New Grantland: Goodbye to the BCS… But Careful What You Wish For

It’s now up over at Grantland:

The primary advantage of a playoff is certainty, and after years of endless BCS debate — which followed decades of debate under the earlier bowl systems — certainty has real allure. But in most sports that have playoffs, like the NFL or the NBA, the criteria for getting to the playoffs is basically objective. Most playoff spots are decided based on win/loss records, with certain mechanical tiebreakers in place and known in advance. It’s not that the playoff crowns the best or most deserving team — just ask the 10-6 New York Giants that knocked off the undefeated New England Patriots in Super Bowl XLII. It’s that the loser has nothing to complain about: Everyone knows the rules.

Yet the new College Football Playoff lacks the very thing that makes playoffs in other sports so palatable, namely a semblance of objective certainty. While the defective BCS formula should have been interred long ago, it has been replaced by a Council of Platonic Guardians. The College Football Playoff selection committee will meet confidentially, then announce the identities of the playoff participants by edict. That’s not exactly what I’d call “settling it on the field.”

Read the whole thing.

  • Yrro Simyarin

    A beautiful argument for why I think a playoff should have nothing to do with a selection committee, and everything to do with conference champions from the power conferences, with home field advantage for the better team.

    I don’t care about the “best” team – I care about the team who won their way to the game. If we only cared about the best team, then why play the games?

    Also – home field advantage pretty much does translate to spotting the better team a few points.

  • Miles_Ellison

    In the end, this will just be an excuse to put multiple SEC teams in the playoffs, whether they actually deserve to be there or not.