Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

BCS takes big step toward change, recommends four-team playoff


HOLLYWOOD, Fla. (AP) -- College football is on the verge of finally having a playoff, its own version of the final four.

For the first time, all the power brokers who run the highest level of the sport are comfortable with the idea of deciding a championship the way it's done from pee-wees to pros. And the way fans have been hoping they would for years.

"Yes, we've agreed to use the P word," Pac-12 Commissioner Larry Scott said Thursday.

They want to limit it to four teams. That's for sure. Now they have to figure out how to pick the teams, where and when to play the games and how the bowls do or do not fit in. The new postseason format would go into effect for the 2014 season.

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/f ... z1tCuHlxII" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

BCS officials and conference commissioners are scheduled to meet in Chicago again in June.

"Having carefully reviewed calendars and schedules, we believe that either an eight-team or a 16-team playoff would diminish the regular season and harm the bowls," the BCS said in a statement. "College football's regular season is too important to diminish and we do not believe it's in the best interest of student-athletes, fans, or alumni to harm the regular season.

"Accordingly, as we proceed to review our options for improving the postseason, we have taken off the table both an eight-team and 16-team playoff."

Any proposed changes wouldn't go into effect until the 2014 season. The current BCS system, in which the top two teams in the final BCS standings play in a national championship game at the site of one of the current BCS bowls (Fiesta, Orange, Rose and Sugar), will remain in place the next two seasons.

http://espn.go.com/college-football/sto ... -proposals" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

EPJr wrote: "Having carefully reviewed calendars and schedules, we believe that either an eight-team or a 16-team playoff would diminish the regular season and harm the bowls," the BCS said in a statement. "College football's regular season is too important to diminish and we do not believe it's in the best interest of student-athletes, fans, or alumni to harm the regular season.

"Accordingly, as we proceed to review our options for improving the postseason, we have taken off the table both an eight-team and 16-team playoff."

Translation: "We at the BSC have finally realized how much money a playoff would bring college athletics...however we have no intention of letting everyone in on the deal. Just as it always has been, only those who are in the club will be able to participate."

WAFJ. However imo this is the beginning of the end. Eventually the playoff will expand to include more teams. If this goes through, this is the final nail in the coffin for the BCS.

SDHornet wrote:Translation: "We at the BSC have finally realized how much money a playoff would bring college athletics...however we have no intention of letting everyone in on the deal. Just as it always has been, only those who are in the club will be able to participate."

WAFJ. However imo this is the beginning of the end. Eventually the playoff will expand to include more teams. If this goes through, this is the final nail in the coffin for the BCS.

Translation: Good riddance to bad rubbish.

Anyone care to place odds on the GPI staying in existence once it's original model & big brother, the BCS, finally bites the dust???

Guys, the BCS isn't going away. Yes, the teams lose money going to bowl games and there is no true championship, but thier leadership (much like Congress) don't care about planning for a better future.

Ibanez wrote:Guys, the BCS isn't going away. Yes, the teams lose money going to bowl games and there is no true championship, but thier leadership (much like Congress) don't care about planning for a better future.

Well let's go through that statement.

The BCS isn't going away? As MASH's Col. Potter would say: "Horse hockey". The 1-2 computer-driven/voter agenda foolishness and weekly standing updates will ALL be a thing of the past. There will be 4 teams to start playing it off on the field, as should've been done decades ago. Down the road it will expand to 8 and maybe more.

Yes, on a counterpoint you can say winning the championship on the FBS level is going to be even more exclusive now because it'll be almost restricted to Big Ten, Pac-12, Big 12 & SEC teams. This will basically squeeze the ACC & Big East and all the lesser leagues out of the show 9 years out of 10.

Teams lose $$ going to bowl games..yep that's true an overwhelming majority of the time today. However, in a world of dwindling endowments & less state aid, the old-boy bowl network is being broken by the realization that the amount of $$ going to schools in this format will be almost TRIPLE what it was during the old bowl setup so sure there will be as much of a champion crowned in FBS football as there is in any other NCAA sport starting in January 2015.

Congress....well no argument there, you're right on.

Four teams isn't enough. Eight would be ideal.

I don't care if you play in the Sunbelt; if you go undefeated, you deserve to be in the bracket if they're going to have one, and I doubt an undefeated Sunbelt or MAC team are going to be Top 4 in the polls. Leaving any undefeated out of a so-called playoff is a logical fallacy.

93henfan wrote:Four teams isn't enough. Eight would be ideal.

I don't care if you play in the Sunbelt; if you go undefeated, you deserve to be in the bracket if they're going to have one, and I doubt an undefeated Sunbelt or MAC team are going to be Top 4 in the polls. Leaving any undefeated out of a so-called playoff is a logical fallacy.

While I don't disagree with you: I'm sure most 1-loss SEC teams would drum an unbeaten SunBelt team by three or more TD's. It'd be easier if the FBS power conferences just formed their own association so we wouldn't have these points brought up. The only reason the other leagues go along with it is for the trickle-down $$ that comes with it.

93henfan wrote:Four teams isn't enough. Eight would be ideal.

I don't care if you play in the Sunbelt; if you go undefeated, you deserve to be in the bracket if they're going to have one, and I doubt an undefeated Sunbelt or MAC team are going to be Top 4 in the polls. Leaving any undefeated out of a so-called playoff is a logical fallacy.

Why would 8 be ideal? Anything less than 16 is not a real playoff

I just think the BCS is too engrained in college sports to just go away in 3 years.

eagleskins wrote:

93henfan wrote:Four teams isn't enough. Eight would be ideal.

I don't care if you play in the Sunbelt; if you go undefeated, you deserve to be in the bracket if they're going to have one, and I doubt an undefeated Sunbelt or MAC team are going to be Top 4 in the polls. Leaving any undefeated out of a so-called playoff is a logical fallacy.

Why would 8 be ideal? Anything less than 16 is not a real playoff

I'd settle for 8 teams, but I agree; 16 is the optimum number. Give every FBS conference an autobid and round out the field with at large bids. That way everyone has a chance.

I think once a lot of the fatcats of college football see how much excitement and money a college football playoff can generate, the playoff bracket will grow and many will wonder why it wasn't done much sooner.

BlueHen86 wrote:

eagleskins wrote:
Why would 8 be ideal? Anything less than 16 is not a real playoff

I'd settle for 8 teams, but I agree; 16 is the optimum number. Give every FBS conference an autobid and round out the field with at large bids. That way everyone has a chance.

You mean, level the playing field? That's not like the FBS

Ibanez wrote:

BlueHen86 wrote:
I'd settle for 8 teams, but I agree; 16 is the optimum number. Give every FBS conference an autobid and round out the field with at large bids. That way everyone has a chance.

You mean, level the playing field? That's not like the FBS

The other leagues will be "bought out", meaning they'll get the same or a lesser percentage of the pot that they get now, but since the pot will be larger they'll get more ca$h.

Ibanez wrote:I just think the BCS is too engrained in college sports to just go away in 3 years.

Dennis Dodd wrote that it would add 100 million dollars to the pot. Every 10 years a new playoff round will be added, and then eventually there will be 16 teams and a reduced regular season. It will be a gradual thing.

93henfan wrote:I don't care if you play in the Sunbelt; if you go undefeated, you deserve to be in the bracket if they're going to have one, and I doubt an undefeated Sunbelt or MAC team are going to be Top 4 in the polls. Leaving any undefeated out of a so-called playoff is a logical fallacy.

Pretty much a moot point, no? When was the last time a SunBelt team finished a season with less than 3 losses? IIRC there have been more than one SB champ who went undefeated in the SB and winless OOC.