Death to a Playoff: Chapter 12

The authors do a good job of exposing the poorly run polling system in Chapter 12. While I don't think polls are a bad idea, I definitely agree that the current system could be vastly improved and probably needs to be completely reformed. If the BCS is going to include human polls in their system, they must do a better job of making the guidelines clear to each pollster and making sure the pollsters are actually closely following the season. Anything less is an insult to the sport, the universities and the fans.

Death to a Playoff: Chapter 11

The BCS uses computer rankings as a way to objectively rank teams according to their performance, without factoring in bias that is inherent in human rankings. This chapter focuses on the computer rankings that the BCS uses, and the authors do a fair job of describing the roots of the computer system, but do miss some key points. The chapter also unfortunately harps on the fact that the BCS has changed its formula 3 times, which should be viewed positively because it shows that they aren't blindly sticking with a formula if it is making mistakes.

Death to a Playoff: Chapter 10

We finally get to the main argument that proponents of the BCS cite the most often and that is the integrity of the regular season. Quite frankly, I expected more out of this chapter. The authors know that the sanctity of the regular season is the main point that the BCS folks turn to and they do a poor job of rebutting this argument. Probably because there is no sound argument for a playoff system that actually increases the importance and value of a regular season, but the authors try anyway. We are left with a comparison to the NFL that misses the point and we are presented with outdated problems that have already been corrected by the BCS.

Big playoffs aren't the answer

Unfortunately, College Football Cafeteria hasn't been able to comprehend that the BCS system of a 2 team playoff is better for college football. He's now claiming that Oregon is not a top-5 team, that it would be better if non-conference games didn't matter, and favors a playoff system similar to “everybody gets a trophy day” by rewarding teams with playoffs spots without having them earn it. I'm watching the VCU vs Butler NCAA basketball semifinal game, and while I like a good story and Cinderella as much as the next as the next guy, these 2 teams are not among the nation's best 4, or best 2, yet one of them will be playing in the finals and may win the championship, which would give them the championship for this NCAA basketball season. Why is it better to reward teams who get hot for 3 weeks as opposed to teams who play well all season long? This doesn't make any sense.