Every autumn, thousands of football fans flock to colleges and universities to cheer on their favorite teams. These fans all want the same thing: their team to win a national championship. College football is currently set up in a BCS system. This system ranks each team in the country using computer programs and polls by sports writers and coaches. At the end of the season, the top eight ranked teams compete in four BCS bowl games. The system designed to find the top two Division 1-A college football teams in the nation and have them play in a championship game. Ever since this BCS system was created in 1998, controversy has arisen (N. Hanna, par. 8). Many people, including myself, feel the BCS system is unfair and should be changed to a classic playoff system like in other sports.
The current BCS is favored by some people, mostly athletic directors, coaches, and people involved with the conferences. Grant Teaff, executive director of the American Football Coaches Association, presented the results of a survey of every 120 Division I-A coaches. The survey showed that a majority of coaches want to keep the system the way it is (Adelson, par. 3). "Right now, we have a good system," said Ohio State head coach Jim Tressel, "I wouldn't be in favor of scraping what we do. There are too many things to keep in mind: bowls, student athlete welfare, all the rest. I wouldn't start over" (Adelson, par. 4). "I believe it is in the best interest of the universities,” said the executive director of the BCS, Bill Handcock, “College football has never been better and I believe the BCS is part of that" (Adelson, par. 10).
Those who are in favor of the current BCS system feel that the system is fine the way it is and does not need changing. In fact, many of their reasons of why the current system should be kept are really just cons of a playoff system. One of the major criticisms is that a playoff system would pose an increased risk for player injuries. A playoff will extend the season by almost a month, thus resulting in potentially more player injuries. Another criticism of a playoff system is that conferences without teams in the playoffs will lose possible revenue. Under the current BCS system, if a team makes it to a bowl game, the entire conference and its teams share the profits (ProCon.org). Without this system, the conferences and the teams will not get the money it is counting on making. However, this is saying that conferences will only get money if one of their team is in the playoffs.
There are eleven conferences in Division 1-A with six of them being “BCS conferences.” Under the current system, the winners of each of the six BCS conference are guaranteed to compete in a BCS bowl game. While teams in the non-BCS conferences are not excluded from playing in the BCS Championship game, it is much more difficult for them to obtain a spot. The winners of the non-BCS conferences will get into a BCS game only if the team is ranked in the top twelve in the final standings (J. Hanna, par. 16). The BCS argues that the current structure successfully serves its intended purpose: creating a college football national champion. As Scott Cowen, President of Tulane University, a non-BCS school, argues, “It [the BCS system] crowns a champion at the expense of the non-BCS schools in Division I-A. Even if they finish the season undefeated, they have no chance of getting into a major bowl game, let alone the so-called national title game, under the BCS system” (N. Hanna, par. 12). What many fans want is a playoff, much like that of the NFL. This way, the best team in the country can truly be tested before being crowned champion (Zhu, par. 6).
According to a survey from Quinnipiac University, 63 percent of college football fans favor a playoff, while only 26 percent want to keep it the way it is (Brown). Fans have become so passionate about a potential playoff, Congress has begun to get involved in the controversy. In 2009, the House Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection held a hearing to dissect the BCS. The hearings purpose was to figure out if the current system needs to be tweaked, overhauled or done away with altogether. Four witnesses testified. BCS coordinator John Swofford and Alamo Bowl President Derrick Fox defended the current system. Mountain West Conference Commissioner Craig Thompson and Boise State Athletic Director Gene Bleymaier testified in favor of a playoff (Lazo, par. 2-4). Nothing recent has come from this hearing.
In January 2009, Representative Joe Barton of Texas introduced a bill to Congress titled “The College Football Act of 2009.” This act prohibited promoting, marketing, or advertising a post-season NCAA football game unless it is from a post-season playoff system. This extreme bill obviously never became law as it was killed by a house subcommittee (H.R. 390 [111th]: College Football Playoff Act of 2009). President Barack Obama has publicly expressed his desire for a playoff on CBS’s “60 Minutes” and on ESPN. “I think it is about time that we had playoffs in college football,” Obama said on ESPN. “I’m fed up with these computer rankings and this and that and the other. Get eight teams – the top eight teams right at the end. You got a playoff. Decide on a national champion” (Wetzel, par. 3). Obama and his administration is currently exploring how to successfully create a playoff in college football by legislation.
