Help with Speech: Topic: BCS vs Playoff System

Oct 17, 2010
71
2
8
Hey everyone i am currently researching for a fifteen minute speech and could use your opinions on the topic.

Pro's and Con's what are you for BCS or the Playoff System.

The good replies will be used for this speech. I am in a group of 5 people and this topic will be debated and discussed in front of the class.
 
Mention of course the NCAA Basketball tournament and the popularity/money that draws compared to bowls like the Little Ceasars Bowl.
 
I would also like to know what you guys are for. Because i am trying to prove Bcs system is better. And would like to use the people who agree with my for my advantage.
 
Last edited:
Mention of course the NCAA Basketball tournament and the popularity/money that draws compared to bowls like the Little Ceasars Bowl.

Maybe mention the revenue college football brings in and how it dwarfs the revenue brought in by college basketball. It all comes down to money and until you can convince every BCS school that they will make more money in a playoff than in the current system, a playoff isn't happening.
 
I think that the bowl system makes the regular season way more fun. Each game is incredibly important. One loss can mean the end of your chances at a championship. If there was a playoff, all the big games during the year would lose a lot of the luster. The regular season has big games every week and lasts longer than a playoff would so I'd rather have big games all year than just at the end of the year.
 
Hey everyone i am currently researching for a fifteen minute speech and could use your opinions on the topic.

Pro's and Con's what are you for BCS or the Playoff System.

The good replies will be used for this speech. I am in a group of 5 people and this topic will be debated and discussed in front of the class.

My suggetion would be that you can implement a playoff system while retaining the current bowl structure as-is.

Take the 8 highest ranked conference champs according to the BCS standings and they play at campus venues the first weekend in December. This season the matchups would be:

(8) Central Florida at (1) Auburn
(5) Oklahoma at (4) Wisconsin
(7) Nevada at (2) Oregon
(6) VA Tech at (3) TCU

The 4 winners play in 2 semi-final games at bowl venues on New Year's Day with the championship game a week or so later at another bowl venue.

The losers of the 4 first-round games still go to bowl games during the Holidays and the existing bowl games are played as-is during the Holidays. The bowl structure remains intact with no games played during final exams, all conference champs have access to the playoffs if they qualify (independents qualify if they are ranked in the Top 8), the extreme importance of regular season games remains intact, and much more revenue is generated (with revenues distributed to all D1 programs). The only drawback is additional travel required for fans of the two finalists but I'm sure the championship game would be a sellout.
 
My suggetion would be that you can implement a playoff system while retaining the current bowl structure as-is.

Take the 8 highest ranked conference champs according to the BCS standings and they play at campus venues the first weekend in December. This season the matchups would be:

(8) Central Florida at (1) Auburn
(5) Oklahoma at (4) Wisconsin
(7) Nevada at (2) Oregon
(6) VA Tech at (3) TCU

The 4 winners play in 2 semi-final games at bowl venues on New Year's Day with the championship game a week or so later at another bowl venue.

The losers of the 4 first-round games still go to bowl games during the Holidays and the existing bowl games are played as-is during the Holidays. The bowl structure remains intact with no games played during final exams, all conference champs have access to the playoffs if they qualify (independents qualify if they are ranked in the Top 8), the extreme importance of regular season games remains intact, and much more revenue is generated (with revenues distributed to all D1 programs). The only drawback is additional travel required for fans of the two finalists but I'm sure the championship game would be a sellout.

So you're leaving out Ohio St, Arkansas, LSU, Michigan St, Stanford, etc. but including Central Florida and Nevada? Or last season, a 12-1 Florida with one loss to 13-0 top ranked Alabama would have been left out? Yeah, not going to work.
 
My take...

Don't listen when someone says regular season loses luster. This is a crap arguement.

The regular season will always matter and mean as much. In a bowl or playoff system you can still drastically effect your position the same.

You keep the playoff small and the spots lucrative. This ensures the reg season matters.
 
I think there is a middle ground. I don't really support the BCS persay but I don't want a playoff system.

I like the bowl system and the regular season is the best out there.
 
