A College Football Post-Season That Can Work
Before I state anything, I simply need to state that the Utah Utes are my school football public bosses for the 2008 season. Why? Since school football is stuck in an antiquated custom in which the public boss is chosen by a survey each year. On the off chance that the AP electors get the opportunity to pick their public boss, for what reason wouldn’t i be able to pick mine?
What we as a whole know, however, is that the postseason of school football is long past due for a change. Indeed, a few years, as in 2002, the BCS was useful. In any case, in different years, as 2008, the BCS was a finished wreck. Why? Since it is naturally imperfect. The BCS is intended to coordinate the two best groups from the normal season in a title game. That is okay when in 2002 Ohio State and Miami(FL) were the main undefeated groups.
In any case, shouldn’t something be said about this year? Utah and Boise state completed the customary season undefeated. Oklahoma, Texas, Texas Tech, USC, Florida, Alabama and Penn State all got done with one misfortune. How on the planet can the BCS guarantee to “know” which of those groups are the two best? All of them presented a decent defense to be given thought.
So with the idea of a school football season finisher not in the plan of the BCS, what should be possible to fix this wreck? The appropriate response is an in addition to one arrangement.
As of now, the BCS matches the two best groups toward the finish of the normal season. An in addition to one configuration contemplates the bowl season before choosing who the two best groups in the country are. Envision this year if the dishes had been Florida beating Texas, Oklahoma squeaking past Ohio State and Utah destroying Alabama? Wouldn’t the bowl season have presented the defense for Utah to play Florida in the title game? Envision a public title where the two groups accomplished something other than win the apparent “best” meetings in school football?