The Instigator
kenicks
Pro (for)
Winning
36 Points
The Contender
dabigdood
Con (against)
Losing
12 Points

College Football Should Have a Playoff System

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/22/2008 Category: Sports
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,778 times Debate No: 2861
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (9)
Votes (16)

 

kenicks

Pro

The college football postseason is a mess. From the complex bowl games, to the BCS rankings, to the controversial decisions, a change is definetely in order. I think a playoff system is that change needed.

Just look at every other major sport, pro and college; hockey, basketball, baseball, soccer, pro football; they all have a playoff format, a bracket, to determine the overall champion. No complaints are coming out of those sports about their postseason, controversial champions, or rankings. Why should college football be any different?

I wish luck to my contender, and await their first rebuttal.
dabigdood

Con

Ok well you say that the post season is a mess however I would argue that it is nothing near that. Having millions of viewers watching ESPN and every single game of the season to figure out whether their team will make the top bowl, or any bowl at all is not a mess.

In taking the affirmative side of this debate your opinions say that you don't think that every game should matter because right now every team knows that with a single loss they could be eliminated from contention for a national championship. The fact that right now every game is extremely important makes more fans watch the games which turns into more money for college football as well as each individual college.

Having this massive decision at the end of the year also makes more and more people watch shows like ESPN to see what teams made what bowls.

And finally, the bowl system simply gathers more money for everyone. The places that the games are held receive more tourists which gives more money to different areas of the country. Also if there were a playoff system many less teams would compete thus many less college programs would receive the benefits of post season football.
Debate Round No. 1
kenicks

Pro

"Having millions of viewers watching ESPN and every single game of the season to figure out whether their team will make the top bowl, or any bowl at all is not a mess."

Quite frankly, this situation is a mess; largely in part to the muddled BCS rankings.

Fans are stuck on pins and needles all year while watching their favorite team play, knowing that one loss will destroy their chances at the gold, the supreme BCS Title. One loss equals devastation for each team. One simple loss crushes a team's dream. One loss is one year wasted.

Does it have to be that way? No, it doesn't. I believe that the way the college football postseason is currently set up takes away from lesser-known colleges, with focus primarily shadowed over the high-ranked, success-predicted schools. With the bowl game system, focus on many schools are taken away. Tell me, how much time is spent on Sportscenter dicussing the dynamics and breaking down the gameplans being put to use in the Roady's Humanitarian Bowl? Played since 1997, last year's game featured Fresno State and Georgia Tech, with the Bulldogs running up 27 unanswered points in the second half, trouncing Georgia Tech 40-28? Who could forget that?

I did.

Maybe it was because the media preoccupied me with ongoing stories about the Fiesta, Rose, and Sugar bowls. Not to mention the BCS National Championship Game. Yes, while some bowls are going to be bigger than others, if you're going to have that many (32 as of last year) then divide attention among them equally.

Which brings me to a solution for lack of attention given to bowl games and colleges; a playoff, one hypothetically resembling the NCAA Men's Basketball Bracket. It should come out like this: 4 sections of 16 colleges, whether sorted by region, league, etc., totaling out to 64 teams. A round would be played each week, narrowing down from the first and second preliminary rounds to the Sweet Sixteen, Elite Eight, Final Four, and the National Championship Game. The whole process would take about six weeks, leaving analysts and fans plenty of time to track their favorite teams, in an arguably more exciting way; more upsets, more drama, more at stake. Unlike underappreciated, miniscure bowl games, each round and game would earn equal attention, much like the March Madness Tournament.

"if there were a playoff system many less teams would compete thus many less college programs would receive the benefits of post season football."

Au contraire. With the playoff system I have devised out, the same number of teams would play as the bowl games, 64, giving each team the benefits of postseason football. It could arguably give the teams even more benefit, as rather than their resume for the year simply stating "Lost in Meineke Car Care Bowl", it would read, "Reached Sweet Sixteen", or even "Reached Final Four".

More benefits would be given to each college and team, with more promises waiting in store for them.

Your rebuttal?
dabigdood

Con

First I would simply like to point out that you haven't argued my last two points of my opening statement. Does this mean that you can't, or you agree, or have you just not gotten there yet?

"Quite frankly, this situation is a mess; largely in part to the muddled BCS rankings."

The rankings are anything but muddled. All year BCS ranks teams 1,2,3,4,5,6... that is the exact opposite of muddled, it is well organized.

"Fans are stuck on pins and needles all year while watching their favorite team play, knowing that one loss will destroy their chances at the gold, the supreme BCS Title."

This is exactly what makes sports interesting, the excitement and tension. What you're suggesting is that the regular season should not matter because 64 out of the 120 schools would compete in the playoffs.