Mention of course the NCAA Basketball tournament and the popularity/money that draws compared to bowls like the Little Ceasars Bowl.

Or mention that the Little Caesars Bowl brings in more money than the two teams that would be playing in round one of one NCAA tournament basketball game with two mid-major teams.

Like The Great Dan Hawkins said, "If we had a playoff system, games still wouldn't be won on the field, they'd be won in the training room because so many guys would be getting hurt."

Just look at the Indianapolis Colts last season, they had to play the super bowl without bob sanders, without a healthy dwight freeny.. and so forth. (I can't think of all the guys but all i kept hearing about was how banged up the colts were)
 
My take...

Don't listen when someone says regular season loses luster. This is a crap arguement.

The regular season will always matter and mean as much. In a bowl or playoff system you can still drastically effect your position the same.

You keep the playoff small and the spots lucrative. This ensures the reg season matters.

I think you include any more than 8 teams and the season does lose its luster. Then, what about the other 62 teams that currently go to bowl games or how do we decide who the top 8 are???

There is no clean solution out there even though all playoff supporters think its an open and shut case.
 
A full fledged playoff system would be a death blow for the athletic budgets of any program that is not perennially in the top 25. Only those teams good enough to be in the playoffs year after year would have any money for their programs.

As it stands now, bowl bids and extra practices for bowl prep benefit a large portion of the 120 FBS programs. If only 16 teams were to participate in a playoff every year the other 104 teams would get next to nothing. Some have proposed keeping some bowls around for the non-playoff teams but I can't see those bowls getting nearly the attention, or having near the payout of the current bowls. All attention and money would go toward the playoffs.

Another issue is how the playoff would work. With a 16 team playoff, the teams that end up in the championship game would end up playing 4 games after the regular season. If you keep 12 regular season games, which would mean those teams play 16 games in one year. Even though these guys are great athletes, they are not professionals like in the NFL. You will see a lot more injuries with 18-23 yr olds playing in 16 games. A "solution" would be to shorten the regular season to 10 games. However, this will hurt the non-playoff teams even more because there will be less ticket revenue, and less TV revenue.

Another issue is how it impacts recruiting for all of the 120+ FBS teams. Right now, some 4 star players go to the non-perennial powers, because they get to play and can still get the exposure of playing in a bowl at the end of the year. With a playoff system, the teams that are always in the playoffs would have that much more to offer recruits.

Another impact is to NFL prospects. Right now you have some NFL teams waiting until round 2 to draft "workhorse" running backs because they are worried about too many miles on the tires. If that running back is on a playoff college team, they might play 3 extra games and be that much more injury prone as a pro, hurting their career. Same issues with the other playoff players that have a higher potential for injury in extra games. The QB that gets a concussion in the 4 playoff game might drop 4 rounds because of it.

The key is to look at who a playoff system will benefit. In the long run will it really benefit teams outside the top 25? True, it might give TCU or Boise a chance to get to the championship, but the only reason Boise State has been able to build up their program is because they were able to build up to the higher status. A playoff system dwarfs the ability for lesser teams to build their program and we wouldn’t see any more BCS busters building up.


Someone mentioned how much the NCAA Basketball tourney makes, but they don’t seem to think about the fact that 65 teams get to be part of that and that a few more basketball games a year does not lead to as many more injuries as extra football games. There is no way to include more than a small fraction of the FBS teams in a playoff logistically so only that small fraction benefits.




The only thing that COULD work would be a Plus One system with the top 4 BCS teams. That would mean one extra game for the championship and leave the rest of the bowls alone. They might be able to go +2 at most with the top 8, but that lengthens the season even more and would probably lead to regular season changes.


Playoff proponents need to realize that these are NOT professional athletes. One extra Bowl game a year is a lot for them. You have travel and pre-bowl activities and the extra practices. If you do all of these at some level for each playoff game, that adds a lot more to what we are asking of student athletes. It works in the NFL because that’s their job. If NFL players get hurt in playoff games, they have their contract to back them up and the team has seasoned backups to step in.



