When high-profile people such as Neuharth start clamoring for a playoff, you know the drumbeat is growing loud across the land. And, as he points out, national politicians have started speaking out in favor of a playoff.

Can the college presidents be so out of touch with the fans and the media that they will fail to fix the problem, soon? Probably.

re: Facts

Make more/better use of them and you won't get lectured.

This game could result in a good ol fashion hog killing! You Razorback fans should try some of eastern NC bbq, it's good!! mmmmmmm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5SQg4IvGc0&fe…

Ok, I do.

"Wetzel’s addition of 5 minor conferences to automatic bids makes as much sense as Paul Krugman or Keith Olberman."

You seem to be having some difficulty with Wetzel's inclusion of the smaller (to quote him "lousy') conferences. I'll let him answer your charge:

"Just like the wildly popular and profitable NCAA men’s basketball tournament, champions of all 11 conferences earn an automatic bid to the playoff.

Yes, all 11, even the lousy conferences. While no one would argue that the Sun Belt champ is one of the top 16 teams in the country, its presence is paramount to maintaining the integrity and relevancy of the regular season. While the idea that the season is a four-month playoff is both inaccurate and absurd – best proven this year – college football’s roller-coaster regular season needs to be protected.

That’s accomplished by two things. The first is playing on the home field of the higher-seeded team until the title game (more on this later).

The second is by giving the chance for an easier first-round opponent – in this case No. 1 seed Alabama would play No. 16 Troy. Earning a top two or three seed most years would present a school a de facto bye into the second round. Why not leave the Sun Belt out and offer a real bye? The extra home game would create tens of millions of dollars in revenue (a carrot to the school presidents).

The season still matters this way. By winning the SEC championship game Saturday, Alabama gets Troy and enjoys home-field advantage in Tuscaloosa until the title game. By losing it, Florida gets Penn State and has to hit the road if it can beat the Nittany Lions.

On the flip side, it brings true Cinderella into the college football mix for the first time. Is it likely that East Carolina could beat Texas? Of course not, but as the men’s basketball tournament has proven the mere possibility (or even a close game) draws in casual fans by the millions.

Perhaps the most memorable college football game of the last few years was Boise State-Oklahoma, in part because Boise was the unbeaten underdog that wasn’t supposed to win. When the Broncos did, in dramatic fashion, they became the talk of the country. There would’ve been historic interest in seeing if they could do it again the following week.

Why wouldn’t college football want that?

For even lower-rated conferences – the Sun Belts, C-USA – allowing annual access to the tournament would not only set off celebrations on small campuses it would actually increase interest for everyone. It would not simply make the regular season matter more it would make more regular seasons matter.

Right now, last Friday’s MAC championship game between Central Michigan and Ohio was virtually meaningless. It wouldn’t be if a berth to the playoffs was riding on it. There’d be a reason to watch.

Who’s against more must-see games?

With the bigger conferences, a championship would take on greater value. Does anyone without direct rooting interest really care that Georgia Tech won the ACC title game Saturday?

They would now. The final week Big East and Pac-10 games (Cincy-Pitt, Oregon State-Oregon) would’ve had greater meaning because if the Panthers and/or Beavers won, it would’ve caused at-large bids to get gobbled up by UC and Oregon.

The interest in every game would increase exponentially – dare I say, every game would actually matter."

So, preserving the 'sanctity' and pertinence of the regular season (a MAJOR concern for many in the anti-playoff camp) with the added benefit of creating even more interest in virtually every game (I was one of those who didn't pay any attention to the ACC Championship game this year. If a playoff slot or two would have been riding on it though, I certainly would have watched.) What's so difficult to understand about that? Isn't that something all fans would want? Not to mention giving the 'little guys' much more of a chance than their ever going to get with the BCS. I mean we get TCU vs. Boise this year, a repeat of last year's match up, correct? Wow. How exciting. In Wetzel's brackets, we'd get a Florida/TCU match up in the second round. That's a game Id love to see but we never will.

You also seem to find a weakness in Wetzels use of the "hated BCS standings' to create his brackets. Personally, since he uses conference champions to fill 11 of the 16 slots, with presumably 2nd place teams or very deserving teams (ala his committee's selections, right?) to fill out the field, I don't think he's using it as much as you claim, especially, as you note, three teams in the BCS top 16 didn't make his brackets. Remember, there wouldn't be any polls used in his system, only the conference champs and the committee's selections.

"I would also refer you to today’s article in the Democrat-Gazette’s sports Section by a Dallas Morning News sports writer."