One of the requirements of sport is equal fairness for both sides. Plain and simple, a playoff system would make the game fair while the current system is not. If you are not in a BCS conference, your chance at competing in a national championship game is very slim. Most of the teams who are in a non-BCS conference end up competing in a non-BCS bowl game. Lots of people have noticed that the BCS system is only for Division I-A teams. If a team is in Division I-AA, Division II, or Division III, they compete in playoff. Fans feel that the NCAA, who is in charge of all these leagues, should keep the way a champion is determined consistent between all leagues. As mentioned earlier, BCS system uses human polls and computer rankings to determine who plays in what bowl games. There is a possibility that BCS human polls are bias. One third of the standings are based on how coaches rank the teams. This assumes that coaches have time to watch all of the games, which they don’t. A playoff system, used by most other sports, would eliminate the controversy (ProCon.org).
Both sides have good support for their arguments. But this controversy ultimately comes down to money and profits. What many people do not realize is if a playoff system is created, it would not eliminate the non-BCS bowls. If the top eight teams compete in a playoff, teams that missed out can still go to a non-bowl game. Conferences are afraid of losing money but, with the current rules in place, if a team goes to a non-BCS bowl, the revenue will still be distributed throughout the conference. Creating a playoff is favored by the fans. And lets face it, with out the fans, college football would not be as profitable as it is. It is better for the NCAA to create a playoff before the government forces it upon them by law. The NCAA knows the BCS system is wrong but, they do not see how profit sharing and bowl revenue can exist in a playoff. A compromise is not really needed since the both parties can get what they want if a there was a playoff in place; the NCAA and conferences can make their profits and the fans can get a truly fair game.
Works Cited
Adelson, Andrea. "Head Coaches Favor BCS System." Orlandosentinel.com. The Orlando Sentinel, 13 Jan. 2010. Web. 26 Mar. 2011.
Brown, Peter. "Use Playoff System To Pick College Football Champ, American Fans Tell Quinnipiac University National Poll." Quinnipiac.edu. Quinnipiac University, 29 Dec. 2009. Web. 26 Mar. 2011.
Hanna, Joseph M., and Matthew V. Bruno. "Why Profits Trump Playoffs in College Football." Sports Litigation Alert 7.8 (2010): 9. SPORTDiscus with Full Text. EBSCO. Web. 26 Mar. 2011.
Hanna, Nicole. Unsportsmanlike Conduct Committed by the BCS. Www.luc.edu. Loyola University Chicago School of Law. Web. 26 Mar. 2011.
"H.R. 390 [111th]: College Football Playoff Act of 2009." GovTrack.us. Govtrack.us. Web. 27 Mar. 2011.
Lazo, Larry. "BCS vs. Playoff Debate Comes to Capitol Hill." Cnn.com. CNN, 01 May 2009. Web. 27 Mar. 2011.
Lazo, Larry. "BCS vs. Playoff Debate Comes to Capitol Hill." Cnn.com. CNN, 01 May 2009. Web. 27 Mar. 2011.
ProCon.org. "College Football ProCon.org." CollegeFootball. ProCon.org. ProCon.org, 14 Feb. 2011. Web. 26 Mar. 2011.
Wetzel, Dan. "College Football Commander-in-chief?" Rivals.com. Yahoo! Sports, 2 Feb. 2011. Web. 27 Mar. 2011.
Zhu, Yong-yi. "Problems With the BCS Playoff System: Testing the Champions." Tech.mit.edu. The Tech - MIT's Oldest and Largest Newspaper, 9 Dec. 2003. Web. 26 Mar. 2011.
Greg,
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed reading your paper on the issue of playoffs in college sport. I agree with your perspective, a computer system and human polls should not determine team rankings and the bracket for the bowl. Great job creating a common ground and exploring both sides of the argument.
A few notes:
Since this is a Rogerian argument, you can hold off on your thesis till you have presented both sides of the story. It seems like a classical argument where the thesis is in the last line of your introductory paragraph.
