Quote:The four top-seeded teams would play in two "semifinal" games, using the existing bowls - Orange, Sugar, Rose, Fiesta and the current BCS title game on a rotating basis - with the two winners meeting in a newly created bowl. Theoretically, it would leave less argument over who's No. 1.
I really think the double-hosting format is going to be a problem that needs to be overcome. I think there will be a compromise that I'll get to later.
Quote:"You'll probably never eliminate all the debate, but it's hard for me to imagine a team finishing fifth in the final ratings having a legitimate argument for No. 1," an ACC athletic director said. "Once you get below four, it's a hard sell."
Well, the argument then won't be that #5 or #6 should be in the championship game, rather the argument will be why is it that #3 and #4 gets to play for it and they don't. If 3 and 4 might be just as good as 1 or 2, theoretically a case could be made more often that 5 and 6 are just as good as 3 and 4.
Quote:According to several sources, no existing bowl, such as the Cotton, Gator or Outback, would be transformed into the championship game because no conference wants to lose an existing postseason opportunity for its member teams.
I understand why the conferences wouldn't want it, but it would be a hard sell to create a brand new Bowl and make it a BCS Bowl over the Cotton, Citrus, or Gator. I doubt the Outback would be in the picture. The only justification that I think might have been acceptable to the other bowls is if the Domed Jets Stadium had been built in Manhattan.
The BCS Cartel might have been able to sell that one as a natural New Year's Day Bowl, getting the northeast more involved with college football (thus increasing ratings overall for the sport in general) and the Big East needing an anchor bowl.
Even then, it would have been a tough sell.
Quote:The money, more than fixing the current system which has led to almost annual debate over which team truly is No. 1, is the driving force behind the "Plus-1," format.
It's ALWAYS about the $$$
Quote:The BCS recently signed a four-year, $84 million deal with FOX that runs through the 2010 bowl games. The Rose Bowl signed a separate eight-year, $300 million deal with ABC which runs through 2014.
"There's not going to be a playoff so you can forget that," said one TV executive who is attending the Big East Conference media gathering here. "But a 'Plus-1' is going to happen - sooner rather than later."
The fact that the Plus-1 didn't happen the last go-round is why ABC didn't go after the whole post-season BCS Bowl package, but instead signed the separate Rose Bowl deal.
Quote:For a "Plus-1" to happen, the Rose Bowl would have to be willing to loosen its grip on matching the top Big Ten and Pac-10 representatives. That is considered the biggest stumbling block.
When the Rose Bowl announced its deal with ABC, the BCS was forced to make several concessions, including waiving the league's $6 million BCS entry fee.
The BCS also assured the Rose Bowl that it could retain its Big Ten/Pac-10 alliance, agreed not to require the Rose to accept a team from a non-BCS conference (think Boise St.) and guaranteed that the nation's oldest bowl game would keep its coveted late-afternoon time slot on New Year's Day.
"There's a lot of history in that game with those conferences," one source said. "I understand their position. But I think a 'Plus-1' is inevitable."
For this to work, I think the BCS will need to end the double-hosting format, elevate not one additional bowl - but two to BCS Bowl status, and then the Rose and the two new bowls will not host the championship game, but rather the NC games get rotated between the Sugar, the Orange, and the Fiesta.
Assume for the moment that the Cotton and the Citrus are elevated to BCS Bowl status. In the years that the Sugar has the NC game, the Cotton gets the SEC champion (if available). In the years that the Fiesta has the NC game, the Cotton gets the Big 12 champion (if available), otherwise they get two at-large selections or a semi-final game. The Citrus becomes the anchor conference for the Big East and when the Orange has the NC game they can substitute the ACC champion for the Big East champion, if available and if desired or possible get a semi-final game.
If in place last year, it might have looked like this:
Top 4 teams tOSU, Fla, Mich, and LSU
Sugar - Florida vs Michigan
Citrus - tOSU vs LSU
Cotton - Oklahoma vs Boise St.
Rose - USC vs Notre Dame
Orange - Louisville vs Wake
Fiesta - NC game between winner of the first two bowl games
Not sure the Rose would have been happy with a return match-up between USC and Notre Dame, but it really would have been the only option acceptable to them with Michigan involved with the semi-final game.
Two years ago:
Top 4 USC, Texas, PSU, tOSU
Rose Bowl - USC vs. tOSU
Cotton - Texas vs PSU
Fiesta - LSU vs Oregon
Orange - FSU vs Georgia
Citrus - West Virginia vs VT (or Miami)
Sugar - NC game between the winners of the first two bowl games.
Rose Bowl would be pleased.
Keeping the Rose happy with this set-up is going to be problematic.
Cheers,
Neil
