Online Now 867

The Lions' Pride

Black shoes, basic blues. No names, all game

Online now 1085
Record: 7381 (3/13/2012)

Boards ▾

The Lions' Pride

Black shoes, basic blues. No names, all game

Ticket Exchange

Buy, sell and swap tickets

Reply

BCS Blowup and solution

  • I think this is the year it happens. And the result will be a change to the BCS. It is early, but we could have undefeated Pac-12, Big10, Big 12, and SEC champ, along with Boise. If we do, Bill Hancock cannot say the system worked. we had 5 undefeateds a few years ago, but since that lot consisted of Cincy, Boise, and TCU, after Texas and Bama, not as big a stink was raised. but it could have gone to hell if McCoy waits one more second to throw that ball away against the Huskers. Same scenario with TCU last year.

    while the SEC and Big12 champs would likely meet in the title game, an undefeated Stanford and/or Wisconsin in the Rose will scream murder if they are left out. The thing is, this could fairly easily be made into a playoff if the BCS thought about making their system more robust in the wake of all the conf re-alignment without changing the dynamics and tradition of the bowls at all:

    This solution is a Plus-2 model (adds 2 extra games):
    1. after the conf champ games, award the season-ending BCS #1 and #2 a bye week for the bowl games.
    2. Have a BCS selection show and play the bowl games as usual. Whoever is BCS 3 and 4 AFTER the bowls gets seeded against 1 and 2 in a BCS Final Four the week after Jan 1 (this is when 1 and 2 would have played each other in the current BCS title game).
    3. Winners of those games meet in the title game the week prior to the Superbowl (2 weeks after the Final Four).

    Pros:
    The BCS gets to keep the current bowl system traditions AND add 2 more BCS games to the rotation. The champion gets decided on the field. More $$$ to the universities, conferences, and BCS sytem. Novel idea right? The BCS would have to juggle a few things to ensure the top teams played each other in the bowls and any remaining undefeateds or top teams get whittled down, but it could work.

    Cons:
    fan travel logistics and cost.
    possible rematches or teams from same conf playing each other again.
    not much else.

    Here's how it would look this year if this was in effect (since BCS is renegotiating the contract soon, they could implement in 2014, if not sooner)
    Jan 2
    #1 LSU (13-0), #2 Oklahoma (12-0) - Bye
    #3 Wisconsin (13-0) vs #4 Stanford (13-0) - Rose Bowl - this is essentially a play-in game to the Final Four - assume Wisconsin wins
    #5 Alabama (11-1) vs #6 Boise (12-0) - Sugar Bowl - play-in game again - assume Bama wins
    ACC Champ Clemson (12-1) vs Big East Champ WVU (11-1) - Orange - Clemson wins, season over
    At large Oregon vs At large ND - Fiesta - Oregon wins, season over.

    Jan 8 -
    #1 LSU vs #4 Alabama - Sugar Bowl site Semi Final (this site would rotate btw Sugar and Orange every year)
    Jan 9
    #2 Oklahoma vs #3 Wisconsin - Rose Bowl site Semi Final (this site would rotate btw Rose and Fiesta)

    Jan 22
    #1 LSU vs #3 Wisconsin - Cowboy Stadium- Dallas (meet in the middle)

    there may be discontent from teams finish 5 or 6, but realistically the top 4 BCS teams after the bowls are the most championship worthy. At a minimum it gives more teams a shot to play for the title where there was no chance before. While this will never happen as long as Joe is still coaching, you have to ask yourself the question if PSU won the B1G at 13-0, went to the Rose, then to the Semi's, then the Title game, would you travel? Maybe not to all 3, but there are plenty of alums that would travel to at least one of the games. and this scenario only applies to the 2 teams that make it.

  • I appreciate your thought, but we're a long way from Jan. Let's see if there are actually 5-6 undefeateds at that time. Plus, the BCS doesn't really care about B10 programs not named OSU nor PAC12 programs not named Oregon/USC nor a loner like Boise. They can point to recent history to justify a B12/SEC Championship Game regardless of how many undefeateds exist. This is about $$$ and politics, not what is right...so don't expect change anytime soon.

    signature image signature image signature image
  • BLOW IT UP its a joke always has been always will be.

    Give us the TRUE playoff we deserve

  • Don't you think it would make more sense, if you're going to have a playoff, that the #3 team plays #6 and then #4 plays #5?

    Unless you're just trying to stick with the traditional Rose Bowl match-up.

    Just a thought.

  • yes was just thinking of the most simplistic solution within the current constructs of the BCS, because that organization is never going away and traditional bowl tie-ins will never go away. Tradition still has a place in college football. We are far away from Jan, I am just postulating what may happen in 2 months, it has happened before. Change will only happen when someone of note gets shafted. Remember the BCS was created in part because PSU did not get to play Nebraska in 94. This is a political thing and the power brokers of the BCS (presidents and conference commish's), Jim Delaney and Larry Scott being two of them, can use their might to push it in this direction.

  • Oh God, not this again. If the BCS were around in '94 we would have been the undisputed national champions.

    People forget how ridiculous the cfb system used to be. The BCS serves its purpose...its allows the #1 & #2 teams to play for the title at season's end. That's all it ever set out to do...nothing more, nothing less.

    The media (ESPN especially) loves to drum up criticism for the BCS simply because they have been removed from the process (the AP poll has been made irrelevant and it irks them)...the sad part is that it's propoganda has been so effective that the majority of the fan bases, including this board, are right in line marching to the beat of that drum.

  • Shundo said... (original post)

    Oh God, not this again. If the BCS were around in '94 we would have been the undisputed national champions.

    People forget how ridiculous the cfb system used to be. The BCS serves its purpose...its allows the #1 & #2 teams to play for the title at season's end. That's all it ever set out to do...nothing more, nothing less.

    The media (ESPN especially) loves to drum up criticism for the BCS simply because they have been removed from the process (the AP poll has been made irrelevant and it irks them)...the sad part is that it's propoganda has been so effective that the majority of the fan bases, including this board, are right in line marching to the beat of that drum.

    Nice of you to pretend we can't think for ourselves.

    So your entire argument is that the BCS is better than what we used to have? Awesome. I guess at the same time we should have stopped at rotary phones simply because they're better than cups with string between them. You must have a hard time posting while using DOS, because it's not worth making upgrades to something that can work, right?

    By the way, I hate ESPN and their propaganda. They're idiots with a microphone who pander to the masses of 5-6 key markets and that's about it. And yet, it's still plainly obvious to me how desperately FBS football needs a playoff.

    signature image