Noontime Extras: The BCS Mess

With Barack Obama in town today talking with 45 of the nation's governors, it seemed like the perfect time to look at the mess that is the BCS. After all, Obama has come out on both ESPN and 60 Minutes saying that he wants to abolish the BCS and have an eight-team playoff.

Think about how unfair it seems that Penn State lost one game by the slimmest margins and that's it. Their season was over. USC lost one game this year, by six points, on the road against a good team the week after destroying a top-five team, and their season was over. USC has given up 10 or fewer points NINE times this year. They haven't even given up a touchdown in SIX games. But with one loss, their season was over in week three.

The BCS has always been in place to find the two best teams, not to rank the top 25 or 50 or 109. One against Two. And it seems that teams like Penn State and USC aren't one or two (or maybe even three or four this year). Most times the BCS been right. In situations like this year, well, it just seems like a big giant mess.

But in a year like this, an eight-team playoff might not work either. Think about what eight teams you'd put in? Would you reward the six BCS conference champions? Okay, let's assume Alabama, Oklahoma, USC, Penn State, Boston College, and Cincinnati get in. That leaves two spots for Florida (or Alabama assuming Florida might win the SEC title game) Texas, Utah, Texas Tech, Boise State, Ohio State and Ball State.

Hell, even TCU is ranked above Cincinnati and Oklahoma State, Georgia Tech and Georgia are ranked ahead of BC. And what happens if Missouri or Virginia Tech win their title games? Mizzou is 20th and Va Tech is 25th.

So what if you eliminate the need for the six BCS conferences to be represented. That would mean that, today, the ACC and Big East wouldn't have a team in the tournament. Fine, they are having mediocre years across the board. But what happens if the numbers shake out after the conference title games and Penn State drops to ninth. The Big Ten wouldn't have a representative?

There is no good way with eight teams. And ESPN knows that, which is why they just dumped about six billion dollars into the TV rights for the BCS. Two at-large teams into a National Championship tournament is not enough. And the College Presidents will never go to a 16 team playoffs (even though that would be amazing drama, great games, huge television ratings and truckloads of money for every school involved).

That is, however, what makes the absolute most sense. Sixteen teams. Each of the 11 conference champions gets a bid (yes that includes the WAC, Mountain West and all the rest...you win your conference and you get in) with five at-large teams filling out the rest of the field. Seeding would be based on the "BCS" ranking and the higher seed would host the first round, with the current BCS bowls making up the quarterfinals, semis and championship game.

It works at the lower levels when there is no money to travel and very little revenue. I hope Barack Obama is reading this while in town...it's not new, but if he's going to push for a playoff, he might as well do it right.

LINKS:

• Who is angrier at Plaxico Burress: Mayor Bloomberg or Stephen A. Smith. I bet I know which one speaks his anger in ALL CAPS.

• The fine folks at KSK have a few funny Plax links. Here and here.

• The Schuylkill 16 is out. Villanova is a pretty darn good team. The others...need some work.

• The peeps over at The Phunyun have a great holiday treat for all Phils fans...I think my favorite is track 14.

• Penn State's mascot was pulled over for DUI. "Sorry officer, this giant head makes the blind spots HUGE." (actually, DUI isn't funny. Just get a friend to pick you up. Or call a cab. They have cabs in Happy Valley, right?

• Stan Hochman talks with Ruben Amaro's Mom, who will always have Jr.'s back.

• Veteran scribe George Vecsey is really really mad about Citi being the name of the Mets Field, especially after the government is giving them all this money. Worth the read.

• Last, yesterday phillyBurbs.com – as part of their Tenth Anniversary celebration – listed the Ten Best Local Listening Experiences. On the DL Podcast was listed on there. It's completely flattering and unnecessary, but much much much appreciated. Hopefully some of you are listeners to the show, and if so, thank you for helping get the word out. If you do listen, or haven't yet, we have a show up today talking with Kevin Kaduk of Yahoo's Big League Stew. Hopefully you'll have some time to listen.