I looked for this but couldn't find it (going back to the 10th). However, if you'd post a link, I'll be happy to look it over. Glad to see you decided to 'blow' some more…;^)

1 Alabama

16 Troy

2 Texas

15 Eastern Carolina

3 Cincinnati

14 Central Michigan

4 TCU

13 LSU

5 Florida

12 Penn State

6 Boise State

11 Virginia Tech

7 Oregon

10 Iowa

8 Ohio State

9 Georgia Tech

I might add that BYU, Miami, and West Virginia would take the spots allotted to the 3 Smallies. That Oregon and a Big Ten team would match up (In the Rose Bowl no doubt), is convenient of course,but it does follow Wetzel's using the BCS) That CMU is given a higher seed than East Carolina in this scheme, implies that the USA Conference is weaker than the MAC. I don't think so, but there will always be controversy.

16 Troy 15 Eastern Carolina

1 Alabama 2 Texas

9 Georgia Tech 10 Iowa

8 Ohio State 7 Oregon

12 Penn State 11 Virginia Tech

5 Florida 6 Boise State

13 LSU 14 Central Michigan

4 TCU 3 Cincinnati

Wetzel's addition of 5 minor conferences to automatic bids makes as much sense as Paul Krugman or Keith Olberman. The above are the facts Birdwood not opinions or assertions. Defend it. I would also refer you to today's article in the Democrat-Gazette's sports Section by a Dallas Morning News sports writer. He goes over the same issues I have brought up in my posts. Better give him an e-mail scolding him about "opinions" and "assertions" Not all scribes or fans are willing to jump into a playoff system site untried.

And, now you are questioning our rights to commment as we see fit because we have never won a national championship. I believe no one is making a comment that requires "credentials". That said, the Hog Nation and others fully recognize our claim to the 1964 National Championship. Arkansas was the only undefeated team standing after the bowls that year and the Football Writers of America and all the others that awarded their championship recognition AFTER the bowls (AP & UPI shutdown their polls after the regular season in those days) named the Arkansas Razorbacks as National Champions.

Depends on what you mean by 'actually'. We have one disputed championship to our credit (which is more than ecu can say). The only reason it is disputed is, at that time championships were awarded before the bowls were played. Alabama and Arkansas were undefeated when this title was awarded to Bama. After the bowls were played Arkansas was the only undefeated team. That's why the titles are awarded after the bowl season today. That's also why many folks consider that championship to belong to Arkansas in fact if not in name.

As to the rest of the horseshit you spew in your post, I'm with the earlier poster: come on back after the game, if you dare. Our defense is better than Houston's. We may play the same type of offense with the same type of team as Houston but your boys will find us a bit tougher to handle. Come on back now, y'hear?

Eastern Carolina, wherever that is, has never even been ranked in a national poll much less been a contender for a national championship, as Arkansas has done several times.

I must admit I did not know that the Greatest Jerk of All Time was from Eastern Carolina. I thought he played at North Carolina.

You'll have a better understanding of the SEC when the middle-tier Razorbacks break all the offensive records of the Liberty Bowl.

I think you miss the point. In a playoff there can't be more than one undefeated team. The BCS will certainly leave us with more than one this year (and in any year there are more than two no-loss teams). That can't in any way help us get to our goal of establishing a true champion.

"But where is this mythical “better”, certainly not with Wetzel’s which qualifies as worse. "

"Worse"? How? If you've actually read his proposal with an open mind, I don't see how you could come to this conclusion. I'll tell you what: 'his' solution (which isn't really 'his'; several people have offered up a playoff system. There are many ways to go about it. His is just one of the best.) will give you an undisputed national champion–every time. The current system will only do that when the most favorable conditions exist (which, in the ten years we've had this turkey, have occurred exactly twice). I'll listen to your case provided you back it up with more than opinion and assertion.

"…if it was easy it would have already been done."

Wrong. It's not about 'easy' or 'hard'; its really about power and control. It won't get 'easy' until those who have the power and control are persuaded to give it up.

"The NBA plays what? 100 games a regular season, the collegiates 30; while the NFL only 16 and collegian footballers 12 or 13. You cannot eliminate the physical nature of football in any playoff scheme."

"One of the apologists’ greatest whines is that a playoff would make the season too long. It’s conceivable that some teams would play 17 games. The guys in the other divisions of college football manage to do it though and as Texas Tech coach Mike Leach points out, the Texas high school season can go 16 games long and the best players are often on both offense and defense. The NFL plays a much longer season with just 53-man rosters.

The length of the season is just another smoke screen."

Wetzel, 'Money Talks' article.

"Baloney;…"

Wetzel, and the other playoff advocates, would take issue with you on this. What's your source(s) for the assertions you make in this paragraph? Also, this statement needs some serious backing up as well:

"…scribes will always complain about anything with cherry picked facts, imagined scenarios, home-cooking bias and cost accounting of which they know nothing about."

"Fans primarily are affected by homecooking and will pied piper-like follow a scribe of their likeing."

Not this one. I follow no one and nothing blindly–ever. You have to convince me with well-thought-out arguments backed up by facts, which Wetzel has. And you haven't.