Report: New BCS format approved

[Crimson Surfer]

Bowl Championship Series commissioners approved on Wednesday the concept for a fifth game, which would determine college football's national champion beginning in 2006, according to a published report.

An announcement is expected Thursday.
The internet report says the commissioners have voted to install a system in which four BCS games will be played around New Year's Day with one bowl getting a second date as the national title game.

Report: New BCS format approved

Bowl Championship Series commissioners reportedly approved on Wednesday the framework for a new postseason model beginning in 2006.

According to Sportsline.com, the "double-hosting" BCS model will begin after that 2006 season with the 2006-2007 bowls. The four existing BCS bowls -- Sugar, Fiesta, Rose and Orange -- will each play host to two games once every four years. The second game in the bowl will be the BCS title game matching the two top-ranked teams from the regular season.

The other four bowls will be a mixture of conference champions and increased at-large openings to provide access for any coalition teams that qualify. The addition of a fifth game means there will be two more BCS slots, bringing the total to 10 (six conference champions and four at-large teams).

BCS bosses reportedly approve new format

The Division I-A commissioners found consensus in the most financially viable plan Wednesday and agreed to use the "piggyback" as the working model for the next BCS contract, according to officials at two I-A conferences.

Each of the four current BCS bowls would host a second game in the year in which it hosts the national championship game, beginning with the 2006 season.

Although commissioners were asked not to comment before a Thursday teleconference, the decision must have been made, if only because the commissioners and their representatives have begun to refer to piggybacking with the more refined term, "double-hosting."

Fifth game to help non-BCS schools

Bowl Championship Series officials are expected to announce Thursday a new postseason model for college football, one that will grant more access to big-money bowls to more schools, starting with the 2006 season.

The five-bowls-at-four sites scenario would keep other bowls, such as the Cotton, Gator or Peach, from becoming part of the BCS. About a dozen bowls had expressed interest in joining the BCS rotation after university presidents agreed in February to grant more access to conferences not currently in the BCS, necessitating an extra game.

With a fifth game, there will be two additional BCS slots for teams, making 10 overall, with four at-large berths instead of the two the BCS has had in its first six years.

New BCS model expected Thursday

 

[Crimson Surfer]

The Bowl Championship Series added a game without adding a bowl but is no closer to a playoff than before.

The BCS will play five games at the current four sites starting in the 2006 season, with the bowl that hosts the national championship game also holding an earlier postseason game.

A committee of school presidents unanimously approved the double-hosting model presented to them by the BCS conference commissioners, Oregon president Dave Frohnmayer said Thursday.

"This model is the least disruptive to current relationships between individual conferences and the individual bowls," Frohnmayer, chairman of the Presidential Oversight Committee, said during a teleconference.

The changes follow a season in which the BCS was criticized for a system that led to co-national champions, Southern California and LSU. While the new model doesn't address the main complaints, the BCS is working on a new formula for the standings that it hopes will fix last year's problem.

Under the new model, the championship game will still rotate between the Sugar, Fiesta, Orange and Rose bowls, but it will be played about a week after the other four games. The name of the championship game has yet to be determined.

The approved model will be presented to the Rose Bowl and ABC, who are set to begin negotiations on a television contract Friday.

By expanding, the BCS is starting to give schools from smaller conferences greater access to the big payout games.

Big 12 commissioner Kevin Weiberg said the BCS looked into bringing in another bowl for the extra game.

The double-hosting model drew the support of the current BCS bowls, who were concerned they would host the championship only every five years, instead of every four.

"This is a new model that presents unique opportunities for the bowls hosting them. The feedback from our current bowl partners has been very positive towards it," said Weiberg, the incoming BCS coordinator.

Frohnmayer said the university presidents rejected the so-called plus-one model, which would have matched the top two teams after the four BCS bowls, because it would be a step toward creating a playoff system. He said there was "adamant opposition" among presidents for moving the BCS in that direction.

New plan: Five games at four sites

 

[bamanut_aj]

I'm disappointed that the University Presidents voted down the "plus one" format. To quote one President "it would have brought us one step closer to the playoff system that we so adamantly oppose....."

Ridiculous.

 

[Alanbama27]

The only reason these so-called Educated men and women don't want a playoff is because they're to stupid to see what the rest of us have known for a long, long time. And that is, that YOU CAN have the best of both worlds! The bowls and a playoff system! As it is 95% of the bowls don't have any part in the championship anyway and in my plan it would make those games actually mean something.

If these "educated" (tongue-in-cheek) men and women (I presume we have some women presidents) would take a step back, the Plus 1 format is no closer to a playoff than adding what they did...the 5 into 4 format. They just won't ever see that what they've done won't work until it is proven on the field. All this did was to add the possibility of a mid major into the fray. I'm all for giving all D1 schools a shot at the mythical title that these idiots have created, but it doesn't solve the problem and will not correct what happened last year because it really doesn't address what happened last year. All this does is give a school that didn't have a shot last year a shot and in reality it could screw things up further because with this we have the possibility of having 3 undefeated teams instead of two! MORON'S!

------------------
The Bus to our future is driven by Coach Mike Shula...Get on board or be left behind!

--Me

 

[ehillbama]

Cecil Hurt made a good point yesterday when he said that the Presidents are afraid that an NCAA run playoff will take a big chunk of the revenue and put it back into the NCAA (as is now with the NCAA basketball tourney). It seems to always come back to $$$$$.

 

[toddhsv]

There is absolutely no doubt anymore that this is all based upon $$$$$$$$

I, for one, have always been somewhat of a fan (term used loosely) of the BCS because no matter what you think, the system has worked up until last year. The easiest thing to do would be to add that second game so we could get those LSU/USC matchups to relieve all doubt of a national champion. It would be so easy. What's really bad is how do you think Nokia, AT&T, Tostitos and FedEx are going to react after they thought their game was the top dog. It will be up until the very next week when the (fill in sponsor here) championship game is played. Bottom line is that with all the "kids need to be in school" lines we have been thrown, this is a definite $$$$$$ scheme.

------------------
RTMF

 

[HighTide333]

Scenario:
The two only undefeated teams remaining will end up in a bowl one year (one of the four established BCS bowls), and then after one of them loses, the winner (what would now be considered the "Champion") would have to then go on to play a team that has a loss (an inferior team) only to get beat in this newest FIFTH bowl.
THEN, you'll have two teams maybe three with one loss at the very end of the entire season.

This plan allows the big nutted money grubbers to take more money and not provide the paying public with a champion.

We are all a bunch of chumps for not demanding a playoff, and until there is a playoff, we will never really have a CHAMPION.
I like the BCS, but I would love a playoff.
This helps more Northern schools get into the mix, which is where all those turds want the money to flow to anyway. I'm not impressed in the least bit with this elitist plan.