As I was reading, I could hear more quotes than your own voice. Make sure you follow-up your quotes with your own words like the end of paragraph 2. I think a personal story, or a story of an athlete could help develop more personality in the paper. Also, in the introduction, state what BCS stands for. In the 4th paragraph try using a different phrase than BCS. A quick glance at that paragraph seems overbearing with “BCS.”
Great paper, good luck with revisions!
-Christina
Greg,
ReplyDeleteI think you did a good job with your first draft of your Rogerian argument on reforming college football. Although I am not very familiar with football, I did become interested with the topic as I was reading your paper.
I liked the sentence, “What many fans want is a playoff, much like that of the NFL. This way, the best team in the country can truly be tested before being crowned champion.” I believe this was worded very nicely and was very persuasive. It seems logical and fair that the best team should win.
I like how your view on the importance of the fans and give them what they want, because without the fans you wouldn’t have college football in the first place.
Things to work on:
I did get confused at points with the terminology, I think if you break it down as simple as you can then it would make it more understandable for everyone.
I don’t think the information in your 5th paragraph is that relevant about the hearing in Congress. I was waiting to learn what they came up with, but was let down that nothing has come out of it yet.
I think you did a good job with the first draft overall, but think you should consider explaining the situation in simpler terms so people who don’t understand those terms can follow the paper as well. Good luck with your revisions!
-Becca Moran
Hey Greg,
ReplyDeleteGood start to your argument! Here are some things I noticed.
Make sure you don't end paragraphs with quotes. It kind of just leaves empty space. Analyze a little closer.
Make your voice heard! A lot of this paper was talking about what other people said, and just sort of stating the facts. This type of argument needs your opinion throughout. Don't wait until the end to do it.
Good Luck with you revisions!
-mark
Greg,
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed reading your first draft of your Rogerian argument about the BCS college football controversy. I like how you manipulated this topic in this style, it really opened up my eyes to the inside story and I think it will to other readers as well. I really enjoyed your first paragraph in that it provided background for a reader unfamiliar with the BCS or college football in general. I think you effectively used the proper Rogerian style (their side, your side, common ground, resolution). You first added in which side of the controversy you believed was best and then continued in the second and third paragraphs to explain the opposite side of the argument. You then transitioned to your side of the argument and made many valid points that directly refute the opposition.
The only thing I would change is the elaboration of common ground and moving it later into the paper, say before paragraph eight. I think you could really explain how all coaches and people involved with the BCS want what is best for the players and the schools. I enjoyed your closing because it effectively wrapped up your argument and brought up some new ideas to be put into consideration. I didn’t think about the compromise being that ineffective because both could get what they wanted, so great train of thought right there. The last sentence really put things into perspective as well.
You have a huge number of good sources used effectively in your paper and it truly shows the ethos you want to convey within the text. Just remember to indent any and all subsequent lines on your works cited page so to clearly show the author. Overall, you have a great first draft and after a few revisions from the feedback of your classmates, you could have a great Rogerian argument. Good luck with your revisions!
--Ethan Freedman
Dear Greg,
ReplyDeleteNice job on your first draft! Sports are a foreign language to me, so a lot of it was tough to get through, but it was impressive nonetheless. You just may want to make some of the language a little simpler if possible.
One thing I must say, is that you should tell what BCS is. That can get very confusing. I also think that you need to balance out your own language and your use of quotations, your quotes currently seem to be outweighing your own thought.
Great job on your first draft. Good luck on your revision.
- Greg
Greg,
ReplyDeleteYou definitely chose a difficult topic for a rogerian argument, but i think you did a really good job with it!
At the start of your paper I was a little lost and confused - It was pretty unclear for me for a while why the BCS system is so bad. In addition, I'm not entirely clear what the BCS system is, and even though you did explain it, I think you could dumb it down a little for the non-football fans like myself so that it's a little easier to understand.
In the third paragraph however, you say: "Under the current BCS system, if a team makes it to a bowl game, the entire conference and its teams share the profit." I felt that this provided a little more clarity at least so this statement was really good. Maybe it would be useful to use it a little bit sooner in your paper?
