BCS Playoffs..UPDATE 6/5. Pac-12 Commish Larry Scott is fucking awesome

[CaribbeanJoseph]

I didn't ignore, I just didn't want to go back any more years. As for Boise getting screwed in 2006, they got screwed because of a low ranking by... *gasp* the human voters, which are the exact people I keep saying are biased and need to be limited. The computers had them at 7th and they would have gotten in the top 4 conference championship playoff, but the human pollsters such as the coaches (who I said get rid of) only ranked them 9th. They wouldn't even have made a top 8 playoff according to those biased fucks. There can be huge changes to the ability of smaller teams to make a tournament if we use a more exact BCS computer ranking, replacing the Coaches' Poll with the AP Poll, and doing away with the idea of AQ BCS conferences.

I was referring to you ignoring 2009, how do you justify Boise not getting in then?

 

[FirstTimer]

If Football Bowl Subdivision conference commissioners and the sport's other power brokers approve a four-team playoff to determine college football's national champion, the semifinals and the national championship game will be played at neutral sites and the BCS bowl games will be played closer to New Year's Day, a source familiar with the negotiations told ESPN.com on Tuesday.

Commissioners of the 11 FBS conferences, Notre Dame athletic director Jack Swarbrick and other network TV and college football officials are meeting in Hollywood, Fla., this week to discuss the future of the BCS.

The source said he believed the commissioners "are too far out on a limb to turn back now," but said there were still many details yet to be finalized. A final decision on the BCS isn't expected this week, but the commissioners and other officials are expected to begin hammering out many of the details of a four-team playoff.

The proposed changes wouldn't go into effect until the 2014 season. The current BCS system, in which the top two teams in the final BCS standings play in a national championship game at the site of one of the current BCS bowls (Fiesta, Orange, Rose and Sugar), will remain in place over the next two seasons.

"I don't know how they could walk back at this point, but they might," the source said. "I think because they're dealing in a world of compromise, I think there's a chance they could only tweak the current system and only deal with No. 1 versus No. 2. But I think they're too far out on a limb to turn back now."

A proposal to play the semifinal games at the home stadiums of the higher-seeded teams is all but dead, according to the source. The semifinal games will either be hosted by the existing BCS bowl games or opened for bidding. The source said it seemed almost certain that the national championship game will be opened to bidding by the existing BCS bowl sites and other cities such as Atlanta, Dallas and Indianapolis.

The conference commissioners have reached a conclusion that some FBS schools' stadiums aren't large enough to host a national semifinal game and that many college towns don't have enough hotel rooms to accommodate bigger crowds.

"What happens if TCU finishes No. 2 in the country and hosts a semifinal game?" the source said. "TCU finished No. 3 two years ago. Are they really hosting No. 3 Ohio State in a 45,000-seat stadium? Where are people going to stay if Oregon hosts a semifinal game? In Portland? As much as it would be great for the sport to see a game played in Ann Arbor, Mich., Tuscaloosa, Ala., or Lincoln, Neb., some of the logistical issues are just too severe. I think that idea has come home to roost as far as these guys are concerned."

The source said a proposal that would require teams to win their respective conferences to participate in a playoff is also all but dead. Under that proposal, Alabama, which didn't win the SEC last season but defeated No. 1 LSU 21-0 in the Jan. 9 Allstate BCS National Championship Game, wouldn't have been eligible for the playoffs.

The BCS hopes to emerge from these Florida meetings with no more than two or three football postseason proposals to be brought to conference brass soon, BCS executive director Bill Hancock told ESPN's Joe Schad Tuesday.

"They know this game is in the fourth quarter," Hancock said. "And it's time to get it done."

Conference commissioners are still debating about what to do with the Rose Bowl as well, according to the source. Rose Bowl officials repeatedly have said they prefer to keep their traditional matchup between Big Ten and Pac-12 teams; Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany and Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott also favor keeping the traditional tie-in intact. But if the Rose Bowl isn't willing to give up its affiliations with those conferences, it might fall out of a potential national semifinals rotation. However, the Rose Bowl would still be eligible to bid for a national championship game.

The source said the conference commissioners also are eager "to take back New Year's Day." Last season, 35 college bowl games were played between Dec. 17 and Jan. 9. Of the traditional New Year's Day bowl games, only the Rose and Fiesta bowls were played on Jan. 2 (New Year's Day fell on a Sunday this year, a day reserved for the NFL). The Sugar Bowl was played on Jan. 3 and the Orange Bowl on Jan. 4.

The source said the commissioners would prefer to play the national semifinal games on New Year's Day and have the winning teams play in a championship game about a week later.

 

[FirstTimer]

On the bolded from the previous post:

1. Fuck them. Seriously.

2&3. Seriously? It's called home field advantage assholes. Hence the higher seed. it'd be like the Cubs or Red Sox getting to the World Series but MLB stepping in because "You really expect the Yankees to come to Wrigley and play in that small of a stadium?". Who the fuck cares. TCU is in the Dallas Ft. Worth area so the hotel argument makes no damn sense anyways.

God forbid people would have to stay in hotels45 minutes from the site at times. Like this doesn't happen already anyways and no one has an issue with it. Fuck this neutral site bullshit. Just another way for the site reps to get more money. That's all it's about. A money grab.

