Before I started my research, I knew a lot of information about my topic. I also thought that though the Playoff is a better move for college football than the Bowl Championship Series (BCS) system because it more accurately ranks teams, it is what the players and media wanted, and it has increased not only attendance but also TV revenue throughout the season. I also knew there were a lot of people that were going, and still have doubts about the new four-team system because of the change to a totally new and different format. I chose this topic because I am very interested in college football and have been watching since I can remember. By pursuing this topic, I hoped to learn which system benefited college football more, specifically which system increased attendance and interest in the sport. My essential questions for my topic were, which system increased the attendance and fan interest throughout the season, and which system was the better move for college football overall? For my sources, I used three from the Gale Database, and two by searching my keywords with .org. I found the best information on the Gale Database sources because they were more credible and had better information. I had more success on the Gale sources. I only had one major failure when I used the official College Football Playoff website and had completed all the quotes when I realized it was a .com website. My mom and Mrs. Adams were especially helpful during this because they helped assist in finding credible .org sources. A roadblock I had during my research was finding my final source. Since I had already used the Gale Database, all the remaining sources were .com websites. This made it difficult to find a credible source for my research. During my research, I made changes in my essential questions focusing them more on attendance, fan interest, and fairness in rankings over-focusing them solely on economics.
In order to get people’s attention…give them a true champion. In the past, the national champion was largely based on media perception, meaning it was largely influenced by the regional bias of the voters. Then, in 1998, with the advent of the BCS, a system that was less susceptible to media influence, but still showed signs of regional prejudice was adopted. After years of complaints, a new system to crown a rightful champion was introduced. A brand new idea of a four-team playoff that strengthened schedules to truely pan out the best teams in the nation, and with that, the College Football Playoff (CFP) was born. The College Football Playoff system is better than the BCS because it is what the fans, players, media, and coaches want. It has also increased attendance and TV revenue throughout the season, and it more accurately ranks the top four teams giving them more of a chance to crown a true champion. Research suggests this is why the CFP was the right move for college football to adopt a new and better postseason system.
Although some people think that the new CFP system is less productive in selling tickets than the BCS, they are incorrect because the CFP increases the attendance throughout the nation creating a sold-out superior fight for the title. In 1990, the season attendance was 25.5 million. Then, “In 1997, the last pre-BCS season, attendance for the sport’s Football Bowl Subdivision (its major division) was 27.6 million. Last season, it was 37.2 million–an increase of 35 percent” (Anderson). With a season increase of almost ten million, it goes to show that the CFP system has interested fans enough to create a dramatic increase in attendance. This not only grows the love of the game but also increases revenue for college football. Also, the CFP is more productive than the BCS because “From the start, fans loved the BCS. And one of the things they loved most about it was complaining about it” (Anderson). Having the system on the fan’s good side is a very crucial part of its success. When fans and media are constantly complaining about the way the national champion is decided, then that system, in this case, the BCS, is not likely to have much success. In 1990, before the BCS, the average attendance was 41,485 fans per game. This is a significant amount less than the average attendance per game now, but “Some of that is because teams now play more games, but the average attendance has also risen, from 42,085 in 1997 to 45,440 last season” (Anderson). Even though teams do play more games in the current system than before, the attendance per game has risen a remarkable amount despite the increase in games. Fans enjoy the new playoff system because of the more consequential and high impact games. In conclusion, the CFP is more effective in increasing fan attendance and, as a result, more productive despite people thinking that the CFP is not as efficient in constantly selling tickets as the BCS.
