Pac 10 will walk away from BCS if the +1 model is used.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19985785/

add this to Big 12's problems, possible Big 10 expansion, problems with the Big East(hybrid, possible loss of a member, etc) and it all adds up to a huge overhaul to the college football landscape in the near future. whether that is a playoff, realignments, super conferences, or a split from the NCAA...i dont know. but something is going to happen.

Hopefully it forces the Big East to split. Mike Tranghese is an idiot. The Big East football schools need to be in a position of power as far as their destiny is concerned, not tied to non-football playing entities while the rest of the BCS conferences are becoming movers and shakers:

Pac-10 chief: We'd leave BCS over plus-1 format
Hansen: 'It's a little annoying that my colleagues continue to float this idea'

By Matt Hayes

Updated: 12:10 a.m. ET July 27, 2007
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."

Hansen's comments are the strongest yet from Pac-10 or Big Ten officials. He says Pac-10 university presidents are more concerned about protecting the sanctity of Rose Bowl than further tweaking the current system, which dilutes the Rose Bowl with a double-hosting model. Hansen says "many" officials within the league and within the powerful Rose Bowl committee want the game once again to pit the Big Ten champions against the Pac-10 champions -- with no BCS strings attached.

"What's the difference between what we use now and the plus-one? Nothing," Hansen says. "You're still relying on (the BCS points system) to determine who plays in the game after all the other bowls. What if three teams are close to each other after all the bowl games? Which two play in the (plus-one) game?"

The BCS television contract with Fox runs through the 2009 season. But the Rose Bowl has signed with ABC through the 2014 game, further complicating any discussion of a plus-one model.

The BCS could begin negotiations for a new deal -- which could be as short as four years or as long as eight, depending on the system in place -- by next spring. That deal would begin with the 2010 season.

Hansen's comments are yet another blow for playoff proponents. In May, Florida president Bernie Machen's playoff proposal was defeated roundly by his fellow Southeastern Conference presidents -- to the point that Machen proclaimed at the end of the league's spring meetings that the BCS was, "a very good way to go."

"(SEC presidents) are persuaded, and I am now persuaded, that the best way to proceed is to try to work within the BCS structure, to make some changes to make it better," Machen said.

Do you think this is just a ploy by the Pac10 to make sure that any '+1' model is for conference champions only rather than a situation where the 4 schools in a 'semifinal' are solely from 2 conferences?

Hoquista Wrote:Do you think this is just a ploy by the Pac10 to make sure that any '+1' model is for conference champions only rather than a situation where the 4 schools in a 'semifinal' are solely from 2 conferences?

Maybe they read this post I made earlier in the week.

It shows the difference when Conference champions are used vs. just the Top 4 teams:

Going back all the way to 1998, if such a model were in effect then and forward:

Pac 10 teams 8 out of 9
SEC teams 7 out of 9
Big 10 teams 5 out of 9
Big 12 teams 5 out of 9
Big East teams 5 out of 9
ACC teams 4 out of 9

Utah once
Notre Dame once

Whereas if it had simply been the Top 4 BCS ranked teams, not limited to one conference representative in the semi-finals in a given year, this would have been the distribution:

Big 12 - 9 teams
SEC - 7 teams
Big 10 - 7 teams
Pac 10 - 6 teams
Big East - 4 teams
ACC - 3 teams

No non-BCS representatives and no independents.

Cheers,
Neil

I'd prefer to see a true playoff, and if the Pac 10 wants out of it - fine by me. If they didn't subscribe to the reality of the situation, the NCAA should prevent any NCAA affiliated schools from scheduling games with them.

Let them play with themselves - and nobody else - and let their fans watch the rest of the nation get excited about a national championship playoff.

If the Pac-10 backs off the BCS, then play-off will begin and certain bowls will no longer be paid the high dollar they once had. The four BCS bowls will no longer have the power they had either. Most of the attention will be on the playoffs. That would also ensure that bowls tradition will return to normal.

The Rose Bowl will always have power. Going back even to the CFA, the Big Ten and PAC-10 were not part of it, going on their own group TV deal. The Big Ten, PAC-10 and Rose Bowl want the sanctity of that game. There's a reason that those two conference, I believe, get bigger payouts for the Rose if they play in it. The Rose went as far, in the last BCS negotiation, to be allowed to decline the selection of a non-AQ team. The Fiesta, Orange or Sugar must take any non-AQ team

What happens if those two conferences had teams that were 1-2 in the polls and you have a separate playoff? What type of sham would that be. "Yeah, were number....#3?"

We already have that in the FCS where the SWAC plays a championship game instead of participating in the FCS playoffs for monetary reasons and the Ivy League refuses to allow member schools to play.

The Big 10, Pac 10, and Rose Bowl could give a sh*t about the sanctity of the game. What they want is their affiliation, keeping the biggest pot of cash in their laps. If they were concerned about the sanctity of the game, they'd push for a TRUE national champion. And the only way you can have that is to determine it on the field. The bowl system prevents that from happening.

The only college division that does not have a true national champion is Division 1A. And that's because of the money involved that the haves do not wish to share with the have nots. That's all it is. You're deluding yourself - or attempting to delude others - if you say otherwise.

bitcruncher Wrote:Let them play with themselves - and nobody else - and let their fans watch the rest of the nation get excited

Now that's just plain nasty!

I like nasty. It can be really fun in the right circumstance.

If the pac 10 pulls out of the BCS, do you think that the BCS would put pressure back on them by having their other bowls cancelled or decrease in their pay outs?

If the NCAA really wanted to pressure the Pac 10, they would prevent member universities from playing games against them. A conference alone, without any competitors is unable to stand.

bitcruncher Wrote:If the NCAA really wanted to pressure the Pac 10, they would prevent member universities from playing games against them. A conference alone, without any competitors is unable to stand.

Let the same be said for ND. If the major conferences refuse to play them then they are forced into a conference for survival. ND is afraid of the conference that really wants them - the B-10 because they are guaranteed 3-5 losses a year. Call it the Navy - BE syndrome. And they are to arrogant to be the big fish in the little pond of the BE because they would get knocked down a peg or two by L'ville and WV - two institutions that they really despise. Hence the only place they really have to go in the end is the ACC which will go to 14 teams to get them if the rest of the conferences would hold their ground and just shut them out.

panite Wrote:

bitcruncher Wrote:If the NCAA really wanted to pressure the Pac 10, they would prevent member universities from playing games against them. A conference alone, without any competitors is unable to stand.

Let the same be said for ND. If the major conferences refuse to play them then they are forced into a conference for survival. ND is afraid of the conference that really wants them - the B-10 because they are guaranteed 3-5 losses a year. Call it the Navy - BE syndrome. And they are to arrogant to be the big fish in the little pond of the BE because they would get knocked down a peg or two by L'ville and WV - two institutions that they really despise. Hence the only place they really have to go in the end is the ACC which will go to 14 teams to get them if the rest of the conferences would hold their ground and just shut them out.

The major conference powers won't stop playing ND. There is too much $$$ involved. It's a guaranteed TV appearance.