AJC > Sports > Columnists > Archives > 2006 > September > 08 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USCollege football doesn’t need playoff
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Terence Moore
Those still whining over the lack of a playoff system in college football haven’t been paying attention. We’re entering the second week of the season, and we’ve already had the yearly slugging match between heavyweights Miami and Florida State. Not only that, Notre Dame had to prove its worth as a title contender by surviving punches and counterpunches in Georgia Tech’s hostile ring.
Added Dick Bestwick, among the all-time wisemen in sports, including a stint as an assistant athletics director at the University of Georgia, “Here [Saturday night], we’ve got Ohio State at Texas playing. That’s pretty darn big. Penn State is playing at Notre Dame [Saturday], and that’s pretty darn big. They’re all involved in a playoff right there. They [the whiners] just don’t get it.”
No, they don’t. Even beyond the fact that the Bowl Championship Series is a somewhat flawed but mostly adequate way of determining a national champion, college football is doing just fine, thank you. We needn’t go further than what we’ve already alluded to, and that is, given the do-or-die, tension-filled nature of the sport nearly every week, more than a few top-15 teams have several unofficial playoff games built into their schedule. Oklahoma versus Texas. West Virginia versus Louisville. Virginia Tech versus Miami. Nebraska versus Iowa State. Cal versus Arizona State. Georgia versus Florida. Notre Dame versus everybody. LSU versus Auburn. Tennessee versus Alabama.
I mean, what do you want? And we haven’t even mentioned the riveting matchups each November during Rivalry Weekend, ranging from Columbus, Ohio, or Ann Arbor, Mich., to The Flats or Between the Hedges. In other words, to all of those whiners: Just sit back, enjoy the wonderful ride from now through those other unofficial playoff games called conference championship games and shut up.
“Every year, there is another half dozen to a dozen schools increasing the size of their stadium, putting on new sky suites, new sky boxes, so I have to believe that you’re already doing something right in college football [with no playoffs],” said Bestwick, now retired in Athens. Just so you know, according to NCAA statistics, attendance at the Division 1-A level of football has increased during each of the past 12 years — you know, without a playoff system. “If attendance was plunging, and if they weren’t building all of these kind of things, then you’d have to look and say, ‘Well, maybe, regarding the lack of a playoff system, we don’t have the right model here.’ “
Instead, it is the right model that showed its worth last weekend by exposing Cal as a fraud. After enjoying the summer with West Virginia as a chic favorite to come out of mostly nowhere to contend for greatness, the Golden Bears spent their first game becoming the Tarnished Bears after getting smacked around Neyland Stadium by Tennessee. It also is the right model that likely will turn West Virginia into this year’s Auburn.
Maybe you remember the silly furor over Auburn missing the BCS championship game after going undefeated in 2004. Well, here’s the rest of the story: Southern Cal and Oklahoma also were undefeated, and they were ranked higher than Auburn, and they rightfully played for the title. Plus, neither Southern Cal nor Oklahoma had anything resembling the Division I-AA likes of Louisiana-Monroe, The Citadel or Louisiana Tech on their schedule.
Auburn did. As for West Virginia this season, all you need to know is that in addition to the Mountaineers facing mighty East Carolina, UConn and Marshall, they are playing Washington. Not the University of Washington or Washington State, but Eastern Washington.
What a waste, especially since the NCAA went to a permanent 12-game schedule this season to give teams more of a chance to add an unofficial playoff game. Or at least something in the vicinity.
“Even better, any conference that doesn’t have a playoff at the end of the year, then the winner of each of those conferences should have to play each other in a game at the end of the season before the bowl games start in December,” Bestwick said. “That would shake, rattle and roll that thing, too. In those situations, it won’t change what bowl game the winner or loser goes to, except when it comes to the national championship game.”
Then Bestwick paused, chuckled, before saying, “As long as I’m living, there will be at least one anti-playoff guy around.”
Make that two.
Permalink | Comments (21) | Post your comment | Categories: Tech / ACC, Terence Moore, UGA / SEC
Comments
By Terry
September 8, 2006 09:08 PM | Link to this
Terrance,
You have your opinion, and Bestwick is brilliant because he agrees with you. Doesn’t say much for Bestwick does it?