"One loss equals devastation for each team. One simple loss crushes a team's dream. One loss is one year wasted."

Also I would like to point out that 1 loss will very rarely knock out the teams aspirations of winning the Nat. Championship, this year the National Champion (LSU) lost two games and still advanced to the BCS title game.

"Tell me, how much time is spent on Sportscenter dicussing the dynamics and breaking down the gameplans being put to use in the Roady's Humanitarian Bowl?"

More than the NCAA Basketball's National Tournament's first round 5 vs 11 match up. At least the Humanitarian Bowl was broadcast live, how many of the opening round March Madness games are? And since football games are longer, how can all of them be broadcast?

"I did."

It doesn't sound like it.

"Maybe it was because the media preoccupied me with ongoing stories about the Fiesta, Rose, and Sugar bowls. Not to mention the BCS National Championship Game. Yes, while some bowls are going to be bigger than others, if you're going to have that many (32 as of last year) then divide attention among them equally."

So are you saying that attention will be spread evenly between the games of your hypothetical tournament? That is simply not possible, people will be drawn towards the higher seeds matches and that is what the media covers.

"The whole process would take about six weeks"

That is a ridiculously long time. Right now the whole system only take 3 weeks and if the playoffs take just as long as half of the season that just demeans the regular season again.

"in an arguably more exciting way; more upsets, more drama, more at stake"

At the expense of the regular season games.

"Unlike underappreciated, miniscure bowl games, each round and game would earn equal attention, much like the March Madness Tournament."

Again, it is ludicrous to say that the final four rounds would "earn equal attention" as the earliest rounds.

To conclude, you are missing two of the main things that make college football extremely popular among colleges. First, the fact that it earns an incredible amount of money for the school, especially when the team gets to a bowl. This would not happen with a tournament. And secondly, the regular season is meaningful because there is no playoff system. Under your proposal the regular season has very little meaning because it would basically be a warm-up for the tournament for the good teams. This also ties into the money issue because if people realize that the regular season is a warm-up they won't buy tickets, and this destroys the self-sustaining environment of college football.

I hope to see a response to my 3rd and 4th contentions in your final speech
Debate Round No. 2
kenicks

Pro

"The rankings are anything but muddled. All year BCS ranks teams 1,2,3,4,5,6... that is the exact opposite of muddled, it is well organized."

Ah, yes, it is well organized at a first glance. That is, until you look deeper in. The way the BCS system works is a compilation of head-to-head matchups and difficulty of schedule, thrown in with different conferences, and specific games. The BCS has 6 of its own conferences: ACC, Pac-10, Big Ten, SEC, Big 12, and Notre Dame (independent). Non-BCS Conferences are as follows: Conference USA, Mid-American, Mountain West, Sun Belt, and Western Athletic Conference. There are 5 BCS Bowls played: Rose, Fiesta, Sugar, Orange, and, of course, the BCS National Championship Game.

Let's take a look at the participants for these BCS Bowls:
Rose Bowl - Big Ten champ vs. Pac-10 champ
Fiesta Bowl - Big 12 champ
Orange Bowl - ACC champ
Sugar Bowl - SEC champ
(One of these games is selected to be the BCS National Championship Game, thus donning the title such as "Sugar Bowl (National Championship Game)")

Let's say that the #1 team is the Big 12 champ, and the #2 team is the Big Ten champ. These two teams are set aside to play in the National Championship game. Then, the two teams with the #2 rankings in the Big 12 and Big Ten are put together, and the team with the higher ranking is put into a slot. Let's say the National Championship Game that year was to be the Sugar Bowl. The bowl games would pan out to look like this:

Rose Bowl - 2nd Overall in Big Ten vs. Pac-10 Champ
Fiesta Bowl - SEC Champ
Orange Bowl - ACC Champ
Sugar Bowl - #1 vs. #2

The Big East Champion is given a spot in one of these bowls, and, if ranked in the top 8, Notre Dame is given a spot. So it would look like this:

Rose Bowl - 2nd Overall in Big Ten vs. Pac-10 Champ
Fiesta Bowl - SEC Champ vs. Notre Dame/2nd overall in Big 12
Orange Bowl - ACC Champ vs. Big East Champ
Sugar Bowl - #1 vs. #2

Under these circumstances, the only way a non-BCS conference champion can receive berth in a BCS bowl game is if they:

Are ranked in the top twelve
OR
Ranked in the top sixteen and higher than another BCS Conference champion.

These teams are classfied as BCS Busters.

