We're on the same page, for sure. I would not have the least bit of a problem going back to the old system. Win your conference, get a nice bowl trip as a reward, and let voters vote. Hell, at least in those days, if you went undefeated and they voted someone else as champ you had legs to stand on by saying "Well, fuck you... we have a different set of voters who say we're champs" Meaning, on the whole, it was just as valid a claim to say we're UPI champions as it was to say we're AP champions.I'm with you. Tournaments/playoffs introduce a lot of randomness/luck.
That said, if you just want to go by regular season then you are never going to have a "true" champion in CFB because they don't all play each other.
Hell, you could make the same case about conference champions anymore. Why does a team like Wisconsin get a shot at the East winner when they had to play no one to win the West? Anything can happen in one game. Same for SEC west vs SEC east right now.
Having seen the transition from the old Bowl system to today's CFP, I don't know if it's any better to day at all. Win the Big Ten, go play the PAC champ in the Rose Bowl and call it a season. Who gives a fuck who the mythical national champion is?
Of course, the fact that we grew up with that reality soils our view of playoffs, I think. We were used to the champion being "the best team that year." And, frankly, there is no objective way to make that determination - a playoff sure isn't designed to find the best team, and frankly, probably is worse at finding the best team than a bunch of people casting votes is. In any case, because we grew up watching for which team was "the best team that year" I think we're also pre-disposed to recognizing what Playoffs are not.
Upvote
0