I'm not the first person in the world to propose something like this.
But for the love of Tao, my fellow Americans, isn't a college football playoff system the most overdue thing in all of the sporting world? (Well, besides a championship for any Seattle team.)
So, because I'm smarter than every other sports philosopher who's preceded me, here is my suggestion and it is flawless and airtight and neat and swell and tidy and clever, and no, what do you mean, of course I'm not biased.
Just think - we could use the existing infrastructure to organize a 10-team playoff over three weekends, culminating in a delayed title game, selecting teams in this way (pay attention):
There are six major conferences in which the quality of football played is understood to be vastly superior. (The SEC, Big 12, Pac-10, Big 10, ACC and Big East.) Each of these conference champions earns a playoff ticket. No questions asked. Each receives a first-round bye - straight to the quarterfinals, with only two caveats: unless one such team has three or more losses, or is outranked by five places in the final BCS standings by an unbeaten, untied team from a non-major conference.
Because, yo, let's face it, there are good teams outside of those conferences. Sometimes there are great teams. (Boise State 2006-2007 springs to mind. The dudes who "upset" Oklahoma in that Fiesta Bowl three years ago. Those types of teams should be in, no questions asked.) At the very least, two of these teams, year in, year out, deserve a shot at the national championship. So between two and four playoff berths would be reserved for non-major conference teams who a) won their conference title and b) had one or fewer losses and c) finished in the BCS top 20.
This year, those teams would be BSU and TCU.
There are great teams who fail to win their major conference championships. At least one a year. Sometimes (and by that I mean "often") two.
This year, that team is Florida.
Following a formula such as that outlined above will usually result in finding the 10 best teams in the country. Or at least the 10 most deserving teams. Each one earned a stab at the national title with its performance; none are unworthy.
But people will ask: What about the next best team? What about the ACC's really good runners-up? The Pac-10's next best team? What about Nos. 11 and 12 in the standings?
Answer: Those schools should have won their conference championship this time around, then. Or had a better year than the Gators. Or not lost that crucial league game early on. Or been one of the top 10 in the final BCS standings. How can you claim to be No. 1 in the country at the end of a year when you were never even the best team in your conference at any point of the season?
The calendar would work ideally. The four at-large teams, whose seeds are determined by the BCS formula, would seek to advance by playing in early December, seeds 7 vs. 10 and seeds 8 vs. 9, at the home of the highest-ranked team. The winners would proceed to the quarters around Dec. 20 and then to the semis right after Christmas.
Those quarterfinals would be held at four of the six sites of the Rose, Fiesta, Cotton, Orange, Sugar and Peach Bowls. The semis could be held at a brand-spanking new site (sunny San Diego?) and another of the six. The title game could be held at the last of those six and rotate from bowl to bowl, as it currently does. (The current system actually is kind of smart that way. Accidentally intelligent, to be sure, but that counts too.)
And incidentally, the losers of the at-large round could even play a consolation game somewhere, just for kicks and pride. And cash. Since we're just making it up as we go along.
The title game could be played right around when it is conducted now, between the 4th and the 10th of January.
This year, you'd get a playoff slate consisting of:
Dec. 19, 9 a.m. EDT
At Miami
(3) Cincinnati vs. (6) TCU
Dec. 19, 1 p.m. EDT
At Dallas
(2) Texas vs. winner of (7) Georgia Tech - (10) Iowa
Dec. 19, 5 p.m. EDT
At Pasadena
(4) Oregon vs. (5) Ohio State
Dec. 19, 9 p.m. EDT
At New Orleans
(1) Alabama vs. winner of (8) Florida - (9) Boise State
Dec. 26, 4 p.m. and 8 p.m. EDT
At San Diego and Atlanta
Semifinal winners
Jan. 7, 8 p.m. EDT
At Tempe
Title game
The mind drools.