North Carolina and Duke play each other, so there is no need for a college basketball playoff. Baseball plays what 30+ games a year? No need for an NCAA World Series either. Div 1-AA has a playoff and they have a champion. With your astute abilities, you need to go talk to the University presidents and help them see the light for those sports as well.
No, let’s just keep things the way they are, change is not good. You might lose a couple of columns each year.
Oh yes, why exactly did the number of games go from 11 to 12? Probably should have kept it at 8 or so like it was in the 1920’s.
PS I understand there is an opening in South Bend for their student newspaper, maybe you should consider applying for it.
By Jim
September 8, 2006 09:39 PM | Link to this
Terrance, You actually argue against a playoff and then talk down the programs that play easy games out of conference. The schools, especially from the SEC, feel that they have to play those easier games in order to have any shot at the national championship. Making it through the conference schedule in good shape is a challenge enough. Schools from all conferences and all over the nation would be much more likely to schedule tough teams that make much better matchups if they believed that another loss or two could be overcome by simply winning their conference and getting a shot at a small playoff. By the way, Auburn’s other games in 2004, mostly tough SEC rivals, and how they dominated in most of them more than made up for the easier games. Oklahoma wouldn’t have may it through the same schedule without a loss or in such an impressive way. Plus, nobody mentions that Oklahoma “stole” one of Auburn’s opponents prior to the season and The Citadel was a last resort for finding an eleventh game. The media never mentions that little tidbit.
By GINGER
September 8, 2006 10:24 PM | Link to this
I WONDER HOW NOTRE DAME FELT BEING GIVEN A GAME BY THEIR BIG TEN REF’S. THEY DID NOT WIN IT WAS GIVEN TO THEM AND THAT IS SAD. IF JOHNSON WAS NOT BEING HELD BACK THEY COULD WIN A BUNCH OF GAMES. THEY ONLY HURT THEMSELVES WHEN THEY DO THIS. TECH FAN
By Howard
September 8, 2006 10:33 PM | Link to this
Division 1-A coaches and presidents do not want a playoff for the following reasons: 1)you can luck up with your schedule and finish number one or two or three and not be that good, 2) Division 1-A coaches do not want the pressure of having to coach their team through a 16-team playoff…not with the salaries many of them earn, and 3)many of the colleges do not want to miss out on the money all these worthless bowls can bring them. And please spare the garbage about extra playoff games hurting the student-athletes…as it is now, these schools are playing 12 and 13 games.
By Mike
September 8, 2006 11:11 PM | Link to this
You say the reason Oklahoma and USC deserved to play for the title is because they were ranked higher. Wow. What insight. If you recall, they both started the season ranked higher. Yet you say the BCS is mostly adquate way of determing a champion. Surely you thought USC deserved to play in the BCS championship instead of Oklahoma or LSU because they were ranked higher. I notice that situation was not mentioned by you. I suppose that is because it doesn’t coincide with your opinion that Oklahoma deserved to play USC instead of Auburn.
By srschirm
September 9, 2006 12:13 AM | Link to this
Make that three, Terence. Good article, as always. Go Tech!
By Michael
September 9, 2006 12:15 AM | Link to this
Once again there is another bowl supporter without a bit of evidence at why these games would be so much worse if there was a playoff with 8-16 teams. Predictably, Terence goes into the whole “Auburn played a weaker schedule” argument. Says who? Some lame computer? When three teams have perhaps one common opponent, there is absolutely no way to compare them. Apples and oranges.
Another fact (bowl supporters hate these): In 2002, Miami and Ohio State went undefeated playing the 19th and 20th rated schedules according to the BCS formula. Georgia had one loss with the #5 schedule. Ohio State didn’t even play the second-best team in their conference.
The whole system is a sham. There’s nothing more boring than having a bunch of writers and coaches appoint two teams as “the best” when Mack Brown can’t even remember who he friggin voted for. Open the doors and let the teams decide who is #1.
By brewerfaninATL
September 9, 2006 12:26 AM | Link to this
GINGER, listen up and pay attention: Notre Dame is NOT in the Big Ten! I don’t care that they play in Indiana which is in the middle of Big Ten country, fact is, they are NOT in that conference! Also, excuses are for losers and the refs did not lose the game for Tech…Chan Gailey did by refusing to involve Johnson in the 2nd half game plan. Why don’t you learn a thing or two about football before posting!
