The Playoff Myth: Why The BCS Is Here To Stay

A college football playoff will never ever happen. Ever.

Yet, thanks to Mark Cuban opening his mouth this week, the call for a college football playoff has been renewed. Just like it was last year, and the year before that, and the year before that. I wish I could pinpoint when a college football playoff became a talking point but for at least the past 20 years, college football fans have spent their December break from football clamoring for a playoff.

If it hasn’t happened yet, what makes people think it’s going to happen now?

I must admit I’m guilty of jumping into the scenario business since earlier this week I wrote an entire column dedicated to a plus-one model after moving the bowls back to their traditional tie-ins. In my opinion, that’s a realistic solution since it has been proven time and time again that the people in charge of college football – university presidents – do not want a playoff system.

The scenarios range from the absurd – 16 teams, using bowls – to the certainly plausible, whether it’s 16 teams on campus or 4 teams using the current bowl structure. The bottom line is that no scenario is going to be accepted if it’s a playoff. The playoff system that makes the most sense, the four-team plus-one, was rejected by college presidents in 2008. If that’s not happening, then nothing’s going to happen.

But why? Let’s review the “myths” about the bowls and the playoffs.

The BCS is hurting college football

If there was ever an example of the old adage, “Any publicity is good publicity,” it’s the BCS. Almost instantly after its creation, the BCS became a punching bag and easy target for sportswriters and fans alike. Put the BCS in a book title and you sell thousands upon thousands of copies. You write a column bashing the BCS, and you’ll receiving hundreds of comments from college football fans commending you on your opinion.

Unfortunately, the exact opposite is true of the BCS. Prior to the BCS, college football was a purely regional sport. Even as the sport’s power brokers realized there was a huge audience for college football, fans didn’t care about much outside of their own conference. Big Ten fans couldn’t care less about Alabama. SEC fans weren’t chanting their conference’s name after big nonconference and bowl victories. You played to win your conference. If you could win a national title, that was a nice bonus.

The BCS system, for the first time, nationalized college football. This year, fans of the SEC were glued into Oregon games and they bizarrely became the staunchest dissenters to Boise State’s run. The entire nation tuned in to see Auburn/Alabama. While much has been made about college football’s ratings declining this year, it comes with two huge caveats. For one, the networks are airing far more college football than they did in the past and certainly more than last year. And second, college football’s regular season ratings absolutely dwarf the ratings for all other sports.

Since ESPN acquired the NBA rights in 2002, its highest-rated regular season game was a Lakers/Rockets game in 2003 that drew 4.8 million viewers. On Labor Day night, Boise State/Virginia Tech drew 9.9 million viewers. On Sept. 11, at noon Saturday, Georgia/South Carolina drew 3.5 million viewers on ESPN2. Only four NBA regular season games on ESPN can claim a better number in nine seasons.

The BCS is hurting the non-BCS schools

This is quite possibly the stupidest argument against the BCS. In 1998, Tulane went undefeated, played in the Liberty Bowl and received almost zero publicity. In 1999, Marshall went undefeated and finished its season playing in the Motor City Bowl at 1:30 p.m. on weekday afternoon. The programs received little to no bump from their undefeated seasons because, frankly, no one cared.

Fast forward to 2010. Boise State, TCU and Utah all spent time in the top five. Utah and TCU were able to use their success to jump to bigger leagues. Boise State became the most talked about team in the country, drawing huge television audiences, including an absurd 4+ million for its game against Nevada that ended around 2 a.m. on the East Coast. Why the jump in interest? Because the BCS opened access up. TCU is playing in the Rose Bowl. Let that sink in – a team from the Mountain West Conference is playing in the Rose Bowl. And this hurts them how, exactly?

The conferences are losing money on the bowl system

There is no doubt there are flaws with the current bowl system, namely the absurd ticket requirements some schools must make in playing in bowls. The BCS is the worst offender, since schools sell tickets at face value while ticket factories like StubHub are selling them for far less. There are times when schools take a bath, no doubt.