4. More poopdick ideas. Here's a great idea, let's try to improve the BCS but not fix one of the most glaring issues with past BCS title games!!

5. The only good thing to come from these meetings so far.

 

[FirstTimer]

More from ESPN:

Among the details to be discussed:

• The model: The leader in the clubhouse seems to be the same model proposed by Slive and Swofford in 2008: a four-team, plus-one system. The top four teams in the final BCS standings would play in two semifinals: No. 1 vs. No. 4 and No. 2 vs. No. 3. The winners would play in a championship game a week or two later. What isn't clear is whether the semifinals and championship game would be played at the site of existing BCS bowl games or other neutral sites.

For now, at least, there doesn't seem to be much support for any playoff models that involve more than four teams. And simply adding a national championship game after the BCS bowl games are played -- and picking the best two teams to play in it -- doesn't seem to have much traction, either.

"There's a chance they could only tweak the current system and only deal with No. 1 vs. No. 2," a source familiar with the discussions said. "But I think they're too far out on a limb to turn back now. I don't think that would be considered good enough."

• The participants: Some conference commissioners have suggested that only conference champions should be included in a playoff, but a person familiar with the negotiations told ESPN.com that the proposal doesn't have much support. Last season, Alabama defeated LSU 21-0 in the Allstate BCS National Championship Game in New Orleans, after the Crimson Tide failed to win not only the SEC but also the SEC West. Under the conference champions-only proposal, Alabama and Stanford, which finished Nos. 2 and 4 in the final BCS standings, respectively, would have been ineligible for a playoff.

Under that proposal, No. 1 LSU (the SEC champion) would have played No. 10 Wisconsin (Big Ten champion) and No. 3 Oklahoma State (Big 12 champion) would have played No. 5 Oregon (Pac-12 champion) in the semifinals. Along with Alabama and Stanford, No. 6 Arkansas, No. 7 Boise State, No. 8 Kansas State and No. 9 South Carolina would have been ineligible for a playoff because they didn't win their respective conferences.

Alabama coach Nick Saban is opposed to the conference champions-only proposal, saying it's unfair to teams playing in more difficult leagues, especially after the latest round of conference expansion.

"Was Cincinnati as deserving as us last season because they won the Big East?" Saban said. "The bigger these leagues get, the more chances you have of having two really good teams in that league."

• The sites: Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany proposed playing the semifinals at the home stadiums of the higher-seeded teams, with the championship game being played at a neutral site. Big Ten fans have long complained about their schools having to play postseason games in warmer climates like Arizona, Louisiana and Florida, which might favor their opponents from the ACC, Pac-12 and SEC.



"It would be fun getting one of those Southern schools up here in our weather in December," Ohio State athletics director Gene Smith said. "That would make it pretty interesting. I don't know if that would fly, but I'd love to see that. We've been playing away from home all these years. You go to the Orange Bowl a lot of times -- I can remember Nebraska, they're going to the Fiesta Bowl one year and playing Arizona State, going down and playing Miami in the Orange Bowl, Florida in Florida. So the northern schools are always playing on the road in those games. So that would be a nice change, an interesting change. I don't know if the Southern schools would be in favor of it."

Michigan coach Brady Hoke, whose Wolverines defeated Virginia Tech 23-20 in the Allstate Sugar Bowl in New Orleans last season, said it's only fair that some of the games are played in the Midwest.

"This isn't golf," Hoke said. "This is football. Football is played in all kinds of environments and climates."

But a source familiar with the negotiations told ESPN.com that conference commissioners have all but ruled out playing the semifinal games at the higher-seeded teams' home stadiums because some of the FBS teams' stadiums aren't big enough to accommodate larger crowds. An inadequate number of hotel rooms and lack of infrastructure in some college towns are also concerns.

"As romantic as it would be to have the semifinal games played on campus, and it would certainly fit into what college football is about, it's just too much to overcome logistically," the source said.

Hoke worries that playing the semifinals and championship game at neutral sites might put too much of a financial burden on fans and players' parents.

"Let's say we go play LSU and we're going down there and the next week we're going to Seattle," Hoke said. "How are [Wolverines quarterback] Denard Robinson's parents going to afford to get there?"

• The calendar: Last season, 35 bowl games were played between Dec. 17 and Jan. 9. After its Nov. 26 regular-season finale against Auburn, Alabama waited 44 days to play LSU in the Jan. 9 BCS National Championship Game. LSU waited 37 days to play the Crimson Tide after defeating Georgia 42-10 in the Dec. 3 SEC championship game.

Some conference commissioners would like to see the national championship game and the other BCS bowl games played closer to New Year's Day. One of the reasons for declining attendance at BCS bowl games is the fact many of them are played on weekday nights, after many fans have already returned to work from the holidays. The most likely proposal is to play the semifinals on New Year's Day and the national championship game about a week later.

Hoke said an additional game might take a physical toll on players.

"My whole deal is are we going to take care of the kids and their families?" Hoke said. "If we make a decision based on what's good for the kids and their families, then let's do it. But if we forget about them and lose sight of the kids, I'm not for it. Are we ever going to worry about the kids? These aren't professional players and their bodies aren't ready to be professionals. If we'd had to play another game after the Sugar Bowl last year, we would have had to play without

David Molk and without [defensive end] Ryan Van Bergen. It would have been hard-pressed for us to go and compete. People can talk about doing it at the FCS level and Division II, but it's different. The pressure that's on kids at this level to perform is different."

