Top Twenty Five Teams In Ncaa Division example essay topic

Ryan Jerzy Jerzy 1 Cady English 10326 May 2003"NCAA Football Playoff System " Thesis: The Bowl Championship Series (BCS) formula has been used to determine the top twenty-five teams in NCAA Division I college since 1998. Many think this system is inadequate and should be changed. The alternative is a playoff system that would give more of the top teams a chance to be named the NCAA football National Champion. I. BCS formula A. Computers 1. Where they " re from 2. How they work. Polls 1.

Where they " re from 2. How they work. Schedule strength. Team losses. Putting the formula together II. Why the BCS formula should be changed.

BCS is inadequate 1. How it's unfair 2. Problems within. Give top teams a chance. Fans, players, and coaches views. Playoff format.

Determining teams playoff seed 1. BCS formula 2. Conference leaders. How playoff would work 1.8 team playoff 2.16 team playoff.

Why a playoff would be better Jerzy 2"NCAA Football Playoff System" The end of the NCAA Division I college football seasons is near and there are still five undefeated teams in the nation, how can five teams play for top honors in the sport? The answer is easy, a football playoff system to crown the champion. The Bowl Championship Series (BCS) formula has been used to determine the top twenty-five teams in NCAA Division I college since 1998. The alternative is a playoff system that would give more of the top teams a chance to be named the NCAA football national champion. A playoff system would give the NCAA Division I football postseason a little more than twenty meaningless bowl games and a national championship game to wrap up the season, but to get to that I should first explain how the Bowl Championship Series (BCS) formula works to determine the top twenty-five teams in the nation. First there are eight computers that are used in the BCS computer system today to determine this part of the ranking system.

Out of the eight computers only the seven highest rankings are used for one team, then the seven rankings (worst ranking dropped) are averaged out respectively. All of these computer rankings are determined through eight newspapers and sports specialists. These computer rankings are how these eight sources rank the top twenty-five teams in the nation. Jerzy 3 The eight rankings come from these computers, Richard Billingsley (Bill. ), Dunkel Index (Dunk. ), Kenneth Massey (Mass.

), New York Times (NYT), David Rothman (Roth. ), Jeff Sagarin's USA Today (Sag. ), Matthews / Scripps-Howard (S.H. ), and The Anderson & Hester / Seattle Times (S.T. ). Brad Edwards, a writer for ESPN. com, has this to say about the computer system: "Though this may be the weakest part of the (BCS) equation, it can still make a difference. Last year, pollsters eventually overlooked Wisconsin's loss to Cincinnati, but the computers didn't. The result: the Badgers had an average computer ranking of 7.71 despite ranking fourth in both polls".

7.71 is the average of where the team is in the rankings among the top twenty-five teams in the nation according to the seven computers. The second part of the Bowl Championship Series formula is the two polls. One comes from the associated press and the other comes from coaches around the league. The Associated Press polls are organized by a number of different newspapers, magazines, and media. While the NCAA football coaches put together the Coaches poll. "This is probably the most critical element of the four because it has only two subsets (the media and coaches polls) to be averaged" (Edwards).

The polls are run similarly to the computers; the two ranking are simply averaged together. "The impact held by each poll Jerzy 4 is greater than that of any one computer or any one opponent. It is no coincidence that the top two poll teams have played for the national title in both years of the BCS" (Edwards). Teams one year can have an effortless schedule and the next have the toughest schedule in the division. That is why the strength of a teams schedule had to be incorporated into the BCS". Within the schedule strength component itself, teams are ranked 1 through 115 based on the winning percentages of their opponents and their opponents' opponents.

Each ranking is multiplied by. 04 to give the teams a point value for schedule strength" (Edwards). Non-conference games affects the strength of schedule the most, "The key is finding opponents that won't beat you but will beat almost everyone else they play" (Edwards). The last part of the BCS formula is the number of team losses. Team losses obviously hurt a team in both the computer and poll rankings, but for each loss the BCS formula also adds another point to a teams BCS total. This makes it very hard but not impossible for a team that has lost only one game to move ahead of an undefeated team in the rankings.

