Toggle sidebar

Changes Could Come to the BCS: Looking Closely at the Proposal

DiamondDust

DiamondDust

Hall of Fame
May 1, 2003
15,157
7
0
Tuscaloosa, Alabama, United States
www.dsmithimages.com
First the link: http://brett-mcmurphy.blogs.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/29532522/33754694

Second, I stand corrected about the automatic qualifiers. I have said repeatedly they would never do away with them. That being said...

Does anyone else see how this completely shafts teams like Boise and TCU (Not that I'm complaining) unless they are in the top 4? Bowls will be able to take whoever they want/make whatever alignments they want. The incentive to take a lesser team will not be there. On the flip side, bowls could take multiple teams from one conference.

And, as usual, the Big 10 could muck it up.

Thoughts?
 
Either the Plus-One or without the Plus-One model would allow the other current BCS bowl games – Fiesta, Sugar, Orange and Rose – to simply align with whichever conferences they want and would not be required to select teams based on a BCS ranking.
Click to expand...

If we go with a plus one model (a four team playoff) then who cares about fifth place and beyond? At that point the bowls should be open to pick who they want and yes, it is going to be a combination of who can bring the most money, fans and excitement.
 
if anyone thinks the FBS presidents and chancellors are interested in creating the playoff zealots’ nirvana of a multi-round college championship tournament, you haven’t been paying attention. The CEO’s of the major universities want absolutely no part of an NCAA-run football playoff that provides automatic berths to Conference USA, Western Athletic Conference and the other current non-AQ leagues. And the BCS appears to be in no mood to continue having one (or more) of the big bowls hosting awful matchups like Oklahoma vs. UConn or Georgia vs. Hawai’i.

So the BCS may be on the verge of throwing up its hands, taking the least complicated route described in today's stories, and saying to hell with the rest of it. Which of course, means the end of having a WAC, C-USA or Mountain West team in a marquee bowl.

Sounds a lot like what we had in 1991, doesn’t it?
 
GulfCoastTider said:
if anyone thinks the FBS presidents and chancellors are interested in creating the playoff zealots’ nirvana of a multi-round college championship tournament, you haven’t been paying attention. The CEO’s of the major universities want absolutely no part of an NCAA-run football playoff that provides automatic berths to Conference USA, Western Athletic Conference and the other current non-AQ leagues. And the BCS appears to be in no mood to continue having one (or more) of the big bowls hosting awful matchups like Oklahoma vs. UConn or Georgia vs. Hawai’i.

So the BCS may be on the verge of throwing up its hands, taking the least complicated route described in today's stories, and saying to hell with the rest of it. Which of course, means the end of having a WAC, C-USA or Mountain West team in a marquee bowl.

Sounds a lot like what we had in 1991, doesn’t it?
Click to expand...

Bingo.
 
Sounds good to me.

Use the BCS to determine the top 4 teams and move to a plus-one model. Remove the Rose Bowl from the model, leaving it to their precious Big Ten versus Pac 12 match-up. The two "semi-final" games would rotate between the Sugar, Orange, Fiesta, and Cotton Bowls, with the BCS National Championship being held at one of those sites, also rotating, much like it is now. Other than that, every bowl is free to choose whomever they want in order to get the best match-up possible.
 
The South prides itself on different traditions. I didn't realize the Big 10 was so stubborn about its tradition of the Rose Bowl. The national media won't make a big deal about it either. If the Big 10's stubbornness is what prevents this, the media should attack Delaney like it would others.
 
RTR91 said:
The South prides itself on different traditions. I didn't realize the Big 10 was so stubborn about its tradition of the Rose Bowl. The national media won't make a big deal about it either. If the Big 10's stubbornness is what prevents this, the media should attack Delaney like it would others.
Click to expand...

Agreed. The Big 10 has gotten away with it for so long because it has been allowed to.
 
This year, for example, could end up looking like this for the major and BCS bowls:

Jan 2nd:
Fiesta Bowl - LSU versus Stanford (Plus One Game 1)
Cotton Bowl - Alabama versus Oklahoma State (Plus One Game 2)

Jan 3rd:
Sugar Bowl - Arkansas versus Oklahoma

Jan 4th:
Orange Bowl - Virginia Tech versus Michigan State

Jan 6th:
Rose Bowl - Oregon versus Wisconsin

Jan 9th:
BCS National Championship (New Orleans) - LSU versus Alabama
 
Last edited:
The Big 10 has shown the past few years that we don't need them in order to select a national champion, so why worry if they won't go along with progress?
 
uafan4life said:
Sounds good to me.Use the BCS to determine the top 4 teams and move to a plus-one model. Remove the Rose Bowl from the model, leaving it to their precious Big Ten versus Pac 12 match-up. The two "semi-final" games would rotate between the Sugar, Orange, Fiesta, and Cotton Bowls, with the BCS National Championship being held at one of those sites, also rotating, much like it is now. Other than that, every bowl is free to choose whomever they want in order to get the best match-up possible.
Click to expand...
How'd you get into my head? Are you pschotelepathical? Even though I didn't think about removing the Rose Bowl AGREED!
 
Make the Big 10 a non AQ and ditch the Rose Bowl if they won't play ball. Screw them.