• The Rose Bowl Game: A person familiar with the BCS discussions described the Rose Bowl as the "elephant that's always in the room." The Rose Bowl wants to keep its traditional tie-ins with the Big Ten and Pac-12. Delany wants Big Ten teams to keep playing in Pasadena, Calif., and Scott wants the same tradition to continue for Pac-12 schools.


Delany's proposal to have a third semifinal at the Rose Bowl -- if a Big Ten or Pac-12 team was among the top four teams in the final BCS standings -- didn't get much thought from other FBS conference commissioners. If the Rose Bowl wants to keep a matchup between Big Ten and Pac-12 teams, it might be left out of the rotation for hosting national semifinals games, if that's where commissioners decide the semifinals are going to be played. The Rose Bowl would still be eligible to bid for hosting the national championship game, though.

"I know [the Rose Bowl] is very important for our commissioner," Wisconsin athletics director Barry Alvarez said. "I think it's important to the other directors to keep that relationship. I heard Jim Delany say this the other day: 'The Rose Bowl is probably one of the top 10 sports properties in the world.' And we've had the long history and tradition with it, and I don't think we want to lose that. Kids coming up now, they want to play in the national championship game, but kids in the Midwest still want to play in the Rose Bowl. It still takes my breath away. When you take that field and the sun's setting over the San Gabriel Mountains and the field is so pretty -- and I've coached and been a director in seven of them -- and I get the same feeling every time I walk in there."

The BCS meetings will continue in South Florida through Thursday. The conference commissioners and other BCS officials are scheduled to meet again in Chicago in late June. By then, we might have a clearer picture of what college football's playoff will look like in the future. Until then, the debate will continue to rage on.​

:cano: at Saban's comment. Nick, you have no point because no one was clamoring for Cincy to be in the NCG last year under the old system. The only other team people were talking about was Oklahoma St....who won their conference. Was OK St more deserving of the one spot simply because they won their conference? Generally no, however to ignore it as a piece to the puzzle is absurdly stupid.​

 

[NAHSTE]

Nick Saban using a strawman argument to defend his tainted championship? Surely, you jest. Anyway, we are going to end up with a plus-1 based on the BCS top 4, with no stipulation that you must win your conference.

In other words, the SEC will have a team in each semi-final.


Also, LOL at Brady Hoke:

Are we ever going to worry about the kids? These aren't professional players and their bodies aren't ready to be professionals. If we'd had to play another game after the Sugar Bowl last year, we would have had to play without

David Molk and without [defensive end] Ryan Van Bergen. It would have been hard-pressed for us to go and compete. People can talk about doing it at the FCS level and Division II, but it's different. The pressure that's on kids at this level to perform is different."
​

:joeybats:​

 

[BrntO4Life]

These talks are just further proof of just how fucking phony this system is...

 

[Bear Pand]

I want 8 or 16.. but that will never happen without a 4 team playoff.

It's a step in the right direction. When the NCAA sees the insane amount of cash they're going to make off this thing.. playoff expansion will come and those like Pand and Jeremy will love it. :kobe:

And everyone else will be hoping and praying it gets expanded to 32, no thanks.

 

[FirstTimer]

Per ESPN

HOLLYWOOD, Fla. -- Commissioners of the 11 Football Bowl Subdivisions conferences are still considering a proposal that would use a selection committee to choose the teams for a potential four-team playoff, Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott and SEC commissioner Michael Slive said after BCS meetings on Wednesday.

Using a committee similar to the one used to select the 68-team field for the NCAA men's basketball committee is just one of the proposals being discussed and debated in daylong meetings at a beachside resort here.

“

There's a lot of open issues about how you select the four teams that are in. Is it current BCS standings, conference champions, some change to the ways the computers work to emphasize strength of schedule or a committee? How do you pick the teams?
” -- Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott

FBS conference commissioners, Notre Dame athletic director Jack Swarbrick, network TV executives and other college football officials will meet again on Thursday. Commissioners will then take the proposals back to their respective university presidents, athletic directors and coaches.

A final decision about changing the format in how college football determines its national champion probably would come before the end of the summer, possibly as early as late June.

A selection committee was first proposed a few months ago, but didn't seem to carry much weight at the time. Under current BCS rules, the top two teams in the final BCS standings play in the Allstate BCS National Championship Game.

If conference commissioners approve a four-team playoff, which would pit four teams in two semifinal games and the winners in a championship game, a selection committee could choose the teams, or the BCS standings could be tweaked to put greater emphasis on factors such as strength of schedule.

"I think (a committee) is worth looking at," Slive said. "I think in the final analysis, we need to look at the entire process. That's a matter that applies to any format."

Scott said commissioners spent more than four hours on Wednesday discussing how the teams would be selected in a four-team playoff.

"There's a lot of open issues about how you select the four teams that are in," Scott said. "Is it current BCS standings, conference champions, some change to the ways the computers work to emphasize strength of schedule or a committee? How do you pick the teams? That might impact how the Pac-12 feels about a particular model."