Jerzy 5 To put all the parts of the BCS formula together simply add together the computer rankings average, the polls average, the schedule ranking points, and the number of team losses. Once these numbers are added together each team will have their BCS ranking number, which most of the time is a number with decimal points because the computer and poll averages are not always a whole number. Then the teams are ranked one through twenty-five with the number one team in the nation being the one with the lowest BCS score. The Bowl Championship Series will then take the top two teams via the BCS formula and match them against each other with the winner to be crowned the NCAA Division I football champion. Bill Vilona, of the Pensacola News Journal wrote, "All of us in the equity conferences believe the BCS has worked; it has done what it's supposed to do.

It's not perfect, but I don't think anything is perfect". The Bowl Championship Series should be changed to a playoff system. The BCS does a great job of utilizing all the statistics and polls to establish the top twenty-five teams in the nation. On the other hand the top two teams are the ones who attend the national championship and that is where the BCS system is unfair. For Example, Alex Giles wrote in his Article "The Proposed Marriage of the BCS and a Playoff Format", "In 2000, the BCS ranked Oklahoma Jerzy 6#1 and Florida State #2 at seasons end, despite the fact that Miami was ranked #2 in the both the AP and the coaches poll and had beaten the Seminoles (Florida State) during the regular season". Ranking problems like that one that happened in 2000 are why the BCS system should modify to a playoff system.

"The BCS is a somewhat confusing and often controversial system" (Vilona). The top twenty-five teams in Division I football battle each and every week for a better spot in the rankings. Most of the time it comes down to the last week of season play to determine which two teams will progress into the national championship game. The top teams should be given an opportunity to earn their way into the championship game. For instance in the NCAA Division I basketball tournament that crowns the national champion, teams that are not even ranked in the top twenty-five still have a chance to win it all with a total of 65 spots in the tournament. The top football teams in the nation deserve a piece of the championship pie just as much as the top two teams in the nation do.

There are many fans, NCAA players, coaches, and officials who would like to see the college football season conclude with some type of playoff system. In Breck Brewers article he comments that, Jerzy 7"A recent poll by Sports Wire revealed that 80% of fans and 75% of Division I players want to see a national championship playoff". It's not just the players and fans who want to see a college football postseason. Ed Sherman of The Chicago Tribune, reported that, "Joe Paterno, the Penn State coach, has long advocated of a playoff". Richard Rosenblatt, also a writer for The Chicago Tribune, reveals that, "Phillip Fulmer of Tennessee, John Cooper of Ohio State, Bobby Bowden of Florida State, and Steve Spurrier of Florida are all in favor of a playoff system".

Blair Kerkhoff, of The Kansas City Star, comments that, "University Presidents, thought to be the most resistant to the idea of a playoff, said yes by 57.5 percent". Many believe the BCS system should be changed, but there are those who would like it to remain the same. "BCS chief Roy Kramer says a playoff might be right for the elite teams such as Florida, Florida State, Nebraska, and Tennessee, it still won't work for everyone in Division I" (Rosenblatt). "Opponents of the system argue that playoffs would simply take up too much time and would not allow student-athletes to accomplish their main objective while at school: to learn" (Brewer). With good arguments on both sides of the topic how should this problem be resolved? Jerzy 8 A playoff would be a great resolution to the NCAA Division I college football championship.

To start any type of playoff the first thing needed are the team rankings to determine which teams will play each other. This can be resolved in one of two ways. The first way is to keep the current BCS formula to rank the top twenty-five teams to determine the playoff seeds. This would mean keeping the computers, polls, strength of schedule, and number of team losses in the rankings. This would be a simple way to do it since the system is used today and it does a good job of determining the top teams, but is inadequate when it has to determine the top two teams. The second way to determine the playoff match-ups are to take the conference champion from the ACC, Big East, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac 10, and SEC.

