Further deconstruction of the NFL-style playoff

College Football Cafeteria has continued to spirited dialogue we have created and it is becoming clear that, to probably no one's surprise, we simply have a difference of opinion in several aspects about what is good for the sport of college football. There is nothing wrong with that. However, while I understand that points he is making, I'm not sure he is grasping the points I am making. Missing this perspective is not surprising and certainly understandable considering my viewpoint is probably in the minority and most other sports have playoffs. Getting people that have followed a playoff system all of their lives in multiple sports to comprehend a new and revolutionary way of determining a champion takes time and education. That is what I am trying to accomplish.

Silly pro-playoff arguments

Thanks to College Football Cafeteria for taking a look at and analyzing my blog. Unfortunately, his responses to some of the points I’ve brought up still do not justify a playoff. Some of the things he comments on were points that were not made by me, but other authors, and while I certainly will not put words in their mouth, I will counter with what I think is appropriate. His post is lengthy, but I will try to target his specific arguments and counter them.

Death to a Playoff: Chapters 2 and 3

Chapter 2 provides a brief account of the creation of the BCS, in part through the eyes of legendary Vince Dooley. While most fans know that the Bowl Alliance was created and eventually transformed into the BCS, many are probably unaware of Dooley’s presentation to Roy Kramer, SEC Commissioner at the time, and his subsequent rejection of said presentation. The authors don’t go into detail about Dooley’s plan and how it would work, only that it involves 4 teams selected after January 1^st bowl games. While this chapter provides little in the way of factually discrediting the BCS/non-playoff idea, it is a nice history lesson.

Great anti-playoff points from the boys at CollegeFootballNews.com

To divert from the Death to the BCS posts just a bit, I couldn't help but include these tidbits from CollegeFootballNews.com to further deconstruct the playoff argument. Reading the Cavalcade of Whimsy today brought the main point of the anti-playoff argument to the forefront...you have to be really good and play really well all season to win the BCS Championship:

Death to a Playoff: Chapter 1

CHAPTER 1: The Plan

The first chapter broadly covers many topics, most of which are explored by later chapters, so I won't get into too much detail in this writing. The most significant part of the plan is indeed the most flawed. While I understand that inviting all the conference champions may be the “fair” thing to do, it is wrong for college football's postseason, and it is one piece of what is wrong with many current playoff systems. 

Death to a Playoff

I have recently finished reading the famed Death to the BCS and I am very impressed. The authors put together some good arguments, did a tremendous amount of research, and all readers will come away better informed and more knowledgeable about the sport of college football. However, when you look past the exaggerations and distortions, the case for a playoff is still unsuccessful. By cutting through the fluff and hyperbole and looking at the facts and history, it is evident that the current college football postseason model of a 2 team playoff is clearly a superior method in determining the champion of any season. While there may be room for improvements in the way the current BCS system selects its teams, the championship game that the BCS system produces is consistently a more accurate reflection of the season's 2 best teams than any other playoff system currently applied to other major sports in the US.