Scott wasn't ready to say that he would embrace a selection committee because he prefers a more objective approach to selecting the teams to play for a national championship.

"I'm trying to stay open-minded about how a committee could work," Scott said. "In basketball, it's established. At first blush, it feels a little counterintuitive to me in how the world has gone and what I think our fans want, which is more objective and more transparent and utilizing technology. I think this is an opportunity for college football to leapfrog forward and to write some more objective system. It doesn't mean that committees can't work, but it just wouldn't have been my first thought."

Scott said if college football decides to expand its championship format beyond two teams it needs to make sure the selection process is transparent.

"I think if we're going to expand beyond (numbers) 1 and 2, we all accept that there's a lot of subjectivity," Scott said. "The difference between 2 and 3 could be a decimal point. If -- and I keep underlining if because it's not a foregone conclusion that we'll get there -- we go to a four-team playoff we're essentially going to put more stock in a more credible, objective, fair system of balance and strength of schedule because we all don't play over the same course. Every conference has different caliber, some conferences play nine conference games and some play eight, some play stronger out-of-conference competition and some tend to not and just want to get home games. There are a lot of variables."

Scott also favors a proposal that would allow only conference champions to participate in a playoff. Last season, No. 2 Alabama defeated No. 1 LSU 21-0 in the BCS National Championship Game, after the Crimson Tide didn't win the SEC or SEC West.

"We're warm to that idea, for sure, and we're having a good discussion and exchange of ideas about it," Scott said. "There's certainly no consensus in the room. I'm in favor of more objective criteria and rewarding performances in the regular season than less subjective, like a team getting in a playoff versus not based on a decimal point change here or there. It doesn't feel very satisfactory, especially when you don't understand how the formulas work. Earning it on the field and placing value on the regular season are principles that we feel strong about. (Under a conference champions-only plan) everyone knows the deal at the beginning of the year."

Slive said he was opposed to the conference champions-only proposal, saying he preferred to choose the best four teams, regardless of whether they won their conference championships or not.

If Scott ran for POTUS tomorrow I'd vote for him.

Holy hell that guy gets it.

 

[Goober]

God forbid people would have to stay in hotels45 minutes from the site at times. Like this doesn't happen already anyways and no one has an issue with it. Fuck this neutral site bullshit. Just another way for the site reps to get more money. That's all it's about. A money grab.

I had to do this when I went to the Rose Bowl. lol.

 

[St. Francisco]

I'm more than ok with the four-team playoff played at neutral sites. Awesome first step in the right direction of an eight-team playoff. A look at the last few years:

2011
#1 LSU (13-0) vs. #4 Stanford (11-1)
#2 Alabama (11-1) vs. #3 Oklahoma St. (11-1)

2010
#1 Auburn (13-0) vs. #4 Stanford (11-1)
#2 Oregon (12-0) vs. #3 TCU (12-0)

2009
#1 Alabama (13-0) vs. #4 TCU (12-0)
#2 Texas (13-0) vs. #3 Cincinnati (12-0)
*Undefeated Boise St. is still left out of the playoffs

2008
#1 Oklahoma (12-1) vs. #4 Alabama (12-1)
#2 Florida (12-1) vs. #3 Texas (11-1)

2007
#1 Ohio St. (11-1) vs. #4 Oklahoma (11-2)
#2 LSU (11-2) vs. #3 Virginia Tech (11-2)

 

[FirstTimer]

I had to do this when I went to the Rose Bowl. lol.

No you didn't Gob. The Rose Bowl is used to running these events and you stayed at the stadium the night before thanks to the 1,500 volunteers that only a BCS bowl could gather.







Also a :yao: moment. Some coach or something brought up TCU.....which is in Dallas/Ft Worth. Dallas, can handle hosting the Super Bowl. Can not handle hosting a BCS playoff game. Got it.

mg:

 

[FirstTimer]

I really don't get where they don't see this as feasible. Tuscaloosa is with an hour's drive from Birmingham, which I'm sure, along the way would have plenty enough accommodations. When NASCAR comes to Talledega, AL, almost every hotel from there to Atlanta, GA(2 hours away) is booked. I live 100 miles outside of Atlanta, and my town(a tourist town) gets a lot of the spill over from the kickoff game in Atlanta. Ann Arbor seems to be in a decent location to provide accommodation within a reasonable drive. Same thing with Lincoln, which if hotels aren't available, are a reasonable drive from Omaha who hosts the College World Series with little issue. My brother had to go to Eugene last year for some training class for his job and came back in love with the town. Most colleges may not be located in a large city but they are usually within a very reasonable drive from a larger city. Not only that but outside of a just a few teams that typically find themselves at the top of the standings and could host a home game, most have capacities as big, if not larger than the bowl stadiums.

The only teams that I can really even imagine being a logistical nightmare, in places I have traveled is Va Tech and West Virginia and those were just passing through and seemed like they were in the middle of no where rather than having the knowledge of where their actual location was on a map.

Excellent post.

There is no logic to their position. It's just the bowls trying to grab for money as they seem some power slipping away and the BCS/Conferences throwing them a bone.

 

[FirstTimer]

UPDATES FROM ESPN

HOLLYWOOD, Fla. -- Bowl Championship Series executive director Bill Hancock called it a "seismic change" for college football.

