5 reasons the College Football Playoff is better than the BCS

The College Football Playoff may still be in its infancy, but it has already proven to be better than the BCS.

In 2014, the College Football Playoff would be introduced into our lives, replacing the BCS, a system criticized for having a computer pick games and only letting two teams battle for the National Championship. This has since provided us with two champions: Ohio State and Alabama.

Along the way, there has been drama and controversy with the CFP. Is this committee picking the right teams? Are they using a system to put together the rankings? Should we trust their opinions?

Despite this, through the past few years, the College Football Playoff has proven to be better than the BCS. Why is this the case?

5. Proving who is the best team

The purpose of a playoff system for any sport is that it is supposed to determine who’s the best team. They have to either work through multiple series or a handful of games to reach the championship matchup. By the end of it, we usually see who has the best team.

With the BCS, this system was supposed to provide us with the top two teams in college football. While it did in some cases, there was always the argument that other schools deserved the opportunity more because of a harder schedule and win-loss deficits, among other reasons. The College Football Playoff doesn’t provide full clarity on this. There are other teams that came close to breaking into the CFP and having their own argument for warranting a spot, which is something that may lead to eight teams in the playoff down the road.

In the meantime, though, two more schools than the BCS system gave us are still being given a chance. This helps expand the field to determine who really is the best by having teams prove themselves. Whoever is the winner would have to go through two of the top teams in the nation to become the national champion.