Just to be clear I'm not saying there's no chance OSU gets jumped due to being a homer, but because I know how the system works. The BCS is flawed and it's gone after this year, but someone that should get a shot is always going to be left out most years. Can't wait for the who's number 4 fights next year. The SEC has played the system well the past 7 years, but this year something they were not counting on happen, two non-SEC BCS schools going undefeated and under this system two undefeated BCS teams are always going to beat out a one loss team.
Since the 2006 season, which is what kicked off the SEC's seven-year run, there has been one team that "played the system" by coming in ranked #1 and then playing in the national championship game. That team was OSU, who lost in said game by a 41-14 score.
The big schools need to break away from the NCAA and form a true playoff system of their own.
I do not support this one bit. If the larger schools were to break away and form their own separate system, here's what would happen.
- Roughly half of D-1A would drop down to 1-AA. Since the lower level has a 65 scholarship limit instead of 85, the only options would be to either raise the limit for 1-AA up to 85 or force the new school to drop down.
- Since the 1-AA schools wouldn't have the cash to be able to raise up to 85, it would be a drop.
- Since about 60 schools would be dropping a level, that's around 1,200 students who would lose their scholarship. For a lot of kids, that's the only way that they're even able to be in college in the first place. Not everyone can afford to sacrifice four years and huge amounts of student loan debt if they're chasing something that goes from "possible NFL dream" to "complete pipe dream".
- There would doubtless be a penalty or simply a disincentive of some type for 1-A schools playing 1-AA schools. This would mean that the new 1-AA schools wouldn't be able to collect four checks of between $600,000 and $1,000,000 every year, which basically keeps their entire athletic department afloat.
- In the absence of a solvent athletic department, it would create a cascade effect of cuts to programs, with football being among the first on the chopping block (since cutting those 65 scholarships would also allow for 65 from women's sports, and since maintaining a football program that stands no chance of doing anything makes no sense).
- That would put 130 more kids out, multiplied by however many schools see the writing on the wall....you get the idea.
I can't stand the "split 'em up!" argument. To me, it strikes me as something propagated by fans of larger schools who want to simply steamroll 60+ schools and countless numbers of kids just to get whatever they want.