SEC commissioner Mike Slive said it was a "significant change," and ACC commissioner John Swofford said the "concept is likely to find its way to fruition."


The 11 Football Bowl Subdivision conference commissioners and Notre Dame athletics director Jack Swarbrick didn't finalize much during three days of meetings here, but it's evident that college football will have a four-team playoff in place by the 2014 season.

There are plenty of details that must still be settled: how the four teams will be selected, where and when two semifinals and a championship game will be played, and how the current BCS bowl games (Fiesta, Orange, Rose and Sugar) will fit into the sport's new playoff model, if at all.

Regardless of the details, college football will finally have a playoff to determine its national champion.

"It's great to get to a point where there seems to be a general consensus that a four-team, three-game playoff is the best route to go," Swofford said. "The next challenge, obviously, is figuring out a format that brings consensus where we can truly make that work. When you get to this point and you've got an agreement on [the four-team playoff], you would certainly hope that we would be able to seal the deal on the particulars."

When Slive was asked if the commissioners could turn back now, he said: "I hope not."

Each of the FBS conference commissioners and Swarbrick left South Florida armed with a few variations of a four-team playoff, which they'll take back to their respective university presidents, athletics directors and coaches to consider over the next several weeks. Hancock said the commissioners had about "two to seven" variations of a four-team playoff to consider.

The FBS conference commissioners are scheduled to meet in Chicago on June 20, with the BCS Presidential Oversight Committee meeting there shortly thereafter.

A four-team playoff format could be finalized by the end of the summer, if not sooner.

"Some people in the room like Model A, some prefer Model B and some like Model C," Hancock said. "There's a lot more work to do."

A person familiar with the BCS discussions told ESPN.com on Thursday that a plan incorporating the current BCS bowl games into the semifinals, while offering the national championship game to the highest bidder, seemed to be the most favored scenario among the conference commissioners. Current BCS bowl games could bid on hosting the national title game, although other cities such as Atlanta, Dallas, Houston and Indianapolis -- which haven't hosted BCS bowl games in the past -- might be involved in hosting the championship game as well.**FT Note, let the corruption begin here!**

Under that plan, two semifinal games would be rotated among the Fiesta, Orange, Rose and Sugar bowls each season. The Rose Bowl isn't yet completely on board in sacrificing its traditional affiliations with the Big Ten and Pac-12 conferences to host a national semifinal game every two years, but the source said the issue "would be resolved favorably."

The source said playing the semifinal games at the higher-seeded teams' home stadiums raised too many logistical issues, and that conference commissioners favored having the BCS bowl games involved in the playoffs. The other BCS bowl games not involved in the semifinals would still host traditional New Year's Day-type games, with participating teams being selected from a pool of teams determined by the BCS standings.

If the SEC champion isn't involved in the four-team playoff, it might still play in the Sugar Bowl, if New Orleans isn't hosting a semifinal game. The Big 12 champion might still end up playing in the Fiesta Bowl, and, of course, the Big Ten champion and Pac-12 champion might still meet in the Rose Bowl if everything lines up right.

At least college football will keep some of its tradition.

"I'm sure there will be some recognition for traditional bowl relationships and contracts," Hancock said.

The source said the current BCS bowl games want to be involved in the playoffs. "They see the handwriting on the wall; they can get on board or be on the same turf with the other bowls, bidding for bowl tie-ins," the source said.

For now, Slive said the commissioners would concentrate on where and when the games would be played, before deciding how participating teams would be selected.

"We talked about the selection process at length," Slive said. "Since the selection process can be used with any format, it's something we can discuss over time. The important issue now is that there are obviously three games and where are we going to play them?"

Once those issues are settled, the real debate can begin. Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott still favors including only conference champions in the playoff -- a proposal that is all but dead, according to the source. Slive wants the four best teams playing for the national title, regardless of whether they won their leagues or not.

At the end of the day, commissioners also aren't expected to recommend using a selection committee to select the best four teams and instead favor tweaking the current BCS formula to place greater emphasis on factors such as strength of schedule, the source said.

"Every conference is going to look at this through its own prism," Slive said. "What might not be a big issue for one might be a big issue for someone else."

But the biggest issue has been settled. College football finally has a playoff.

Larry Scott makes me hard.


MOAR NEWS!

Progress.

That's all college football playoff proponents were hopeful of when this week's BCS meetings began in South Florida. And that's what they got. With the commissioners' support, the sport has never been closer to a playoff.

Details such as dates and locations have to be determined. The school presidents still have to sign off on the plan. But, by 2014, we'll likely be preparing for a college football Final Four in mid-December. Doesn't sound too bad, does it?

Let's examine some of the elements of that initial four-team bracket, what thematically might come to pass in 2014.

The SEC will continue to dominate
No stunner here, but the SEC figures to benefit from the new system -- at least presuming its current cycle of success is sustained.

As ESPN's BCS analyst Brad Edwards pointed out in February, no conference has had more top-four finishers in the past decade than the SEC. It's done it 12 times in that span, including the top two a year ago. Last season, the league just missed out on having three of the top four spots, all from the Western Division (LSU, Alabama and Arkansas). Could you imagine that playoff scenario?

