PDA

View Full Version : BCS finally looking into playoff format


jjchieffan
01-07-2008, 10:42 PM
All I can say is about F***ing time!

NEW ORLEANS (AP) -- BCS officials are going to have some serious discussions in the upcoming months about going to a plus-one format, which could create a four-team major college football playoff.

Atlantic Coast Conference commissioner John Swofford, the new coordinator of the Bowl Championship Series, said Monday he intends to lead a "thorough" evaluation of the plus-one format. The BCS must determine in the next nine to 12 months what format it will use for the 2010 season (2011 bowls) so it can negotiate a new television deal.





Swofford takes over this year for Southeastern Conference commissioner Mike Slive as the public face of the BCS.

Swofford and Slive, speaking to the Football Writers Association of America, said there was increased support among conference commissioners and university presidents for having serious discussions about the plus-one, which would set the national championship game matchup after the Rose, Orange, Sugar and Fiesta bowls have been played.

Top-ranked Ohio State and No. 2 LSU were to play in the BCS national championship Monday night.

Big East commissioner Mike Tranghese and Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe have also said they'd like to look deeper into a plus-one.

Big Ten commissioners Jim Delany and Pac-10 commissioner Tom Hansen have said the university presidents they work for are opposed to moving the BCS to a plus-one, in part because it could make the Rose Bowl less attractive.

The Big Ten and Pac-10 have a contractual relationship with the Rose Bowl.

"Not withstanding that opposition, we will continue to discuss and evaluate the plus-one or formats of interest brought by others that come to the table," Slive said. "Fully understanding that in the final analysis that it comes down to each conference deciding what format it prefers."

Commissioners from all 11 major college football conferences will meet in Miami in April and the plus-one will be a topic.

"I think we would be remiss if we didn't have that discussion in full and play it out and see what the ramifications of it are in great detail," Swofford said. "To see if there are unintended consequences there. What are the pluses, what are the minuses? Really drill into it so we can have the right kind of information.

"Evaluate it in a thorough way and ultimately make a decision. You don't know unless you have that discussion."

Both Swofford and Slive said if a plus-one was adopted, they would support seeding the top four teams after the regular season and playing No. 1 vs. No. 4 and No. 2 vs. No. 3 in bowl games, essentially creating two national semifinals.

Rose Bowl officials have said they are wary of any change to the BCS that would lessen the significance of their game or make it more difficult for them to line up the their traditional Big Ten-Pac-10 matchup.

"That's a definite hurdle," Swofford said. "I don't know if it's the biggest, but it's significant."

The winner of the semifinals would play a week later in the BCS national championship game.

Had such a format been used this season, it still would have left several teams -- including Georgia and Southern California -- with a good case to be playing for a national title out of the mix.

Ohio State would have played No. 4 Oklahoma in one game and LSU would have played Virginia Tech in the 2-3 game. Both Virginia Tech and Oklahoma lost their bowl games.

Georgia and USC finished fifth and seventh in the BCS standings, but had impressive victories in their bowl games.

Currently, the BCS championship game matches the top two teams, using a combination of poll rankings and computer ratings, after the regular season. The other four BCS bowl matchups are made with no regard to pairing the remaining highest ranked teams.

The BCS is in the middle of a four-year, $320 million contract with Fox that runs through the 2009 season and 2010 bowls. The BCS will begin negotiating with Fox on another deal in the fall. Fox has exclusive negotiating rights with the BCS.

Chuck Gerber, executive vice president of college sports for ABC and ESPN, said if the BCS opens negotiations, ABC would be interested in reacquiring the television rights to the BCS.

ABC had the BCS until the 2006 bowls.

ABC still has the rights to the Rose Bowl, a deal that runs through 2014. Gerber said ABC's deal with the Rose Bowl would not stand in the way of the BCS changing to a plus-one.

"If the Rose Bowl wants to do this, we'll make it work," he said.

That's a big "if."

