Playoffs v. BCS

I've heard this a million times already from around the college football universe. IF WE JUST HAD A PLAYOFF THEN EVERYTHING WOULD BE SO MUCH EASIER.... blah blah blah I am here to -gasp- defend the BCS

My lead argument, may I present to you the current situation in the DII football landscape which might I add uses a playoff.


In Region 1: (The north east) there are 6 playoff spots as there are with all regions the top 2 get a by the bottom 4 play in the first round similar to the NFL playoffs.

Going into the final week of the season

1. Shepard 9-0
2. Bloomsburg 9-1
3. Kutztown 9-1
4. Mercyhurst 8-2
5. Cal U of PA 9-1
6. Shaw 8-2 (1 loss being against a DI FCS team)
7. Wesleyan WV 8-2
8. Concord 8-2 (1 win being against a DIII team)
9. St. Augustine 8-2
10.Winston-Salem 8-2 ( 2 wins over DIII)

How they fared in the final week
1. Shepard L 28-24 against unranked Glenville State
2. Bloomsburg L56-37 against Mercyhurst in conference finals
3. Kutztown W27-24 against unranked Gannon
4. Mercyhurst W56-37 against Bloomsburg in conference finals
5. Cal U of PA W24-0 against unranked Cheyney
6. Shaw W 14-7 unranked Virginia St.
7. Wesleyan WV did not play
8. Concord L 56-33 against unranked west liberty
9. St. Augustine did not play
10. Winston- Salem did not play


ok while the top 6 are in the debate is, who gets the by? who gets the top seed?
Sure 3rd ranked Kutztown and 4th ranked Mercyhurst won while the top two teams lost, but Bloom, Kutztown, and Mercy are in the same conference all played each other.... KU beat Mercy, Mercy Beat bloom, bloom beat KU.... who gets the top nod? I'd say this is equally confusing to the BCS and therefore the argument that Playoffs let it get settled on the field is not true. Even with the playoffs, it will be upto polls and computers to decide the playoffs not the teams.

At the current system yes it would be up to the polls but in the era of Super Conferences(if it ever happens and I think it will) it won't rely on Polls for Playoffs only for seeding.

Super Conferences Playoff Set up-
Big10(16 teams)- Conference Champion Advances to Playoffs
SEC(16/18 teams)-Conference Champion Advances to Playoffs
ACC(16 Teams)-Conference Champion Advances to Playoffs
PAC10(16 Teams)-Conference Champion Advances to Playoffs

the 4 Champions get seeded based on Polls
(all teams picked at random sorta)
#2 Michigan(B10) v #6 LSU(SEC)
#4 Oregon(P10) v #5 Miami(ACC)
What happened to #1,3? well they were upset in the Conference Championship Games
Winners advance to the National Championship
and so you see Polls play a lesser role in the Landscape

I honestly think the super conference is the pipe dream of the commissioner of the Pac-# I honestly think the other conference leaders and most of the school presidents are to held onto the bowl system and recognize the super conference system will destroy it. Remember the more bowls there are the more money in there pockets, the super conference actually will get you less money than the bowl system... unless you are the lone super conference (what the Pac-10 tried to do)

The one thing I think that will happen is the return of sport specific conferences. There will be basketball specific and football specific conferences in the coming years.

The Pac-10 is a pretty screwed up conference right now. At the moment there are only two really decent teams, Oregon and Stanford (some people also say Arizona but they have already lost 3 in conference and still have to play Oregon). Everybody else is pretty weird, beating teams they shouldn't be beating (Oregon State and Arizona is a good example, when UA was ranked #11) and losing to teams they should be winning to (USC and Washington, or OSU and Washington). Oregon and Stanford have zero and one loss respectively (Stanford's to Oregon). The super conference won't happen anytime soon from the west (although Utah is joining next year... but still)

Not to mention, there are only THREE teams that have EVER made the #1 spot in the BCS polls (USC and UCLA). Look at the SEC if you want your super conference.

well yes I know that but the Pac-10 attempted to become the super conference this year, they came up short thanks to the Longhorns

actually it was Jim Delany(Big10) who started the whole ball then the PAC10 jumped on

as to the Bowls no one said there wouldn't still be bowls you'd have you National Playoffs and your Bowls for everyone else Imagine the Cash Cows from the Semi-Finals and Championship Games

but imagine how much you lose if all the other bowls become "not the playoffs"

they'll still be money as ESPN and the Bowls will get Money people will still want to see the schools coming in and that's where a bowl makes it's money at this point they want to expand bowl eligiablity which means a sub 500 team will make a bowl game they are getting to make Bowls a Farce when I was a kid there wasn't nearly as many and personally it was better

oh I totally agree there , the teams that do not deserve to be getting to bowls getting to them *cough ND in the sugar bowl a few years back cough* is pretty pathetic. If they want to add more bowls, why not send some DI FCS teams who may have already had there playoff hopes dashed play a few of the lower bowls like the New Orleans bowl or the RL carriers bowl (which now that I remember were pretty good games )