Alabama, Clemson, Ohio State and Washington Make Playoffs

It is finally over. As predicted a while ago the four selections for the 2016 season's playoffs are in and everyone is happy except for those who are not. Only one Big Ten team made it but it was not a team that won its division let alone the league title. No one is unhappy with Alabama and Clemson but the selections of OSU and Washington are the more controversial. Penn State beat OSU, won their division and won the conference title and, while happy with the Rose Bowl berth, have to be disappointed that they are on the outside looking in. Michigan is pissed too but they did not have enough good wins. As for the Washington Huskies they are being hammered for their out-of-conference schedule but that just kept others in the running because they are champs of the second or third best conference and only had one loss. They also pass the dreaded eye test as they excel in each facet of the game. Without specific rules this type of controversy will continue to flourish. I am okay with the four teams selected, although would have been okay with PSU getting OSU's spot, and am hoping for some good playoff football.

Not A Good Night For College Football

I do not know where to start there was so much awful football playing and coaching last night. It was difficult watching the games it got so bad and the tape of the 4th quarter of the Ohio State win should be burned. We were forced fed four final teams to battle for a true champion and three of them played like crap. Even the fourth did a number of wrong things but were fortunate to be playing the train wreck of a team called Florida State. I love college football and hate that this bs over-hyped crap was dumped on us fans. The old bowl system was much better, at least based on one night.

College Football Playoffs Set

I think I know what happened here. The committee had no idea how to choose between TCU and Baylor for one spot in the four-team playoffs that they booted them both. Or the committee is corrupt and chose the four teams with the most money. That is probably not the case but, of course, using a committee instead of a math formula allows that suggestion. Dropping TCU three spaces after a 52-pont win does not help. Alabama got everything they could have hoped for by not only playing against a third string QB but by avoiding the TCU and Baylor offenses. They also play close by, which is huge. Saban versus Meyer is fun but Saban seemed to have Meyer's number at the end of their rivalry. Let's all hope for some great games.

CFB Playoffs

It is December 4 and the race to earn the four spots in the national championship playoffs is approaching the finish line. As with the BCS and even the old voting post bowl way of picking the national championship, the only way this works is if the right number of teams finishes clearly ahead of the pack. In 2005 Texas and USC were undefeated and clearly the best teams in the country and the BCS selected them to play for the national championship. Bingo. In 1977 after Notre Dame upset Texas in the Cotton Bowl there were a few teams with legitimate claims to the title. That was not so good. This year we have a chance to have four clear cut teams but are more likely to have some cloudiness, which should be expected. Should Alabama, Oregon, TCU and FSU win their games Saturday as favorites and Baylor and Ohio State lose then the current top four will be in and the only potential problem will be with seeding. That would leave us with four programs that have separated themselves from the rest and give us representation from four of the five power conferences. The biggest potential problem is with TCU and Baylor, if Baylor beats Kansas State and TCU does not stumble versus Iowa State. Even if we all think TCU is better than Baylor and even if we think there were some odd ref calls in the TCU-Baylor game, the committee would be setting a dangerous precedent if it picked a same-record TCU over Baylor being that Baylor won the head-to-head match-up. And before you counter that by saying that the road team, TCU, led throughout, the winner, Baylor, had 297 more yards. That is enough of a difference to raise an eyebrow if TCU gets the bid. The other thing about Baylor that bothers me is that the committee seems to be punishing them for a poor non-conference lineup--and I am all for that--but looking the other way with other teams. Remember when Mississippi State was the top ranked team in the country and looking for a final four spot? The Bulldogs played Southern Miss (3-9), UAB (6-6), South Alabama (6-6) and UT-Martin (6-6 in FCS). They also played Kentucky and Vandy from the SEC East. Yes they play some very good SEC West teams, but Baylor played TCU, West Virginia, OU, Kansas State (Saturday), and Texas. The difference is not overwhelming. So what's a fan to do? Well watch the games Saturday and hope for good action. Then we can bitch next week when the games are set. Have fun.