(Notice how I placed the highest-ranked conference champion in a favorable venue. Remember my above-average smarts I told you about? Notice how Florida is severely penalized for losing its conference title game, but gets a chance at redemption IF it can get past disrespected BSU? Notice how long-undefeated Iowa is punished for that late loss, and faces a daunting challenge, but gets its reward for a terrific season anyway? Notice how TCU leapfrogs ACC champ Ga. Tech because of its sparkling record and No. 4 BCS position? Notice how all FIVE undefeated teams qualified? Notice the Pac-10 vs. Big 10 pairing that dropped into the Rose Bowl's lap?)
All right, clean it up, so I can conclude. The beauties of this system:
1. EVERY team can win the national title at the beginning of the year. That is not true now. A Nevada team that began the season unranked, then went 11-1 and won the WAC would never reach the BCS title game. Not in a million polls. But it could finish 10th in the BCS and earn an at-large bid, thus standing a slim chance under this setup.
2. Bowls can survive - and thrive. The big'uns have to BE the quarterfinal and semifinal games. But the rest will live on unchanged, because they will remain a big deal for each school involved. And the Rose, Orange and others would not lose notoriety for being part of a playoff - they'd still serve as massive rewards for truly outstanding teams each year; their winners would still retain bragging rights; their losers would still claim prestige for having participated in them; and one of them could even BE the title game on a rotating basis. The TV rights would escalate, if anything, and it's not like the games would ever fail to sell out.
3. The regular season continues to mean something. Unlike the NBA, the NHL and yes, college basketball, the pressure to win every week will remain intense. The consequences of a single ill-timed loss will be catastrophic. Borderline teams will be in playoff mode from October on. It's one of the best parts of college football: you have to be outstanding ALL YEAR LONG, and that requirement should persist.
4. The NCAA and the TV stations make incalculable gobs of dough. More than they presently do.
5. The major conferences keep their privileged status. Conference champions are automatically eligible to win the national title; lesser conferences have barricades in place and are limited to four at-large berths - and even then, realistically, it'd be the rare year when three
6. Silly controversy over whether 2009 TCU or 2006 BSU deserves a title shot would disappear and be replaced with good controversy, like whether the ACC was really a "major" conference this year.
I rest my case.
Friday, December 18, 2009
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
How Long / 12-15-09
I promise, this post is tangentially connected to politics, so it's not off-topic.
Because breaking my own self-imposed rules would be rude. To me.
Below lies a list of institutions present in our society. Next to each rests two figures; the first one is that institution's age, while the second is the percentage of the lifetime of our nation that the institution has existed. Finally, I post a bit of trivia about each item.
(I count the "birth" of the nation as the moment all 13 states ratified the U.S. Constitution. That was in May 1790, 209.5 years ago.
Enjoy!
Google / 11.25 yrs / 5.4 percent
"Originally the search engine used the Stanford website with the domain google.stanford.edu. The domain google.com was registered on September 15, 1997. They formally incorporated their company, Google Inc., on September 4, 1998 at a friend's garage in Menlo Park, California." (Culled that from wikipedia. Didn't google it.)
Twitter / 2.67 yrs / 1.3 percent
"The [company's] projections for the end of 2013 were $1.54 billion in revenue, $111 million in net earnings, and 1 billion users." (OK, again from that wikiplace, gotta find a new source.)
Ratification in Mississippi of the 19th Amendment, allowing women to vote / 25.67 years / 12.7 percent
Text of the highly objectionable amendment: "The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation." (Hey, that's the actual text of the amendment, NOT from wikiwiki.) Oh, incidentally, Mississippi legislators also generously made some time to ratify the amendment declaring slavery illegal... in 1995.
50 U.S. States / 50.33 yrs / 24 percent
Hawaii's state flag includes a Union Jack in the upper left corner.
"The Simpsons" / 20 yrs / 9.6 percent
The first episode aired 12-17-89 and was named "Simpsons Roasting on an Open Fire."
"The Price is Right" / 53.5 years / 25.5 percent
More than 7,000 episodes have aired.
High Fructose Corn Syrup / 44.67 yrs / 21.3 percent
"The average American consumed approximately 28.4 kg (63 lb) of HFCS in 2005." (Yes, wikipedia, you got me.)
Social Security / 74.33 years / 35.5 percent
The program has collecting its own check for a little more than nine years now!
