Sports feeds
E-mail sports alerts
DDN sports mobile
Sports TwitterBCS nixes four-team playoff proposal
> Comment: Do you agree with this decision?
Thursday, May 01, 2008
HOLLYWOOD, Fla. — Even a four-game playoff scenario was too much.
Bowl Championship Series officials rejected a plan Wednesday, April 30, to turn the much-criticized system for deciding a national champion in college football into a four-team playoff, starting in the 2010 season.
Extras
The BCS format will remain the same until at least the 2014 season.
"After a very thorough, very good discussion among the group, we have decided that because we feel at this time the BCS is in an unprecedented state of health, we feel it's never been healthier during its first decade, we have made a decision to move forward in the next cycle with the current format," Atlantic Coast Conference commissioner John Swofford said.
Southeastern Conference commissioner Mike Slive presented a plan for a plus-one format, matching the No. 1 team in the nation against No. 4 and 2 vs. 3 in the marquee bowl games. The winners would meet a week later in a BCS title game.
In the end, only the SEC and ACC wanted to even continue the discussion of the plus-one. "I can't say I'm surprised," Slive said. "There is a bit of disappointment."
No vote was taken, commissioners said, but leaders of the Big East, Big 12, Pac-10 and Big Ten made it clear they did not want to move toward a playoff in any way.
The BCS has two years left on its four-year, $320 million TV deal with Fox, and new negotiations likely will begin in the fall.
Comments
By Minton
May 1, 2008 3:12 PM | Link to this
JOSH NCAA Guidelines do not require you to play a championship game.They allow you to have the option to split your conference in half and then play a championship game. http://www.big12sports.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/big12-footbl-championship-07.html “Per NCAA guidelines, a conference with 12 members MAY play a 13th football game to determine a champion, provided the regular season is played in divisions” Notice the word “MAY” in the quote. It’s all about MONEY!!!
By oldtimer
May 1, 2008 2:54 PM | Link to this
Frankly, I’ve never been into the whole idea of picking a national champion. I guess I’m a purest, but I think winning your conference title should be your No. 1 goal. Then a bowl berth as a reward. Is my conference team better than yours? Who cares…it’s just a game!
By Bob540
May 1, 2008 12:39 PM | Link to this
The current system wouldn’t be so bad if strength-of-schedule were added back in as part of the selection criteria. Then, teams wouldn’t be so eager to schedule cupcake non-conf games, and BCS bowls and NC match-ups wouldn’t be selected based strictly upon record. Still, I don’t think anything compensates for a screwed-up season like 2007, when every good team lost to weaker teams and/or late in season. You can’t adequately control for that.
By Wolverine
May 1, 2008 11:59 AM | Link to this
As for a playoff, any format, no more than 8 teams, would allow teams to schedule a great non-conference matchup without fear of one “good loss.” The money from such a regular season TV game would have to be more than playing McNeese St. Look at hoops. Where would all those great early season games be if they had a format like football. You’d see Duke playing Grambling every week. Alas, they’ll never get it right…no matter how much they tweak computer calculations.
By Wolverine
May 1, 2008 11:53 AM | Link to this
First, I disagree with the decision, tho I’m not surprised. Going on a few things mentioned here…I don’t mind 6-6 teams playing in a bowl. It’s like the NIT, giving rising programs a marker of achievement. However, the added 12th game has done nothing but cause all the big dogs to go out and gather another piece of meat (for their coffers). It produced almost no good games (even though my UM got stung by that tactic).
By Josh
May 1, 2008 10:45 AM | Link to this
Here’s the solution…Use the math done in 2003. The two teams deserved to be there were there, LSU and Oklahoma. In a tie, the teams with the tougher schedules should play. That’s why USC was left out. The sports reports whined so the math was adjusted to make it what it is today. Then force each BCS conf school to play 1 school from 2 different BCS conferences. This should have a rotational schedule. This ensure teams like OSU don’t play the Ohio bowl.
By Josh
May 1, 2008 10:45 AM | Link to this
Here’s the solution…Use the math done in 2003. The two teams deserved to be there were there, LSU and Oklahoma. In a tie, the teams with the tougher schedules should play. That’s why USC was left out. The sports reports whined so the math was adjusted to make it what it is today. Then force each BCS conf school to play 1 school from 2 different BCS conferences. This should have a rotational schedule. This ensure teams like OSU don’t play the Ohio bowl.
By Josh
May 1, 2008 10:41 AM | Link to this
Obviously many of don’t know a thing about college football. The Big 12, the ACC, and the SEC have conference championships because of the NCAA rule that 12 team conferences must have a championship game. Sure it generates revenue, but that would be the fault of the NCAA not the conferences themselves.
Blame the weak conferences like the Big 10 and the Pac 10. They’re money hungry alliance with the Rose Bowl caused this one. Isn’t is funny 2014 is when the Rose Bowl contract expires?
By Tom
May 1, 2008 9:35 AM | Link to this
Yes, I agree.
By Minton
May 1, 2008 9:26 AM | Link to this
Can’t blame Big10 or Pac10.No school wants a playoff.They’re all money hungry.Why do you think the SEC and Big12 have conf championships.MONEY!They screw themselves and fans out of a chance to play for a championship every year by having a champ game.They didn’t always have one,but it makes the school more money. You think any school is willing to give up the millions they receive for taking part in a bowl game?NO!It’s easy for the media to blame the big10 since they’re in the spotlight.
By VietVet
May 1, 2008 7:26 AM | Link to this
Disappointed that the Big 10 didn’t want a playoff.Probably knew they wouldn’t win it anyway with the SEC involved.Any playoff scenario is better than the situation we have now.Take all conference winners and draw for initial game matchups,bracket them, and let’em play at a neutral site/central location.Eliminate some of these tier two bowl games pitting 6-6 teams.Teams with 6-6 records shouldn’t go to bowl games anyway.No national interest in those-only local.Need clear champ,not mythical.