Division I College Football Should Implement a Play-off System

Ok, so the ‘voting' should be taken out of the BCS system so that it will be completely fair…. hmmmm…. ok. Well I can't possible think of any way to argue that. Well…except what are you going to do when more that two teams are qualified? Say there are three undefeated teams? Or no undefeated teams, and a dozen one-loss teams? How would a loss be evaluated by a computer? Since a loss on paper is just a loss…then what we'd draw ping-pong balls for national championship game? Plus, when win/loss and scores are the only items factored into who is the national champion then teams will have an even more incentive to stack their schedules with the easiest opponents (Probally more D-II) to sneak into the championship game and go for broke their. What does two Big name schools that spend half their season cruising by inferior (D-II) opponents prove? Nothing, strength of Schedule of schedule should be calculated (as it would be for at large teams). Ex: Who was a better one loss team this year: Texas or Ball State (At the conclusion of the regular season). Also your system would have pitted Boise State vs. Utah. Now, since Utah beat Alabama I don't think anybody could argue with that, but since Boise lost in a none BCS bowl game where they really desirving? Think of any play-off ever played. How often do the top two seeds ever make it? And when they do (Like last years Lakers/Celtics NBA final) haven't they proved they where the two best teams? I don't see how college football should weasel out of the highest level of compotion like all other sports. Let's look at the Neg's only independent argument first: It's stupid. Now that I turned that…oh what you actually wanted me to say more about? Look at the numbers in the seeded tournament vs. BCS. Ok, so Florida and USC wouldn't win as much…. because the system would no longer be rigged. What happens when you actually play the games? There is a chance for variety and thus more likely that a wild card team could rise up and take the title, and is that such a bad thing? Was it absolute diasterous for the NFL when the Giants shocked the undefeated Patriots to win the Super Bowl? No, it was absolutely fantastic for everyone (unless you're a patriots fan). The play-off, now having 16 teams instead of 2, and being played would cause the variation. And no, just because the Sun Belt Champion, or the ACC Champion (this year Virginia Tech with four loss) shocked the world and started winning in the post season and won a championship that would not make them a bad team winning a title, because if the other teams where better how did they loss to them in a play-off? You would get the two best teams, every year. Small market, big market, unheard of maybe, but you would get the 2 best teams. On you argument about conflicting with the NFL and Final exams, I loved it! You used Wiki, good stuff for source situation. Let's look at our good friend Dan Wetzel again, "Different schools have different academic schedules, in fact their wasn't a weekend someone wasn't having exams. However, college athletics has never allowed academics to stand in its way before. In this day of 12-team super leagues and midweek television games, this isn't an excuse. " Also, Sub-Division, D-II, and D-III schools do it as I've previously stated, plus an on slate of almost everyother sport. Are these kids just more talented that they can balance school and athletics or what? And seriously the college is going to get distracted watching sports? No college president will let it happen? Again, what about Sub-Division, D-II, and D-III. What about soccer, men's water polo, and field hockey? They all have tourments around the same time. The argument is flawed. The national exsposure and plablicity plus profits from a system seeing the higher seed having the first two rounds at home far out way any mimimiual impacts. Besides, students would be watch either other divisions of college football's play-offs, bowl games when they start, or a number of other sports like the NBA, NFL, and NHL in season then anyway. Apparently, one week to prepare for a game isn't enough time or even two. Not when it's a play-off game. In college football we need a month. So lets have the 1st round in Jan. The second in Feb. The third in March. And the Finals in April. WTF? Seriously, every other sport, and football at the high school, collegent, and professional levels, all pop up and play the play-off game with a usual break between the end of the regular season and the play-off. Not an entire month to do nothing. The purpose of a play-off is to establish who the best team, after completing the task of the regular season, is truly the best. As we have even seen in college football the best team (like Ohio State 3 years ago) after a huge lay-off doesn't necassarly respond well. They shouldn't have to. When you take exstend time off from a season, the grueling toil becomes pointless and basically you have no idea who the best team is anymore. Plus, my opponent also missed my main point with ignoring the bowl games. He argues that "one or two weeks between the season and the other bowl games for a playoff tournament. [Isn't nearly enough time. ]" Duh, that's why the play-off teams wouldn't compete in the bowl games, I suppose I didn't make myself clear the first time. Anymore stupid questions? And just if I didn't make it clear, all of the other bowl games could still be played just not with the teams in the play-offs (We'll actually I suppose if you wanted to, a team getting out in the first or even second round could pick up a bowl game if they really wanted to). Finally, I would like to reinforce this debate is about why College Football should implement a play-off, not if the BCS is good or not. The BSC, besides being rigged and thus illegal for obstruction of trade, doesn't really matter in the scope of this debate as the con has to prove why a play-off is so detrimently not merely present a simply counter-plan revoking voting for the BCS. College football compose to many teams to merely use records and tie breaker like they do in pro sports, though that would be the preffered option to create a play-off. Consiquently, college has to use some kind of selection committee. No one whines about college basketball, in fact everyone loves that. This would be the same, only better cause its football. Basically, the Pro team doesn't have to destroy the BCS, though I'll say I hate it, just show the voter why obviously a play-off system is superior. Look at the logical flow of ideas and see if they make sense to you: 1)Have Cinderella's in College Football 2)Have 4 weeks of intense college Football play-off games like the NFL 3)Bring money into schools that host games. 4)Allow all teams, not just the big ones to have their shot at a title. 5)Not take a month off between the regular season and the post season.