BCS Officials to consider plus-one format

**mojo** · 01-07-2008, 04:56 PM

Not sure if anyone has already posted this or not but thought people would be interested to read this. I know I was!

BCS officials to consider plus-one format - College football - MSNBC.com

**l2alphmacchio** · 01-07-2008, 04:59 PM

Of course the "little eleven" (Big Ten) doesn't like it. It conflicts with the best cable network ever...

**IsUaClone2** · 01-07-2008, 05:25 PM

I am truly sickened by the Big Ten's myopic position that they are entitled to the most money and the most exposure when they have been putting an poor-to-average product on the field/court. It sounds so much like the position that Notre Dame has taken for years.

If you really want to make them squeal:

1. Lessen the impact of the media polls on the BCS calculation in favor of the computer calculations.

2. Put the bowls and tournaments in tiers and then make the payouts consistent for all teams in each tier.

3. Place the teams -- without regard to conference affiliation -- in the tiers based on the modified BCS poll.

**BryceC** · 01-07-2008, 05:49 PM

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.

I didn't know it was possible to make the Rose Bowl less attractive after pitting a crappy Illinois team everybody knew would lose against USC.

**cytech** · 01-07-2008, 06:06 PM

Maybe the big 10 and the pac 10 can form their own football league, and take the rose bowl with them. That would solve alot of problems.

**Clonefan94** · 01-07-2008, 06:08 PM

Originally Posted by BryceC

I didn't know it was possible to make the Rose Bowl less attractive after pitting a crappy Illinois team everybody knew would lose against USC.

That's exactly what I was thinking. Then again, how can the Big 10 be for a playoff system. Somehow, they end up in the game more-so than others probably do. Basically, they know this assures them of 2 teams in the BCS, without having a Championship game. Obviously, no matter how underserving their second place team is, they still get a nostalgic trip to the BCS by having the current system where the rose bowl is always played. A lot of that rides on my assumption that obviously, the team that wins the big 10 will be in the NC game, because we know they are so deserving of that after making it through that rigorous schedule.

Anyways, I say we let them go back to the old way it was. Let them have their precious Big 10, Pac 10 matchup. The rest of us will work out a system without them.

**mojo** · 01-07-2008, 06:13 PM

Seems like there are a few complaints about the Big Ten and PAC-10 but honestly I was simply pleased to see that they are going to finally take a serious look at it, seems to me like a step in the right direction.

**isucy86** · 01-07-2008, 07:04 PM

This solves nothing. There will still be schools/conferences that feel they have been slighted because they are outside the top 4 teams. Who would the top 4 teams have been this year? OSU, LSU, Georgia and USC? It would seem to me that schools like Oklahoma WVU or Va Tech would argue they should be the 4th team over Georgia or each other.

IMO the solution is straight forward:

1) Allow schools only 3 non-conference games if the conference has 10 or more members. I'd rather see ISU play Baylor than NDSU or UNI.

2) Get rid of conference championship games. Each conference would establish their own rules for determining a regular season champion. The regular season champ in the ACC, Big East, SEC, Big 10, Big 12 & Pac 10 would get an automatic playoff berth. The 2 top ranked teams which are not conference champs would also get a playoff bid.

3) The Friday/Saturday before Christmas would be round 1 at the higher seeds home:

Game 1 Fri - Ohio State vs. Kansas
Game 2 Sat - Georgia vs. West Virginia
Game 3 Sat - LSU vs. Va Tech
Game 4 Sat - USC vs OU

3) The Saturday before New Years have round 1 winners play at the Orange, Rose or Sugar Bowl sites.

4) The Friday after New Years the championship game is held at the location not used for the 2nd round.

The bowls would continue as today. Teams in the 8 team playoff cannot play in a bowl game.

**cyfreddy** · 01-07-2008, 08:32 PM

Originally Posted by isucy86

This solves nothing. There will still be schools/conferences that feel they have been slighted because they are outside the top 4 teams. Who would the top 4 teams have been this year? OSU, LSU, Georgia and USC? It would seem to me that schools like Oklahoma WVU or Va Tech would argue they should be the 4th team over Georgia or each other.

IMO the solution is straight forward:

1) Allow schools only 3 non-conference games if the conference has 10 or more members. I'd rather see ISU play Baylor than NDSU or UNI.

2) Get rid of conference championship games. Each conference would establish their own rules for determining a regular season champion. The regular season champ in the ACC, Big East, SEC, Big 10, Big 12 & Pac 10 would get an automatic playoff berth. The 2 top ranked teams which are not conference champs would also get a playoff bid.

