.vresize.36.36.medium.0.png){kind=small}
.vresize.36.36.medium.0.png){kind=small}
So Jim Delany, the man who has spent his years as Big Ten commissioner steadfastly lobbying against a college football playoff, now apparently sees the light.
Dissatisfaction with the BCS and the bowl system in general — from fans, coaches, administrators and even politicians — has become so pervasive that even Delany, the power broker of power brokers, has had to turn heel and run from the disaster of a system college football uses to determine its champion.
“I think sports fans are conditioned to playoffs. I don’t begrudge them that,” Delany told the Chicago Tribune this week. “They’re looking for more games, but we’re trying to do the right thing. It’s a matter of coming up with something that does not kill the baby with the bath water.”
Though short of a full endorsement of a four-team playoff, it’s close enough. This is no denial. The Big Ten is now on record as being open to change, which means there isn’t a single conference still publicly supporting the BCS. A playoff is coming, and it’s coming soon. Only the details are left to sort out.
And instead of appearing to be dragged kicking and screaming into this, the Big Ten is going to be at the forefront of creating the new rules of engagement. It’s a smart move, albeit a bit humorous. Even Christopher Columbus, upon discovering America by accident, wasn’t so arrogant as to pretend that’s what he was aiming for all along.
We know better. But what matters here is the result, not the motive behind it. If the Big Ten wants to position itself to drive this train, all the better. When you’re talking about a group of people that embraces change at a glacial pace, it’s important not to let perfect be the enemy of good.
And what’s about to happen is going to be good for everybody but the bowl executives whose six-figure salaries depend on maintaining the status quo.
If college football is really going to do this, there are two issues on which there should be no compromise, no matter what system emerges.
First, this must be a playoff, not a “plus-one.” The term “plus-one” implies that the bowl system remains as it is, with the traditional BCS bowls providing the venues for semifinal games and the winners playing in what we now know as the BCS Championship. But why placate the BCS bowls and let them serve as middlemen to run (and profit from) a playoff? They’re not needed anymore. Whatever plan emerges should reflect that.
Second, if the powers that be settle on a four-team playoff, only conference champions should be eligible.
No offense to Alabama, which did nothing wrong moving up the BCS standings while others lost, but it should not have had an opportunity to play LSU a second time last season. College football prides itself on preserving the sanctity of the regular season, but giving Alabama a rematch after it lost head to head to LSU did the opposite of that. Alabama might have been the best team, but it didn’t win its conference. It should not have been eligible to play for a national championship.
My preference, of course, is an eight-team playoff. The best format I’ve seen comes from Oklahoman columnist Berry Tramel, who proposed taking the champions of the top five leagues (the Southeastern Conference, Big 12, Big Ten, Atlantic Coast Conference and Pac-12) and give them byes in an eight-team bracket. The champions of the six other Division I conferences (the Big East, the Mountain West, Conference USA, the Mid-American, the Sun Belt and the Western Athletic) would play off against each other and fill in the final three slots.
More likely, we’re looking at a four-team playoff. And though it won’t eliminate arguments — the debate between teams No. 4 and 5 will carry huge stakes — it’s a step in the right direction. But what have the other leagues accomplished if the SEC ends up with two teams in the playoff more often than not?
Recent developments in realignment leave college football with six major conferences and a huge gap to the rest of Division I. Though every conference champion should, in theory, be eligible for the playoff, it stands to reason the four spots would typically go to the SEC, the Big 12, the Pac-12 and the Big Ten with the ACC, Big East or independent Notre Dame able to supplant one of those leagues in a given year.
This process shouldn’t be at the mercy of some mysterious mathematical formula. Put the conference champions in front of a blue-ribbon committee and let them pick the four best. And by excluding any team that doesn’t win its conference, not only would it keep the regular season extremely meaningful, but it could encourage some better nonconference matchups that have all but disappeared.
Under that setup, the difference between the No. 4 and 5 teams could come down to who played a better nonconference schedule. Just like in college basketball, playing a tougher schedule would be part of the criteria for getting in.
That’s not the current paradigm in college football, where schools shy away from tough matchups because losing practically eliminates them from the national title chase. If winning the conference championship is the primary qualifier for a playoff, schools should feel emboldened to take some chances in scheduling nonconference games.
There are dozens of legitimate possibilities for a playoff format, but the truth is anything will be better than what we’ve got now. After years of denying the obvious, even the Big Ten can’t hold onto the BCS any longer. Delany’s comments to the Chicago Tribune tell us he’s already given up the fight.
