In the United States' judicial system, precedence serves an important role in determining how to handle the outcome of cases. The courts follow codified laws set forth by the government, draw back on the stipulations set forth by previous opinions, and even dissenting statements can be cited during a court's ruling later down the line. The College Football Playoff committee has its laws set in place, yet a severe lack of precedence. To compensate, strict adherence to the constitution has been the route through the first two years. This has arguably led to two major mistakes on determining the "top four teams" in college football, which is ultimately the purpose of the committee. Last year, it was Florida State. A 13-0 record, ACC championship, and the prestige of being defending champion vaulted the Seminoles into the playoff. However, after nearly a half dozen games won late in the fourth quarter against less than stellar opponents in conference play, Oregon embarrassed them. This year, it was Michigan State. A 12-1 mark, Big Ten championship, and wins over Oregon and Ohio State gave the Spartans a stellar resume. However, after escaping with a win over Michigan courtesy of the most fortuitous play in college football history and losing to 5-7 Nebraska, Alabama shut them out. A blowout game should be a rarity with the teams selected for the playoff should the committee be doing their job correctly. Was the writing on the wall with some of the events that took place during the regular season? Perhaps, with Vegas pegging the aforementioned winners by comfortable spreads.
So why should a move to eight happen? The College Football Playoff committee's website says the four team playoff is ideal because it, "preserves the best regular season in sports and protects America’s rich bowl tradition." Furthermore, "it goes just the right distance and respects the academic calendar while limiting the number of games played by student-athletes." There is a litany of issues with these rationales:
- The college football regular season will not be changed by doubling the amount of teams contending for a championship- Only about 6% of teams will qualify for a slot, far less than about every other league on Earth. It will only keep more fan bases invested throughout the fall and give even less merit to those complaining their team was left out as they were likely given plenty of opportunities during conference play to earn an opportunity.
- Rich bowl tradition? More bowls get added every year. Teams with losing records qualified for bowl games this years. Attendance at nearly 90% of bowl games is in the few hundreds, if not less. Essentially, every bowl not determining the champion is a consolation anyways. Tradition outside of the Rose Bowl is dead.
- Respects the academic calendar? First games can be played the third Saturday in December. Most years, the first bowl games are played then anyways. The second and third fall into their current positions on the calendar. It baffled me and nearly insulted me the website thought this defense was reasonable.
- The student athlete label is nothing more than an a redundantly failed, borderline oxymoronic defense to the intentions of the NCAA. Rescheduling final exams isn't a problem for myself in many of my courses. I'm sure eight universities wouldn't have an issue with accommodating their football players through this process. Especially if it leads to higher interest in enrolling in their university after a postseason run in one of collegiate athletics' two biggest sports.
- Safety is the only respectable defense against playing an additional game. There was a major motion picture made about one of the sport's biggest health epidemics. But with two weeks off in between the final three playoff games, there would be an increased amount of recovery time compared to the regular season.
As for the impossibility of selecting the top four teams, look no further than the headlines and discussions that have taken place about college football this week. The result of a bowl game apparently determines about 95% of the perception on whether a team's season was a success or a failure. Three weeks ago, the consensus was the selection committee selected the top four teams without flaw. On social media, analysts are now proclaiming Clemson, Alabama, Stanford, and Ohio State were the top four teams this season. Michigan State and Iowa are proof the Big Ten will live on in irrelevancy until the end of days. Oklahoma served as another chapter in the age old narrative about the lack of anything resembling defense existing in the Big 12.
Postseason play in sports determines whether a team wins a championship or not, and as a result, it determines the legacy of that year's team. But to the extent of one bowl game erasing the importance of the previous 12 or 13 games in college football is almost laughable. All three teams had fantastic seasons. Nothing should be taken away from them. Suggesting they didn't belong in the playoff or playoff conversation after their final game of the season is insulting to the players. Teams have poor showings all the time, and for the Spartans, Hawkeyes, and Sooners, they just so happened to suffer the consequences in the most paramount game of their seasons. One of those consequences should not be a label of overrated from the sports media, but sadly that's not the case.
The funny things is, you won't see this line of thinking in any other sport. Should the Panthers or Broncos lose their first playoff game, credit will be given to the winning team on an incredible performance. It would be asinine to label either Carolina or Denver as fraudulent teams. The same thing goes for playoff series in the MLB, NBA, or NHL. Why not college football? My best guess is conference pride, exuberated most audibly by fans of the schools in the SEC, but seen at a level in all corners of the country. Conference bowl records suddenly become the most important measuring stick of an entire season. Yet again, to have such sweeping conclusions drawn from one week of the season is severely statistically flawed, but for some reason, the competition annually rages on. You won't see Ravens fans supporting a Steelers' run to the Super Bowl for AFC North pride. You won't see Red Sox fans rooting for the Yankees to win another world series for the AL East. But for some unexplainable reason, you bet it matters if Nebraska beats UCLA and Auburn beats Memphis in a third tier bowl game. College football fans, we ought to be better than this. Let's stop practicing this personally unfathomable way of thinking and respect the players on our teams. (Expanding the playoff officially kills multiple birds with one stone)
The criterion used to rank teams by the committee won't change. There's no better objective procedure out there. However, with only room for four teams, a Power Five conference champion will continue to be left out. Last year, as a Buckeye fan, I would've been terrified should Ohio State have been matched up against TCU, one of the Big 12's co-champion. This year, I'm sure Clemson or Alabama fans wouldn't want to defend Christian McCaffrey University, the Pac 12 champions. At the end of the day, that's why the amount of teams the committee can put into field needs to double as soon as possible. Both teams deserved the right to play for a championship. They might get blown out like the 2014 Seminoles or 2015 Spartans, but depriving them of an opportunity is highway robbery. TCU (and Baylor, the other conference co-champion) and Stanford have legitimate gripes because of the four team model. Teams ranked #9 in the final ranking likely would not have nearly as much of a justifiable claim. Five conference champions and three wildcard teams. It sounds too easy. If you're not sold, just take a look at the matchups we were deprived of by not having this format:
(1) Clemson vs. (8) Notre Dame: A rematch of one of the best games of the college football season? Sign me up. Who knows how that plays out in monsoon free conditions.