By Gary Christopher
September 9, 2006 09:25 AM | Link to this
I totally agree with the theme of your article. You usually hit the issue head on. However, your reference to West Virginia in the article should be asteriked with a “courtesy of ACC greed” qualifier. Yes, I am an undergrad alumni from WVU and thoroughly enjoyed the whipping and crow that a certain Georgia Bulldog defender had to eat after Steve Slaton blew by Mr. B [the Bulldog defensive back with the big mouth] in the Nokia Sugar Bowl last January. Having said that, WVU’s schedule IS a waste this year. If they keep winning and playing the way I believe this team is going to play [they have kids with their heads screwed on right] the Whine will become defining about all the cupcakes they have on their schedule. No one can deny that. The real question is “Why”? Don’t compare them to Auburn. Auburn had a complete choice in the matter of who they scheduled. WVU did not because the greed of the ACC and the powers that be in that conference recruited and swayed Miami, VPI, and Boston College away from the Big East and left a serious hole in WVU’s schedule two years ago. Some teams have been added to WVU’s schedule for the future in Florida State and so forth, but quality schools were hard to come by during this interim period. The governor of the State of West Virginia forced the Marshall game. One team backed out in February of 2006 and who do you get to play at that late date at HOME??? They were fortunate to be playing Eastern Washington. Penn State won’t play us even though they did for years because of their commitments to the Big Ten. Boston College won’t, despite a long and storied history, because of their need to play ACC schools and their own greed for home games. Miami and Virginia Tech likewise….. There hasn’t been enough written about the core issue of greed that instigated that transaction. This is not one of the healthy aspects of College Football today along with soaring coach’s salaries [where did the love of the game go that guys like Don Nehlen and other Hall of Famers espoused?].
You are correct. WVU will not play for the national championship even if they are fortunate to win all their games and play with a style that is enjoyable to watch with kids who deserve to be rewarded- that is they think more about team than self. If Auburn or LSU and Ohio State go undefeated then they will surely deserve it based on strength of schedule. However, the issue will not be that WVU backed away on their own choosing. Teams that they would love to play this year and did for many years left them high and dry for $ signs to a conference commissioner and group of Presidents that lost on credibility in my mind as institutions of integrity.
So, later in the year, when the bandwagon has formed in criticizing their schedule…and I can hear the distant howl already…..at least call the spade a spade like you normally do.
By rolheath
September 9, 2006 10:22 AM | Link to this
ditto long live the debates who’se best? my team of course!
and bring back the tie, no more 2 or 3 overtimes
By Ron
September 9, 2006 11:01 AM | Link to this
Wow, I actually agree with Terrence Moore for once. We already have enough “champions” to go around. We have a Rose Bowl champion, a Sugar Bowl champion, etc. The problem with a playoff system is this: You take the top teams (64 in basketball), and make them play elimination games until only one ends its season with a win. The other 63 all finish with a bitter, disappointing loss. For many, there will be no tomorrow. Remember, these are college kids. The bowls we already have are colorful, exciting and steeped in tradition. A lot of players get to end their football careers on a high note, not just those from only one school, as the playoff proponents would have it. I keep hearing “fans” say, “we deserve a national champion, decided on the field.” Why? What about the players? Leave the system alone. Well said, Terrence.
By BirdDawg
September 9, 2006 01:47 PM | Link to this
Terence Moore, you are an idiot.
Auburn was undeserving in 2004?
Let me ask you something, Fool: you actually believe that getting through the Pac 1 plus 9 is the same as getting through the SEC? Or that the Big 2 plus 10 is the same as the SEC?
If you do, then you truly are more ignorant then you’ve ever let on in your ridiculous columns.
You know nothing of College Football, Terence Moore. Not one damn thing.
By MRDux
September 9, 2006 01:59 PM | Link to this
Terrance,
So your reason for not wanting a playoff system is….?
10) College football season is long enough and we need to devote more time for hockey.
9) I’ve got to make my preseason soccer picks and you know how much time that takes.
8) Notre Dame might not make it very far in the playoff system. How embarrasing could that be?
7) I wouldn’t get to vote my preference for #1 based on the preseason team picture.
6) “I’m happy with the current situation” would make for too short of a column.
5) I’m really a big lacrosse fan and had to write something / anything to keep getting a paycheck.