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/football/ncaa/specials/bowls/2007/01/07/plus.one.ap/index.html?eref=si_topstories

BigMeatballDave
01-07-2008, 10:44 PM
This is great news. Hope it goes through.

Ari Chi3fs
01-07-2008, 10:47 PM
**** the Rose Bowl.

irishjayhawk
01-07-2008, 10:50 PM
4 Team? Seriously? Same system screwed up the top 8 this year so bad. OSU moves up to #1 by NOT PLAYING and KU by NOT PLAYING moves down 4? And their Non-conference is a draw.

4 teams would be a disgrace. It's gotta be 8-10.

Mecca
01-07-2008, 10:52 PM
Even if they go to the plus 1...there will still be bitching...

Out of KU, WV, USC/Georgia....if it was this year someone would be complaining that they should get to go.

Even if they eventually went to an 8 team playoff team 9 would bitch that they didn't get in.

tk13
01-07-2008, 10:52 PM
It'd be better, for sure, but there's still probably going to be controversy either way. Just like there would've been this year if a team like Mizzou was left out of a playoff, even if it was 8 teams.

jjchieffan
01-07-2008, 10:54 PM
I think they should require your conference to have a championship game to qualify a team for the playoffs. I am not saying you have to win your championship game, just even the playing field. If MU had not had a championship game to play in, It would be them playing tonight. OSU should have had to play a championship game.

Mecca
01-07-2008, 10:55 PM
I think they should require your conference to have a championship game to qualify a team for the playoffs. I am not saying you have to win your championship game, just even the playing field. If MU had not had a championship game to play in, It would be them playing tonight. OSU should have had to play a championship game.

So you are saying the Big 10 and Pac 10 should be forced to add teams to their conferences you have to have 12 teams to play one which neither do.

jjchieffan
01-07-2008, 10:57 PM
Even if they go to the plus 1...there will still be bitching...

Out of KU, WV, USC/Georgia....if it was this year someone would be complaining that they should get to go.

Even if they eventually went to an 8 team playoff team 9 would bitch that they didn't get in.

Sure someone would complain, but the 6 other teams that now have a chance at the title wouldn't be. Way to find a negative spin MEcca. We can ALWAYS count on you for that.

Mecca
01-07-2008, 10:58 PM
Sure someone would complain, but the 6 other teams that now have a chance at the title wouldn't be. Way to find a negative spin MEcca. We can ALWAYS count on you for that.

It's just the point that in college football no one is ever gonna be happy, and somehow "big name schools" will always be the bad guys that screw the other teams or some such.

"Look USC doesn't deserve that!" always happens.

Der Flöprer
01-07-2008, 11:00 PM
My team is a Pac 10 team. That said, if the Pac 10 and the Big 10 don't like it, **** em. They can not compete and keep the stupid ass Rose Bowl. It'll have all the prestige of the Cotton Bowl before you know it. No offense MU fans, but tell me you wouldn't have rather played in the Rose, or Sugar Bowl.

tk13
01-07-2008, 11:01 PM
OSU didn't really play in a championship game officially... but a lot of seasons the Michigan game is usually for the Big 10 title... it has been the last two years. Pretty much the same thing. If there was a title game a lot of times it'd just be a rematch a week later. I'm sure people would complain that you'd basically have to beat the same team double elimination to get in... that's not very fair either.

Bump
01-07-2008, 11:01 PM
I could live with 6 but 4 isn't fair. IMO if you are in the top 8 then you are capable of competing for a National Championship. Also, I don't think that winning their conference needs to be a requirement also.

Der Flöprer
01-07-2008, 11:01 PM
It's just the point that in college football no one is ever gonna be happy, and somehow "big name schools" will always be the bad guys that screw the other teams or some such.

"Look USC doesn't deserve that!" always happens.


Listen, I'm not trying to give you a hard time but, when was the last time you were happy? How about optimistic about something? Anything.