As Edwards pointed out, the SEC is all but unbeatable in non-conference games with national championship implications. The last time it lost a game of that sort was Florida's loss at Florida State in the regular-season finale in 1996. Of course, then the Gators turned around and stomped the Seminoles in the Sugar Bowl to claim the national championship.

The point is, the SEC has been extremely good in games similar to the proposed semis.

The underdogs' odds will improve, too
The term AQ is about to become obsolete. Forget the conference champs and automatic ties; it's all about the top four. If you're in it, it doesn't matter what your league tie is.

The TCU Horned Frogs must be thinking, "Sure, now you do it." The Frogs could have used this universal acceptance in past years, having finished No. 3 in the BCS standings in 2010 and No. 4 in 2009.



It's still somewhat beneficial for the Boise State Broncos (who, it's worth noting, have never made it into the top four prior to the selection of the No. 1 versus No. 2 matchup), if and when it lands in the Big East. The second-tier conferences -- the Big East and ACC, namely -- will stand to gain because there is a better chance, with an inherently weaker schedule than the other leagues, that they could sneak a team into the third or fourth spot.

Since the SEC's reign of national championship dominance began in 2006, the ACC, Big East and Mountain West conferences have combined to place four teams in the top four of the final BCS standings, with none able to crack the top two. (The Cincinnati Bearcats, remember, were No. 3 in 2009, even if they were obliterated by Florida in the bowl game after Brian Kelly's departure.

Boiling things down, the fact is that more teams from more leagues have a chance to play for a title when there are four teams in the bracket instead of two -- and teams that run the table against lesser competition are among those that stand to benefit.

The locations will play an important role
The commishes wouldn't, and really couldn't, rule it out, but on-campus semifinals seem highly unlikely. Too many concerns with weather, stadium size, if the smaller burgs could house tens of thousands of fans, things of that nature.

Some coaches, like Oklahoma's Bob Stoops, will lobby for the bowl system to be maintained for the semifinal round. Other coaches and administrators might go for the neutral-site concept. This sure seems like a great time for Jerry Jones to get his cathedral into a more prominent role with the sport. Cowboys Stadium has been gradually moving that way, anyway, with the kickoff classic-type games. Why not elevate it to the initial host for the first Final Four? After a year (or two) there, rotating to select sites -- Super Bowl locations, essentially -- would be wise.

The Rose Bowl as the standard championship location, a notion floated by fellow ESPN Insider Ryan McGee, is intriguing as well. A lot of college administrators could get behind that, in the name of tradition. If not, it could rotate through the current BCS sites, just as it does now.

One more caveat: There's some concern, and rightfully so, about placing the semis too close to the SEC and its schools (Atlanta and New Orleans, for example), but there's a decent chance that the rest of the country might have to just get over that. Count that as yet another potential advantage for the nation's strongest conference.

Regular-season scheduling could be affected
Schools with national title aspirations were previously structuring their schedules to ultimately land in the top two. Will they alter their philosophies to finish in the top four, with the road to the title being twice as wide?

Really, a lot of it depends on how the conference and school administrators determine to revamp the BCS formula -- and primarily the strength-of-schedule factor. (They have said they most assuredly will.) One AD at a top-shelf program said that, in all the playoff talks, there is keen interest in maintaining the integrity of the regular season. Valuing schedule strength is certainly one way to do that. You don't want to have teams scheduling down, just to find a way to stay afloat in the race for the top four. (You could also argue that perhaps teams would be more inclined to schedule tougher non-conference games, if they felt the new format provided more margin for error.)

That AD said he doesn't anticipate scheduling any differently at his school. For one thing, he said, non-conference schedules are set so far out in advance that there's no way to know if an opponent will pose a threat to a title run five years down the line.

Perceptions throughout the game could change
A playoff would also change the way a season and the week-to-week matchups within that season are viewed. For instance, most perceived last year's LSU-Alabama game to be a de facto semifinal game in November (at the time at least), even though it worked out that they played again for the BCS title.

If the same thing played out with a four-team playoff in place, we would know going in that both teams would be all but locked into berths in the final four. A loss in games of that ilk wouldn't hurt as badly, but winning would still mean something, in terms of seeding. And that's especially the case if it wound up influencing where the games were played (if homefield was incorporated, after all).

Really, having the playoff broadens the pool of potential contenders. Looking at the 2012 season, LSU, USC and Alabama are the top-line teams, the national championship favorites. If a playoff were already in place, the net would be cast wider to include teams such as Oklahoma or Oregon, Virginia Tech or (in other years) Boise or TCU.

There is still a lot to be determined ("we're being very careful and cautious, to make sure we don't mess up what's already great about the game," the AD said), but at least we're closer now to a playoff than we've ever been.

EVEN MOAR NEWS!
HOLLYWOOD, Fla. -- Football Bowl Subdivision conference commissioners, Notre Dame athletic director Jack Swarbrick and other college football officials Thursday agreed to eliminate eight-team and 16-team playoff proposals to determine the sport's future national champions, but settled on very little else during weeklong meetings at a beachside resort here.

After meetings Thursday, BCS spokesman Bill Hancock said the sport's 11 FBS conference commissioners would take "two to seven" playoff proposals -- each involving four teams -- back to their respective university presidents, athletic directors and coaches to discuss for the next five to seven weeks.