Four Team Playoff Blues

If Alabama wins Saturday then the nation will have a few weeks to get ready for a national championship tilt between the Tide and Notre Dame.  The Irish will still be knocked for, well, I am unsure what reasons, but generally most everyone will accept the pairing as the best way to decide the 2012 champion.
But what if the four-team playoff system, to begin next season, were in place this year?  To be honest it would be a problem-causer.  Let's say, for the sake of argument, that all of the favorites this weekend win their games.  So Notre Dame and Alabama, obviously, are in.  But what about spots three and four?  Kansas State and Florida?  That would leave both Oregon and Stanford out, plus the 2-loss SEC teams and FSU.  SI conducted a survey of 11 current administrators and they came up with Florida and Oregon.  So no KSU nor a Stanford team that could win the Pac 12 title and has already topped Oregon on the field.
Not sure making the playoffs larger would work as the main BCS conference champions should get automatic berths but that may not leave enough at large berths to count for Notre Dame, a Boise State type team and all of the talented second place teams from big conferences.  No one has explained where these games are going to be played either.  Go to 16 then the logistics get worse.
One thing is clear about the future of playoffs.  Money will be the driving factor.

View From Bennett Avenue

I just finished reading an editorial by New York Times writer Pete Thamel that lambasts college football for not instituting a playoff system. Because of a lack of a playoff system college football this season is "sputtering to the finish." The term "lackluster" is used in the headline and later in the article he negatively compares the college game to the NFL version because the NFL playoff system guarantees that "the top teams are usually left to play each other."

There is so much wrong with his analysis that I am unsure of where to begin. For one thing there is the tone, which is one of someone who does not seem to appreciate the basic joys of college football. I began a text Sunday morning to a friend, Patrick Carroll, with the line "another great day in cfb." Unlike Mr. Thamel I enjoyed a slate of games that featured a heavyweight clash between Alabama and Louisiana State, a stunning performance by Stanford in beating Oregon, wild finishes involving ranked teams such as Cincinnati, Houston, Georgia Tech and USC and upsets of Northwestern over Iowa, Navy over Notre Dame (okay, so I a lifelong ND fan did not enjoy this one too much) and Nebraska over Oklahoma. I do not know what sport he was following, but college football delivered Saturday as it does every week.

Now the three teams atop the rankings are still there and have been there all season, which is something that drives him crazy. This is where the college game gets treated unfairly by the national media, especially by those who do not understand the sport. There are some years, such as 2005, where one or two or even three schools separate themselves from the pack. In other years, like the past few, we have multiple undefeated or one-loss teams all fighting to finish in the top two of the final regular season BCS poll. Prior to the BCS, the Alabama-Florida winner and Texas would have been contracted to play in different bowl games. With that now a thing of the past, they can meet in a BCS title game reminiscent of the 2005 season when USC and Texas pulled away from the others by mid-season and then met in a memorable title game. In the NFL, we actually have the same situation as the past two seasons can illuminate. Where was the suspense two years ago when everyone was waiting to coronate the Pats from late September on? Yes the Giants upset them in the Super Bowl, but so too in 2005 did Texas (a dog of more than a touchdown) shock a Trojans squad that was being ranked with the best of all-time. What is the difference? But then last season the NFL was so wide open that a mediocre Arizona Cardinals team that lost games during the regular season by scores of 56-35, 48-20 and 47-7 reached the Super Bowl. Where is Thamel's editorial decrying the lack of excitement in the NFL this season as New England, Indianapolis, Pittsburgh, Minnesota, New Orleans and Arizona all look to be locks to win their respective division crowns? You get both types of seasons in both the pro and college game.

