Death to a Playoff: Chapter 9

The misleading information runs rampant in this chapter. Most of the data from this chapter are taken completely out of context and void of any relevant comparison. They go on to use this misinformation to make completely baseless arguments, mainly that all teams load their schedules up with the easiest teams possible so that they can all go undefeated, because the only thing that matters to the BCS is won-loss record. This poorly constructed chapter full of weak arguments starts off with a sob story about how Michigan had to open their season in their newly renovated stadium against the eventual Big East champion who had won at least 8 games in the 3 seasons leading up to 2010, but the only information we receive about the UConn Huskies is that they recently made the transition to Division I-A football and that they play in a small stadium. Both of these facts imply that the Huskies are much weaker than they actually are. It only gets worse from there.

Death to a Playoff: Chapter 8

The authors provide a cute anecdote about the USC Trojans claiming they were going for a 3-peat in 2005 while LSU fans were wondering how they could make this claim when USC did not win the championship in 2003. They then weakly try to connect how USC not making it to the BCS Championship game merits expanding the college football postseason to a bloated 16 team playoff system. Unfortunate as it may be that USC was left out, this does not warrant a playoff system to include 8 times as many teams as the current system. Instead, an appropriate change was made by the BCS placing more emphasis on human voters, and the system remains better than any 16 team playoff could be.