To Have and Have Not

The upper subdivision of Division 1 college football is made up of one hundred and twenty schools. This leaves a handful of topics up for debate each season.

Some of these debates include: which team is No. 1, who deserves the coveted Heisman Trophy, and in recent years, which conference is supreme.

However, none of these stir people up like the debate over the postseason. From Seattle to South Beach, no conversation is more prevalent. And considering how restless people have become, no conversation is more pertinent.

Will D1-A ever do away with the BCS rankings and the outdated bowl lineup that accompanies them? Will it ever concede that the current system is flawed and give equal opportunity to all of its participants? My prediction: not anytime soon.

But if the bowl subdivision isn't willing to revamp its postseason format and install a playoff of some sort, it has a big problem on its hands: the Top 25 polls.




The Associated Press and USA Today Coaches ballots would be useful if there were a playoff system in place, as they could be a guide for seeding teams when it came time for the tournament -- you know, like Division 1 college basketball.

But without a playoff, these controversial rankings hurt the game, dictating the destiny of each postseason-eligible program. And despite the fact that they're nothing but opinion, the polls greatly influence public perception -- which is often skewed.

It all starts with the preseason polls. These early rankings are a barometer, a starting point. They give us an idea of who stands where. But undoubtedly, many teams are significantly over- or undervalued to begin each season.

This inaccuracy is then carried on throughout the year. And when certain teams start to surprise pollsters on the field, whether good or bad, voters scramble to adjust their rankings accordingly.

For instance, the Washington Huskies were ranked right around No. 85 to begin the season. But after defeating No. 3 Southern Cal just two weeks later, the Associated Press moved Washington into their Top 25. That was, of course, until Washington was knocked off by unranked Stanford the following week.

Where does a team like Washington belong? They beat a top-3 team one week, but then lost to an average (or so we think) Standford club a week later. How can someone possibly determine where to rank the Huskies?

Imagine if Washington defeated No. 3 Southern Cal in the final weekend of the regular season, as opposed to the third weekend in September. They would be rewarded -- because of their big win at season's end -- by playing in a respectable bowl game with a lucrative payout.

On the other hand, if their season ended following the Stanford loss, Washington would be playing in a no-name bowl, earning much less revenue for their school. This is yet another example of how the what-have-you-done-for-me-lately? polls are imperfect.

Why does it matter when a team loses? And why does it matter who beat them? If there were a playoff, there would be no need to debate whose losses were "better." Nor would there be a need to fight over strength of schedule.

Sure, there would be a few bubble teams during the selection process, as there are in basketball. But if there were a 16- or 32-team playoff, would those that fall in that bubble range even have a legitimate argument? If your favorite team is ranked outside the top-16 in the preseason polls, is "championship or bust" your war cry?

At times I've considered how things would go if the initial AP and Coaches polls were released a few weeks into the season. But there are problems with that scenario as well.

Certain teams would then be elevated -- just as they are in the preseason polls today -- because of their program's history or conference affiliation.

Plus, nearly every top-line team plays a few scrubs to start the season, meaning that voters would then have to decide whose wins were more impressive. And that would be counter-productive.

What would be productive, though, would be to institute a playoff.

Sure, I'd like to see a more accurate method for ranking teams -- but if the Football Bowl Subdivision would abandon the current postseason format and devise a playoff, the polls wouldn't be so controversial.

School presidents and conference commissioners could kill two birds with one stone: equal rights for every FBS program, as well as rankings that would guide -- not decide -- postseason destinies.

Why pass up an opportunity to perfect America's greatest sport?