From the AP: Bob Stoops is done with the politicking that has turned the national championship race into a campaign, and he thinks other coaches are getting tired of it, too.  “It’s unfortunate. No one likes to do it,” the Oklahoma coach said Tuesday at his weekly news conference. “I think that’s why more and more of us say, `Hey, let’s find a way to get a playoff in place so that we don’t have to do that.”‘

And Pete Carroll, from ESPN: “The feeling you have to campaign like that just doesn’t feel right with me at all,” he said. ”I don’t like it. It just plays to the nature of the whole system. You’re trying to influence people on their choice as opposed to going out and playing.”

Just who, praytell, is stopping any team from going out and playing?

Let’s break this down.  Since 1869 or so, college football has been an imperfect game.  It has never had a playoff.  It has, over the years, had various polls.  It was a sport driven for the most part by tradition and pageantry, the epitome of good, clean fun.   Right?

Bowl games came about as a reward for playing the season.  Meanwhile, the pollsters starting picking the best teams.   The popularity of the sport exploded.

There have been some changes to the game here and there, but the integrity of the regular season has always been maintained.

The NCAA does not commission an official national champion for college football.  The champion is mythical, based on the vote of pollsters.  Some people hate that.   I think it’s part of what makes the sport so unique and great.  People debate and argue and fight over who is the best.  So what if the debate isn’t always settled?

We vote for a lot of things in this world.  We just had a Presidential election a few weeks ago.  It involved a LOT of politicking.  Each man had to prove to the nation that he was the best.  Each had to lay out his case.  Maybe John McCain was better ‘in the political arena’, but because he couldn’t convince people of that, he lost.

That’s just the way it goes.  We vote on the Heisman, we vote on our national champion, we vote on the President.

Meanwhile, you have coaches of two of the major powers complaining that, somehow, after 140 years of college football, their programs, which have been built up over the years by great men into powerhouses, are at some kind of disadvantage because maybe, just maybe, they might have to tell a few people that their team deserves to be the national champion.

These guys don’t mind telling high school athletes why their programs are the best.  They do it year round and it culminates in recruiting rankings come February.  In short, being a college football coach is a unique job that requires more than just ‘playing it on the field’.  Carroll says it well right here:

I think there’s more stuff to be involved with. Having energy for all of that is important because, you know, when you finish with your football, there’s other things going on. It’s not just academics; it’s an opportunity to promote your program, which you don’t do in the NFL, you just play the games. You have a chance with boosters. You’re much closer to fans directly. And that calls for a lot more opportunity for activity and stuff. So I think the energy it takes to do that is different.

So, why is it so distasteful to make a point about telling people how good your team is?

Bud Wilkinson and John McKay never whined about not having a playoff.  Their teams proved it on the field and voters acted accordingly.

But this new group of coaches–along with willing accomplices in the media–would throw away the sanctity of the regular season by instituting a playoff scheme of some sort. They claim the regular season would be secure from further taint, but it’s a slippery slope.  An eight team playoff is a popular idea, but it would only be a temporary salve for those who want to make the college game more like the NFL.

Soon, we’d hear a lot of crying over the seedings (I can’t believe USC didn’t get put in the same bracket as Oklahoma!) and which teams would be excluded from the Elite 8.  Then we would hear from coaches complaining about being left out and suddenly the playoff would expand to 10, 12, 16 and then even more teams.  Eventually, 2 and 3 loss teams would be in the playoffs and we would see a champion who, like Villanova 1985, was merely the hottest team at the end of the season.  A true champion for college football?  Hardly.  A boon to NFL-ophiles who don’t like to watch much college football anyway and don’t give a hoot about tradition?  Absolutely.

The simplest way for USC and Oklahoma to win a national title is to prove to everyone on the field that they are the best team.  They play 12 games every year to provide us the data to figure it out.  USC got beat by Oregon State on the field.  It might not get to the BCS title game as a result.  Tough.  Go coach your players better, Carroll.  Oklahoma lost to Texas on the field.  That’s a head-to-head battle, Stoops.  And yet you want another shot?  Come on.  The thing is, OU still might make the title game because it was able since that loss to, yes, convince voters that it is the best team.  With a playoff, maybe OU doesn’t display its recent mastery.  There would be no need to.  Teams would play for, what, seeding?  The quality of play during the regular season would go down, not up.  Teams like Oklahoma, USC, Florida and all the other powers with loaded rosters would coast until the playoffs and then their superior depth would take over, resulting in more national titles for college football’s upper crust.  No wonder these guys want a playoff.

College football is a unique institution.  Why throw away the very things that make it so infuriating and interesting at the same time?