We Have a Playoff: Little Will Change

The leaders of College Football have finally decided to implement a 4-team playoff system after the 2014 season. While most will be celebrating this new (and overdue) phenomenon, my thought is: What's the point? Would a 4-team playoff have resulted in the crowning of a different National Champion over the last few years? Are we simply adding another game and millions of dollars in revenue to the leviathan that is college football with not real change in result?

It is my understanding that starting in 2014 a selection committee will select the 4 teams that will participate in the playoff and will take strength of schedule and conference championships into account. That is not to say you must win your conference to participate in the playoff, nor should you, because the goal should be to reward the best teams with the best post season opportunities and not to protect the financial fiefdoms the major conferences have carved out for themselves.

So, I go back to my first question, would a 4-team playoff have really changed any of the actual national championships since 2009? All rankings are from the final BCS standings after the conference championships have been played and the eventual champion is marked with a *. I am using the BCS rankings because they take strength of schedule into account and appear to most accurately reflect how a selection committee would go about its business. 2009 may seem a tad arbitrary as a starting point, but I was unable to watch a significant amount of college football from 2003-2008 because I was in the Army stationed overseas and will not attempt to recreate my memory from highlight shows and newspapers.

2011

LSU

Alabama*

Oklahoma St.

Stanford

Except for fans of the OSU Cowboys, pretty much the entire country is in total agreement that Alabama was the best team in 2011. They lost only 1 game, to the eventual 2nd ranked team in the country and later annihilated that team in the BCS Championship Game. Okie St. lost to lowly Iowa St, not because of a plane crash that killed members of the women's basketball team, but simply because they had a less talented team than both LSU and Alabama as evidenced by the 2012 NFL Draft. 8 players were selected from Alabama, including 5 of the top 35 selections while Okie St had only 3 players picked in total. In total, LSU would beat Stanford and Alabama would defeat OSU, giving us the exact same championship game and champion.

2010

Auburn*

Oregon

TCU

Stanford

2010 was rare in college football. There were exactly 2 elite teams, once strength of schedule was taken into account, which deserved a chance at the national championship. Cam Newton and Auburn were not going to be defeated, end of story. All the whining about TCU and Boise St. was simply noise from sports writers and TV personalities with an axe to grind. Playing 2 difficult games early in the season is not the same thing as playing an elite conference schedule with legitimate teams every week later in the season. Sorry TCU and Boise. You're undefeated records are seriously flawed and do not pass the muster of hindsight. None of those teams were an actual juggernaut loaded with NFL caliber talent. They were high quality teams that fattened their records up on patsies and then wanted a seat at the party. What would the argument be if a big name school like Notre Dame played a TCU or Boise strength schedule and went undefeated? There would be howling and moaning to no end! Everyone likes the little guy, but the little guy gets creamed when he has to play a real schedule.

2009

Alabama*

Texas

Cincinnati

TCU

2009 might have been the only season to see a different result, but not from Cincinnati or TCU. If Colt McCoy doesn't get hurt on the opening drive of the national championship game against Alabama we might have seen a very different game. Not to say that Texas would have won, but McCoy was uniquely important to his team and after he got hurt the Horns had little in the way of a backup plan to combat the Crimson Tide's stout defensive unit. The Bearcats and Horned Frogs would have been little more than fodder for the top 2 teams. They were both quality squads, but they played in 2 of the worst conferences in the FBS.

So, that is three seasons and from my perspective, the BCS got it right each time. The best team was the winner of the national championship. Arguments from the Oklahoma St's of the world are filled with technicalities like, Alabama didn't even win their own conference, how can they play for the championship? Well, they were better and their only loss was a close game to the top ranked team in the country. Get over it, your team wasn't as good as Alabama, at least now; Alabama will get the opportunity to prove it to you.  This new playoff system will not have much of an effect on who is crowned national champion, it justs moves the argument from January to early December as everyone will put arguments forward for how the selection committee should do its job.

If teams outside of the SEC want to complain about how the national champion has been decided they should make the argument that bowl games are always played in nice hot weather which provides a distinct advantage to the southern schools. I have no doubt the Ohio St's and Oregon's of the world would fare much better in future playoff games if Alabama and LSU were brought out of the comfort of the south and into the Chilly confines of northern outdoor stadiums in the middle of January.

Let me hear the chant, no more southern monopoly on bowl games!