the tindog coffeehouse

While college football fans may be begging for a playoff system, they should probably be careful what they ask for. At least if the NCAA basketball tournament is any indication. If the NCAA and coaches get their way, the current 65-team March Madness tournament could expand to as many as 96 teams, adding up to a mind-boggling 31 extra games to the schedule. (And you thought filling out your bracket was tough before!)

BCS proponents argue that in basketball, the already-bloated playoff system makes the regular season irrelevant, and if that’s true, then a 96-team playoff would make it even more so. That alone should be reason enough not to fatten the tournament any more than it is.  But Andrea Adelson of the Orlando Sentinel points out another reason, one that would drastically affect college football as well:

Continue reading…

According to economists Michael Davis and Ewing Marion, the BCS is statistically fairer than a college football playoff system would be.

No, really.

They’ve invented a metric called the “Fairness Index”, which “measures the average ratio of the champion’s regular season record to its team with the best regular season record.” By their calculations, the much-maligned Bowl Championship Series, with its convoluted system of computer rankings, human polls, and exclusionary provisions, has a fairness index of 97.2%, while the NFL’s playoff system comes in at a mere 91.6%.

Their argument is this: With a playoff system you allow a certain number of teams into the brackets, which sounds fair on the surface but can result in a team with a lesser regular-season record winning out against a more deserving team. As an example, they point to the fact that the Arizona Cardinals, which had a regular-season record of 9-7, reached last year’s Super Bowl and almost beat the 12-4 Pittsburgh Steelers. According to Davis and Marion, had the Cardinals won, that outcome would’ve been less fair. Plus, they say, the more teams you allow into the playoffs, the more unfair the end results tend to be.

Continue reading…

Did Karl Marx, the Father of Socialism, invent college football’s Bowl Championship Series (aka the BCS)?  Or would he have approved of a “communistic” playoff system?

That appears to be the big question in college football (and even on Capitol Hill) these days.

First, during a hearing in May by the House Energy and Commerce Committee (because apparently they have nothing better to do), Congressman Joe Barton compared the BCS, which decides bowl placement based on several computer algorithms and human polls, to communism:

“It is interesting that people of good will — I think everybody on whatever side of the issue is a person of good will — keeps trying to tinker with the current system.”

“It’s like communism, you can’t fix it.”

Continue reading…

Texas coach Mack Brown wasn’t happy. Because of an odd tiebreaker rule in the Big 12 Conference, OU will play Missouri for the Big 12 Championship with a shot at the National Title game should they beat the Tigers. The Longhorns, meanwhile, finish behind OU even though the Sooners lost to the Horns in October and will likely end up in the Fiesta Bowl against Ohio State.

That, apparently, isn’t a good enough consolation prize for Mack:

I’m really disappointed for our kids that two teams we beat this season will be playing for the Big 12 Championship. I’ll try to explain it to them, but most importantly, my message will be that you’ve done enough to put yourself in position to play for the conference championship, you had a great season and there still is a lot out there for you to play for. …

Since this situation has never happened before in the Big 12, I think the conference should follow the lead of all of the other BCS leagues with championship games (ACC/Conference USA/Mid-American/SEC) in how they settle three-way ties. I think their systems are fairer and give more credit to how the two highest ranked teams performed against each other on the field.

I have to wonder, though: Would Mack and all the other angry Longhorn fans feel the same way if they had come out on top?

Continue reading…