The new CFP system is an improvement over the old BCS system because it strengthens teams’ schedules and increases TV revenue for college football. A playoff would more accurately rank teams because “the BCS rewards undefeated BCS teams, so schools sometimes try to schedule games against weaker opponents to protect their records. A playoff would remove the easy schedule and make the championship solely about performance” (ProCon.org. ‘College Football’). Once the College Football Playoff eliminates “cupcake games”, it forces teams to play harder schedules. This change provides a more accurate ranking of the top four teams at the end of the season. Through a 2012 pole on Sports Center analysts found “77% of people polled by ESPN think the four-team playoff announced on June 26, 2012 was the right move for college football” (ProCon.org. ‘College Football’). Most people are in favor of the new CFP system because it strengthens teams’ schedules and increases TV revenue. This is better for fans and college football because it makes the teams play harder schedules making every game a high-intensity battle for a potential playoff position. The new system also makes more money for college football. Also, because of the new playoff system, “Television contracts for the playoffs are estimated to generate annual revenues ranging from $600 million to $1.5 billion” (ProCon.org. ‘College Football’). This growth in revenue shows improvement with the new CFP system because it generated more money for college football. Not only does the increase in TV revenue make more money, but it also shows that fans of the sport are more interested in watching games than in past years. In conclusion, the CFP is a better option over the BCS because it not only increases TV revenue but it also strengthens teams’ schedules proving which teams are truly the best.
Because of all of the corruption caused by the BCS system, the CFP was the right move for college football because, in addition to more accurately ranked teams, it fulfilled the fans, players, media, and even coaches want for an improved system over the BCS. College football’s shift into a playoff system was the right move because “Every other NCAA sport uses some type of tournament or playoff to determine the best team that season” (ProCon.org. ‘Should College’). Knowing that every other college sport has a playoff to determine the champion, there is no reason that college football should be any different. There seem to be no issues or complaints about the playoffs in other sports. So, college football’s move to go to a playoff format was definitely the right move. The move to the CFP satisfied fans, players, and the media because “Everybody hates college football’s Bowl Championship Series. The BCS rankings let the media, the coaches, and eight computers determine which two teams play for the national championship” (ProCon.org. ‘Should College’). Unfair rankings and conflict caused by the BCS have created issues which made the move to the CFP even more justified. They also made a lot of people including; fans, coaches, players, and the media happy because of all the hatred toward the BCS system. The transition away from the BCS and all its conflict and complaints was appropriate because “The obvious solution is a playoff. Players want one. Fans want one. The media want one” (ProCon.org. ‘Should College’). Knowing that a lot of people wanted to make the change to the playoff system proves that the CFP is a better option for college football. Also, after years of complaints from the players, media, coaches, and fans about the BCS, college football’s move to the CFP was definitely necessary. In conclusion, the CFP was the right move for college football because it not only more fairly ranks teams, but it also satisfied the fans, players, media, and coaches desire for a new and better system.
The switch made by college football to transition to a four-team playoff system was the right move to make because of the new system’s merit. It creates a fairer structure for ranking teams. It also satisfied the players, coaches, media, and fans who want to trust a new and better system. It created a spike in the revenue of TV and attendance throughout the season. This is why the CFP is the better course to take for the new postseason system to declare a rightful champion.
Overall, the CFP was the right move for college football because of all of the benefits, including a fairer and more accurate ranking of the teams. It caused an increase in TV revenue and attendance throughout the season, and it satisfied coaches, players, fans, and the media’s want for a new and trustworthy system. Throughout the process of writing this paper, I have learned that it helps to build it steps at a time instead of attacking the paper as a whole. In the words of Alabama coach Nick Saban, “Focus on the process of what it takes to be successful.” Staying on the topic of success, during the essay, I found it easy to think of ideas and research them because I am actually interested in the topic. Although I had this success, I did also have trouble finding multiple credible sources not being able to include .com websites. Also, proving my point in some of my topic sentences was a struggle in a couple of situations. Because of this, next time I write a research paper as complex as this one, I will focus on finding credible sources and trying to stay on a step to step process by not focusing on the paper as a whole. During my research for the paper, some of my important results would include proving that the CFP did, in fact, increase the TV revenue and attendance throughout the season. Also, knowing the fans, players, coaches, and the media wanted a better, more fair system to decide the champion, and finding, through ESPN polls, that the majority of people believe that the playoff was the right move for college football. In conclusion, having a playoff with such crucial and game-changing benefits is the obvious solution for the college football postseason. Any team would definitely side with a playoff that year in and year out selects the true best four teams in the country to battle for the title, National Champions.