BCS officials and conference commissioners are scheduled to meet in Chicago again in June.

"Having carefully reviewed calendars and schedules, we believe that either an eight-team or a 16-team playoff would diminish the regular season and harm the bowls," the BCS said in a statement. "College football's regular season is too important to diminish and we do not believe it's in the best interest of student-athletes, fans, or alumni to harm the regular season.



"Accordingly, as we proceed to review our options for improving the postseason, we have taken off the table both an eight-team and 16-team playoff."

Any proposed changes wouldn't go into effect until the 2014 season. The current BCS system, in which the top two teams in the final BCS standings play in a national championship game at the site of one of the current BCS bowls (Fiesta, Orange, Rose and Sugar), will remain in place the next two seasons.

Hancock said another proposal eliminated was the idea of having three semifinal games if the champions of the Big Ten or Pac-12 were among the four teams competing in the playoffs.

Under that proposal -- which never seemed to carry much weight with many commissioners -- the Big Ten and/or Pac-12 team would have played in the Rose Bowl -- with four other teams competing in the national semifinals -- and then two winning teams would have been selected to play in a championship game.

Another development was the agreement by FBS commissioners and other officials to eliminate the practice of designating conferences as "AQ" and "non-AQ" leagues.

Under current BCS rules, champions of the ACC, Big East, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-12 and SEC automatically receive a spot in one of the five BCS bowl games -- Fiesta, Orange, Rose, Sugar and the Allstate BCS National Championship Game. Champions of Conference USA and the Mid-American, Mountain West, Sun Belt and Western Athletic conferences have to meet other criteria to qualify for a BCS bowl game.

 

[FirstTimer]

On the subject of what I bolded in the 2nd story. This is why 1. Preseason rankings need to go and 2. The games need to be played at home stadiums of higher seeds.

 

[FirstTimer]

If the 11 Football Bowl Subdivision conferences and independent schools decide to incorporate the existing Bowl Championship Series bowl games into a four-team playoff, the sites of the two national semifinal games might be determined by the conference affiliations of the two highest-ranked teams.

Under a plan proposed during BCS meetings this week in Hollywood, Fla., BCS officials discussed having the Fiesta, Orange, Sugar and Rose bowls serve as rotating sites for two semifinal games.




Conference commissioners and Notre Dame athletics director Jack Swarbrick are leaning heavily toward offering a national championship game to the highest bidder, which might include host cities of the current BCS bowls, or new hosts such as Atlanta, Dallas, Houston and Indianapolis, sources familiar with the discussions told ESPN.com.

After three days of meetings, college football certainly seems headed to a four-team playoff. A final decision might come before the end of the summer, if not sooner, but the postseason changes wouldn't take affect until the 2014 season.

The current BCS system, which pits the two highest-rated teams in the final BCS standings in a national championship game, will remain in place during the next two seasons.

Sources told ESPN.com that the commissioners are leaning toward incorporating the existing BCS bowls into a playoff. Instead of designating two BCS bowls as the host sites for two semifinal games before a particular season, the sites wouldn't be determined until the four participating teams were named.

In an effort to maintain a sense of tradition, conferences would keep their relationships with BCS bowl games -- the ACC champ would play in the Orange Bowl, Big 12 champ in the Fiesta, Big Ten and Pac-12 champs in the Rose Bowl, and SEC champ in the Sugar Bowl. For instance, if Alabama finished No. 1 in the retooled BCS standings, the Crimson Tide would host the No. 4 seed in a national semifinal game at the Allstate Sugar Bowl in New Orleans. If Oregon finished No. 2, the Ducks would host the No. 3 seed in the Rose Bowl Game presented by VIZIO in Pasadena, Calif. A source familiar with the discussions said he preferred this particular plan because it "preserves tradition and the regional tie-ins."

The source said it also solved the "Rose Bowl problem" -- Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany and Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott have maintained their leagues' desires to play in the Rose Bowl every season.

Under this proposed plan, if a Big Ten or Pac-12 team finished in the top two spots, it would automatically play in Pasadena. And if a Big Ten or Pac-12 team didn't finish in the top two, teams from those leagues might still play in the Rose Bowl, as long as they were among the teams included in the BCS pool. The source said the plan maintained those leagues' relationships with the Rose Bowl, without giving them an "obscene consideration."

Sources told ESPN.com that conference commissioners were still weighing the positives and negatives of the proposed plan. One potential issue is that based on historical results, the Sugar Bowl and Rose Bowl might host national semifinal games more frequently than the Orange Bowl and Fiesta Bowl. As a result, financial considerations among the BCS bowls would have to be negotiated for the plan to work.

The proposed plan also would give fans less than a month to arrange travel plans to cities if their teams are selected to play in the national semifinals and then travel to another for a championship game a week later if their team wins. Additionally, sources told ESPN.com that BCS officials also would like to maintain the number of teams selected to play in BCS bowl games. Under current BCS rules, 10 teams are selected to play in BCS bowl games -- the ACC, Big East, Big 12, Big Ten, Pac-12 and SEC champions are automatic qualifiers, along with four at-large selections. FBS conference commissioners have decided to eliminate designating conferences as "AQ" or "non-AQ" leagues, meaning any team in the top 10 of the final BCS standings would be eligible to play in a BCS bowl game, regardless of its conference affiliation. If BCS officials decide to maintain a pool of 10 teams playing in BCS bowl games, a fifth bowl game probably would be elevated to BCS status, possibly the Cotton Bowl in Dallas or Chick-fil-A Bowl in Atlanta.

