Unnamed high ranking BCS Official: Playoffs are coming.

[Davi323]

NEW ORLEANS—Ugly doesn’t begin to describe it. But it most certainly defined it—in such a profound way that even the men who run this crazy, controversial contraption we call the Bowl Championship Series are giving in.

Years from now, this BCS National Championship Game won’t be remembered so much for Alabama’s utter domination of LSU as it will the beginning of radical change in college football. A national playoff is coming, everyone.

It’s only a matter of what it looks like.

“It gets done,” a high-ranking BCS official told Sporting News Monday evening.

Here’s how: over the next six months, the leaders of the sport will meet at least four times to iron out a plan that protects the importance of the regular season—the one aspect BCS leaders believe separates the game from every other—while embracing a new frontier for the poll-driven sport.

It begins Tuesday here in New Orleans with a meeting of conference commissioners, and includes meetings in Dallas in February and Miami in April. Another meeting in June is also likely, especially considering the magnitude of the potential change.

When asked what the playoff would look like, a high-ranking BCS source said there are “at least 60” different options on the table, and that includes everything from a four-team playoff to one game after all the bowls.

I really, really, want this to be true. Many of us have been huge critics of the BCS for years, and this year did absolutely nothing to alleviate that criticism. If this unnamed source is telling the truth, then all of the bitching we have done may have actually MATTERED. We made our voices heard, they listened. We may actually be on the verge of the radical change to college football that we have long desired. Obviously, if this ends up being true, I will be happy, given my position on the BCS. However, not everyone wants a college football playoff. What are your opinions on this?

Will you celebrate the creation of an NCAA Division I/FBS College Football playoff, or will you be mad that they could potentially be destroying the traditional bowl system?

 

[Slyfox696]

My guess is this has a lot to do with it:

The overnight ratings for the BCS National Championship Game show that last night's rematch between Alabama and LSU was the lowest-rated title game in the 14-year history of the BCS, bringing in a 13.8 overnight rating, a 14% drop from last year's game between Auburn and Oregon. The previous low had been set in 2002 when Miami played Nebraska for the title and the game brought a 14.3 rating.

http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/24156338/34308344

I'm so glad other people refused to watch it as well. I will celebrate anything which resembles a playoff. An 8 team playoff is easily the best option, but even a 4 team playoff is better than the nonsense which happened last night.

It's long been said the only way the system changes is if there's no money in the current system. This is a great start.

 

[Megatron]

I've already stated my view on a playoff before and still believe a full out 16 team playoff would be the best case scenario for college football. With that highly unlikely to happen, at least we aren't just getting one game. NCAA Division 1 football is the only sport in America where there isn't a playoff to determine a national champion, despite it having the potential to be a huge cash cow. This is a step in the right direction, and hopefully we only have to see one more title game decided by the BCS (since I believe ESPN's contract runs out after next year).

Still, fantastic news. Lord knows it's been a long fucking time coming.

 

[ITurnGirlsGay]

I've already stated my view on a playoff before and still believe a full out 16 team playoff would be the best case scenario for college football. With that highly unlikely to happen, at least we aren't just getting one game. NCAA Division 1 football is the only sport in America where there isn't a playoff to determine a national champion, despite it having the potential to be a huge cash cow. This is a step in the right direction, and hopefully we only have to see one more title game decided by the BCS (since I believe ESPN's contract runs out after next year).

Still, fantastic news. Lord knows it's been a long fucking time coming.

I'm with you on this. As Passan, Peters, and Wetzel laid out in their book, Death To The BCS, a 16 team playoff is the most viable option without screwing someone.

There's 12 conferences in major college football and, since all of them half to agree to a new system, it makes sense to have one from each conference with 4 at-large bids. You could still keep the shitty bowls as a consolation prize for teams that would not make the playoffs much like they do with the NIT and March Madness.

Instead of arguing about which 1 loss team got left out, it would be a much more fruitless argument about which 2-3 loss team got left out. I am okay with teams that have 2 or 3 losses not being able to play for it all. If college football has a down like 2007, it would most likely be 3 loss teams that are complaining about not making the playoffs.

You could use a selection committee to rank the schools like they do with the NCAA tournament (here's where the Coache's, Harris, and AP would come into play) and the higher ranked teams would host a playoff game in their stadium (just like the FCS) to reward seasonal merits.

