Family reunions and the BCS
Cameron Blair
Issue date: 9/25/08 Section: Sports
So, after way too much turkey and pasta salad, I began to think about how bigger isn't always better. Then I began to doze off (too much triptophan). But after waking up, I realized the significance this concept holds in the sports world.
The Football Championship Subdivision (formerly Division I-AA) is, in many ways, superior to the Football Bowl Subdivision (formerly Division I-A).
Now I know the talent level of the players in FBS is, for the most part, superior to the talent level of the FCS schools. I'm not saying that the smaller schools can consistently compete well with the football factory schools (Appalachian State notwithstanding) - when I say the FCS is better, I am referring to the competitive system the league has in place. Instead of using an insanely complicated formula (see: BCS) to decide who plays in the national championship game, the FCS uses a very novel idea: letting the teams decide who is the best team.
The FCS accomplishes this by implementing a playoff system consisting of 16 teams. The field is made up of the eight conference winners as well as eight teams that receive at-large bids. These 16 teams face off in a single-elimination tournament, and the two teams left standing play the championship game. No questions are asked and no one is given a raw deal. The best team wins.
See how simple that is? It's just like that small family reunion where you can be comfortable enough around everyone to let the burps fly, and the food is homemade and delicious.
Now let's contrast that with the process of determining a champion in the supposedly superior FBS.
Here, each team plays a 10- to 12-game schedule in which roughly a third of those games are played against teams with a fraction of the amount of scholarships the larger schools have.
There are a handful of "marquee" games during the regular season that the networks get to hype endlessly, and these games often end up failing miserably to live up to the hype (the USC drubbing of Ohio State earlier this season).
The Football Championship Subdivision (formerly Division I-AA) is, in many ways, superior to the Football Bowl Subdivision (formerly Division I-A).
Now I know the talent level of the players in FBS is, for the most part, superior to the talent level of the FCS schools. I'm not saying that the smaller schools can consistently compete well with the football factory schools (Appalachian State notwithstanding) - when I say the FCS is better, I am referring to the competitive system the league has in place. Instead of using an insanely complicated formula (see: BCS) to decide who plays in the national championship game, the FCS uses a very novel idea: letting the teams decide who is the best team.
The FCS accomplishes this by implementing a playoff system consisting of 16 teams. The field is made up of the eight conference winners as well as eight teams that receive at-large bids. These 16 teams face off in a single-elimination tournament, and the two teams left standing play the championship game. No questions are asked and no one is given a raw deal. The best team wins.
See how simple that is? It's just like that small family reunion where you can be comfortable enough around everyone to let the burps fly, and the food is homemade and delicious.
Now let's contrast that with the process of determining a champion in the supposedly superior FBS.
Here, each team plays a 10- to 12-game schedule in which roughly a third of those games are played against teams with a fraction of the amount of scholarships the larger schools have.
There are a handful of "marquee" games during the regular season that the networks get to hype endlessly, and these games often end up failing miserably to live up to the hype (the USC drubbing of Ohio State earlier this season).
