Posted on 12/08/2011 4:39:47 AM PST by Dysart
Maybe we won't need to cross our fingers and toes. The "plus-one" -- a four-team college football playoff -- is under serious consideration in conferences that previously stood firm against any idea of a bracketed tournament. How serious?
"I happen to agree with my conference colleagues about the plus-one game,"... "I think it's inevitable at this point."
....
• The plus-one is coming.
• The way we view the bowl hierarchy likely will change.
• The NCAA's approval of up to a $2,000-per-athlete stipend to offset the actual cost of attending a university is the first major step toward a separation of Division I's haves and have-nots, and it could be the first step toward a break from the NCAA by the wealthiest schools.
None of the athletic directors who spoke Wednesday voiced support for a full-fledged, NFL-style playoff, but they did acknowledge the possibility of a change that would allow four teams to compete for the national title at the end of the season. "I was vehemently against it initially," UCLA athletic director Dan Guerrero said, "but I'm a little more open to the discussion as it relates to a plus-one." The fact that two athletic directors in the Pac-12 -- a league long known for its resistance to a playoff -- would concede the possibility of a change is a major step. Monday, Big 12 athletic directors voted to throw their support behind the plus-one. The SEC and ACC supported a four-team playoff in 2008, but they were rebuffed by the other conferences.
That isn't the only major change in the works. The idea of BCS bowls may change as well. For the past few weeks, conference and school officials have hinted at the idea of taking away automatic qualifying bids to BCS bowls.
Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/andy_staples/12/07/img-forum-plus-one-ncaa/index.html#ixzz1fwgv6iQn
(Excerpt) Read more at sportsillustrated.cnn.com ...
I trust nothing as it relates to the BCS/NCAA
I would like to see the plus-one format expanded tp the top 8 teams. After all, there are too many variables during the season, from uneven strength of schedules to outright biased voting, and an larger pool of teams would mitigate some of that weakness. Also, flush about half those year-end bowls. More of them dilutes the experience and is tantamount to participation trophies.
Well placed skepticism, imo; maybe they recognize or relent now to their image problem (or to put a finer point on this— their specious modus operandi) and are taking a genuine measures to overhaul the model. Could it be worse than bidness as usual?
I want to watch football, ESPN has money for TV, and places like Birmingham get some tourism.
Minor bowls are win-win-win.
The Plus one is inevitable. They have already made the title game its own “bowl” and have made it a week after New Years.
If we got a playoff, what would happen to the classic Bowl Games like the Rose Bowl? I would like to see it between the Big 10 and Pac 10 (not 12!), not a playoff game for teams on their way to the championship.
They died a long time ago. Now it's Big 10 vs Pac 12 if, and only if, the conference winners don't go to a BS bowl. That wouldn't change if a playoff was initiated.
“conference and school officials have hinted at the idea of taking away automatic qualifying bids to BCS bowls”
BSC bowls will be given to schools that travel the best. That is why Va Tech and Michigan are playing in the Sugar Bowl. These schools fill seats.
Last Year, UConn played in the Fiesta Bowl and besides ESPN crews, no one from the state of Connecticut showed up.
The Big Bowls will rotate at being the quarter and semifinal games.
BTW, because of Jerry Jones’ investment in Cowboys’ Stadium, they will probably bring the Cotton Bowl back into the BCS mix.
The “AFC” and “NFC” championship games would be played in two name bowls. Prime time.
The Super Bowl-type National Championship game would be played the second week after New Years.
Best,
Chris
This is the result of Oklahoma State getting jobbed, at least from the “Big 12-2” POV.
The more rounds you add, the more injuries will play a factor, I think a 4-team playoff would work just fine.
Let’s say the Rose Bowl and the Sugar Bowl were the sites for the semifinals. Here’s how the traditions of these bowl could be incorporated into the set-up:
First, the Semifinals are held on January 1, in honor of the Rose Bowl Parade.
Second, the Rose Bowl gets first dibs an any team qualifying from “the west” and the Sugar Bowl gets first dibs on any team qualifying “the south.”
