Mili - good points - allow me to counterpoint.
Why do they need a playoff? The season acts as a playoff...and the bowls cap it off.
Then why do the Big 12 and SEC have their own championship games?
These games are not true 'playoffs' - they are merely one way to determine an undisputed conference champion since everyone cannot play each other. This is more like the 'plus one' format - which I would not consider a playoff.
If it isn't broken...don't fix it: College football isn't broken.
College football itself isn't broken...it's the BCS that's broken.
The BCS does exactly what is was designed to do - create a #1 vs. #2 matchup without using a playoff. There are only two real problems with the BCS: 1) your average AP voter hates algebra, and 2) there will always be a good 3rd team on the outside looking in.
IMO the BCS worked the way it was supposed to last year. USC had a terrible SOS, and by the formula created, did not deserve to play for the title. They were reminiscent of the Nebraska teams in the 80's, i.e. loading up on a weak schedule and ending up ranked in the top 10 each year.
If there is any type of playoff...my opinion is that it should be a MAX of 4 teams. Why do we need more than 4?
Because with the parity in football today, a deserving team could be ranked significantly lower than it should be. YSU won at least one national title when it was ranked lower than #4 in the final regular season poll (actually two titles, if I'm not mistaken).
Pro's & Con's of a 4 team playoff
- teams would only be included if they demonstrated excellence the entire season
- where you start in the preseason polls would be a huge factor
- the NCAA would be leaving a lot of money on the table with fewer games
- 'wild card' teams frequently win the title
- a hot team at the end of the season could make a run, and depending on your perspective, this good be good or bad
Why is the BCS in trouble?
Because it may end up allowing an unranked team into a BCS bowl while shutting out its own #5 team.
This problem has only been created by the ever shifting foundation of conference alignments. When the BCS was created - who would have thought that Miami, Va Tech, and BC would move to the ACC leaving the Big East decimated? The BCS itself can't be blamed for this when the Big East wouldn't normally be guaranteed a BCS bowl offering such a weak lineup.
Playoffs won't remove controversy...they will just move it. If you have 8 teams...then #9 and #10 are going to bitch. Right now #3 and #4 bitch.
The farther down the line you go, the less they can bitch about. #3 may always have a legitimate bitch...#17 has a far less legitimate bitch.
Then why did they have to go to a 'playoff' to determine the 64th seed for the NCAAB tourney?
And, we still haven't answered how we would pick the top 16 teams? AP poll? ESPN / Coaches poll? Both? The BCS? We would be having the same conversation all over again, except it would be about wether a 7-4 OSU is more deserving than a 8-1 TCU team.
Remember 2002? How fun would have have been if we knew all we needed to do was finish in the top 8?
Remember 1998? How fun would it have been had we been selected for a playoff berth despite our sleepwalk against MSU.
I guess I buy into the 'the season itself is a single elimination tournament'. Who's to say that a good team won't sleepwalk in the playoff?
Keep in mind that Div I-A college football is the only major sport, either pro or amateur, that doesn't have some sort of playoff system. That alone should tell you how fucked up it is.
This incongruency never really mattered to me. I don't think it is a logical conclusion to say 'everyone else has a playoff - therefore college football must have playoff'.