I love the bowl system. It gives benefits to a lot more teams than a playoff would. Do you know how many donors pony up the extra dollars on a bowl trip? That donor money far outweighs the bowl payouts. An extensive playoff system would almost certainly kill the lesser bowls and the teams that would go to those lesser bowls along with them.



/rant
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rogue52
Cyjack I think you are wrong. Leaving out a team that lost a game or 2 is the point. This ensures that reg season matters.

Another key point people always miss when they make too large of playoff bracket. If #9 gets left out that's fine. The point is to find a true champion. If you bring in top 8 teams you can be 99% sure the true #1 is in there.
 
So you're leaving out Ohio St, Arkansas, LSU, Michigan St, Stanford, etc. but including Central Florida and Nevada? Or last season, a 12-1 Florida with one loss to 13-0 top ranked Alabama would have been left out? Yeah, not going to work.

Leaving teams out who don't win their conferences keep intact the extreme importance of the regular season and maintains the flow of big TV money for regular season games.
 
Idea #1.

I like the idea of using the BCS system to determine the top 8 teams in the nation, then having those 8 teams in a playoff. In this case it would be:
1 Auburn vs 8 Arkansas
4 Stanford vs 5 Wisconsin
3 TCU vs 6 Ohio State
2 Oregon vs 7 Oklahoma


Idea #2.

Get rid of the BCS national championship, and give all bowl bids away as normal.

Then have the winner of the Rose Bowl play the winner of the Sugar Bowl. And the winner of the Fiesta Bowl play the winner of the Orange Bowl (these can be switched, just giving an example). Then, obviously, the two winners would play.

This idea would keep the "integrity" of the names of the bowl games, but also declare a true winner through a playoff system.
 
Hey everyone i am currently researching for a fifteen minute speech and could use your opinions on the topic.

Pro's and Con's what are you for BCS or the Playoff System.

The good replies will be used for this speech. I am in a group of 5 people and this topic will be debated and discussed in front of the class.


Just look at the impact that a bowl win has on a program like Iowa State.

If we had a full playoff, like basketball, do you think we would get the same feeling from a first round win and a second round loss. Right now, 25% of the programs end the season with a win. We care about winning a bowl. Do you think we would have had as much interest in the last few games if we didn't have a chance at a bowl? Clearly, the bowl system makes the regular season important.

Only the premier teams (and ESPN junkies/bookies) really care about whether they are #1 (or who is #1). I care about my team and want to finish the season with some excitement so that the enthusiasm carries through to the next season.

NCAA football bowl picks are much more fun than NCAA basketball tournament picks. Nearly every game is a tough pick. And the competition in the pools keeps going right to the end. In basketball, just pick #1s and you do pretty well (of course, with a few notable exceptions). People who know nothing about basketball do well in the basketball pools. Gee, isn't that fun? :jimlad: In football, it is much more about whether a style of play or game plan will be able to overcome the other team. If you don't know football, then you are only lucky if you get more than 50%.
 
Ask the NFL or MLB if they would like to go back to a two team play-off. I think you know the answer. With an 8 team play-off you not only get a true champion but have many more meaningful bowl games (7 instead of 1) and you keep a lot more fans interested up to and beyond Jan 1. A play-off would not affect the regular season, only make it more meaningful for more teams down the stretch as it does in the NFL and MLB. It also would not hurt the also ran bowls as they still would be for traveling fans, final rankings and conference comparisons. Probably didn't help your argument did I?
 
To the OP: so, you have to defend both sides of the argument, right kid? Good luck- nothing you say, even if it is right, is going to convince tens of ADs and their presidents that your side is better EVEN AFTER defending both sides.

What you need to win your arguments are big bags of money for and against BCS. Since you wont have them, you will lose both sides of the debate:


Here's how your argument for class should go down:

Susy: BCS, blah blah blah, you get the point
You: Big Bag of Money

You win round one.

Susy: Playoffs suck, and here is why, because I have to debate.
You: ...another Big Bag of Money.

You win round two, with amazingly, the same argument for both sides.
 
Last edited:

Help Support Us

Become a patron