The bottom line to the BCS/playoff debate

I’m not afraid to say that I am a casual college football fan.

During the regular season, I will watch a handful of games, usually those that feature matchups between two top 10 schools. I don’t get too invested in the college football regular season because I know that it’s probably going to come to a disappointing conclusion. There will be a BCS Championship Game that will pit the top two teams in the country against each other, but there is always a debate about who truly belongs in that game.

That’s the only postseason game I’ll watch. At that point in the season, I only really care about teams that still have a shot to win the national championship, and that late in the game, it’s down to two teams. I couldn’t care less about the other BCS bowls because they have absolutely no impact on who will be the national champion.

College football purists probably look down their nose at guys like me, but I don’t really care. Fans like me are the ones that could take the sport of college football to the next level.

If there were an eight-team playoff, I would sit down and watch every single one of those seven games. If the BCS-playoff debate is about money, then I don’t see how doubling the number of games that the casual fan watches can do anything but increase ratings (and ad revenue).

Also, knowing that the college football season would come to a solid, undisputed conclusion, I would find these late season play-in games a lot more interesting. Under the current system, I’m not going to watch #12 Oklahoma State try to knock off #3 Oklahoma. But if the Cowboys were to have a shot to make it the playoffs (and to knock the Sooners out), then I might tune in. The same goes for the Florida/Florida St. matchup.

Suddenly, a casual fan that used to watch 5-10 games a year is now watching 20 or more. How is this bad for college football?

Follow the Scores Report editors on Twitter @clevelandteams and @bullzeyedotcom.

Related Posts