PLAYOFFS: Coaches Bowl Over New Postseason Plans

As college football runs one last pass pattern before the 1990s, it still just doesn’t seem that the last decade of the century will be the time to see a postseason playoff format. Right now, the detractors of such a plan are many. If the whole idea is leaky, they certainly have their reasons.

--No type of playoffs would help the football-playing athlete in school.

--No type of playoffs could replace the loyal menage a trois between teams, conferences and bowl games.

--No type of playoffs can make the season any shorter.

Add it all up and you come face-to-face with the status quo: no type of playoffs.

Of course, not everybody in the student block-and-tackle business is opposed to some type of playoff system. And with good reason, apparently. By one estimate, a postseason playoff would bring in $80 million to the competing teams, some $30 million more than the amount generated by the current postseason setup of bowl games.

DeLoss Dodds, athletic director at the University of Texas, chaired subcommittees for both the National Collegiate Athletic Assn. and the College Football Assn., that looked into the playoff format

“That is the basis of my experience, which is worth nothing,” Dodds said.

What he meant is that after intense study by both the NCAA and the CFA, absolutely nothing has come of formulating some type of plan for playoffs.

The most recent action/inaction on the playoff issue was in June when it was discussed, but never made it to the floor for a vote at a CFA board meeting. The CFA is composed of most of the top Division I-A football powers, but does not include any from the Big Ten or Pacific 10. Even so, Dodds said the CFA proposal still would have created playoffs even without teams from those conferences. Dodds said football playoffs will be here to stay in only a matter of time.

“I think the mood of most people today is that (playoffs are) something that will probably happen in the future,” Dodds said. “As time goes by, there will be more and more support for it. I just don’t think people are ready for it yet.”

Some formidable opponents have lined up against any playoffs, including Coach Tom Osborne of Nebraska and three of the most respected coaches in the Pac-10: Don James of Washington, Larry Smith of USC and Terry Donahue of UCLA.

James, who said it would be hard to change his mind, claimed playoffs would increase the schoolwork load on players and upset the bowls, who have been profitable allies.

“They’ve done an incredible amount for us over the years,” James said. “They’ve paid a lot of bills.”

Smith and Donahue shared James’ concern with the classroom burden that would have to be shouldered by their players. The playoff issue is being pushed more by the media and the success of the NCAA basketball playoffs than the football coaches, said Smith, who can’t figure out a fair way to select playoff teams anyway.

Donahue pointed out that only one team would win a playoff, unlike what happens in the bowls.

“If there are 18 bowls, then there are 18 winners,” he said.

Osborne’s primary complaint about a playoff is that it would lengthen an already long season that’s grown over the years.

“We had nine games in the 1960s, then it went to 10, then 11,” Osborne said. “In many cases now, we’re playing 12 games a year, not counting a bowl.”

According to a recent survey conducted by the American Football Coaches Assn., the majority of coaches do not want playoffs. Charlie McClendon, president of the coaches group and a former football coach at Louisiana State, said when he speaks out against playoffs he is speaking like a coach.

“If you’ve only got one coach who wins in a playoff, then everybody else will be labeled a loser: He can’t win the big one,” McClendon said. “That’ll stay with ‘em, too. All my coaches, I tell ‘em, fellas, you’ll just get yourself in a big ol’ box.”

Nevertheless, Joe Paterno and Lou Holtz are eager to climb inside. Paterno of Penn State and Holtz of Notre Dame are probably the best-known activists for the playoffs. Paterno has a preference for a playoff. Why? He just likes it.

“I like to play, I like to coach Saturday and I like big games, so I like a playoff system,” Paterno said. “A national playoff in college football is probably inevitable.”

Holtz became a playoff believer in 1977 when his Arkansas team finished 11-1, the same as Notre Dame and Alabama, but the Irish finished as national champions in the polls. Wary of upsetting the bowls, Holtz’s idea is to select either the top two or four teams by some sort of computerized method, then have a playoff just before the Super Bowl.

“But I don’t expect to see that happen in my lifetime,” Holtz said.

The CFA plan that never got off the ground was scheduled to fly in 1991. A total of 16 teams would be involved: five conference champions, the top-rated northern and the top-rated southern team would all receive automatic berths. The nine remaining teams would be chosen by committee.

According to the plan, the top eight teams would play at home sometime in the first two weeks of December. The quarterfinal games (eight teams remaining) would be played on New Year’s Day at bowl sites. The semifinals would also be played at bowl sites, the second Saturday of January and the final would be at a bowl site Saturday, one week before the Super Bowl.

Dodds believes it is likely that something similar to such a format will eventually be accepted as the revolutionary first playoff structure. The key is the time period from Jan. 1 up to the Super Bowl, Dodds said.

“That’s why it’s inevitable that we’ll have playoffs,” he said. “We’re accorded in that period, with the exception of NFL football, the opportunity to improve college football’s position in the marketplace. If we don’t fill that void, some other entity will fill in there and will be locked out as far as (television) network considerations.”