Comments

[mbtoole]

What about having a Selection Committee determine the 8 or 16 teams that gets into a proposed Playoff?

[Loqiel]

The lessons, as always:

1. If you're going to lose, do so early in the year. Voters forgive early losses much more easily than a late loss that sticks in the mind.

2. Run up the score. In 1994 Penn State went into Indiana and, with the PSU defensive scrubs in the game, Indiana scores 22 points in the fourth quarter, including a cosmetic 40-yard bomb for a TD with no time remaining to make the score 35-29. The voters of the polls, only looking at the final score and not the fact that PSU rolled up 469 yards of total offense (including Ki-Jana Carter's 192 on the ground) drop Penn State to number 2, a drop from which they never recover... because they didn't run up the score in the first three quarters. It's not enough to win anymore. You have to humiliate your opponent while doing it.

3. There will be no playoff until bowls figure out a way from which to profit from it. A playoff marginalizes and categorizes bowl games even more than they are now: a bowl who hosts the first round would be less prestigious than one that hosts the next round. Does anyone remember how hesitant the Rose Bowl was to enter into the BCS? And how hesitant they were to relinquish the Big Ten and/or Pac Ten winners should they be in the BCS Championship? PSU couldn't play Nebraska in 1994 because the Rose Bowl would not let them do so, because it would have cheapened their bowl. Only when they got the National Title game in a rotation did they agree to it.

4. University presidents will put forth the fact that their students will miss classes, exams etc because of a playoff system. They conveniently forget that this happens for the NCAA basketball tournament each year. If you paid them enough though, I bet they'd change their tunes. Remember, football programs fund most if not all of a university's other athletic programs in the average university.

In short...

5. It's about money. But isn't it always?

[Kulp]

As one of the biggest supporters of a college football playoff and a big football nerd that has heavily researched the subject, I'd have to say that 16 teams is just too much, though it would be the most fair.

One of the supposed sticking points to the playoff system is how a drawn out post season would effect student athletes in the classroom, an argument we all know is BS, but that's beside the point. 16 teams also takes a lot of emphasis off the regular season. Again, not a great argument, but these are the things detractors have been saying all along.

It's going to have to at least begin at 8, if not only 4 teams, and even that would be major progress at this point.

One thing that has driven me nuts about the BCS and therefore I believe should be a rule for a playoff is you must win your conference championship to be invited as long as we are using a lower number of teams. Major conferences with qualified participants get automatic berths, then qualified non-BCS or independents. Only after all qualified options have been invited should an at large team receive the berth. I've always wondered how a team could be National Champions if they weren't even conference champions.

To prevent schools from crying about missing the playoffs, I also suggest a major realignment so that every major conference plays a championship game. Obviously the ACC, Big 12, and SEC are fine. Pac 10 should add two (Fresno and Hawaii most likely), Big Ten should add one (ND?), and the Big East should pillage the C-USA (East Carolina, MAC (Buffalo, Florida Atlantic, Temple).

There are some obvious flaws with the realignment, mainly the Big East isn't exactly a power house with those additions, but they could be. The point is simply to create as even a playing field as possible between the conferences for those playoff berths, with qualifiers holding the whole thing together. Major conference winners must have X number of wins (10?) or conference wins (6?) or beat X number of ranked opponents. Non-BCS, same deal, but higher win total or something, followed by some clear guidelines for if necessary at larges.

[Loqiel]

Kulp, I love the idea of Notre Dame joining the Big Ten, but it will never, ever happen. They make plenty of money as an independent school with their huge TV contract and besides, the Big Ten would expose them as frauds even more than they are now, costing them a bowl game and the big payoff that comes with going to a bowl game.

I like your realignment idea though, in general. There's too many conferences. We need to tighten this stuff up.

[play]

Mets curse continues. Citi sponsers their next dumpy stadium and the financial institute almost goes under.

