Many sports fans do not like the way college football determines their national champion. Football is my favorite sport and, in most cases, I tend to like college better than professional. Something I like about the BCS format is that, as a college football fan, you are guaranteed to have two of the top teams play for the championship. It is hard to point to a year and say a team that played in the BCS Championship Game was not worthy. There have been some years when an equally worthy team gets snubbed, but never a game without two teams that were worthy. A matchup of two of the best teams would not always be the result of a tournament format. Upsets would occur and the hottest teams would advance, just like in the other sports.
In college football the regular season matters. The complete body of work throughout the season is considered when determining the champion. Why should a team that lost three games to begin the season have the same chance of winning a championship as a team that lost a game at the tail end of their season? That is what would occur with a tournament. I have heard over and over again how a team is now playing like a championship team. So that means we just forget the beginning of the season when they weren’t playing like a championship team?
In any sport that uses a “one and done” tournament format you are not guaranteed to see two of the best teams play for the championship. In some cases sports that use a series format will weed out the teams that are getting “hot at the right time,” but this isn’t always the case. Here are some examples of this “getting hot at the right time” phenomena:
- New York Giants 2012 (NFL)
- Green Bay Packers 2011 (NFL)
- Arizona Cardinals 2009 (NFL)
- New York Giants 2007 (NFL)
- Connecticut Huskies 2010-11 (NCB)
- Syracuse Orangeman 2002-03 (NCB)
- Villanova Wildcats 1984-85 (NCB)
- NC State Wolfpack 1982-83 (NCB)
- Houston Rockets 1994-95 (NBA)*
- Washington Bullets 1977-78 (NBA)*
- St. Louis Cardinals 2011 (MLB)*
- Boston Red Sox 2004 (MLB)*
- Florida Marlins 2003 (MLB)*
- Anaheim Angels 2002 (MLB)*
- Florida Marlins 1997 (MLB)*
This is by no means an exhaustive list and for some sports it was much easier to weed through history and pick out champions that were not the best team throughout the season. With the exception of the New York Giants from this year, all of these teams won their respective championships, despite, in many cases, multiple teams being better throughout the season.
There are arguments to be made on both sides; some people love to enter a postseason with uncertainty and the thought that any team can win the championship. Others would rather see the teams that have proven they are the best throughout the entire season battle it out for the title. Personally, I love the story of an underdog, except of course when I have a rooting interest in the game. However, there is definitely some merit to a system that ensures the championship game is played between two of the very best teams in the sport.
No comments:
Post a Comment