Mecca
01-07-2008, 11:02 PM
If it's unfair some teams play championship and some teams don't then maybe some of these other conferences shouldn't have 16 teams....

Mecca
01-07-2008, 11:03 PM
Listen, I'm not trying to give you a hard time but, when was the last time you were happy? How about optimistic about something? Anything.

I'm generally pretty happy, I was just giving an opinion of how with a plus 1 unless there are 2 clearcut teams people will complain. In some years there's a clearcut 1 and 2 and then I guess the BCS is fine.

MadMax
01-07-2008, 11:04 PM
Listen, I'm not trying to give you a hard time but, when was the last time you were happy? How about optimistic about something? Anything.


Floppy ? That you? lol

Dicky McElephant
01-07-2008, 11:06 PM
Sweet....so now the Irish can lose in the 1st round like my Chiefs. That's even if they get there......hey like my Chiefs!

AggressiveNapkin
01-07-2008, 11:07 PM
About time. Both KU and MU would hang with those two teams and could likely win IMO.

The USC team would beat either one. No doubt in my mind.

jjchieffan
01-07-2008, 11:07 PM
So you are saying the Big 10 and Pac 10 should be forced to add teams to their conferences you have to have 12 teams to play one which neither do.

Why would they have to add teams? I don't see any reason why the conferences can't have 2 five team divisions. If they must have 12, then so be it. The big 8 had to become the big 12. The Big 8 would not be a BCS conference.

Mecca
01-07-2008, 11:09 PM
About time. Both KU and MU would hang with those two teams and could likely win IMO.

The USC team would beat either one. No doubt in my mind.

And if you took USC to play LSU....KU, Georgia and WV would all be enraged that it's unfair that USC is getting to go and not them.

It's some rule you have to have 12 teams in your conference to play a championship game.

jjchieffan
01-07-2008, 11:13 PM
It's some rule you have to have 12 teams in your conference to play a championship game.

That is another stupid CFB rule. What difference would that make. Well if that is the case, then I am sure both conferences would have no problems finding 2 teams to join a BCS conference. They should pick 2 lowly shitty teams just ot rub it in the face of the morons that made that retarded rule.

banyon
01-07-2008, 11:13 PM
Even if they go to the plus 1...there will still be bitching...

Out of KU, WV, USC/Georgia....if it was this year someone would be complaining that they should get to go.

Even if they eventually went to an 8 team playoff team 9 would bitch that they didn't get in.


The point is that it's finally moving, even if it is gradual.

it's much better to have the argument about who should be the 8th or 16th team in as opposed to who is truly the champion.

The NCAA BB Tournament is IMO the best sporting event out there, but even they have controversy about the 65th team in. But still, they feel pretty confident they have crowned a chapion though.

Der Flöprer
01-07-2008, 11:14 PM
Floppy ? That you? lol


How'd you guess?

banyon
01-07-2008, 11:14 PM
And if you took USC to play LSU....KU, Georgia and WV would all be enraged that it's unfair that USC is getting to go and not them.

It's some rule you have to have 12 teams in your conference to play a championship game.

I think if we went to 8 12,or 16, you could just give auto bids to the conference winners. Then it wouldn't matter if conferences wanted to award the bid to their tournament winners or their regular season winners. it would be their choice.

Coach
01-07-2008, 11:15 PM
The point is that it's finally moving, even if it is gradual.

it's much better to have the argument about who should be the 8th or 16th team in as opposed to who is truly the champion.

The NCAA BB Tournament is IMO the best sporting event out there, but even they have controversy about the 65th team in. But still, they feel pretty confident they have crowned a chapion though.

Which is the reason why I'm all for a 16 team format instead of 8. That way, the margin of error is less in a 16 team format than the 8.

Yeah, I know the 17th and possibly the 18th team will bitch, and there'll be controversy about the 16th team, but as you menetioned, I'm sure the NCAA FB would feel pretty confident that they have crowned a "Official" Champion.