But the athletic departments at universities have been largely unconcerned with struggling to profit off the bowl system. Why? Because they don’t make their money from the postseason. They make their money from the regular season. The Big Ten just received $140 million over six years from Fox for its championship game – do you think they want to mess with that annual $23 million check? The SEC is receiving billions – yes billions – from CBS and ESPN for regular season college football. Do you think the conference is in a hurry to mess with that?

College football makes a lot of money in its current system. A lot has been made about the quotes from conference commissioners to Congress about a playoff system making “more money” than the current system. That is undoubtedly true but the key word is “more.” The conferences, particularly behemoths like the Big Ten, SEC and Pac-12, are making money hand over fist already. There’s little impetus for the conferences to rip up a system that is making them plenty of money as is.

A playoff would crown a true national champion

For some reason, American sports fans have been conditioned to believe playoffs are the only way to crown a true champion, even though the exact opposite is quite true. The playoffs reward teams that get hot at the end of the year. I’m not saying this is bad, but the notion that a playoff crowns a more deserving champion is absurd. You can say it’s more exciting, more finite or more interesting, but you can’t say more deserving.

Look at soccer. The most popular sports league in the world is the English Premier League. They don’t have a playoff. They don’t have a postseason. Each team plays 38 games – twice against the other 19 teams. At the end of the year, the team with the best record is the champion. That, my friends, is a true and deserving champion. Next to that, college football crowing a champion with one “playoff” game is as close as it gets. The English Premier League seems to be doing just fine. So does college football.

A playoff would eliminate controversy

I read about a four-team proposal to crown this year’s national champion. In one semifinal, it would be undefeated Oregon against undefeated TCU. I love it. In the other, it would be #1 undefeated Auburn against #4, 11-1 Stanford. So let’s see, who would be upset with that? Do you think the Big Ten, with its trio of 11-1 teams, might cause a bit of a stink? Last year, there were five undefeated teams – how does five fit into four? About as well as three does.

If we go to 16 teams, the controversy remains. Does the 6-6 Sun Belt champion get a playoff spot over 9-3 Alabama? If they don’t, why does the Sun Belt keep playing football? What does a #1 seed get you? A second-round matchup against Arkansas? How is that fair?

It’s my opinion that a playoff would only increase controversy. Think about it – instead of having one or two teams with gripes, you increase the number tenfold. Few teams can claim they are #1 or #2. A whole lot more teams can make a case for #4. And I can think of about 25 teams who could claim to be #16. It’s a can of worms the college presidents don’t want to open and they’ve made that clear.

Congress could force a playoff

An absolute and complete non-starter. President Obama and other legislators looking to get some publicity can stand up and say they want a playoff, but the response from college presidents would be predictable. They’ve already stated what they would do – the bowls would go back to the old system and that would be that. As Big Ten commissioner Jim Delaney so eloquently stated last week – the big conferences have opened up access willingly, but they don’t have to keep doing so.

Fans are outraged there is not a playoff

The final myth is arguably the most important. It has been painted that college football fans are outraged with the BCS and strongly believe the sport needs a playoff. It’s true, but only to a degree. Fans are unhappy there isn’t a playoff but they aren’t outraged. If they were, then 30+ million people wouldn’t have tuned in for Alabama/Texas last year, making it the year’s most-watched non-NFL sporting event. If they hated bowls so much, than last year’s Alamo Bowl – featuring Texas Tech and a 6-6 Michigan State team – wouldn’t have been ESPN’s most-watched bowl…ever.

And therein lies the fallacy of claiming a playoff is needed. A playoff is wanted. Fans are still going to games, they’re still buying merchandise and they’re still tuning into 35 bowl games in greater numbers than ever.

Until people stop watching and purchasing tickets, a playoff remains a desire. We won’t see a playoff until fans boycott the current system. I don’t see that happening in my lifetime. Do you?

Follow me on Twitter