The Federal Income Tax / 96.83 years / 46.2 percent
I know, sometimes it feels like 46.2 percent. But from 1952-53, if you made more than $400,000, your tax rate was... wait for it... oh yeah... 92 percent. Good times. (Incoming President Dwight Eisenhower, a Republican, predictably lowered it to 91 percent through 1960. Tax cuts. Sheesh.)
Because breaking my own self-imposed rules would be rude. To me.
Below lies a list of institutions present in our society. Next to each rests two figures; the first one is that institution's age, while the second is the percentage of the lifetime of our nation that the institution has existed. Finally, I post a bit of trivia about each item.
(I count the "birth" of the nation as the moment all 13 states ratified the U.S. Constitution. That was in May 1790, 209.5 years ago.
Enjoy!
Google / 11.25 yrs / 5.4 percent
"Originally the search engine used the Stanford website with the domain google.stanford.edu. The domain google.com was registered on September 15, 1997. They formally incorporated their company, Google Inc., on September 4, 1998 at a friend's garage in Menlo Park, California." (Culled that from wikipedia. Didn't google it.)
Twitter / 2.67 yrs / 1.3 percent
"The [company's] projections for the end of 2013 were $1.54 billion in revenue, $111 million in net earnings, and 1 billion users." (OK, again from that wikiplace, gotta find a new source.)
Ratification in Mississippi of the 19th Amendment, allowing women to vote / 25.67 years / 12.7 percent
Text of the highly objectionable amendment: "The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation." (Hey, that's the actual text of the amendment, NOT from wikiwiki.) Oh, incidentally, Mississippi legislators also generously made some time to ratify the amendment declaring slavery illegal... in 1995.
50 U.S. States / 50.33 yrs / 24 percent
Hawaii's state flag includes a Union Jack in the upper left corner.
"The Simpsons" / 20 yrs / 9.6 percent
The first episode aired 12-17-89 and was named "Simpsons Roasting on an Open Fire."
"The Price is Right" / 53.5 years / 25.5 percent
More than 7,000 episodes have aired.
High Fructose Corn Syrup / 44.67 yrs / 21.3 percent
"The average American consumed approximately 28.4 kg (63 lb) of HFCS in 2005." (Yes, wikipedia, you got me.)
Social Security / 74.33 years / 35.5 percent
The program has collecting its own check for a little more than nine years now!
The Federal Income Tax / 96.83 years / 46.2 percent
I know, sometimes it feels like 46.2 percent. But from 1952-53, if you made more than $400,000, your tax rate was... wait for it... oh yeah... 92 percent. Good times. (Incoming President Dwight Eisenhower, a Republican, predictably lowered it to 91 percent through 1960. Tax cuts. Sheesh.)
Monday, December 7, 2009
Take 5 / 12-07-09
(First things first: Apologies to Dave Brubeck for the headline.)
Here are five quick takes on the three topics that are legal to discuss on this blog. By the way, that holy trinity is comprised of politics, sports and spirituality. In case you hadn't noticed.
I. Health care reform
A bill reforming health care will clear the Senate. Sometime this month or next. It may or may not be a good bill. What's a good bill, you ask? Something that addresses the unethical number of uninsured Americans and something that provides for an avenue for certain folks to purchase government-issued health insurance in certain states; in other words, something that brings down long-term costs to society by accomplishing those two goals.
A great bill would be Medicare For Everyone. That's not on the table, sadly. But with incremental progress, we can get there, and this bill would appear to represent incremental progress in that direction. Just because it doesn't go far enough doesn't make it a bad bill, just a placeholder.
The opposition will not muster the 41 votes necessary to filibuster the bill, whatever form it takes. Filibustering, for the political novices out there, is the act of NOT ending debate on a bill. Debate must end, by a 60-40 or greater vote, for a piece of legislation to be considered for passage. (Even more parenthetically, it is FALSE and UNTRUE and INACCURATE that a bill must receive 60 votes to clear the Senate and head to President Obama's desk. It only needs a simple majority of 51 votes, or failing that, 50 plus Vice President Biden's.) So a very determined group of 40 or more Senators can keep legislation from ever COMING to a vote by filibustering it, but it takes 51 to vote it down once it clears that hurdle. Yes, I'm done with caps lock for a few paragraphs.