Der Flöprer
01-07-2008, 11:15 PM
I'm generally pretty happy, I was just giving an opinion of how with a plus 1 unless there are 2 clearcut teams people will complain. In some years there's a clearcut 1 and 2 and then I guess the BCS is fine.


Right on. I really really wasn't trying to give you shit, I'm just sincerely not sure I've ever seen you post "What a great idea!" Or "Sweet!" It was genuine curiosity.

Mecca
01-07-2008, 11:15 PM
Progress is fine, in most years there isn't even a problem with the BCS because there are 2 clearcut teams.

Der Flöprer
01-07-2008, 11:16 PM
I'm generally pretty happy, I was just giving an opinion of how with a plus 1 unless there are 2 clearcut teams people will complain. In some years there's a clearcut 1 and 2 and then I guess the BCS is fine.


I agree with you btw. You can please some of the people some of the time.......

Mecca
01-07-2008, 11:17 PM
For the record, I don't think there's ever gonna be a playoff because I'm pretty sure the Pac 10, Big 10 and Big 12 all said if they went to some sort of playoff they'd "pull out" because the kids are suppose to go to class or some stupid shit.

Coach
01-07-2008, 11:17 PM
I think if we went to 8 12,or 16, you could just give auto bids to the conference winners. Then it wouldn't matter if conferences wanted to award the bid to their tournament winners or their regular season winners. it would be their choice.

1 Non-Conferece game

Play out your 8 conference games

Play out your conference championship game, and the other conferences that does not have a conference championhip game, play a non-conference team. (Must be a D-I team. I-AA is not allowed)

Then the top 16 teams on the BCS rankings get in the playoffs, which would mean 4 games in the 16 bracket playoff format to decide the NC, and 12 of the 16 more than likely will be conference champions, and the other 4 would be the highest BCS rankings that are not a conference champ.

AggressiveNapkin
01-07-2008, 11:17 PM
I think if we went to 8 12,or 16, you could just give auto bids to the conference winners. Then it wouldn't matter if conferences wanted to award the bid to their tournament winners or their regular season winners. it would be their choice.

Sounds like a pretty viable option to me but i could still see plenty of people bitching about the choice made.

Coach
01-07-2008, 11:17 PM
Progress is fine, in most years there isn't even a problem with the BCS because there are 2 clearcut teams.

Unfortunately, the problem with that is that there haven't been any "clear-cut" team lately.

banyon
01-07-2008, 11:20 PM
For the record, I don't think there's ever gonna be a playoff because I'm pretty sure the Pac 10, Big 10 and Big 12 all said if they went to some sort of playoff they'd "pull out" because the kids are suppose to go to class or some stupid shit.

Yeah, I think that all the Division I-AA kids just drop out of class and get expelled to have time to do their tourney.

banyon
01-07-2008, 11:21 PM
Wow. Chris Fowler just said "This system stinks" I think his bosses finally gave him the greenlight to promote the plus one.

jjchieffan
01-07-2008, 11:22 PM
Progress is fine, in most years there isn't even a problem with the BCS because there are 2 clearcut teams.

I disagree. Every year it seems like there is an issue. There have been what, 2-3 co champions because the AP disagreed with the BCS? And how many times have they had to change the rules? Several.

banyon
01-07-2008, 11:22 PM
Sounds like a pretty viable option to me but i could still see plenty of people bitching about the choice made.

Again, better to have that argument than argue that you haven't crowned a champ.

Mecca
01-07-2008, 11:22 PM
Yeah, I think that all the Division I-AA kids just drop out of class and get expelled to have time to do their tourney.

It's just the retarded reason they use....the real reason is. "We don't wanna lose our locked in BCS money by being a BCS conference!"

banyon
01-07-2008, 11:24 PM
It's just the retarded reason they use....the real reason is. "We don't wanna lose our locked in BCS money by being a BCS conference!"


The problem is, I think that reason is retarded too. There's LOTS more $ to be made in a playoff.

