Commentary : A Vote for NCAA Playoff System

Who’s No. 1?

This would have been a good year for college football to have answered that question with a playoff system.

The better teams--all but Brigham Young--have all been beaten once, and BYU played the nation’s 89th-toughest schedule.

Can a team that meets one weak opponent after another be considered for the national championship?

Certainly not. But it could be considered as a playoff team.

This year, so could three others. They are Florida, Boston College and Washington.

If these teams were in a two-round playoff this month, the Florida Gators would probably win it. By the thinnest of margins in a field of eight or 10 other fine teams, they earned No. 1 this season.

This would make an interesting Final Four for this season’s tournament:

--Florida (9-1-1) vs. top-seeded BYU (13-0).

--Boston College (10-2) vs. second-seeded Washington (11-1).

On New Year’s Day, Boston College showed that it had a football team this season, as well as a Heisman Trophy winning quarterback. Thus, one way or another, the Eagles could be expected to reach the final round.

There they would be eliminated by the champion, a Florida team that started 0-1-1 last September but finished 9-0 with the nation’s most successful freshman quarterback, Kerwin Bell.

The only undefeated 1984 coaches in Division 1-A were BYU’s LaVell Edwards and Galen Hall, the successor to Charlie Pell at Florida, who was 8-0.

But while BYU was playing the nation’s 89th-toughest schedule, Florida played the fifth-toughest, and Boston College the fourth-toughest.

What about the probation that kept Florida from accepting a bowl bid?

The best answer is that college teams shouldn’t be put on probation. College presidents should.

The NCAA is punishing the wrong people. Penalties should go to those responsible, specifically, the coach, the athletic director and the president. That might end the cheating.

The case against BYU is that it didn’t prove itself No. 1. Or even No. 2 or No. 3.

Each year the Cougars play Western Athletic Conference games against Utah, Hawaii and New Mexico. The WAC won only 43% of its non-conference games this season, 13 of 30.

By contrast, Florida and Washington play in the nation’s toughest conferences.

Florida represents a group--the Southeastern--that won 68% of its non-conference games, finishing 36-15-2.

Washington, despite an 11-1 record, couldn’t even win its conference, the Pacific 10, which won 67% of its non-conference games, 24 of 36. The Pac-10 also finished 3-0 in bowl games, winning three of the five major games Tuesday.

Years ago, when Penn State was winning nearly all of its games, those who voted in the polls refused to name Joe Paterno’s team No. 1. They told him he wasn’t playing a tough schedule.

Paterno then sought out a tougher schedule and coached the Nittany Lions to the top. Penn State played the toughest schedule in college football this season, and finished 6-5.

If BYU had been given the same ultimatum that Penn State received a decade or so earlier, it wouldn’t have been considered for first place this season.

In the early fall of 1984, BYU was ranked where it belongs, toward the bottom of the top 10. Then, as the better teams beat one another, the voters kept moving BYU up, automatically and unthinkingly.

As schools such as Washington and Nebraska lost to such tough customers as USC and Oklahoma--among others--BYU was smashing Texas El Paso, San Diego State, Utah and Utah State to win the national championship.

BYU recently has been following a policy perfected by the late Bear Bryant at Alabama. The Crimson Tide won some of their championships by lining up a tough team or two in the midst of a series of breathers.

Last year BYU scheduled UCLA, this year Pittsburgh and next year Washington. It’s obviously easier to play one or two carefully spotted good teams than a number of them.

In the last half of its schedule this year, Florida met and defeated Tennessee, Auburn, Georgia, Kentucky and Florida State.

BYU’s beating Tulsa, Colorado State, Utah and Utah State simply isn’t the same thing.

The only surprise is that the nation’s voters haven’t been realistic and thoughtful enough to give BYU the same choices they gave Penn State:

--If you want to be a national champion, play a championship schedule.

--If you want to be a regional champion, there’s absolutely nothing wrong with that.

No one really knows how good the Cougars are. On one hand they gained a lot of yards in the Holiday Bowl against a Big Ten team, Michigan. On the other, Michigan was 6-6 this season.

It’s true the Cougars beat Michigan with an injured quarterback, but their plight can hardly be compared with that of Iowa, which, seemingly Rose Bowl-bound in a tougher conference, lost its quarterback altogether.

When Chuck Long returned, he threw for six touchdowns against Texas in the Freedom Bowl. One could imagine the Hawkeyes’ chances against Tulsa, Utah State and Texas El Paso.

During the regular season, Iowa beat Michigan, 26-0. Later, BYU had to go all out to beat Michigan, 24-17.

It is becoming increasingly difficult to achieve an undefeated season in major college play. The 13-0 of BYU as a WAC team is not comparable with Florida’s 9-1-1 as an SEC team.

Some say that BYU deserves No. 1 because there is no other standout team. The reality is that there are several standout teams, particularly in the SEC and the Pac-10 but also in the Midwest and the East.

Nebraska could beat UCLA but not Oklahoma. USC could beat Washington but not UCLA. Florida could beat Florida State but not Miami. Penn State could beat Iowa but not Notre Dame.

Those who mourn the years when there were usually dominant teams--making No. 1 easy to see--are really talking about grind-it-out teams. When it was muscle vs. muscle, the more muscular dominated. But who wants that era back?

It’s more interesting when USC can upset Washington and UCLA can upset USC.

The only Division 1-A conference so weak that it can’t turn up a candidate to challenge its best team is the Western Athletic, BYU’s conference.