In short, not that I have any brevity-ability whatsoever, too many individual Democrats have too much to lose, and by "too much" I mean any position of privilege or leadership or committee chairmanship, by filibustering a bill brought to the floor by their own party. A number of D's may elect to vote against the bill after it clears the filibuster, but they will not commit political suicide by snubbing their self-interested noses at the party leaders. And if one of them does (yes, I'm glaring at you, Joe L.), Obama will pick off one of the Maine Republicans to break ranks.
II. TARP refund
Apparently, of the approximately $97,245 quopthrillion earmarked last year for the bailing out of financial institutions, the government will receive a refund of $200 billion. (Yes, the first figure is a slight slight slight tiny little tiny exaggeration. The second number is accuratish. Truthy, even.)
Early speculation had Obama laundering that money into a jobs bill. Because there seems to be a rumor out there that unemployment is high. Well, BHO said today he's gonna use a chunk of it to pay down the projected budget deficit instead.
This move is either shrewd, concessionary (not an actual word), morally responsible, or a combination of all three. (Always my favorite. The large supreme sans olives.)
Shrewd because it appeals to independents for whom the mounting deficit is alarming. Concessionary because Republicans have hypocritically been clamoring for excess funds to be applied to the gaping budget hole. (This despite the fact that their presidents practically invented the deficit.) And morally responsible because a good way to screw our kids and grandkids over is to leave them with a crippling national debt. We should be teaching them loads and loads of Mandarin, by the way. Just in case.
All three of the above, in 40-25-35 proportions, seems about right.
III. Merriners ad newe thurd basemen
Seeattle whill sine thurd basemen Chone (prunounced "Schawn") Figgins tuah 4-yeer, $36-miliun kontrakt tudde'.
Two out of the last 20 words are spelled right... Yes, Mr. Figgins spells his name so it'll rhyme with scone, just not the way you're necessarily used to saying "scone" unless you're from London, Manchester, Sydney, or North Uppitycrust. Parents are interesting people sometimes.
Anyway. Figgins is awesome. Ichiro-lite with the bat, only with more walks, and a good defender to boot. The M's will annoy their way to many wins this season with those two dudes at the top of the lineup. I look forward to many 32-pitch first innings from the opposing pitcher. Hee hee.
IV. Tiger
Newsflash: Tiger Woods has a penis.
V. Copin' Hagglin'
(One of my best/worst recent puns. Admire it.)
Obama hosted Al Gore in the Oval Office as worldwide climate change talks in Denmark began. Other than providing Fox "News" with a chance to put two of their favorite villians (where was Hillary!?) in the same picture without having to use Photoshop, the meeting was uneventful... except to remind us that for all of Obama's compromising with Republicans, he is committed to addressing climate change from an orthodoxically liberal point of view.
To clarify that hideous sentence, he might ditch the public option, he might work a bunch of tax cuts into a stimulus bill, he might drag his feet on closing the Guantanamo prison, but he's holding the line on climate change. 17 percent cuts in CO2 by 2020 is his short-term goal; that climbs to 83 percent cuts by 2050. This is another reason he has a chance to be the most important/successful President in recent history.
P.S. I had fun with some of the links. Enjoy. Also, I'll try to not go a month between posts again. But no guarantees.
Here are five quick takes on the three topics that are legal to discuss on this blog. By the way, that holy trinity is comprised of politics, sports and spirituality. In case you hadn't noticed.
I. Health care reform
A bill reforming health care will clear the Senate. Sometime this month or next. It may or may not be a good bill. What's a good bill, you ask? Something that addresses the unethical number of uninsured Americans and something that provides for an avenue for certain folks to purchase government-issued health insurance in certain states; in other words, something that brings down long-term costs to society by accomplishing those two goals.