Commissioners also discussed having the host city of next season's national championship game host a BCS bowl game as a "dry run" to a title game.

 

[FirstTimer]

Not sure how I feel about the above plan.

Could be worse

 

[Bear Pand]

Four team playoff is exactly what I wanted to see. Makes no diff to me where the games are played and other small details like that.

I agree they need to do something about preseason polls and the human polls themselves. The coaching poll is a joke and should not have any impact on who makes it IMO. Or at the very least not nearly as much impact as it has with the current system.

 

[JeremyHight]

From CBSSports.com

CHICAGO -- Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany said Wednesday that one possible way of determining which teams advance to the four-team playoff in 2014 is a conference champion model that would be capped by the team's national ranking.

Delany, who met with CBSSports.com and other reporters on Wednesday in Chicago, said one proposal being considered is the conference champion only model, but that the conference champion would have to be ranked among the top six teams in the country to qualify.

If a conference champion was among the top six in the rankings, it would automatically qualify for the four-team playoff. The top four ranked conference champions among the top six would qualify and if less than four conference champions were among the top six teams then the remaining spots would be filled by the highest ranked non-conference champions or an independent (Notre Dame, BYU, Army or Navy).

The commissioners must determine whether the four teams are the four highest ranked teams or a "conference champion only" model. SEC commissioner Mike Slive favors the top four ranked teams because he it would involve the top four ranked teams.

Others, such as the Pac-12's Larry Scott, prefer including only conference champions, because it increases the importance and value of winning their conference. Even in a "champion only" model, there still would have to be access for Notre Dame or independents, BYU, Army and Navy, if they ranked among the nation's top four teams.

ACC commissioner John Swofford said he like's the simplicity of No. 1 vs. No. 4 and No. 2 vs. No. 3.

If the conference champion only format was in place last season a four-team playoff would have consisted of No. 10 Wisconsin (Big Ten) against No. 1 LSU(SEC) and No. 5 Oregon (Pac-12) against No. 3 Oklahoma State (Big 12).

Using the model that Delany said is being considered -- capping the conference champions among the nation's top six ranked teams -- No. 2 Alabama, as an at-large selection, would have replaced No. 10 and Big Ten champion Wisconsin. The national semifinals last year would have been No. 5 Oregon (Pac-12) vs. No. 1 LSU (SEC) and No. 3 Oklahoma State (Big 12) vs. No. 2 Alabama (at-large).

How to rank the teams for the 2014 playoff is something the commissioners must still determine -- whether it's to use the current BCS ranking system, come up with a new computer/voting model or use a selection committee. Delany said he prefers a selection committee, although he's not ruling out other ways of determining the four teams.

Another item that must be determined is dividing the revenue among the conferences. Without the AQ conference and non-AQ conference labels, I asked Delany how would the commissioners determine how much each conference receives without those AQ/non-AQ labels.

"It's a secret," he said.

Delany also said he's optimistic that when the commissioners meet June 20 in Chicago they will have the playoff model finalized to present to the Presidential Oversight Committee for approval.

I actually really like this system. If you are a conference champion in the top 6, you deserve a shot at the title over a team who didn't even win their own division or conference. It keeps the importance on the regular season and pushes teams to have a solid resume, even if they don't win their conference as there is still a shot if they play well enough. Plus, it keeps it locked to 4 teams, which is a plus.

 

[FirstTimer]

http://espn.go.com/college-football...-get-preference-college-football-playoff-idea

Conference Champs to Get Preference

CHICAGO -- Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany says a model being considered for a four-team college football playoff would give preference to conference champions ranked in the top six nationally.

CBSSports.com reports that Delany spoke to a group of reporters during a meeting at the Big Ten headquarters in Chicago.





Various models for a four-team playoff will be considered by conferences during the next month. The focus will be on where and when the games will be played. After that is settled, how teams will be picked will be decided.

In the plan Delany discussed, a conference champion automatically would qualify for the playoff if ranked in the top six. If fewer than four conference champions were among the top six, the remaining spots would be filled by the highest-ranked teams.

Nebraska chancellor Harvey Perlman still sees an issue with Delany's selection process.

"No system is going to be perfect," Perlman told ESPN.com. "That's one of the reasons why I think thinking about these four-team playoffs is fraught with disappointment, because there's still going to be controversy about who are the four teams as opposed to who are the two teams. No system is going to be perfect. If you don't like computers, then you'll think it's wrong. If you don't like committees, you'll think it's wrong. I think we'll just pick one, the system that seems to have the most fan confidence, and use it.

"I don't think it's possible to pick the two best teams in the country to play. In football, that just doesn't work."

Perlman said the "highest priority" is "to preserve the status of the Rose Bowl and our connection to it."

Fuck the Rose Bowl

 

[Senser81]

Why does the Nebraska chancellor want to preserve the Rose Bowl? I don't think Nebraska has ever played in it.