4) I don’t understand what a playoff system is.
3) Dick Bestwick really wrote this column for me.
2) I get my thrill by irritating AJC readers.
And the top reason is: 1) The Rose Bowl parade is the best part of the college football season.
By RxDawg
September 9, 2006 02:10 PM | Link to this
I will agree that college football has the best regular season because it puts so much emphasis on wining the games. However, the national championships are fake. They are decided by the media and that is flat out not right. Settle it on the field. Who wouldn’t have wanted to see USC and AU a couple of years ago. Or LSU and USC the year before that. Just play the games. Its very doable. If there was a 4 team or even 8 team playoff at the end of the year it would not take away from our regular season. There would still be a HUGE emphasis to win the games cause its pretty tough to be ranked in the top 8. It’s whats best for the sport. Everyone knows this, and it should be done. It will be done eventually.
By TechFan
September 9, 2006 02:45 PM | Link to this
The reason that college football doesn’t (and shouldn’t) have a playoff format is simply because of economics. Under the current system, each year a dozen or more teams can claim they ‘would have’ been the national champion, if such a format existed. That sells tickets. It keeps the fat white alumni smoking the stogies and writing the checks. These are the same checks that Mr. Moore cashes each week. Why do you think he waddles when he walks.
By RxDawg
September 9, 2006 02:45 PM | Link to this
The best system I’ve heard is an 8 team playoff. Take the 6 winners of the BCS conferences plus 2 at large for the little guys and ND. Then the rest can still have the bowls. Will the music city bowl really mean anything less because of this?
By Randall
September 9, 2006 04:20 PM | Link to this
You are the most consistent writer AJC has…consistently ridiculous…consistently idiotic….consistently wrong! The only major sport not to have a playoff system to determine a true champion is college football. If you’re not ranked high enough to begin the season, say an Alabama out of the top 25, or a team even as low as Georgia starting at 15, has to count on EVERY team above them to lose at least once, maybe twice, while they have to run the table to even come close. A top 5 team can lose early in the year and still have a shot at winning it all. It’s all where you are in the polls. As has been pointed out time after time, a conference like the SEC beats up on each other while teams in other conferences play one or two tough games a year as they breeze through their schedule, ala USC, Notre Dame, Ohio State, to name a few. Northern sportwriters and a screwed up BCS system (or should I say BS) determine a national champion….and it’s right about 1 year out of ten…thats not enough….WE NEED A PLAYOFF SYSTEM!!!!!!!
By Randall
September 9, 2006 04:21 PM | Link to this
You are the most consistent writer AJC has…consistently ridiculous…consistently idiotic….consistently wrong! The only major sport not to have a playoff system to determine a true champion is college football. If you’re not ranked high enough to begin the season, say an Alabama out of the top 25, or a team even as low as Georgia starting at 15, has to count on EVERY team above them to lose at least once, maybe twice, while they have to run the table to even come close. A top 5 team can lose early in the year and still have a shot at winning it all. It’s all where you are in the polls. As has been pointed out time after time, a conference like the SEC beats up on each other while teams in other conferences play one or two tough games a year as they breeze through their schedule, ala USC, Notre Dame, Ohio State, to name a few. Northern sportwriters and a screwed up BCS system (or should I say BS) determine a national champion….and it’s right about 1 year out of ten…thats not enough….WE NEED A PLAYOFF SYSTEM!!!!!!!
By Coach
September 10, 2006 12:27 AM | Link to this
Your column is right on. It is ironic that with the exception of men’s basketball, all the other college playoffs that now take place are being subsidized by college football, which, we are told ad infinitum, is “the only major sport not to have a playoff system to determine a ‘true national champion.’” The goose is already laying enough golden eggs to support women’s sports and men’s minor sports, too. Don’t kill it to try to find more eggs.
By Whopper Dawg
September 10, 2006 12:58 AM | Link to this
As always you are a complete and total idiot, and coming from someone that calls himself Whopper Dawg that puts you in some very bad company.
Whopper Dawg
By BadgerDawg
September 10, 2006 02:05 AM | Link to this
Necessary: a college football playoff Unnecessary: Terence Moore at the AJC
On the positive side, I didn’t see any implication in the article that a playoff was racist. Baby steps, Terence, baby steps.