Mon Nov 17, 2008 1:36 pm EST
Last month, then-candidate Barack Obama shocked the world with his unabashed support for a college football playoff on the eve of his election, a controversial move that pushed him over the top in the final 24 hours of the campaign. Now, with the power of the nation's highest executive office at his command, the President-elect laid out his playoff plans in further detail in his much-discussed appearance on last night's 60 Minutes:
"It would add three extra weeks to the season," he said at the conclusion of a wide-ranging interview. "You could trim back on the regular season. I don't know any serious fan of college football who has disagreed with me on this. So, I'm going to throw my weight around a little bit. I think it's the right thing to do."
Finally, a man in the Oval Office who shares the hopes and values of his people. A college football playoff is the right thing to do. I've said it many times over many years. I can back it up. And if Mr. Obama is serious about throwing his weight around, I would like to officially throw Doc Saturday's hat in the ring to become America's first Secretary of the College Football Postseason, based on my long list of qualifications:
• I am a doctor. Obviously.
• No one has written more about playoffs over the last three years. At my old digs, I hashed, cheered, pounded and debated the merits of a playoff in excruciating philosophical detail. It's an issue close to my heart and mind, and for all its dirty tricks and appeals to the bogus sanctity of the past, the opposition will not catch me by surprise.
• A record of reaching across the aisle. With all due respect, sir, you are mistaken when you say "no serious fan of college football" disagrees with you about the urgency of a playoff. There are quite a lot of anti-playoff conservatives passionately engaged in the national discourse, and they are quite serious. They must be assuaged by someone who understands their point of view and concedes some of its points. I am that man.
I can work with bowls by assuring all bowl games will continue to exist, even the ridiculous ones in awful places no one wants to go to. I can work with conference commissioners by introducing flexible standards that allow automatic entry for conference champions if (and only if) those teams meet certain criteria. I can work with fans by recognizing that some teams (even conference champions) don't deserve an automatic courtesy. When the New York Giants, for example, upset the clearly superior New England Patriots last February, rendering the NFL regular season nearly meaningless, I joined the playoff detractors in calling out the injustice of a six-loss "champion" that finished three games behind the winner of its own division after 16 games. I, too, highly value the tense, competitive regular season that has always defined college football, and would never allow a bracket to grow too large and inclusive to undermine that key element of its appeal. Which brings us to my next point ...

Yes, we can
• I have strongly endorsed your eight-team policy. Because college football can't afford to allow a wild card like New York, or a middling seed like Villanova, N.C. State or Arizona to "get hot" at the end of the season, it's essential to guard against "playoff creep" by capping the tournament at eight teams. Since the inception of the BCS in 1998, only two teams have finished in the AP's top eight at the end of the regular season with more than two losses: 10-3 Kansas State in 2003, after blowing out undefeated Oklahoma to win the Big 12 championship, and 10-3 Texas A&M in 1998, after beating undefeated Kansas State to win the Big 12 championship, when one of the Aggies' losses was due to forfeiting a win over Louisiana Tech due to an ineligible player. At eight, the riffraff do not make the cut.
• I recognize the historical mandate of Change. As you clearly understand, Mr. President-elect, we're at a turning point in America. The direction is clear, and you need someone on your college football playoff team who understands that trajectory.
Twenty years ago, the bowls were a mishmash of lawless, backroom handshakes with no accountability to the polls. Today, through the Bowl Alliance, which beget the Bowl Coalition, which beget the endlessly-tweaked BCS, the top games are part of a rigidly organized system whose sole purpose is to determine a so-called champion. Ten years ago -- even two years ago -- no president, athletic director, commissioner or other establishment power broker would be caught dead considering the idea of a playoff in public. For too long, we heard, "They will never let it happen." Now, in consecutive offseasons, a small insurgency of the men always said to be staunchly barricading the castle from the bracket-wielding barbarians has not only publicly promoted the idea of a playoff on multiple occasions, in an official capacity, but declared a playoff an inevitability. Its time will come.
I will seek the advice of experienced men of vision such as Pete Carroll, Bob Stoops and the most poll-scorned of them all, Joe Paterno. Together, we can make that time sooner rather than later.
• I will not extend special circumstances to special interests. I understand Domers are a key element of your constituency in Chicago, but it's time to put an end to the cronyism and good-ol-boy networks of the last century once and for all. Notre Dame will operate under the same conditions as all at-large teams until it joins a conference and wins it. "Change" means real change.
For all these reasons and more, if you want someone who has put a great deal of thought and work into the issue and who believes in your vision, Mr. Future President, my e-mail is on the sidebar (and Blair Kerkhoff can be my senior advisor).
Dr. Saturday is a college football blog edited by Matt Hinton. Email him tips and feedback.

