In the wake of Sunday's announcement of LSU meeting Alabama in a rematch for the national championship, sports radio has been filled this week with arguments for and against the Bowl Championship Series system. Should the system stay the same, should there be a "plus one" game, or should there be a full fledged playoff system?
Proponents of the BCS system claim that its goal is to assure that the two best teams in the nation meet each other for the national championship. Is that really what happened this year? I really don't have a problem with LSU playing against Alabama again. (Though LSU vs. OK State would have been a really fun matchup and I am tired of the SEC ruling the BCS)
My beef this year really lies with the Sugar bowl selections. Seriously, how do they take Michigan (2 losses) and VA Tech (2 losses) over Boise St. (1 loss) or Kansas State (2 losses but a tougher schedule)?!?! Everythng that I have heard said that the Sugar bowl took Michigan and VA Tech because they "travel well" and "bring money". I don't care about money, I want to see the true better teams in the nation get the best opportunities.
I have been a fan of a playoff system since 1994 when my beloved Nittany Lions went undefeated and were bettered in the polls by an undefeated Nebraska team without a real explanation. I would love to see the NCAA start with an 8 team playoff, with the possibility to expand to 16. Could you imagine a mini March Madness in December? If you take the top 8 teams after the regular season and let them play it out on the filed, instead of in the polls and computers, this would give us a true champion. Once you get those teams in a playoff- all bets would be off. Imagine if Boise St. would beat Oregon, OK State, and then LSU in the championship game. What a great and interesting system that would be.
Oh well, I guess for now we are stuck with the BS...oops, I mean BCS.