Often the preseason popularity contest polls end up making more of a difference than the actual games.

Like an earlier poster mentioned, if you start the season out unranked you have next to no shot at the national championship. If you start the season out ranked number one and lose early to a crappy team (USC) you have a better chance at playing for the national championship than a team that happens to lose to a much better team in November.

What’s worse, teams in the Big 12, SEC and other conferences with championship games are at a clear disadvantage to teams in the PAC-10, Big 10 and other conferences that don’t have to in some cases beat the second best team in their conference twice to even get a shot.

The only thing I’ve found worth rooting for in college football in recent years has been for everyone to lose and create another mess that can only be cleaned up by a playoff system.

It’s interesting to me that teams with 1 loss seem to be more vocal about their belief in a playoff system. I say “Welcome aboard!” I’ve been a believer in the playoff system for years. Let me give you a few reasons why.

1) The BCS currently uses a formula (possibly created by monkeys in a damp, dark cave) to rank each team. I won’t go into all of the problems this past week (and Nov ‘07). But why would we choose to have faith in a computer formula to determine the two teams playing for the championship?
2) College football is cyclical – meaning the strength of the conferences is up and down. This year, the SEC and Big XII appear to be the strongest. When you have 4-5 legitimate teams in a conference beat up on each other, the “monkeys” have to follow the formula. The losers lose. The winners win. On the other hand, when a weak conference (this year – Big 10) has one legitimate team (Penn St), they waltz through the conference without defeat. The monkeys jump up and down with glee! It makes their jobs much easier. BTW, there is no conference championship game in several conferences which could affect a team one way or another.
3) The rankings (BCS, AP, or whatever one chooses) are subjective. If you have more sports writers voting in the Midwest or in California, who might be noticed and thereby get the votes? I think the answer is clear. This year, Penn St. has a decent team with a great coach – a legend in Joe Paterno. Wouldn’t it be a great “feel good” story if Joe P (who is the age of Methuselah) led his team to a national championship on crutches and a bad hip? And how many sports writers take that into account when voting for the Nittany Lions? I’m skeptical.
4) The game shouldn’t be a democracy. In other words, we don’t vote for the best baseball team at the end of the year. We don’t take a vote on the best NFL team. In golf, they play the Masters for four rounds, rather than voting for who the best golfer is (Tiger would get most votes). You get the idea. Why can’t we solve the problem on the field? Sixteen teams wouldn’t prolong the season any longer. If you win, you move on. If you lose, “Thanks for playin’ but go home.”

Sorry for the length. But you asked. And on this one, I’ve got an opinion. Thanks for letting me vent!

Remember dem Gator boys’ first NCAA basketball championship three years ago? They started the pre-season outside of the Top 25! In the BCBS, a team like that has no chance to win it all. And if you’re not USC, Fla, etc you lose one and you’re done. Garbage. Play-offs! Play-offs!

I mean come on…who wants to see the SEC smother a Big Ten team again the in national title game…it’s needs to be a competitive game!