Silly me. I thought embracing the move from the BCS to a four-team playoff was going to usher in an unprecedented era of world peace. Instead, in one corner, we’ve got the Big Ten clutching on to the Rose Bowl like grim death, while in the other, Texas AD DeLoss Dodds is ready to chuck all the bowls in the trash can.
And now we’ve got the Michigan AD telling us it’s no big thang, mane.
“Where we are right now, we have a system that’s been pretty good determining the No. 1- and No. 2-ranked teams. … Our ability to know who is No. 3, No. 4, No. 5 and No. 6 is far less accurate, and so what we’re doing now is coming up with a way to play an extra football game. That’s great. People are excited about another football game. The only thing they’d like more than one football game is two more football games.”
Curse you, fans, you and your damned excitement! Can’t you let the people in charge screw things up on their own?
It’s enough to have better men than me shaking their heads in frustration. Like Bruce Feldman:
The good news? It sounds like we’re very close to finally getting an actual college football playoff. The not-so-good news? The selection process that is bound to be involved to determine the final four teams involved is going to be messy.
Really messy.
Hopefully, though, we’ll get some level of progress on this front too. After all, when you really examine the old BCS formula that thing was a farce. Start with the Coaches Poll that figured into it significantly. College coaches don’t have the time to get involved in watching other teams they aren’t playing. The not-so-well-kept secret is their football ops guy or their sports information director fill out their ballots, just as former Alabama coach Gene Stallings admitted Wednesday morning he had his do when he was “involved” in the Coaches Poll. On top of all that, their livelihood is so dependent on the outcome of the poll. It’s ridiculous to have them involved in this.
True ‘dat. But I tell you what – Feldman goes on to mention something almost as a throwaway line that I don’t think is a half-bad idea.
Years ago I made the case that the Vegas oddsmakers would probably be the best fit in determining the rankings. Not that I ever thought it would actually happen, but within the context of it, there is relevant point: In theory, the oddsmakers get you the strongest or best teams, but do they actually get you the “most deserving” teams? Those terms don’t always go hand-in-hand.
Maybe yes, maybe no. But I do know a couple of things. One, if Vegas does the picking, it’s going to be cold-blooded. There’s no money to be made in being biased or having conflicts of interest. And, two, the odds are set in anticipation of how people bet; to some extent, those lines reflect our own enthusiasm and respect for the teams in play. So on some level, isn’t that giving the fans what they want?
I’m curious what you guys think of that.
Get The Picture 