[Dan Levy]

I said last week that Notre Dame should join the BIG EAST in football (they are a member in every other sport) or the BIG EAST should kick them out of the league.

It's not like they are needed in basketball. That conference is like the NBA East now. And the other sports are good, but it should be football or get out.

That would give the BIG EAST nine football schools, which is good because they can play eight conference games.

Every school in the country should play eight conference games, then four out of conference games. That way, if you play in a weaker conference, you'll have four opportunities to play tough schools while Michigan plays Appalachian State (oops, wrong choice).

The NCAA could set up conference challenges like in basketball for one of the non conference games (Big Ten vs. Big East, SEC vs. Pac 10, etc) and the conferences nominate schools to play in those games. They should also go back to FCS games not counting toward bowl eligibility.

There are a lot of rules they could change. Basically, they just need to be more like college basketball. I agree that 16 teams is a lot, but Penn State has one loss, by one point in a major conference on the road and they are eighth this year. And there could be as many as for undefeated teams when the season is over...after the title game.

That doesn't seem right either.

[Kulp]

Yeah, ND in the Big Ten is a dream. It just sounded a lot better than Ball St.

One more thing I will add about the BCS...

One of the reasons the system is broke is actually the fault of the schools. It's hard to take PSU seriously when their non-conference schedule includes Coastal, Temple, and Syracuse. These schools should make it their mission to test themselves more on their preseason. Keep one cupcake for a tune-up, but a lot of this would take care of itself if schools would be willing to take on decent competition.

Big 10 teams should go after games against Ball St. and Utah. Pac 10 teams should be looking for games against Fresno, Hawaii, and Boise every year. SEC teams should want to play Southern Miss and East Carolina, etc. Some do, many don't, and at the end we are left to not only question the legitimacy of these non-BCS schools when the truth is the big boys don't want to play them, and at the same time the big boys want to cry when they are excluded because they played a weak schedule. As long as there is no playoff, these schools need to grow a sack and take it upon themselves to prove they deserve a shot.

[Gerry]

@Loqiel:

They shouldn't publish any rankings until the season ends. Too much emphasis is put on them when determining the rankings over the final weeks.

They should publish them once, at the end, taking into consideration the WHOLE season. That would help take emphasis off late losses.

[ryan]

16 teams is too many.

The real solution is 12 teams, with the top 4 teams getting a first week bye (BCS #1-#4), then invite all of the other BCS confernce champions, and top ranked BCS teams not already in. Seed according to BCS rank and play.

[Loqiel]

One of the reasons PSU and a lot of other universities play games like Temple and Syracuse is for recruiting purposes: you play Temple to recruit the Philly kids and Syracuse for the kids in NY. They put Oregon State on their non-conf sched for a test and they laughed them out of Beaver Stadium.

A typical arrangement is the cupcake will play two games at the big school's field and one game at the cupcake's field. The big school is a game closer to bowl eligibility (remember, this is about money and always will be) and the cupcake gets a nice payday due to attendance and the contract they signed with the big school. Everyone wins.

I want to know why people hammer conference schools for their early game choices but Notre Dame gets a free pass because they're Notre Dame. Here's Notre Dame's schedule this year:

San Diego State (2-10) W
Michigan (3-9) W
Michigan State (9-3) L
Purdue (4-8) W
Stanford (5-7) W
North Carolina (8-4) L
Washington (0-11) W
Pittsburgh (8-3) L
Boston College (9-3) L
Navy (7-4) W
Syracuse (3-9) L
USC (10-1) L

So in other words, the winning percentage of the teams they beat is .300. The teams that beat them? .671. Does that strike anyone else as playing a weak schedule to get to a bowl? And they still almost threw it away with a loss to Syracuse and a game they should have lost to Navy (Navy!).

Ugh.

[Zack]

@ Kulp

you conveniently left Oregon State (who beat USC and is second in their conference) out of Penn State's out of conference schedule. Also, when Penn State put Syracuse in, they had just gone to a BCS game.