Along with the six conference champions the top ranked non-conference champion teams would also be added to the playoff respectively. Those are the two ways that the match-ups in the playoffs could be determined. An eight-team playoff would be a great way to replace the current BCS system. Here is how it would work (see figure 1); "The playoff system would begin at the end of the second full week in December, matching #1 vs. #8, #4 vs. #5, #2 vs. #7, and #3 vs. #6 in the Quarterfinals; The winners of the four Quarterfinal match-ups Jerzy 9 would advance to the Semifinals to be played the following weekend. The winner of #1 vs. #8 would meet the winner of #4 vs. #5, and the winner of #2 vs. #3 would meet the winner of #3 vs. #6. The winners of the Semifinals would Advance to the National Championship and the winner of the final National Championship game would be deemed the National Champion regardless of its season ending BCS rankings" (Giles 3).

This system would give six more teams a chance a the national title and create a "march madness" type feel to the college football playoffs. A sixteen-team playoff would also work great, giving more teams a chance to win and a chance to lose. This playoff system would work like this; in the first round of the playoffs teams will be playing for one of the eight spots in the next round. The in the second round of the playoffs the winner of #1 vs. #16 would play the winner of #8 vs. #9, the winner of #4 vs. #13 would play the winner of #6 vs. #11, the winner of #3 vs. #14 would play the winner of # 7 vs. #10, and the winner of #5 vs. #12 would play the winner of #2 vs. #15. The next round in the playoffs would be the semifinals matching the winner of the '#1 vs. #16' vs. '#8 vs. #9' to play the winner of '#4 vs. #13' vs. '#6 Jerzy 10 vs. #11' and the winner of '#3 vs. #14' vs. '#7 vs. #10' to play the winner of '#5 vs. #12' vs. '#2 vs. #15'. The next round would be the National Championship game matching the two teams that made it all the way through three rounds of the playoffs.

The winner of this game would be crowned the NCAA football National Champion. This sixteen-team playoff would take more time to complete than the eight-team playoff, but it would give more teams a chance. Each of those two playoff systems would be an improvement from the current BCS system. A playoff would give additional teams a chance to become the Division I national champion. It would add excitement to the college football postseason that has never been there before. Teams will fight all season long to earn a chance to get into the playoff tournament.

"College football stands alone among major sports without a season ending tournament" (Kerkhoff). It's time for the NCAA to propose a playoff system incorporated into their football program for the improvement of the league. The BCS, with its complicated computers, polls, and formula will not last forever in the college football league. All the time and statistics that go into the formula make the BCS in need of a change. A majority of NCAA football fans, players, coaches, and even university presidents would like to see the current format changed to Jerzy 11 a playoffs system. Either an eight-team or sixteen-team playoff would incorporate properly into the college football season.

A playoff would give top teams that are not ranked number one or number two an opportunity at winning the desirable title of NCAA Division I national football champions. With the BCS system in operation until 2006 the college football playoff system will have to wait a few years until it can be initiated into the world of the NCAA. Jerzy 12 Jerzy 13"

Bibliography

Brewer, Breck. "It's Time to Bring on the Brackets". n. pay. 4 Apr 2003.
Edwards, Brad. "figuring Out the BCS isn't as hard as it looks". 15 Aug 2002.
n. pay. 8 April 2003.
Giles, Alex. "The Proposed Marriage of the BCS and a Playoff Format". 19 Nov. 2002.
4 sections. 8 Apr. 2003.
Kerkhoff, Blair. "Special Report: College Officials Say Yes to Playoffs". Kansas City Star. n. pay. 8 Apr. 2003.
Rosenblatt, Richard. "Playoff Looming, But BCS Viable Despite its Flaws. Chicago Tribune. 10 Jan. 1999: 5.
Sherman, Ed. "NCAA Football Playoff Arrives At 'Study's tage". Chicago Tribune. 22 Jan. 1994: 1.
Vilona, Bill. "College Football Playoffs Not in the Picture". Pensacola News Journal. 23 Jul. 2000.
n. pay. 4 Apr. 2003.