So, overall, the BCS Bowl Games are classified as such:

Rose Bowl - 2nd Overall in Big Ten/BCS Buster vs. Pac-10 Champ/BCS Buster
Fiesta Bowl - SEC Champ/BCS Buster vs. Notre Dame/2nd overall in Big 12/BCS Buster
Orange Bowl - ACC Champ/BCS Buster vs. Big East Champ
Sugar Bowl - #1/BCS Buster vs. #2/BCS Buster

Doesn't seem that hard to be a BCS Buster, eh?

In the 10 years of BCS Rankings, there have been three BCS Busters. There have been forty-two BCS Bowls. 39 of the 42 teams in BCS Bowls have been BCS Teams. Non-BCS Teams reach BCS bowls 7.14% of the time.

Seems a little biased. A little too biased.

Kudos to the 2006 Boise State Broncos, the 2005 Utah Uteps, and the 2007 Hawai'i Warriors, for cracking through the bizzare BCS.

But enough about the bowls. Let's talk about the playoffs.

"Fans are stuck on pins and needles all year while watching their favorite team play, knowing that one loss will destroy their chances at the gold, the supreme BCS Title." (my quote)

"This is exactly what makes sports interesting, the excitement and tension. What you're suggesting is that the regular season should not matter because 64 out of the 120 schools would compete in the playoffs." (your rebuttal quote)

First of all, I had already stated the fact that the amount of teams playing in the playoff format would be equal to the number of teams playing in the current Bowl Format; 64 out of 120.

Second of all, you say that "the regular season should not matter because 64 out of 120 schools would compete in the playoffs". Let's take a look at college basketball. 64 teams compete in their playoffs, their March Madness Bracket. Because so many teams compete in this tournament, do you infer that College Basketball fans don't treat each game of their season with value? Of course not! Each game has impact on their rankings, their seeding, the team's value.

'Ah', you think as you read this, 'But College Basketball has 341 teams, compared to college football's 120. He's run himself in a trap!'

I have come to realize this as well, and the fact that half the teams would receive berth in this playoff would diminish the purpose of the regular season. Like all flaws in postseason formats in sports, things can be changed. So, rather than having a proposed 64-team bracket, it could shorten down to a 32-team bracket, or even a 16-team bracket. In college basketball, roughly 18% of teams get a chance to partake in March Madness. With a 16-team bracket, a mere 13% of teams would get a chance to partake in the postseason, thus, elevating the importance of each regular season game.

Have I satisfied you yet?

'Apparently not', you think, 'because schools would lose money from the loss of the sponsorship of the bowl games.'

I'd like to go further into this debate by bringing up the flaws of sponsorship in bowl games. One looks at the BCS Bowl games to see that the most broadcasted, most analyzed, most hyped games of the year are sponsored by the following companies:

Tostitos
Citi
FedEx
Allstate
AT&T (former)
Nokia (former)

For years these games have lived down as plainly the Rose Bowl. The Orange Bowl. The Sugar Bowl. The Fiesta Bowl. That's how everyone remembered them; that's what they lived down to be; that's what people thought of when they thought of College Football.

Then they had to go and change things. Now, tell me, please, somebody tell me, what in god's name do Tortilla Chips, Retirement Funds, Phone Companies, Postal Services, and Financial Services have to do with football?

Let me rephrase that: What in god's name do big, greedy, corporate chains of Tortilla Chips, Retirement Funds, Phone Companies, Postal Services, and Financial Services have to do with football?

Nothing.

But some people don't see it as nothing. Some people see it as an opportunity to advertise their product through beloved pastimes. Some people see it as an opportunity to earn some quick cash by signing a piece of paper, handing over the rights to a beloved sporting event, a pastime, to greedy corporations, so they can slap their product name on it. They think it'll create affiliation, so when Bowl season comes around, people subliminally think "It's time to stock up on tortilla chips (Tostito's, of course), purchase insurance (my gut feeling tells me Allstate is the best choice), buy an excessive bluetooth- unlimited-texting-wi-fi-interent cell phone (I should get it with AT&T's service-they deliever our world!) and deliver my mail from FedEx, because with Express, Ground, Kinko's, Home Delievery, SmartPost, Custom Critical, and Trade Networks, the world is on time!"

In some cases, for some people, this actually happens. The greedy, corporate businessmen and the money-hungry people signing over the deal are both selfish and soulless-a deadly combination (or, at least, an annoying, arrogant one).

Here are some other uneccessary, consumer-happy titles given to bowl games:

Auto Zone
Capital One
Chick-Fil-A
Insight
Ford, GM, Chrysler
Emerald Nuts
Meineke
Papa John's
Bell Helicopter
Sheraton
Valero

...The list goes on. Don't get me wrong, I'm not attacking solely college football on this one; many professional sports take part in this consumer-happy marketing, and it is wrong. Don't try to tell me that this sponsoring is good for college football, or America in general, because you're just wasting your time. In a playoff/bracket system, I cannot guarantee a marketing-free sports experience, but there would definetely be significantly less.

