Division I College Football Should Implement a Play-off System

My opponent's argument rests on the fact that the BCS system is biased towards the teams that can receive the most votes. I have an alternative solution to this problem that does not implement a play-off system: remove the polls. I think that opinions should not be in the BCS system, and rather, the win records and scores should be the only factor that the BCS computer takes into account to decide the top two teams. I will be arguing that rather than implementing a play-off system, Division I College Football should remove the voting influence from the BCS. My opponent's first paragraph is about how the BCS is ruled by votes. This is negated with a change in the BCS. My opponent's second paragraph refutes an argument against play-off systems. That's nice. However, that does not do anything against the BCS. My opponent's third paragraph is a plan that he can lean back on. Ironically enough, this system includes bids for the bottom five seeds, when my opponent is openly against voting for teams in championships. My opponent's fourth paragraph is about how he is okay with bowl systems. That's nice. It still doesn't attack BCS. My opponent's fifth paragraph attacks the time issue against play-offs. http://en.wikipedia.org... "Also, although controversial, the BCS and non-BCS bowl games earn millions of dollars for college football. Thousands of college alumni enjoy the current bowl system; the bowl games take place around the New Year's Day holiday period, where fans can get time off work and school to travel to a warm-weather destination to watch their team play. If a playoff tournament were held after the New Year's Day bowls, the games could not take place on Saturday or Sunday without conflicting with NFL playoff games. College presidents are opposed to holding playoff games in January, as this would conflict with final exams at many colleges and universities." So, we definitely don't want college football to compete for time with the NFL. Additionally, BCS is the only system that does not make football games interfere with final exams. This isn't just in concern for the football team; this is also about the students who watch the games. No college president wants all of the students at his college to spend the night watching football rather than studying, resulting in dropping grades that poorly reflect the college's academic ability. My opponent's proposition of a compact season ignores the many other non-BCS bowl games. http://www.nationalchamps.net... They occur from Dec. 20 to Jan. 8. My opponent wants to start the playoffs the weekend after Dec. 3. We may be talking about different years, but the point is, you only get one or two weeks between the season and the other bowl games for a playoff tournament. That's nowhere near enough time for a decent playoff. My opponent's sixth paragraph addresses the problems of voter bias in the BCS. This is fixed with the removal of the voting system, with the BCS only taking actual scores into account. "Quite simply their is only one solution. College football must change over to a play-off system. If they want to keep their credibility, or even pretend they are a 'real' sport. With die hard competion. Then prove it, what are they scared of? In America we have a system, one system to determine the champion, the best, and that system is a play-off." There is a better solution: remove voter bias from the BCS. If there is a tie between the BCS and the play-off system, the vote would go to the BCS, because there is no reason to implement a system that would take more time and money to set up, without any improvements being made. Finally, my own contention: seeded tournaments are not always reliable. http://www.jhowell.net... Using the top eight power rankings from the above source, I used an Excel spreadsheet to calculate who would win a seeded tournament each time. Well, Florida would win only 30.2% of the time, and Southern California would win only 15% of the time. Obviously, the best team should win the tournament. With an unbiased BCS, Florida would win 59% of the time, while Southern California would win 41% of the time. This shows that the BCS would have the final two teams always being the best teams, while a play-off system might result in two of the worst teams competing in the final round. We want to see the best, not the worst. And we definitely don't want to see the best team against the worst team in the final round. That gets boring. Thank you for starting this debate. I look forwards to your response.