The next item on the list is that Thamel knows today, November 10, that the rest of the season lacks "a single competitive game left on the schedule that directly relates to the national title." That is completely wrong for two major reasons. One is that the games on the field have to be played out. Is it really impossible for Texas to lose to Texas A&M, who won this hard-fought series match-up two out of the last three years, and then fall behind a Cincinnati squad in the BCS standings, if the Bearcats can stay undefeated? Or for Alabama to drop road games at Mississippi State and Auburn or Florida to lost at South Carolina or to a Florida State squad playing for its aging coaching staff? He writes that there are "no elite teams" yet is upset that these three teams are running away with the national title picture. In 2006, a 10-1 USC squad was knocked out of the BCS title game on the final day of the regular season by a 6-5 UCLA team. In 2007, the final three weeks of the regular season saw massive upsets in Arizona beating Oregon, Texas Tech beating Oklahoma, Arkansas beating LSU and Pitt beating West Virginia, all of which shook up the BCS rankings. So, upsets occur. Watch the games!

The other major reason that the statement above, which mocks the rest of the regular season, is incorrect is that it misses the point about college athletics. Professional sports are set up in such a way that there is one champion and the rest of the teams are losers. The college game cannot be set up that way, and should not be set up that way. I am looking forward to next week's Ohio State game versus Iowa, which is a de facto playoff game for a spot in the Rose Bowl. Does it have any national title implications? No. Can it be a fun and competitive game? Sure. Do these two teams want to win that game more than any other because they want to win the Big Ten and get to the Rose Bowl? Absolutely. There is nothing like that in the pro game. And then the following week, Ohio State has to travel to Ann Arbor to face a Michigan squad that knows that they can restore a great deal of lost pride by upsetting the Buckeyes. Would the Redskins, let's say, want to beat the first-place Cowboys (as a Giants fan I cannot believe I typed those words) this season. Sure. Is it anywhere close to being the same as the Michigan-OSU level of emotion? Not by a mile.

Which gets back to Thamel's main argument that by not having a playoff system the college game is eliminating suspense from the end of the regular season…umm on the off years that teams pull away from the pack. That the Iowa-OSU game would be more important if the two teams were not just playing for the conference title and BCS game berth but for a shot at a playoff where they could possibly win the whole thing. But, of course, everyone is knocking the Big Ten this season. So the Big Ten's fight for a potential playoff spot would be the equivalent of this season's AFC West battle between San Diego and Denver--that is, two decent teams who do not look to be as good as some other AFC teams. Or it would if the two teams played each other in December, which they do not. In fact, San Diego's last six games are against non AFC West opponents. How stupid is that?

While a playoff system would cheapen the regular season, the main argument against it is economics. First of all you would have to have a 16-team system as there would be no way to determine at large teams fairly in an 8-team system. With eight teams the winners of the ACC, Big East, Big Ten, Big Twelve, Pac Ten and SEC would eat up six spots. How would you then determine the remaining two spots when, using this season as an example, you would have too many deserving teams to choose from (Boise, TCU, the SEC title game loser, etc.)? So, let's go with a 16-team playoffs with the lesser bowls being used as sites for playoff games. But that would mean that the teams from up north would have a huge disadvantage as they would be playing on the road throughout the playoffs. But more importantly, how could they fill the seats for these games? Right now the Outback Bowl grabs teams from the Big Ten and SEC and gives their fans a month to book flights, hotel rooms and rental cars for a game played when they have off from work in a place where they would want to spend a winter vacation. Now you would be telling fans of the Iowa-Ohio State game that they would play December 12 in Orlando and if they win they will play the following weekend in Dallas and then the following weekend in Pasadena. Apart from some very wealthy folks who would have to have a lot of free time, it would not work. It somewhat works for hoops, but the arenas, which do not always sell out, are much smaller and the NCAA has teams play in the same site for two games. That works in basketball where you can play twice in three days. Giving some teams home games would be good for attendance, but bad for both the visitors and the current bowl system. If Oregon hosted three to four playoff games they would be a favorite for the national title. Having to win on the road for the month of December would make it nearly impossible for the Ducks to win. And, of course, their getting a home game in round one as the Pac Ten winner while Boise would have to go on the road will get Senator Hatch and his ilk all fired up again.

So for anyone unable to be excited by the rest of this college football season, I say good riddance to you. There are plenty of fans glad to take your tickets.