Wednesday, January 7, 2009

NMAA bracket could work for college football

Commentary by John Gale

It seems every year, the Bowl Championship Series either completely gets the matchup in the National Championship Game wrong or at least proves ineffectual at determining a true national champion.

The most egregious example was in 2003, when No. 1 USC was left out, allowing radio talk show host Jim Rome to make the observation about how ridiculous it was that "No. 2 and No. 3 are playing for the right to be No. 1."

That debacle led to the one thing the BCS was supposed to prevent--a split national championship. Of course, the BCS apologists continue to defend a broken system and claim that the controversy is "good for college football." Yeah, right.

The latest mess features the only undefeated team in the country, Utah, being left out of the title game despite the Utes' four wins over top 25 teams. Utah, the No. 6 team in the BCS rankings, also beat Oregon State, the only team to beat USC.

If that wasn't enough, Utah just got done taking care of No. 4 Alabama in the Sugar Bowl, winning handily, 31-17. The Crimson Tide had been No. 1 until a loss to Florida in the SEC Championship Game.

And if Utah can do that to Alabama, who can say that they couldn't beat Florida or Oklahoma, the two teams that will be playing in the National Championship Game on Thursday night?

And for that matter, who can say that USC or Texas couldn't beat the Sooners or Gators, given the chance?

Alabama was really good this year, and I didn't give the Utes much of a chance to beat the Tide.

But that's the thing about sports--you never know what will happen in a game, despite what the matchup looks like on paper.

And that's the main reason that Division I-A college football needs a playoff. Most people didn't think Utah could beat Alabama, but the Utes came out with a strong game plan, jumping on the Tide early by scoring three touchdowns in the first 11 minutes.

Alabama made a charge, but Utah weathered the storm, quite a convincing victory for a Mountain West Conference school.

After watching the Sugar Bowl, I have a hard time disputing Utah coach Kyle Whittingham's argument that the Utes are the best team in the country, regardless of what happens in the National Championship Game on Thursday.

But without a playoff system, we'll never know, which is why college football can't be considered a true sport.

After all, every other sport at just about every level determines its champion on the field of play through a playoff.

Put aside for a moment that both the NFL and the other divisions of NCAA football have playoff systems and consider that even New Mexico high school football gets it right.

In fact, the NMAA has exactly the right format for college football, a 12-team playoff. The NFL also has a 12-team playoff, though it functions a little differently.

Sixteen teams are probably too many for a college football playoff, and eight teams are probably too few (though I would take even a four-team playoff over nothing at all), considering there are over 100 Division I football teams.

A 12-team playoff is just the right number of teams, and more importantly, a 12-team playoff features bye weeks for the top four teams, which is an essential reward for the teams who have had the best seasons.

The Belen football team ripped off eight straight wins to finish the regular season 9-1. The Eagles were one of the four best teams in Class 4A and earned the right to rest up for a week before taking on what turned out to be Silver in the quarterfinals.

Likewise, my beloved Pittsburgh Steelers played one of the toughest schedules in NFL history and dealt with a shaky offensive line and even shakier offensive play calling by either head coach Mike Tomlin or offensive coordinator Bruce Arians in goal line situations.

That the Steelers managed to go 12-4 against that murderous schedule is an accomplishment that deserves to be rewarded with a week off and a home playoff game.

In a college bracket, the top four teams get byes, the next eight teams would get in, with at least one coming from a non-BCS conference like the Mountain West or the Western Athletic conferences.

The teams seeded from No. 5 to No. 8 would host the teams seeded from No. 9 to No. 12 in the opening round.

After that, the four BCS bowls (Rose, Orange, Sugar and Fiesta) would host the remaining games with each hosting either two quarterfinals or one semifinal in alternating years.

Also, one of the bowls hosting a semifinal would host the national championship game, with the title game rotating to be played at each of the bowls once every four years.

Ideally, it might be nice for the higher-seeded teams to host these games, but let's be realistic--the big bowl games won't give up their money-making contests for nothing.

Another way to keep those running the current system happy is to let the less prestigious bowls continue to hold their games.

A playoff system would undoubtedly make a ton of money, much more than what the current system makes.

But a playoff would mean that the big conferences would have to turn control over to the NCAA, and too many university presidents in those conferences oppose a playoff because they would rather have near-complete control over a smaller pie than lose control over a much bigger one.

So that means that we may never get a playoff, and a great team like Utah may never have a chance at the title.

My alma mater, Brigham Young University, was the last team outside a power conference to win the national championship in Division I-A football, back in 1984. I was 2 years old.

And unless a playoff system is implemented, the '84 Cougars will likely be the last non-BCS conference team to win it all, even if there is a team like Utah that could win it if given the chance.

E-mail this story Printer-friendly version