Just think ratings =$$$.

Plus you can still have the meaningless bowls on the side of the tourney too, and the sponsors can stay on with each round of the tourney and the locations.

Mecca
01-07-2008, 11:26 PM
The problem is, I think that reason is retarded too. There's LOTS more $ to be made in a playoff.

Just think ratings =$$$.

Plus you can still have the meaningless bowls on the side of the tourney too, and the sponsors can stay on with each round of the tourney and the locations.

I think all of them are much more comfortable with their locked in money and possibly getting 2 teams...instead of rolling it in a playoff and possibly watching their conference go down in flames to smaller schools..thus losing money and prestige.

banyon
01-07-2008, 11:49 PM
I think all of them are much more comfortable with their locked in money and possibly getting 2 teams...instead of rolling it in a playoff and possibly watching their conference go down in flames to smaller schools..thus losing money and prestige.

But you can still lock them in with the auto bids like I posted above.

Skip Towne
01-07-2008, 11:55 PM
Even if they go to the plus 1...there will still be bitching...

Out of KU, WV, USC/Georgia....if it was this year someone would be complaining that they should get to go.

Even if they eventually went to an 8 team playoff team 9 would bitch that they didn't get in.
Team #65 used to bitch when The Dance went to 64 teams. So they included a play-in game for spot #65. Now team # 66 bitches.

Guru
01-08-2008, 12:23 AM
For the record, I don't think there's ever gonna be a playoff because I'm pretty sure the Pac 10, Big 10 and Big 12 all said if they went to some sort of playoff they'd "pull out" because the kids are suppose to go to class or some stupid shit.
That is such a load of crap too. They don't put the basketball teams on hiatus for a month.

BigMeatballDave
01-08-2008, 06:22 AM
4 Team? Seriously? Same system screwed up the top 8 this year so bad. OSU moves up to #1 by NOT PLAYING and KU by NOT PLAYING moves down 4? And their Non-conference is a draw.

4 teams would be a disgrace. It's gotta be 8-10.Hey, its a start. Baby steps...

BigMeatballDave
01-08-2008, 06:27 AM
I could live with 6 but 4 isn't fair. IMO if you are in the top 8 then you are capable of competing for a National Championship. Also, I don't think that winning their conference needs to be a requirement also.Yes, winning your conference should be a requiement.

BigMeatballDave
01-08-2008, 06:31 AM
Notre Dame needs to join a conference.

BigMeatballDave
01-08-2008, 06:33 AM
Does anyone see the irony of bitching about playing a conference championship game? It is, more or less, a play-off game.

Pushead2
01-08-2008, 07:07 AM
Notre Dame needs to join a conference.

They had the chance, they don't want to lose out on the money of automatic bowl bids. They knew if they were in the Big 10 that they would not make the Rose Bowl for a longggggg time.

BigMeatballDave
01-08-2008, 07:17 AM
They had the chance, they don't want to lose out on the money of automatic bowl bids. They knew if they were in the Big 10 that they would not make the Rose Bowl for a longggggg time.TV money from NBC, too.

I hope the NCAA makes it mandatory to win your conference in order to win a National Championship. ND will always be left out. :)

Extra Point
01-08-2008, 09:27 AM
Assuredly, the BCS will develop a playoff format that the majority of fans won't like. Good luck sorting this out with the NFL, when the New Years Day semifinal falls on a weekend.

bkkcoh
01-08-2008, 09:57 AM
Notre Dame needs to join a conference.


Do they have to share their bowl money like the teams in a conference does? I realize there are a lot of independent football schools, but is it to each his own on bowl money?

El Jefe
01-08-2008, 10:19 AM
4 Team? Seriously? Same system screwed up the top 8 this year so bad. OSU moves up to #1 by NOT PLAYING and KU by NOT PLAYING moves down 4? And their Non-conference is a draw.

4 teams would be a disgrace. It's gotta be 8-10.


I agree, they need to make it 8 teams at least.