The idea would be an “east-west” bowl for the Rose Bowl, and a “north-south” pairing for the Sugar Bowl. This year it would be Stanford v. Alabama in the Rose Bowl and LSU verses Oklahoma State in the Sugar Bowl (no northern team finished in the top 4).
Third, I’d like to see winning a conference championship count for something but not be automatic. So, let’s say conference champions that are ranked in the top 12 are automatic qualifiers; and, that conferences can only send two teams.
Then, you’d have: LSU, Oklahoma State, Oregon and Wisconsin in as Conference Champions; Alabama, Stanford, Boise State and Kansas State as the highest ranking, eligible “at large” teams.
(Arkansas would be skipped over because of the max. of 2 per conference rule, in favor of K-State. If there hadn’t been an ACC conference championship game, Virginia Tech would be in and K-State would be out.)
For the four host sites for the first round, on Dec. 25, we could say:
Indianapolis (preferred host conference Big 10) - Wisconsin v. Stanford
Fiesta Bowl (preferred host conference Pac 12) - Oregon v. Alabama
Cotton Bowl (preferred host conference Big 12) - Oklahoma State v. Boise State
Citrus Bowl (preferred host conference SEC) - LSU v. Kansas State
National Championship Game would then be at the Orange Bowl
The sites can be shifted around, but the Rose Bowl really needs to be on January 1st.
Fourth, to accomodate the 3-game playoff, there should be a strict limit of 12 regular season games and no extra game for a conference championship.
Fifth, the exhibition bowl games are all o.k., as to whether 6 wins is enough to qualify for a bowl game might be revisited. But, they’re only exhibition games, so, as long as those involved are happy, what’s wrong with it.
But, with only eight teams in the playoffs, there will be many very good teams (as well as some mediocre teams) available for the exhibition bowl games. And, when you combine the fun of college football with the holiday atmosphere, it’s great entertainment.
Presuming this is a Football-only stipend, watch for Title IX to rear its head and next thing you know, women's volleyball will want the same, then the Tennis team, then the Lacrosse. At that point, it will fall in on itself, and we'll be back to where we started.
All speculation on a true playoff is just that - speculation. A +1 is going to be the most likely and basically inevitable outcome.
That said, I think they should make the +1 a CONFERENCE CHAMPION ONLY setup. And I say that as an Alabama (by marraige) fan that is happy to see the Tide get a second shot at LSU.
Take the top 4 Conference Champions - in this year’s case that would be LSU, Oklahoma St, Oregon and Wisconsin. Seed them with 1 vs 4 and 2 vs 3.
Yes a +1 of LSU vs Stanford and Alabama vs Oklahoma St would be more competitive than LSU vs Wisconsin and Oklahoma St vs Oregon, but I firmly believe that not winning your conference should be an eliminator.
It’s. A. Game.
Woah now. I'm perfectly fine with 6 wins. I think that's the only way my Black Knights are going to make Bowl games for the near future.
Lets call college ball what it is Professional. The colleges just get the players as students also.
I cant believe I am about to say this.
The students need a union.
Football is a multi-billion dollar business; the game is played on the field.
Much the same way the stock market is a trillion dollar marketplace wherein the bets are effectively a game.
As an entrepreneur I immerse myself in earnest business-- the capital investments and operational management. Implementing my strategies involve competitive gamesmanship.
It's a matter of perspective and experience, FRiend. You might ponder this issue a bit more.
A +1, not a playoff. The structure is already there. 2 of the Big Bowls take turns being the semifinals. The title game is the next week.
Nothing more needs to be done, or will happen anytime soon.
“Football is a multi-billion dollar business; the game is played on the field.”
My point, FRiend: all this over a game whose entire existence is for entertainment. I understand your perspective - mine is that people who get so immersed in the “importance” of being able to name a “national champion” of something which only really benefits the participants (on the field or in “the biz”), not the spectators, are seriously in need of a real life.
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.