CSNbbs

Full Version: BCS Changes--the Most Likely Scenario?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
When the BCS Committee meets to consider changes (April?) what is most likely to happen? Here's what I think.

1-Changes designed to avoid what happened this year--a split national champion. Maybe a committee to select the two teams who will play for the title? You think ABC will let this one slide by? Reports are that the ratings for this year's BCS Championship game were the lowest ever.

2-Perhaps a tweaking of how money is distributed so that non-BCS conferences will receive a bit more.

3-Adding a 5th BCS Bowl where a non-BCS team will be one of the participants.

Of all these, I feel the 3rd one would benefit the MAC and other non-BCS conferences the most. It would start an erosion of the "non-BCS" label. How can you refer to conferences as "non-BCS" if they can provide a team that will play in a BCS Bowl? Would this bring back to prominence the ugly "mid-major" label? You can bet that "top tier" conferences would employ some kind of label.

As posters on this and other boards have noted, 5 of the top 25 teams in this year's final polls were "non-BCS teams". Might as well toss in here that the MAC was the only non-BCS conference to have 2 (this has happened twice in recent years) and no other non-BCS conference has ever had more than 1.
Just some haphazzard thoughts on your projections...

1) Ratings for the "championship" game may have been the lowest, but I can't help but wonder what the ratings were for that game combined with the Rose Bowl, compared to last year.

2) I would expect you're right about "tweaking". There will probably be an attempt to throw a few crumbs the nonBS way to quiet the Congress.

3) I think you're right about this one. And I think, if it's done in the manner you suggest, that it's BS. If a 5th bowl is added, bring in TWO non-BS teams. And DON'T pair them up in that bowl; that would only underline the perception that it's a NON-BS bowl played by NON-BS teams and therefore not worthy of serious attention. Spread them out to play the BS teams instead.
And, for goodness sake, make the Cotton Bowl the fifth B©S game. I'm just old enough to think that it's a real shame that game no longer pits conference champions against each other. In my youth, that was my second-favorite bowl game. I guess it's too late to get Lindsay Nelson back on the broadcast, though. 03-wink
I have always thought it was horrible that the johnny-come-lately Fiesta Bowl 03-wink supplanted the Cotton Bowl as the 4th major bowl. I'm not even sure when it happened; I just noticed one year that the CB had been relegated to secondary status.
The 79 Cotton Bowl in which Joe Montana engineered a stirring comeback from a 22 point deficit in the 4th qtr for the Fighting Irish still ranks as one of my favorite bowl memories.

The Cotton Bowl! 04-bow
That was one of my worst. Although it made me a Joe Montana fan for life, I lost a week's worth of lunch money on that game. I made it back on the Super Bowl that year (the Steelers covered the spread I gave the other kid by one point), and then I gave up betting for good.
DevilGrad Wrote:then I gave up betting for good.
Sure you did, Charlie Hustle. :rolleyes:

When will you ever come clean, DG?
LOFL!

I've already come cleaner than Pete. Honestly, I haven't wagered on a game since seventh grade.
So a wager of Irish whisky and Cuban cigars from me vs. some expensive champagne and stinky cheese from you would be out of the question next Wednesday night when the Flashes invade "The Library," eh? 03-wink
[quote="DevilGrad"] And, for goodness sake, make the Cotton Bowl the fifth B
Reference URL's