Posted on 07/27/2007 5:07:36 PM PDT by GOP_Raider
LOS ANGELES -- Pac-10 commissioner Tom Hansen, who supports bowl games and opposes a playoff system, told Sporting News Thursday his league will walk away from the BCS if the plus-one playoff model becomes a reality.
This offseason alone, conference commissioners from the SEC, ACC, Big 12 and Big East have said they are intrigued by the plus-one model -- which would provide a championship game between the two highest-ranked teams after the bowl games -- and might be open to implementing such a plan when the new television contract is negotiated sometime over the next year.
The model, however, will go nowhere without Pac-10 and Big Ten support.
"Our presidents have no interest whatsoever in a plus-one model -- none," Hansen says. "It's a little annoying that my colleagues continue to float this idea as though it has merit. If they continue to push it, and try to push us into a corner ... "
Will the Pac-10 walk away from the BCS?
"Yes, no question."
lotta pac 10 teams do not have difficult, week-to-week schedules.
my solution, top teams in each conference (top 1 or 2) enter into a playoff system, the CCHA did it, the NCAA basketball did it, its time for football to do it too, after all college gridiron is basically a stepping stone for the NFL anyway.
Pac-10 walk away from the BCS? Hah. I hope they push forward with this plan just to call his bluff. Whatever “his” presidents want, I doubt they want to walk away from the millions and millions in revenue the system brings in.
Besides, what do the presidents care? USC would get a chance for double exposure - basically have the possibility of playing in two “bowls” every year. It wouldn’t affect any of the other Pac-10 teams at all.
Babies. If they leave and nobody else does they are only hurting themselves.
When are they officially going to start paying the players?
It’s called a free ride to college plus stipend.
I think they might play this to return to a Big Ten(eleven)/Pac Ten champs Rose Bowl. The winner can still be end of the season “#1” since the BCS authoritarians can’t control all the polls.
Or you can play for Oklahoma.
Man I wish there was a edit button.
Or SMU. :)
“I think they might play this to return to a Big Ten(eleven)/Pac Ten champs Rose Bowl. The winner can still be end of the season “#1” since the BCS authoritarians can’t control all the polls.”
Fine, within two years, the networks will have convinced the world that the playoffs without the Big10 and Pac10 are the real championship and no one outside of California, Michigan or Ohio will care less. We’ll have our national championship game and they will have the rose bowl.
Works for me! Go Blue!
ROFLMAO
USC is what 58-6 in the last five years?
Yeah, they have been a pretty weak #1.
Get real.
How soon success makes us forget the past.
USC was 71-58 from 1991 to 2001, that is about a 6-5 average each year. One of the reasons so many of us USC fans are enjoying this now is because we remember those years, as well as the 26-20 years from '83-'86.
USC may be on top now, but it will turn, all too soon for some, and not soon enough for others.
Ok as a casual college football observer I might be getting the wrong idea from this so PLEASE correct me if I’m wrong, but what the hell is it about the plus-one playoff model has Hansen’s panties in such a twist? Even I can see the BCS is an absolute mess. SOMETHING needs to be done. As I see it (again correct me if I’m wrong here) as Hansen’s basically crying ‘Whaaaa....You do this, andandand...I’m just going to take my ball and go home...’
Basically the way the “plus one” system would work would be to create a National Title game (between the top two teams) and pick the opponents for that game after all of the bowl games have been completed. What the BCS has done now is pick the two teams for the title game—like they did last year with Ohio St and Florida—before the bowl games.
And, yes, you do see it correctly for the most part.
A story that gives us one and a half sentences of quotes to explain a position, isn’t a story that’s intended to inform anyone of anything.
You get one and a half sentences to explain why northern California and southern California shouldn’t split into two different states.
We’ll post that sentence and a half on an internet forum and see what happens.
Sadly, that's modern "journalism" for ya, brought to you by your friends in the MSM.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.