College Football

I'm finding it amusing that the very same sports commentators that complained about the computer rankings of the BCS polls a couple of years back are now complaining about the committee of experts that compiles the current top four for the college playoff system.

Right now, Clemson is ranked number ONE with a 10-0 record.

But then everything gets muddy. Alabama with a 9-1 record sits at number TWO, while undefeated Ohio State, Iowa, and Oklahoma State are at numbers 3, 5, and 6 with perfect 10-0 records!  Notre Dame has a 9-1 record, yet because of the committee selection process, they are still currently NUMBER 4 and IN the tournament.

Numbers 7-10 also have only one loss, and they think they belong in "the tournament of four" as well. So basically what you have are 10 deserving teams waiting for a committee to decide if you're good enough to be in the magical final four.

The new way to determine the top four, is at this point, far worse than the BCS's way of determining the top 2. The committee says they base it more on strength of schedule than record, which is fine, but you end up with undefeated teams that may not make it that way.

Thankfully there are conference championship games yet to play. For example, either Iowa or Ohio State will have at least one loss by the time the final four is selected. So things will probably get less muddy.

The problem? Notre Dame could conceivably get jumped at the end even if they win the rest of their games. If that's the case, how can they be number four right now?

Folks are already discussing a larger playoff  system which would include the top eight teams. One extra game would be added to the schedule of the top eight and they would play the first round of the playoffs immediately when the regular season ended while the final four teams would play around New Year's like always. Considering the college schedule already has more games because of  the revenue producing conference championship games, MOST think that this is a bad idea. That's a lot of games for college players to play each year.

There is no perfect system. The best would be a sudden death tournament that lasted the entire season with all the teams, where if you lost even ONE game you would be eliminated from contention from the championship game. That way, every single game would matter and a committee wouldn't have final say based on what of the individuals of a committee thought.

The best part of THAT system would be that teams with a light schedule wouldn't even be considered for the final two even if they finished the season undefeated. It would force great teams to have tough schedules.

Which was what the BCS system WAS.

Currently, it'll only get worse and more muddied as time goes on. And fans still won't realize how good the old system was.

I've been ranting on this for years, but even experts are starting to see the logic of the argument.