The Archway

Issue date: 12/4/09 Section: Sports

(MCT Campus)

I don't know about you but I hate the NFL playoff setup. Who really wants to see all those weeks of games. Wouldn't it be better if we just voted on what matchup we wanted to see for the Super Bowl and then matched up a bunch of rivals in a sponsored bowl game system. We could see the Saints and Colts matchup in a high scoring Super Bowl. Kurt Warner and Brett Favre could square off in the AARP Bowl. The Eagles and Titans could match up in the Fed Ex Air and Ground Bowl. Marc Sanchez and Chad Ochocinco would go head-to-head in the Nathan's Hot Dog Bowl. And Jake Delhomme and Jay Cutler could combine for double-digit interceptions in the Salvation Army Giveaway Bowl. What could be better?

Ok, maybe things would be better off the other way around. By that I mean, the college game could learn from the pro game. Not only do all fans hate the BCS bowl system because it leaves a national championship in the hands of voters, but I am sure a playoff system would be monetarily beneficial. Sure sponsorship and dozens of bowl games bring in lots of revenue for schools who would otherwise not be in a post season playoff pool. After all, football does not lend itself to a March Madness type tournament because it would take months to complete. We don't need to get rid of all the (stupid) bowl games that matchup the mediocre teams of power conferences. The Chick-Fil-A bowls can stay.

What needs to be done is adjust the current BCS system for the top eight teams and create a 3-week playoff. This would allow us to really see who the best team in the country is. There would be the six power conference Champions and two teams from mid-major conferences. This means the loser of the Alabama vs. Florida game would be out this year, although one of those teams may be better than a team that gets in my playoff system.

Like I said, my playoff system gives the Cincinnati's, TCU's, and Boise State's a chance to show if they are on the level of a Florida and a national champion, because the loser of the SEC Championship game will have already had their opportunity. If you aren't the best team in your own conference, then you aren't the best team in the country. This year we would probably have the SEC champion (Florida or Alabama), Ohio State, Texas, Oregon, Cincinnati, Boise State, TCU, and Clemson.

You can still name the individual games as bowls and get sponsors. It would increase the number of games, which means more television advertisements, more ticket sales, more concessions sold, and more parking lots to fill. The BCS will argue there isn't enough time to get in this many games and it would take away from the "student athletes'" class time.

First, the current system has the national champion contenders waiting five to six weeks without a game before the national championship. I think they could manage to squeeze in 2 more games in that time. Second, the lower divisions in college football all have playoff systems. Is there class time not as important? I would argue it is more important, as a UNH player is going to be relying on his engineering degree for a job after graduation fare more than USC player is relying on his basket-weaving degree.

The thing that perplexes me (and all football fans for that matter) is why those with the power to change, refuse to do so. It makes too much sense. More games, more money, more enjoyment for fans, and a TRUE national champion. The NFL has it right and the college game should take a page out their book. Then again, that Kurt Warner- Brett Favre AARP bowl does sound intriguing.

Page 1 of 1

Article Tools

Please note: All comments are approved by The Archway prior to their publication.