The college football postseason is a mess, and evasive action is in need of taking place.

A playoff system is the answer, the solution, the safe haven.
dabigdood

Con

dabigdood forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by birdpiercefan3334 8 years ago
birdpiercefan3334
cool, I do LD debate. I tried PoFo, but I like values debate better.
Posted by dabigdood 8 years ago
dabigdood
birdpiercefan: yes I am, I do PF.
Posted by shwayze 8 years ago
shwayze
we need a playoff system. The BCS has failed college football for too many years.
Posted by birdpiercefan3334 8 years ago
birdpiercefan3334
By the way, dabigdood, are you a high school debater?
Posted by birdpiercefan3334 8 years ago
birdpiercefan3334
I am negating this round, for the simple reason that while it is true that in some situations a playoff system would enhance the excitement of the FBS system,the con brought up this arg.

"Ok well you say that the post season is a mess however I would argue that it is nothing near that. Having millions of viewers watching ESPN and every single game of the season to figure out whether their team will make the top bowl, or any bowl at all is not a mess.

In taking the affirmative side of this debate your opinions say that you don't think that every game should matter because right now every team knows that with a single loss they could be eliminated from contention for a national championship. The fact that right now every game is extremely important makes more fans watch the games which turns into more money for college football as well as each individual college.

Having this massive decision at the end of the year also makes more and more people watch shows like ESPN to see what teams made what bowls."(dabigdood).

This argument was not rubutted by the pro, thus dropping the point, with the con extending and impacting upon THAT point, while the con attacked all of your points. Thus, I negate.
Posted by dabigdood 8 years ago
dabigdood
Continuation of last post. Sorry
Again that is not relevant. They pay for the games and the wonderful arenas in which the games are played and is just an example of Capitalism at work.

"A playoff system is the answer, the solution, the safe haven."

It is none of these, the system is fine now and you have yet to effectively prove the fault with the status quo (current system) so you have not proved that there is a reason to change. So for all intensive purposes there is none so that is why you all need to negate the resolution that "College Football Should Have a Playoff System"

Thank You
Posted by dabigdood 8 years ago
dabigdood
I missed the deadline by like 5 minutes, LAAAAAAMMMMEEEE!!!

Ok I have very little time remaining to post so I will make this short and sweet. You told me exactly how the BCS system works during your last statement so it is obviously not that "muddled."

"Under these circumstances, the only way a non-BCS conference champion can receive berth in a BCS bowl game is if they:

Are ranked in the top twelve
OR
Ranked in the top sixteen and higher than another BCS Conference champion."

"Seems a little biased. A little too biased."

There is absolutely no bias about that, if you are in the top 12 you're in, period.

"there have been three BCS Busters. There have been forty-two BCS Bowls."

That is in no way relevant to your topic, it just says that teams that are not in the BCS conferences aren't as good.

"First of all, I had already stated the fact that the amount of teams playing in the playoff format would be equal to the number of teams playing in the current Bowl Format; 64 out of 120.

"Let me rephrase that: What in god's name do big, greedy, corporate chains of Tortilla Chips, Retirement Funds, Phone Companies, Postal Services, and Financial Services have to do with football?"

Aga
Posted by kenicks 8 years ago
kenicks
...Oh, and by the way, the only reason I know tuppence about the Roady's Humanitarian Bowl is because I looked it up.

I like to use clear-cut research in my debates to coincide with my beliefs and opinions. It really helps.
Posted by bigbass3000 8 years ago
bigbass3000
College football has history. The bowls are symbols of history and yes it would be easier, it still, does not preserve the ideals of the first bowl games.
16 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by PhillyEgls20 8 years ago
PhillyEgls20
kenicksdabigdoodTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Longhorn4Life929 8 years ago
Longhorn4Life929
kenicksdabigdoodTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by shlh147 8 years ago
shlh147
kenicksdabigdoodTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by sluggerjal 8 years ago
sluggerjal
kenicksdabigdoodTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by yanksfan1987 8 years ago
yanksfan1987
kenicksdabigdoodTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Randomknowledge 8 years ago
Randomknowledge
kenicksdabigdoodTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by dabigdood 8 years ago
dabigdood
kenicksdabigdoodTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by blond_guy 8 years ago
blond_guy
kenicksdabigdoodTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by massvideogamer 8 years ago
massvideogamer
kenicksdabigdoodTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by kenicks 8 years ago
kenicks
kenicksdabigdoodTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30