The BCS should just take the top 6 teams and fill their bowls. This would solve the problem.

Pro format would work:

Top 2 teams get byes.
Play-in games #3 vs. #6 Orange
#4 vs. #5 Fiesta

Semifinal 1 Cotton
Semifinal 2 Sugar

Final whichever rotation dictates Sugar Bowl venue this year #1 vs. #2
 
uafan4life said:
Sounds good to me.

Use the BCS to determine the top 4 teams and move to a plus-one model. Remove the Rose Bowl from the model, leaving it to their precious Big Ten versus Pac 12 match-up. The two "semi-final" games would rotate between the Sugar, Orange, Fiesta, and Cotton Bowls, with the BCS National Championship being held at one of those sites, also rotating, much like it is now. Other than that, every bowl is free to choose whomever they want in order to get the best match-up possible.
Click to expand...

^ This is what I have had in mind when stating my preference for a +1.

Something eventually will happen. There are too many advocating for a change and worse a full playoff.

I believe that this is the one that has a chance to be implemented, actually will work fairly well, and is least subject to further change.
 
pc2bama said:
Make the Big 10 a non AQ and ditch the Rose Bowl if they won't play ball. Screw them.

The BCS should just take the top 6 teams and fill their bowls. This would solve the problem.

Pro format would work:

Top 2 teams get byes.
Play-in games #3 vs. #6 Orange
#4 vs. #5 Fiesta

Semifinal 1 Cotton
Semifinal 2 Sugar

Final whichever rotation dictates Sugar Bowl venue this year #1 vs. #2
Click to expand...

this
 
pc2bama said:
Make the Big 10 a non AQ and ditch the Rose Bowl if they won't play ball. Screw them.

The BCS should just take the top 6 teams and fill their bowls. This would solve the problem.

Pro format would work:

Top 2 teams get byes.
Play-in games #3 vs. #6 Orange
#4 vs. #5 Fiesta

Semifinal 1 Cotton
Semifinal 2 Sugar

Final whichever rotation dictates Sugar Bowl venue this year #1 vs. #2
Click to expand...

A +1 with the regular bowls happening around New Years and the BCS Championship on the last day possible will work, but a two week playoff will never get accepted.
 
Junking the AQ aspect of the BCS bowls is a step in the right direction. It recognizes the economic aspect of the bowls from the standpoint of the bowl committees and sponsors. Whoever is behind this proposal musta' been born before the days of every-kid-gets-a-trophy correctness.

Given that Bama and LSU are spoken for, the Sugar Bowl would love to have Arky or UGA. Instead they get Michigan and VaTech. It'll be a sellout, but TBD whether the fannies will be in the seats on Jan. 2. Junk the AQ nonsense and the Sugar Bowl cobbles together a good matchup.

ND will complain since the proposal would remove their engraved invitation to a BCS bowl so long as they don't wet the bed too badly during the regular season. Thankfully they've been perennial bed-wetters these last few years so it hasn't been an issue...
 
uafan4life said:
Sounds good to me.

Use the BCS to determine the top 4 teams and move to a plus-one model. Remove the Rose Bowl from the model, leaving it to their precious Big Ten versus Pac 12 match-up. The two "semi-final" games would rotate between the Sugar, Orange, Fiesta, and Cotton Bowls, with the BCS National Championship being held at one of those sites, also rotating, much like it is now. Other than that, every bowl is free to choose whomever they want in order to get the best match-up possible.
Click to expand...

It sounds good to me too, except that the Rose Bowl isn't going to allow itself from the mix, so try this scenario on for size.

The final BCS rankings determine the top four teams. However, instead of using the current bowls to act as the tournament, simply leave them as is. The Rose Bowl can remain a Pac12/Big Ten match-up on New Years Day and the Sugar, Orange and Fiesta can be sprinkled throughout the following week as they are now. The difference would be that there would be two BCS Semi-final games on New Years Day as well. More games equals more money, and since we know this whole thing is driven by money anyway, everyone is a winner. Originally, I though of having these games at neutral sites, but then I thought that could be a logistical nightmare, since most suitable neutral sites are already involved in bowl games anyway.

So, why not have the #1 and #2 seeds host the #4 and #3 seeds in a pair of New Years Day games? Using this system, the latest BCS bowl game would not extend a bid and the losers of these semi-final games would play there. That would leave four BCS slots open for at-large bids.

Using this year as an example:

Oklahoma State vs. Alabama in Tuscaloosa - December 31st (January 1st is a Sunday) @3:30 PM EST - Alabama: 42 - Oklahoma State: 10
Stanford vs. LSU in Baton Rouge - December 31st @7:30 PM EST - LSU: 38 - Stanford: 21

Rose Bowl - Oregon vs. Wisconsin - January 2nd
Fiesta Bowl - Clemson vs. West Virginia - January 2nd
Sugar Bowl - Michigan vs. Virginia Tech - January 3rd
Orange Bowl - Oklahoma State vs. Stanford - January 6th (moved back to be a week from the semi-final)
BCS National Championship Game - New Orleans - LSU vs. Alabama - January 9th

Alabama: 27 - LSU: 6

:biggrin2:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New Posts

Advertisement

Trending content

Advertisement

Latest threads

Top Bottom
Back