But added on to this, I love how people say that teams like Penn State have such an easy schedule, but don't look at the teams that Texas Tech played (UMASS, Southern Methodist, Eastern Washington) or Alabama (Clemson- who really sucks, Tulane, Western Kentucky)

It is difficult sometimes for schools to make these difficult out of conference schedules. They usually are set up years in advance and sometimes schools end up being terrible years after it is schedule (like Syracuse, or ND last year for Penn State). Luckily, in 2 seasons Penn State has a home and home with Alabama, then they start a home and home with Virginia (which is not very good right now, but better than the Coastal Carolinas and Temples of the world)

[Kulp]

I was just using PSU as an example that everyone would know. Yes I left Oregon St. off, but even being a PSU fan myself, I don't feel that one game was enough.

Loqiel, I never really considered the recruiting factor involved in playing games against Temple and Cuse, and I admit I don't even see the advantages it presents. Between the Internet and cable TV, I'm not sure what would compel a kid from NY to watch Cuse get stomped by PSU, much less come away thinking PSU is the place to go because they can handle that awful program. Then again, I've never been a highly recruited athlete, so there may be something I am missing. But anyway, do they really need to play Temple every year for recruiting purposes? The whole thing just doesn't add up for me, maybe you can shed some light?

Yes, it's always ultimately about the money, but the payday for playing in the BCS Championship and winning is a lot greater than any other bowl, so it still benefits the school to go out of their way to play the tougher schedule. Certainly they could wind up losing more too, but as it stands now, they lost one game and automatically lost their bid. What is the advantage to all those non-conference wins if PSU could have wound up in the Rose Bowl anyway with a few extra losses?

Anyway, I'm not trying to hammer PSU or any school really, like I said I am all about a playoff, I just feel these schools have no reason to complain when you look at some of their non-conference schedules.

ND is another story, I actually don't consider the program relevant enough right now to give it much thought.

[zachman]

@ Kulp the schedules are made a few years in advance. Last year Penn State played Buffalo and now Buffalo is in the MAC championship game yes i know that isnt the biggest team but still it is hard to get the teams in thier prime. When Penn State scheduled syracuse cuse was doing pretty good. And who does Penn State play in 2009-2010? They the current #1 in the nation Alabama so I am sick of people saying thier non- conference is crap. they oregon state this year and they had a legitimate chance to go the Rose Bowl. Ugh damn college football every year it pisses me off and my blood pressure goes up

[Kulp]

I know the schedules are made in advance, and there is no perfect system, but this year PSU scheduled one decent non conference game. Syracuse hasn't been to a bowl since 1999. Temple never. Coastal not even able. That's not cutting it with everybody being down on the Big Ten. And again, I am a PSU fan. Is the BCS fair? No, but I think we're kidding ourselves if we believe they deserve it over a 1 loss team that's played a tougher schedule.

As for Buffalo, I don't necessarily disagree with your point, but instead of scheduling a program that hasn't risen yet, schedule one that's been to the dance. You may catch them on a down year, but there is a big difference between scheduling Buffalo before they get good, and scheduling Utah and catching them on an off-year. A program that knows how to win is better than a program that doesn't.

[zachman]

A agree with everyones points...but the problem is that there will never be a good solution...money is the reason why playoffs will never occur but even if they did there would still be bickering. Instead of now of the top 2 teams whatever the playoff might be the 9th, or 17th ranked team is gonna be pissed. Phuck the BCS and go Penn State. Maybe PSU beating a highly ranked USC team might show that the Big Ten has some credibility left especially PSU!

[BFisch]

Seriously stop fucking bashing Notre Dame because you're panties are in a bunch over PSU not making the title game.......
wawawawa is all I ever here whenever PSU misses out: man the hell up and be proud your team got in the Rose Bowl, rather than get mad at Notre Dame for maybe making a bowl game.
Their should be a playoff, but it wont happen for a while.