Posted Feb 3 2010
RivalsMinute: Bama wins the title
Posted Feb 3 2010
Posted Feb 3 2010
Edited by MJD
Edited by 'Duk
Edited by J.E. Skeets
Edited by Greg Wyshynski
Edited by Matt Hinton
Edited by Chris Chase
Edited by Jay Busbee
Edited by Jay Busbee
Edited by Steve Cofield
Edited by Chris Chase
Edited by Chris Chase
Edited by Brooks Peck
Edited by Andy Behrens
90 Comments
1 - 25 of 90
Report Abuse
Yahoo commentards get ugly and political in 3....2.....1
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Your countdown was correct, sir!
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
An appointment all should heartily endorse.
it is certainly desirable that the Czar charged with devising and implementing a playoff be fully aware of the numerous and egregious problems inherent in such (as the eminent author of this post has almost invariably displayed in his frequent, insistent, but occasionally persuasive advocacy).
Thus, all hail His imperial Majesty Matthew I.
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
1) The czar has, with very few excpetion been a russian autocrat given to incompetence, corruption, brutality or a some particularly infelicitous combination of the 3. This concern can be discounted as I have great conficence that our host may be able to avoid these particular predilictions.
2) If one were a hawk one could hardly have found someone better than the Don Rumsfeld to run the Pentagon during a war. Here at least a modicum of concern is warranted in light of the enthusiam one naturally has of the good dr. taking on this important task.
Still, in the sprit of this bipartisan consensus ne puxu ne pera, vashe velichestvo ( good luck your majesty) .
Report Abuse
God help us.
Report Abuse
But as for the playoff system, I see no reason for not doing it. The bowl season is so long that an 8 team playoff could play out with plenty of extra time. My only concern would be like you said, keeping teams like the New York Giants from being crowned champions. I think I like the idea of a 6-team playoff better. With the the top 2 seeds getting a bye in the first round. Because there are not always 8 quality teams deserving a national championship shot. This year though there are 8 legit teams with semi-arguments.
Report Abuse
And i dont get the craze over Obama wanting a playoff. Everyone does... stop acting like he came up with the idea. Have u seen him play ball? he tucks in his shirt and wears sweatpants with scrunchies.
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Boise St (once before and this year), Utah (once before and this year), and Hawaii(last year) proved that you can crack the top 10 by simply winning all your games even if your schedule is ranked 90th in the country. If you start an 8 team playoff, teams from all the major conferences will follow the same formula just to make the playoffs. They no longer need to schedule tough because they don't need to be in the top 2. Since there are no byes in an 8 team playoff, being #6 is not that different from being #1.
Also, since conference strength varies from year to year, how do you determine if a one loss Penn St is better than a 2 loss Florida. I think everyone agrees that even if Florida were to lose to Alabama in the SEC championship, they are a better team than Penn St. who didn't have to play a conference championship game.
I think having 12 teams in will give reassurance to teams like USC and Ohio St. that they can still schedule tough non conference games and get in the playoffs even if they lose 2 games. If you limit it to 8, teams will be gunshy to schedule tough, the regular season is going to suck, and you're going to end up with tons of 1 and 2 loss teams.
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
[Sun Belt] @ #1 Alabama
Boise St @ #8 Penn St
Cincinnati @ #4 Florida*
Ball St @ #5 Oklahoma*
[CUSA] @ #2 Texas Tech
Ohio St* @ #7 Utah
UNC @ #3 Texas*
Georgia* @ #6 USC
* is at large teams
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Also, when was the last time a BCS team went to Muncie to play? Actually, it was Indiana 2 years ago, but that doesnt really help SOS does it? Texas aint offering them a home and home to prove their worth.
Ball St. in undefeated. We know they are better than the teams they have played, we dont really know how good they are.
And if they are bad, then some top team gets to crush them and gets an effective bye. So whats the problem again?
I see no disadvantage to a 16 team tourney vs an 8. And it prevents missing out on some oddity like Ball St or Boise St or Tulane or etc.
Report Abuse
I posted this on the Yahoo Pacific 10 message board on October 20, 2004
It is obvious that we need a playoff. The winner of the SEC and Big 12 would have one of the eight spots. The conference champs from the six majors should go plus the two other highest ranked teams. You would then have three weeks to find out who is number one. Four games after Thanksgiving. Then the next two games. Then a real championship game. Every team would lose other than the real champion. 8 to 4 to 2 to 1. Money is the only reason this does not happen. It is the same reason the second largest city in the United States, does not have an NFL team. I think it is sort of funny that the BCS coordinator, and the Big 12 commissioner are the same person. Maybe Kevin Weiberg should have asked what would have happened if Oklahoma would have won the BCS championship game? Would that have made the Big 12 championship game more or less important? Rankings are BS
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
The above make up two thirds of the BCS rankings.
Report Abuse
Now, how do you choose two of Texas, Texas Tech, Alabama, Utah, Boise State (and I suppose Ball State)? How do you explain to those that miss out that Pitt, having lost to Bowling Green and Rutgers, was more deserving?
Lesson: if you reserve spots for conference champs, take the best conference champs, not the champs from the best conferences. (This also applies to the current BCS.)
1 - 25 of 90