A great bill would be Medicare For Everyone. That's not on the table, sadly. But with incremental progress, we can get there, and this bill would appear to represent incremental progress in that direction. Just because it doesn't go far enough doesn't make it a bad bill, just a placeholder.
The opposition will not muster the 41 votes necessary to filibuster the bill, whatever form it takes. Filibustering, for the political novices out there, is the act of NOT ending debate on a bill. Debate must end, by a 60-40 or greater vote, for a piece of legislation to be considered for passage. (Even more parenthetically, it is FALSE and UNTRUE and INACCURATE that a bill must receive 60 votes to clear the Senate and head to President Obama's desk. It only needs a simple majority of 51 votes, or failing that, 50 plus Vice President Biden's.) So a very determined group of 40 or more Senators can keep legislation from ever COMING to a vote by filibustering it, but it takes 51 to vote it down once it clears that hurdle. Yes, I'm done with caps lock for a few paragraphs.
In short, not that I have any brevity-ability whatsoever, too many individual Democrats have too much to lose, and by "too much" I mean any position of privilege or leadership or committee chairmanship, by filibustering a bill brought to the floor by their own party. A number of D's may elect to vote against the bill after it clears the filibuster, but they will not commit political suicide by snubbing their self-interested noses at the party leaders. And if one of them does (yes, I'm glaring at you, Joe L.), Obama will pick off one of the Maine Republicans to break ranks.
II. TARP refund
Apparently, of the approximately $97,245 quopthrillion earmarked last year for the bailing out of financial institutions, the government will receive a refund of $200 billion. (Yes, the first figure is a slight slight slight tiny little tiny exaggeration. The second number is accuratish. Truthy, even.)
Early speculation had Obama laundering that money into a jobs bill. Because there seems to be a rumor out there that unemployment is high. Well, BHO said today he's gonna use a chunk of it to pay down the projected budget deficit instead.
This move is either shrewd, concessionary (not an actual word), morally responsible, or a combination of all three. (Always my favorite. The large supreme sans olives.)
Shrewd because it appeals to independents for whom the mounting deficit is alarming. Concessionary because Republicans have hypocritically been clamoring for excess funds to be applied to the gaping budget hole. (This despite the fact that their presidents practically invented the deficit.) And morally responsible because a good way to screw our kids and grandkids over is to leave them with a crippling national debt. We should be teaching them loads and loads of Mandarin, by the way. Just in case.
All three of the above, in 40-25-35 proportions, seems about right.
III. Merriners ad newe thurd basemen
Seeattle whill sine thurd basemen Chone (prunounced "Schawn") Figgins tuah 4-yeer, $36-miliun kontrakt tudde'.
Two out of the last 20 words are spelled right... Yes, Mr. Figgins spells his name so it'll rhyme with scone, just not the way you're necessarily used to saying "scone" unless you're from London, Manchester, Sydney, or North Uppitycrust. Parents are interesting people sometimes.
Anyway. Figgins is awesome. Ichiro-lite with the bat, only with more walks, and a good defender to boot. The M's will annoy their way to many wins this season with those two dudes at the top of the lineup. I look forward to many 32-pitch first innings from the opposing pitcher. Hee hee.
IV. Tiger
Newsflash: Tiger Woods has a penis.
V. Copin' Hagglin'
(One of my best/worst recent puns. Admire it.)
Obama hosted Al Gore in the Oval Office as worldwide climate change talks in Denmark began. Other than providing Fox "News" with a chance to put two of their favorite villians (where was Hillary!?) in the same picture without having to use Photoshop, the meeting was uneventful... except to remind us that for all of Obama's compromising with Republicans, he is committed to addressing climate change from an orthodoxically liberal point of view.
To clarify that hideous sentence, he might ditch the public option, he might work a bunch of tax cuts into a stimulus bill, he might drag his feet on closing the Guantanamo prison, but he's holding the line on climate change. 17 percent cuts in CO2 by 2020 is his short-term goal; that climbs to 83 percent cuts by 2050. This is another reason he has a chance to be the most important/successful President in recent history.
P.S. I had fun with some of the links. Enjoy. Also, I'll try to not go a month between posts again. But no guarantees.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)