Political Action Committees in College Football
The current college football post season consists of a bowl championship series otherwise known as the BCS. The BCS is a series of 32 bowl games that college teams compete in. These range from random no name bowls like the Papajohns.com bowl to the BCS National Championship, where the number one and two teams in the nation play for the top honor in college football. The BCS system is often criticized because of its complex system of computer rankings, and coaches polls that often end unfairly for good teams. Recent outcries and debates have drawn the attention from Washington.
A group of college football fans have recently formed a Political Action Committee (PAC) to push for a college football playoff system much like the NFL. The fans are hoping that the influence of Congress will pressure college officials to make a change. "What we wanted to do was put together an effective way to ratchet up the political pressure." One of the PAC's founders Matthew Sanderson told the Omaha World-Herald.
Although a playoff system would be the fairest way to determine a national champion, the bowl system creates 32 more games in one season to create revenue for small towns and cities that the games are played in. The Chancellor of the University of Nebraska and chairman of the BCS Presidential Oversight Committee, Harvey Pearlman, said that the BCS was one of the best things to happen to college football. "It modifies the traditional conference alignment with particular bowls to create the opportunity for the No. 1 and No. 2 ranked teams to meet in a bowl game, while preserving the bowl system to the benefit of 64 universities and many cities around the country," states Pearlman. College football players and fans also enjoy the bowl system because it allows teams that may not be the best in the country to get their chance at some postseason action. No matter how the post season is run, there will always be a love for college football within many fans hearts.
HUSKERFAN13
4 comments:
I think the BCS bowl system should also remain because of a few reasons. For one thing a playoff system in college football would be nearly impossible as college teams don't play over the winter break. It would be unfair to have a playoff system that would take up students winter breaks because of football. Students also need breaks during the December season because of the end-of-semester exams given at this time. The option of having a playoff season after winter break would also not work very well for the teams as this would extend for another month through January prolonging the season to the length of a pro football season about. Student athletes can wait till they get to the pros if they do to devote their lives to football.
The BCS system is definitally pretty confusing. I follow the Huskers but not a whole lot else. I agree that a playoff system would be less confusing, but at the same time I think that it would miss some of what the current system has. It does not seem entirely fair that a team should be judged purely on whether they win or loose. I think that the current system does a good job of looking at how a team did within the game and how they've improved throughout the season. I don't know that a pure playoff system would really reflect that.
A playoff system in college football is certainly NOT impossible. Creating a system that uses an eight-team playoff would maintain the integrity of the bowl system, and the importance of the regular season. Give the higher-ranked team home-field for the first round, use neutral sites for the semis and the finals.
Easy.
I believe the BCS needs to stay because although it has its flaws, it is the way sports should be treated. With the BCS, a team's performance during the regular season actually matters. In a playoff system, a team can barely get by, could enter the playoffs a lucky team, and could win the 3 or 4 games in the tournament and become "national champions." For example, in the college world series 2 years ago, Fresno State was the 4th seed in the regionals, but they got lucky, and climbed further and further up the playoff ladder and became national champions. They may have won the games in the tournament, but they could barely pull off a winning record in the regular season. If a BCS system would have been in place, the teams with the best records in the regular season, (teams like UNC and Cal St. Fullerton) would have ended up as the best teams. Though watching a huge underdog win it all in a playoff system can be fun, in reality, the underdog doesn't deserve to be the national champion because the regular season record is poor. That is why the BCS bowl system needs to stay. With the BCS, the teams that play the best in the regular season get to be the titles as the best teams in the country. That is how sports should be.
Post a Comment