I thought that the Obama quote that you had was really effective. Somehow his words clarified to me tremendously what exactly the problem is so this source was great.
You do a really good job of presenting each side/system of football in your argument. I'm not so sure how well it works however that you have no compromise. Without a compromise, I don't really see what the big issue is if the two sides are functioning perfectly fine independent from each other.
Overall this is an awesome start for your first draft. As a person who admittedly knows nothing about football whatsoever, this argument was fairly easy to understand without needing to understand the basic rules of the game.
Good job and good luck!
-Meredith
Greg,
ReplyDeleteI really liked your introduction, you made it really easy to understand. I know nothing about college football, and this made the issues surrounding this argument very clear.
I would like to see some more of your voice come through, there were a lot of quotes, and not much of your voice. There were a few points you brought up in your voice that were really good, and it would be nice to see more of that.
I think you need some sort of a compromise at the end, but besides that it was a great essay
good luck with revisions
Zane
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteGreg,
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed your first draft concerning the issues with, and reform of, college football. I believe you did a good job creating common ground and making your argument Rogerian.
A few things to keep in mind for your revision:
Explain what BCS stands for. Although you explained what it did, why exactly is it called this? I found myself thinking this as I was reading and it sort of distracted me from focusing on your paper.
Also, try not to state your thesis until later in the paper, or even near the end. You should explain both sides—the side you support, and the opposing side. It’s important to explain both before you explain what your opinion is, because this is Rogerian.
Finally, try to quote less and explain your point of view more. Try paraphrasing more often; this might help your opinions come together better than seeming like and extended collection of other people’s ideas and facts. Make sure you book-end your quotes with opinions and analysis detailing why this is relevant to your argument. Try applying more pathos to the paper to fully round out your argument; as it is, you have very good ethos with so many good sources.
Good first draft overall. Good luck with your revision!
-Ethan Wennberg
Greg, great first draft!
ReplyDeleteYour intro is very strong and maps out the issue very well.
I must say, I really don't know anything about sports so much of this was confusing for me. However, your target audience is one that is familiar with sports and with this issue so I don't know if it's that necessary to change too much of the technical language.
I feel like at times this was between a Rogerian and Classical argument. Although you used Rogerian techniques well, such as stating common ground effectively, I feel like it would help to include more Rogerian language and perhaps an incorporation of pathos with an anecdote or something relate-able.
Another main thing I would work on is to strengthen your presence in the paper as the writer and more importantly, a persuader. If you incorporate more original thoughts and opinions of your own, you paper will really become much stronger and have much more author credibility.
Overall, excellent work. You make incredibly valid points and this paper is off to a great start.
~Molly
Greg,
ReplyDeleteI think this paper is a super strong first draft. Even though I am not really into football, you explained everything so that I understood and knew exactly what you were talking about. I also think you have a lot of good research.
One thing that I think would really enhance your paper would be to choose a clear audience. In particular, I feel that writing to the Obama administration, Congress, or NCAA people and writing in letter format would easily fix this. Also, you established good common ground, but you should use it more throughout the whole paper and build on it, especially in your conclusion. One last comment, I think adding a bit more rogerian language would only be to your benefit.
Seriously though, you are off to a fantastic start. And your paper was very interesting to read. Great work!
Lindsay
Greg,
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed reading your first draft. Even though I am not a football fan nor do I even watch football, I will still interested in your topic. You're argument was able to grasp my attention. You did a great job in explaining the argument very clearly especially for those who do not understand football and the BCS system.
A few things to think about:
You should probably delay your thesis and not put it in the first paragraph. You don't want to state your opinion directly from the start of your paper. It would be stronger if you stayed clear from your side of the argument until later on, especially being a rogerian argument.
Your overall paper is heavily fact based, which is good but I would like to see more of your own opinion. Within each of the paragraphs that you state your own opinion, you should put more of your point view instead of just stating facts.
You should also add something about how it effects you and would effect other people. Maybe you can add a personal story on why you feel so strongly about your opinion.
