, and no Sun Belt, MAC, WAC, C-USA or even Big East teams made the playoffs since I based the seeding off of the BCS rankings... another reason why they're flawed.

As a transitional system though, I think this would work until a system like the one the book suggests where the 11 conference champions make it and a selection committee picks 5 at large teams (which would likely include some participants from here). When I do the bowl game round, I'll also try to put together a sample bracket of the system implemented in the book and a rough outline of how that tournament would have gone. In the ideal world, their system gets put into place immediately, though knowing the minds of the Cartel, as the authors put it, they'll dismiss it as garbage and go back to counting their money.