When the letters BCS are combined, few good things can be said. The controversial system for deciding the teams in the national championship bowl has come under nothing but criticism since its inception four years ago.
The Bowl Championship Series computer rankings are the brain child of former Southeastern Conference Commissioner Roy Kramer. It is no coincidence that Kramer is one of the few people who applaud the system.
The BCS was made to combat the problem of split national champions, which was the case in 1997 when Michigan and Nebraska split the national title. While fans are willing to stomach co-conference champions, the idea of two teams tying for the top spot in the country is generally unacceptable. Enter the BCS.
The BCS is a computer ranking system that takes into account total records, rankings in both the Associated Press and the USA Today's Coaches Poll, strength of schedule, victories over ranked teams, margin of victory, and also the opinion of specific writers. At the end of the regular season the BCS ranking will decide which teams, according to its formula, deserve to play in the national championship bowl. The top two teams will meet in the Fiesta, Sugar, Orange or Rose Bowl, which alternate the national championship game.
In theory, each of the last four championship bowls should have featured the No. 1 and No. 2 college football teams in the nation. One team should have won and been crowned national champions with no reason for post-season debate. And while the last four championship games did produce a winner that was crowned national champion, the post-season debate was as furious as ever.
The first showcase of the BCS, the 1999 Fiesta Bowl, witnessed Tennessee defeating Florida State. The top two teams played, so when Tennessee knocked off the Seminoles, no debate followed. The 2000 Sugar Bowl, however, was not as simple. when Florida State took on Virginia Tech. Nebraska fans complained that they should have been put in the national championship over second ranked Virginia Tech.
In the 2001 Orange Bowl, the BCS computers produced Florida State as the opponent for undefeated Oklahoma. Fans of the Miami Hurricanes were livid as their team, with only one loss, had been the only team to beat Florida State that season. Nevertheless, the BCS ranked Florida State ahead, denying the Hurricanes a chance to compete for the national championship.
In the following year, Roy Kramer and his brain trust decided to change the BCS formula. For instance, margin of victory would not count for as much, because it appears that coaches were purposefully running up the score on lesser opponents. Miami fans were once again incensed when they discovered that with the new formula, the Hurricanes would have played in the Orange Bowl the previous year instead of Florida State.
The most notable cry against the BCS came as a result of last year's national championship in the Rose Bowl. Miami was entrenched at No. 1 and Oregon and Nebraska were in the running for No. 2. Both teams had made it through the season with only one loss, the difference being that the Cornhuskers' one loss had kept them from their conference championship. While logic would say that the Pac-10 champions were more deserving than the Big 12 runners up, the BCS computers did not and Oregon was sent to the Fiesta Bowl to play, ironically, Big 12 champion Colorado.
Every year there is a greater call for the BCS to end. Many suggest implementing a playoff system; the only recognized way to truly determine a deserving national champion. There isn't another football league in existence that operates without a playoff and the arguments from BCS designers against a college version are weak at best.
Arguments exist that a playoff would cut into student-athletes' study time and pose a greater risk for injury and/or exhaustion. While these are warranted concerns, they are not the true reasons the makers of the BCS do not want a playoff. The one thing the bowls, in their current form, do successfully is generate mass amounts of money. Higher-ups in the college football world are concerned more for their dollars than a true champion.
In theory, a playoff would not be difficult. The month of December is mostly clear of college football games, so an 8-to-16 team, 3-4 week playoff would fit in nicely. The top conference's champions would receive automatic bids and, in an act of appeasement, the BCS formula could even decide the remaining at-large bids. The BCS bowls could be used as the semifinal and championship locations. As this would only use three of the four bowls, a consolation game could be added between the losers of the semifinal if need be. The first round or two, depending on how many teams are selected, could be played in the Cotton Bowl, Citrus Bowl, Gator Bowl, etc. This would, of course, result in the elimination of some current bowl games; the Galleryfurniture.com and GMAC bowls will unlikely be missed.
The change to a playoff would have a myriad of benefits. The top two teams would make it to the championship and, bad officiating aside, fans would have no reason to complain.