Also, your purpose and audience is a little bit unclear. If you think of an exact audience you would want to address it would be better.
Overall, this is a great first draft. Good luck with your revisions!
-Joni Fromer
Hey Greg,
ReplyDeletegoof first draft and an interesting topic. You have maintained your voice throughout the paper but have also attempted to present voices from the opposition, such as in paragraph 2 when you mention those who favor the current system. The use of quotes also makes, the acknowledgement stronger. You also presented some strong statistics taht uphold your side of the argument, such as in paragraph 5 where you mention how 63% favor playoffs.
However, perhaps your took into your stand on the argument too quickly in the introduction where you mentioned that the system was "unfair". Also, I'm not too sure if terms such as "unfair", "criticism", "cons of a playoff system" are very rogerian like words. I had a similar problem with my first draft because of my strong views against the topic, but if you I suppose you should sugar coat them a little.
Wish you well on the final draft. Adieu!
Greg,
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed reading about your topic because I am a college football fan as well. I liked how you talked about their side and how a longer season might lead to injury and such. I think you had a lot of nice sources and your opening was very strong in giving background information to the reader.
A couple of things to work on could be to maybe give your opinion and position later on in the essay and not right away. Also, although you have great numbers and facts, try to put in some of your own voice and personal opinion on the subject matter.
In all nice first draft and cool topic choice!
Jake
Hey Greg,
ReplyDeleteI just got finished reading your piece, and I must say that I find it to be an interesting read. You also provide a strong platform of evidence, and the facts you bring up really stirs attention. Not to mention, it was very well written to say the least. You also seem to have a firm grasp on the concept of the rogerian argument. As mentioned before, you provide a strong platform of evidence, but you just might want to make sure that your quotes don't make your argmuments. It was difficult for me to detect your voice, but other than that I was very pleased with your writing.
- Keep up the good work!,
Caleale
Greg,
ReplyDeleteThis is a very well written and interesting essay with a strong foundation of evidence. Your voice is present through much of the paper and you did a good job bringing those less familiar with the topic up to date.
Although it was explained well, it wasn't clear why one would be against this system, especially in the first paragraph. I also think it is important to spread out your quotes and information. I felt like in your 2nd and sixth paragraphs were a cluster of quotes while the rest was your voice with one or two quotes with in. Attempt to spread these quotes out more evenly so to help a flow throughout your paper.
Great job on your paper! Keep it up!
Greg,
ReplyDeleteGood start on your paper! As a person who is not informed about the college football "process" the introduction definitely helped summarize the issue at hand. I felt that you created an effective common ground and your sources were solid. I especially liked the Obama quote, great find!
However, I felt compelled after the first paragraph to re-read certain parts of the paper because I found myself confused with where the issue to headed. Your thesis can also be towards the end, in order to not create a "defensive side" by the audience. The argument is great, but as a rogerian paper I suggest finding a compromise rather than sticking with one side.
Overall its a great issue, very current. Its a great start and I wish you luck!
- Molly Schneider
Greg,
ReplyDeleteGreat job so far! Here are a few things I noted:
-Be careful on your formatting of quotes, remember that you don't capitalize in the beginning of a quote.
-It read really smoothly, I didn't have to stop and re-read that often.
-Try to paraphrase more often. There seemed to be a lot of quotes in a row.
-Show your own opinion on the subject and then relate it to the sources that you found.
-Look for a scholarly source that can enhance your claim.
Overall, well done. Good luck revising.
Elizabeth Rubel
Greg,
ReplyDeleteYour topic for the paper was awesome. As an avid college football fan, there was no point in the essay where I lost interest or anything, well done. It also does a good job of pointing out that the system is based on profit rather than competitiveness.
Given that fact, in your position maybe I would stress how much the integrity of the sport is being compromised due to the greed. You touched upon it but maybe stressing it more would give your paper more of an edge. The solution is so clear, the fact that we need a playoff, that I think this makes it hard to keep this paper typically rogerian. At the same time I don't think you should be penalized for pointing out a necessay solution.
Either way, real good job man, your not far from a very solid, intersting paper. Hope this helps and good luck.
-Brendan Casey