3) The Friday/Saturday before Christmas would be round 1 at the higher seeds home:

Game 1 Fri - Ohio State vs. Kansas
Game 2 Sat - Georgia vs. West Virginia
Game 3 Sat - LSU vs. Va Tech
Game 4 Sat - USC vs OU

3) The Saturday before New Years have round 1 winners play at the Orange, Rose or Sugar Bowl sites.

4) The Friday after New Years the championship game is held at the location not used for the 2nd round.

The bowls would continue as today. Teams in the 8 team playoff cannot play in a bowl game.

Couldn't agree more ! This sure looks better then the present format.

**Wesley** · 01-07-2008, 08:58 PM

Too good to be true. The bowls are all about money.

**jumbopackage** · 01-08-2008, 03:38 PM

Originally Posted by cytech

Maybe the big 10 and the pac 10 can form their own football league, and take the rose bowl with them. That would solve alot of problems.

I believe something somewhat similar to this actually happened with TV in the mid/late 80s.

Originally Posted by isucy86

This solves nothing. There will still be schools/conferences that feel they have been slighted because they are outside the top 4 teams. Who would the top 4 teams have been this year? OSU, LSU, Georgia and USC? It would seem to me that schools like Oklahoma WVU or Va Tech would argue they should be the 4th team over Georgia or each other.

IMO the solution is straight forward:

1) Allow schools only 3 non-conference games if the conference has 10 or more members. I'd rather see ISU play Baylor than NDSU or UNI.

2) Get rid of conference championship games. Each conference would establish their own rules for determining a regular season champion. The regular season champ in the ACC, Big East, SEC, Big 10, Big 12 & Pac 10 would get an automatic playoff berth. The 2 top ranked teams which are not conference champs would also get a playoff bid.

3) The Friday/Saturday before Christmas would be round 1 at the higher seeds home:

Game 1 Fri - Ohio State vs. Kansas
Game 2 Sat - Georgia vs. West Virginia
Game 3 Sat - LSU vs. Va Tech
Game 4 Sat - USC vs OU

3) The Saturday before New Years have round 1 winners play at the Orange, Rose or Sugar Bowl sites.

4) The Friday after New Years the championship game is held at the location not used for the 2nd round.

The bowls would continue as today. Teams in the 8 team playoff cannot play in a bowl game.

You just left the ONLY undefeated team during the regular season out of your playoff. It's entirely conceivable that Hawaii COULD have beaten, say, Missouri soundly, and finished the season undefeated, while you would possibly have a team that lost to Pitt the week before the playoff win the "championship".

I don't see that as any less controversial.

I like the idea of a +1 game, but I don't want a tournament bracket. Play out the bowl games, and then take the two top teams and put them in a championship game. It'd be tough this year, with Georgia, USC and LSU all staking a claim, but I think it gives teams like Utah, Hawaii, BYU etc. a fair shot at the national championship if they go undefeated, which is something that almost no playoff system will ever give them.

Replace the BCS championship game with the Cotton Bowl to keep 5 BCS games, and then play a BCS championship game after all the BCS games have been played. You'll get a lot of good bowl games, and a chance for teams to make their case in those games for the NC game.

**cybsball20** · 01-08-2008, 03:43 PM

A plus one format wouldn't have worked this year either. If they went plus one the final four would have been Ohio State, LSU, Virginia Tech and Oklahoma. Arguably the best two teams are still left out.

**wonkadog** · 01-08-2008, 03:50 PM

nm..............

**wonkadog** · 01-08-2008, 03:52 PM

It's ridiculous to argue that a "playoff system wouldn't solve anything either." Instead of arguing over who WON THE NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP we would be arguing over who the 8TH BEST TEAM IN THE COUNTRY IS. I'll take that trade-off any day of the week!!!

**jumbopackage** · 01-08-2008, 03:53 PM

Originally Posted by wonkadog

It's ridiculous to argue that a "playoff system wouldn't solve anything either." Instead of arguing over who WON THE NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP we would be arguing over who the 8TH BEST TEAM IN THE COUNTRY IS. I'll take that trade-off any day of the week!!!

You can only say that you had a legitimate championship if you say you had a legitimate field of all the contenders for that championship. Any playoff system I've seen doesn't include all the legitimate contenders, or at least enough of them that the n-1 team can't make the argument that they could have won the championship had they had a chance to.