By now, you've noticed that I don't have any picks for college football bowl games. That's because this Web site boycotts the bowls, in hopes that the foolish college presidents soon realize how idiotic and archaic their system is. Could you imagine if NCAA basketball, instead of running its beloved 65-team tournament in March, decided to play 30 meaningless games, randomly designating one of them as its championship? Seriously, it's the dumbest thing ever.
Cleveland Indians minor league pitcher Mike Eisenberg, who runs a football-related blog, recently contacted me and suggested that we should do a back-and-forth argument regarding the playoff situation. He told me he was in favor of the bowls. I told him to send me a few questions in an e-mail, so I could answer, he could then respond, and so on. Here are the questions he asked me (in bold) and my responses to them:
| What will they do about classes and exams? Will the playoff schedule not take away from academics?
I never understood this argument. The BCS overlords and the greedy college presidents always give us crap about classes, finals and academics. Yet, the athletes in Division 1-AA, II and III all endure a playoff that lasts about a month. What, are they that much smarter than the Division 1-A players? Is that why they can engage in a postseason and eschew a few days of studying for their B.S. classes like Sports Management, the History of Disco and Natural Disasters - In Movies? Two of those are real courses at Penn State, by the way.
The bottom line is, if the lack of studying were a real problem, the other divisions wouldn't hold a legitimate postseason. The agenda the college presidents have with maintaining the BCS has to do with financial reasons. The fact that they're insulting the public's intelligence by giving us false reasons behind their decision not to organize a playoff is yet another reason to eliminate the BCS. The people in charge who don't want an NCAA Football Tournament are liars and frauds who cannot be trusted. I wouldn't want to be associated with them.
There will be up to four, maybe more, extra games for some teams. What will happen to their post-regular season statistics? Stats count during bowl games, so will there need to be a new stat category?
Do stats count in March Madness? I don't even know, I'm asking you. If so, then OK. If not, then OK. Who cares? Statistics shouldn't hold any college president back from electing to run a playoff to determine a legitimate champion. Tell me, would you rather have passing and rushing totals that aren't skewed, or a national title that decides a just champion?
The BCS makes around $100 million in revenue each year. How will the people who benefit from that fare? What is more important? Dollars or Sense?
Now, the real issue. College presidents don't want a playoff because they're scared of losing the money they're making every year. As I've mentioned countless times, they are greedy, selfish, stubborn and untrustworthy. They are also archaic dinosaurs who don't realize that a correctly conducted playoff could produce even more revenue for them.
Think about it - people would be filling out brackets, taking off from work that first Friday, watching mid-majors upset the likes of Ohio State, USC and Oklahoma, and enjoying what could be the best event in all of sports. This thing would be a cash cow. And the kicker is, while you have eight or 16 teams competing for the title, you could still have the minor bowls throughout the week. Everyone would at least stay static financially. The schools perennially involved in the tournament would get rich beyond their wildest dreams.
The BCS began in 1998. Only three times has the BCS failed to create a definite champion. In 2003, 2004, and this season, all of which had unique qualities. Who is to blame? The randomness of college football or the selection process of the BCS?
Only three times? Three occurrences in a 100-year stretch is OK. But you said "since 1998." That's only 10 years. So, 30 percent of the time you're not getting a definite champion? Does the NFL award the Lombardi Trophy to at least two teams thrice a decade? It just doesn't make any sense.
If a playoff is installed, what happens to the bubble teams that are left out? Won't it just create the same mayhem that leaving Missouri out this year has caused?
It's impossible to please everyone. Even in college basketball, teams complain every year. But let me ask you something. What's worse: Giving an undefeated team (i.e. Boise State and Hawaii) or a one-loss team (i.e. Kansas) absolutely no shot to win the title, or leaving a three-loss squad out of the tournament? If a team drops three contests in a 12-game season, it doesn't deserve to have a gripe. But if a squad wins every single one of its Saturday battles and doesn't even get the chance... What's the point of even playing at all?
Once teams have clinched a spot, what is to keep them from sitting out good players and giving up? It happens in the NFL, but having to fight for the top spot in the rankings every week in college is what makes it exciting.
You see college teams giving up all the time! Right after Boston College lost its first game of the year, it didn't even show up against Maryland. Following USC's defeat at the hands of Stanford, the Trojans sleepwalked through Arizona, nearly losing, 20-13. After Wisconsin suffered its first loss, it was demolished by a mediocre Penn State squad.
As for sitting out good players, you don't see Roy Williams and Coach K holding out their top athletes in the conference tournaments, despite having their bids locked up. They want as high a seed as possible. I feel as though college football coaches would treat their players the same way.
I received an e-mail from Mike a few days later...
Here is what it said:
"OK, I'm copping out on this one. You've turned me to your side. Great answers to the questions. They are all convincing. Thank you - let's get the playoffs going."
I really hope I convinced more than one person. If you still like the BCS and the bowls, you fall into one of three categories:
- You're an idiot and cannot understand logic.
- You love fraud sports that produce illegitimate champions thrice a decade.
- You're a 150-year-old stubborn college president counting cash amid Bingo and Jell-O meals.
I ask you to please join the Boycott the Bowls Initiative.
Your duty? Simple...
DO NOT WATCH ANY BOWL GAMES!
("Championship Game" is optional)
I cannot stress this enough! If a good amount of people stop watching the bowls, TV ratings will go down, sponsors will pull out and the greedy overlords will be forced to switch to a playoff.
If you love college football and want to save it, you will do this.
But until there is a legitimate postseason... The Ten Boycott the Bowls Initiative Commandments
I will not post any picks for bowl games.
I will not offer any suggestions on whom to pick in bowl games.
I will not watch any bowl games.
I will not look up the score of any bowl games.
I will not analyze any bowl games.
I will refer to bowl games as "exhibition matches."
I will advocate for a playoff at every opportunity.
I will slander and libel college presidents at every opportunity.
I will not trust or respect anyone who favors bowl games after reading this page.
I will continue to run my NCAA Football Tournament (which ESPN has stolen from me) every year until there is a playoff.
Give a hand for The Ten Boycott the Bowls Initiative Commandments. I'd like to preserve these on a stone tablet, but despite searching my house, I could not find one.
Until I do, check out the following:
2007 NCAA Football Tournament
2007 NCAA Football Tournament Printable Bracket
Mike Eisenberg's Blog
2008 NFL Mock Draft
Weekly NFL Picks