(2) Alabama vs. (7) Ohio State: A rematch of the 2014 semifinal. The two teams with the most NFL Draft talent. Saban versus Meyer again.
(3) Michigan State vs. (6) Stanford: Old school football at its finest. Pac 12 champ vs. Big Ten champ. The Rose Bowl as it was intended.
(4) Oklahoma vs. (5) Iowa: Heartland battle between two contrasting styles.
Subjectively ranking one conference champion ahead of another needs to be eliminated. Many believe the committee has messed this up through the first two years of the playoff already. Who knows how many more times this mistake will be made in the years going forward if the magic number remains at four. I do know, however, that every year well grounded complaints about the committee's selection will be preached after the conclusion of the bowl games. Erase this pressure, give fans more football, and allow more programs the chance to participate in the chase for a championship.
If this circulates to every corner of the Internet and a high ranking official of the NCAA ends up reading my thoughts and the feelings of so many others? Ignore everything else. Except the line below:
Current Format: $$$$$$ for you. Eight Team Format: $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ for you.
J. Nave
Postseason play in sports determines whether a team wins a championship or not, and as a result, it determines the legacy of that year's team. But to the extent of one bowl game erasing the importance of the previous 12 or 13 games in college football is almost laughable. All three teams had fantastic seasons. Nothing should be taken away from them. Suggesting they didn't belong in the playoff or playoff conversation after their final game of the season is insulting to the players. Teams have poor showings all the time, and for the Spartans, Hawkeyes, and Sooners, they just so happened to suffer the consequences in the most paramount game of their seasons. One of those consequences should not be a label of overrated from the sports media, but sadly that's not the case.
The funny things is, you won't see this line of thinking in any other sport. Should the Panthers or Broncos lose their first playoff game, credit will be given to the winning team on an incredible performance. It would be asinine to label either Carolina or Denver as fraudulent teams. The same thing goes for playoff series in the MLB, NBA, or NHL. Why not college football? My best guess is conference pride, exuberated most audibly by fans of the schools in the SEC, but seen at a level in all corners of the country. Conference bowl records suddenly become the most important measuring stick of an entire season. Yet again, to have such sweeping conclusions drawn from one week of the season is severely statistically flawed, but for some reason, the competition annually rages on. You won't see Ravens fans supporting a Steelers' run to the Super Bowl for AFC North pride. You won't see Red Sox fans rooting for the Yankees to win another world series for the AL East. But for some unexplainable reason, you bet it matters if Nebraska beats UCLA and Auburn beats Memphis in a third tier bowl game. College football fans, we ought to be better than this. Let's stop practicing this personally unfathomable way of thinking and respect the players on our teams. (Expanding the playoff officially kills multiple birds with one stone)
The criterion used to rank teams by the committee won't change. There's no better objective procedure out there. However, with only room for four teams, a Power Five conference champion will continue to be left out. Last year, as a Buckeye fan, I would've been terrified should Ohio State have been matched up against TCU, one of the Big 12's co-champion. This year, I'm sure Clemson or Alabama fans wouldn't want to defend Christian McCaffrey University, the Pac 12 champions. At the end of the day, that's why the amount of teams the committee can put into field needs to double as soon as possible. Both teams deserved the right to play for a championship. They might get blown out like the 2014 Seminoles or 2015 Spartans, but depriving them of an opportunity is highway robbery. TCU (and Baylor, the other conference co-champion) and Stanford have legitimate gripes because of the four team model. Teams ranked #9 in the final ranking likely would not have nearly as much of a justifiable claim. Five conference champions and three wildcard teams. It sounds too easy. If you're not sold, just take a look at the matchups we were deprived of by not having this format:
(1) Clemson vs. (8) Notre Dame: A rematch of one of the best games of the college football season? Sign me up. Who knows how that plays out in monsoon free conditions.
(2) Alabama vs. (7) Ohio State: A rematch of the 2014 semifinal. The two teams with the most NFL Draft talent. Saban versus Meyer again.
(3) Michigan State vs. (6) Stanford: Old school football at its finest. Pac 12 champ vs. Big Ten champ. The Rose Bowl as it was intended.
(4) Oklahoma vs. (5) Iowa: Heartland battle between two contrasting styles.
Subjectively ranking one conference champion ahead of another needs to be eliminated. Many believe the committee has messed this up through the first two years of the playoff already. Who knows how many more times this mistake will be made in the years going forward if the magic number remains at four. I do know, however, that every year well grounded complaints about the committee's selection will be preached after the conclusion of the bowl games. Erase this pressure, give fans more football, and allow more programs the chance to participate in the chase for a championship.
If this circulates to every corner of the Internet and a high ranking official of the NCAA ends up reading my thoughts and the feelings of so many others? Ignore everything else. Except the line below:
Current Format: $$$$$$ for you. Eight Team Format: $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ for you.
J. Nave
No comments:
Post a Comment