[Loqiel]

Everyone is down on the Big Ten because of Ohio State, who gets blown out of BCS bowl games it goes to. PSU won their last BCS bowl game in 2006 and finished third in the nation, which a lot of people conveniently forget because they're too busy watching Jim Tressel get embarrassed.

As for recruiting games, games in that area let people attend the game in person, letting them see firsthand the team, the system and so on. While recruiting games were very necessary in the pre-Internet and pre-coverage of EVERYTHING world, they still do play a part in the necessary evil that is attracting new talent.

I'll put this another way: look at PSU's old rivals. West Virginia. Notre Dame. Pitt. Syracuse. Rutgers. Maryland. That's not by accident; that covers West Virginia and some of Virginia, Indiana, Ohio (Pitt is midwestern), New York, New Jersey and Maryland. Throw in Temple and you've got both ends of the state covered, and a wide, wide recruiting base.

Remember also that schools are very limited in the direct contact that they can have with kids, whether it be by phone, face-to-face visits or whatnot. There is, however, nothing that stops a kid from going to see them play a game, or going to campus to hang out with some friends, or doing his own research which happens to be facilitated by a game in his area.

Recruiting games and recruiting are like dating in a sense. If you don't put yourself out there in a specific area, you're not going to attract very many desirable potential partners from that area, are you? And while the Internet enhances your chances of getting in touch with people from that area, nothing beats showing up at a bar and seeing what happens in that area and getting face time.

Tougher schedule or not, it's hard to play well when you're not recruiting well. Go ask Rich Rodriguez what happens when you don't have the right recruits for your system. That's why recruiting games are important.

[Scott]

I don't feel bad for Penn St. at all. (And I am a PSU alum). This is what you get when you schedule Costal Carolina, Syracuse, and Temple. Plus the Big 10 SUCKED this year. PSU has no one to blame except themselves.

[Kulp]

@ Loqiel,

Okay, I can buy that, and thank you for the solid explanation. Still there are plenty of decent programs in the area that would allow PSU to mix it up. And again, this goes for every team, PSU simply being the relevant example. It's not that I believe they should completely eliminate cupcake games, especially in light of the recruiting info, but every team should be making an effort to load up on strong competition.

[Mike H.]

If it weren't for history, this would be easy to solve. Or something like that.

It's pretty funny how college basketball has rankings, yet, when it comes down to tournament time, they go straight out the window. Rankings came into existence before instant national acknowledgment of a team's quality. The NCAA relied on sports reporters to fill in the gaps of old-timey college football.

I'd argue that rankings, therefore, are no longer relevant. Yeah, they line up schools from across the country. But we have almost instant information to everything.

So ditch the outdated stuff and put the focus back on competition. Conference play determines championships. Teams play a minimum of 10 conference opponents. Yep, that means conferences go to 12 teams. This gets Notre Dame into a conference (either Big East or Big 10) and Utah and BYU go into the Pac-10. Set eight conferences only in the FBS. That's 96 teams. Sorry, Buffalo, or Middle Tennessee State. Then the eight conferences face each other in quarterfinals, semifinals, and the National Championship.

This preserves the rivalries, guarantees boatloads of cash, and leaves little doubt as to the national champion.

[zachman]

@scott

How is it Penn State's fault that the Big Ten was not up to par this year? its not like they had anything to do with the conference not being as good this year.

But this is why college football is so exciting because up until PSU lost to Iowa they were in the National Championship hunt. If they would have went unbeaten then they would be playing in Miami in January instead of Pasadena so they have no one to blame but themselves

[Mike H.]

Oh, and here's why I want to see PSU play USC. Because a team this concerned about fashion this late in the season has their priorities so far out of whack that it would be a hoot to see the team I like beat the hell out of Ralph Lauren, Pete Carroll, and these nancies that haven't seen a real defense all year long.