Playoffs or BCS…how about Poker?

By Hugo Guzman | Tuesday, November 15, 2005 | ( 0 )

Got something to say?

When there's a problem it's human nature to conjure up solutions. Whenever one seems to fit, the bandwagon better be large enough to support everyone jumping on. One such bandwagon is the idea of a College Football Playoff to replace the BCS. I hate to be the only naysayer on the planet, but I don't think it would solve a thing. Let me elaborate for those of you dropping your coffee cups and cursing me as a supporter of the current system.

No, I do not think the BCS is perfect. Anyone who doesn't see that pretty much doesn't follow college football, but let's get real for a second here. Right now, the biggest problem with the BCS process is the �odd man out" theory. For instance, last year an undefeated Auburn team got stuck in the Sugar Bowl while undefeated USC and undefeated Oklahoma battled, er, well at least one team battled in the Orange Bowl (USC embarrassed Oklahoma and the Big 12 in general with a 55-19 rout). Although Auburn coach Tommy Tubberville (may I suggest he start going by �Tom" as to not sound like a Disney character) bought his team �championship" rings, they had as much significance as those pictures you buy at Six Flags theme parks where you get your face superimposed on an issue of Sports Illustrated with the caption �world's greatest quarterback" written underneath. I'm not knocking the achievement, just making the point that an undefeated team did not get to compete for the title.

Or there was the LSU/USC/OU debacle of 2003, where the coaches and the media had USC ranked number one, but the mystery computers had them third, and the team everyone knew to be the best, had to waste an afternoon destroying Michigan in the Rose Bowl, only to split the title and have to hear LSU fans claiming a computer coronation and a crystal ball trophy (ADT) made them the �true champs."

The system is broke, but will a playoff fix it? I'm not convinced. Let's say we adopt the popular eight-team tournament and we knock off two non-conference games (let's say the ones where LSU plays UL-Lafayette, etc) and we just eliminate down to a champion. The problem won't get solved, it gets transferred from the debate of who's number two and number three to who's number eight and number nine. For me, it's harder to evaluate the one and two loss teams lurking around the bottom of the top ten than the top three teams. Let's take a look at this year to make my point.

Notre Dame is in 6th with two losses followed in succession by one-loss Virginia Tech, Alabama, Ohio State and Oregon. How do you pick seven and eight? Each of the one-loss teams lost to a top five opponent. Sure there would be a true champion at the end of the tourney, but if you are looking to end the debates of �what if", a playoff wouldn't solve it unless it was a sixty-four team tourney like NCAA basketball runs. That wouldn't work because the regular season would have to be roughly six games long, which is not enough to evaluate anything.

I know they say it's easier to rip an empire down than to build one, so in good conscience I must suggest something in its place. Let's keep the system the same, but let's eliminate the computers. Let's have a coach's poll and a media poll (none of this Harris hoopla) and let's have each member announce their rankings on ESPNews live. This way, any homer coaches or reporters would be held accountable immediately for their biases. When Mack Brown goes up and claims Texas is the best, let's see him say it. ESPNews is already struggling to have sports 24/7 (see Cold Pizza, ESPN Hollywood, and their unwatchable original movies), so why not add the human drama of pollsters lying to get their hometown teams to that special next level? It turns me on, that's for sure. I mean, it's not surprising that on ESPN.com when you check the results of the daily polls, which provide a geographic breakdown of what states voted for what, that in Heisman debates Texas goes to Vince Young, California to Reggie Bush, and Indiana to Brady Quinn. Let's watch this bias in action. You know it'd make good television.

If all else fails, perhaps we could give the top forty coaches twenty-five hundred dollar buy-ins to a World Series of College Coach Poker tournament in Vegas where everyone invited to the final table gets their team in tournament, and the top four places get home field in the first round, then the top two in the second round (if they win). The winner gets a bracelet, as usual. My predictions for the final table would be Mack Brown (he's from Texas and it's not called Texas Hold 'Em for nothing), Tommy Tubberville (good poker face claiming Auburn was national champion last year), Jeff Tedford (good game plans always), Charlie Weis (see Tedford), Pete Carroll (gotta like his chances after a 31 game win streak), Steve Spurrier (the ole ball coach might be a good ole poker player), Larry Coker (good at having a consistently good squad) and Frank Beamer (Beamer Ball translates to poker well with lots of folding).

According to my plan, we'd have USC, Texas, Virginia Tech, Auburn, Miami, Cal, the other USC (South Carolina) and Notre Dame in the playoffs. Big programs, big markets and big name coaches. Who cares who got left out?

Let's be honest. They should have come to me a long time ago.

Got something to say?