The only downsides to doing this would be if a team like Boise State got left out of the playoff because TCU won the MWC and they gave out the at-large bids to other conferences. That's really the only struggle, but it's no different than the NCAA tournament where good schools get screwed on Selection Sunday in favor of higher profile schools with lesser accomplishments.

An 8 team playoff will only increase the amount of schools that are left out because of voter bias and shitty computer rankings that are not made public. The fairest way to do it is to reward all conference winners. It makes the most sense and gives the little guy a shot. Even if the Sun Belt winner had to play LSU in Death Valley, at least the got the ratings and publicity from their ass-kicking. They got a chance. That's all they can ask for.

 

[ITurnGirlsGay]

My guess is this has a lot to do with it:


http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/24156338/34308344

I'm so glad other people refused to watch it as well. I will celebrate anything which resembles a playoff. An 8 team playoff is easily the best option, but even a 4 team playoff is better than the nonsense which happened last night.

It's long been said the only way the system changes is if there's no money in the current system. This is a great start.

Also Sly, it's worth noting that two National Title games with extremely low rankings prior to last night's also featured teams that didn't win their conference, but were allowed to play for it all.

Interestingly, the three lowest overnight ratings for the BCS Championship Game occurred in a year when there was some controversy over the participating teams. The previous low (14.3), in 2002, featured Nebraska, which didn't win its conference. LSU's win over Oklahoma in 2004 featured a Sooners team that didn't win its conference.

Here is the link to that article.

http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2012/01/alabama-lsu_produces_lowest_tv.html

 

[Jsaturn14]

I absolutely agree with everything that has been said here. First, just so I can state my position, I think the BCS is the most convoluted and ridiculous bullshit ever created to determine a "champion" in any sport in history. The so called "eye test" should never be a factor in determining who the best team in the country is, nor should anything else that utilizes the human bias in all of us like it is holy scripture. The BCS must die, and it must do it as soon as it possibly can, which, as has already been pointed out, will probably be next year as that is when the current deal with ESPN expires.

Secondly, I am so happy that the country decided to NOT watch this championship game and send a message to BCS officials that we are done with their system. It wasn't just the championship game though. If you read the CBS article that people have been linking too you will read that ALL BCS Bowl Games were down 10% in the ratings from last year, and 21% from 2009. People are starting to tune out of all games, no matter how good the matchup is, such as with Oklahoma State and Stanford, and I think Sly is right in saying that the declining ratings is a BIG reason why change is coming.

Now, what kind of change is coming? In a perfect world, a 16 team playoff would be the ideal scenario with the 12 winners from each conference and 4 wild card teams, however, I can see how this could possibly hurt the college football regular season as well which is the one great difference college football has that no other sport has. Their regular season does matter, and every week they do a fantastic job of setting up one or two games that feel like HUGE, national championship caliber games. I don't think college football will ever risk losing that, so I think what we are going to eventually end up with is a scenario where we dismiss the Automatic Qualifying crap from conferences, and we get an 8 team playoff where the teams with the best 8 records go at it for the title. Of course other things will come into play, such as strength of schedule, that will bust up ties and such, but I really think this is what we will eventually get, and it will be fantastic. However, I think what we will first get, the first stepping stone toward this larger goal, will be the plus one system, which will work for me greatly. Imagine if we had the plus one this year: Okie State vs Bama, and LSU vs Stanford, with the winners of those games playing for the title. Who wouldn't have wanted to have seen that this year?

It boggles my mind that college football has taken this long to see how FANTASTIC a playoff would be for the sport. It would eliminate all controversy at the end of the season, it would be a huge cash cow for the sport, and it would actually create TRUE national champions in the sport. I am so happy that they are finally starting to get a clue though, and I can only hope that in 2013 they will take the first steps toward a larger goal.

 

[Fire Marshall Bill]

My guess is this has a lot to do with it:


http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/24156338/34308344

I'm so glad other people refused to watch it as well. I will celebrate anything which resembles a playoff. An 8 team playoff is easily the best option, but even a 4 team playoff is better than the nonsense which happened last night.

It's long been said the only way the system changes is if there's no money in the current system. This is a great start.

I don't care what caused it. It's just about damn time something like this happened. I know I refused to watch it. I watched Raw and went to bed. Not only because it was clearly going to be another terrible game, but I refused to give any ratings to more BS that the B"c"S created. It's the worst system ever created and it needs a major overhaul.

As Megatron stated, I wouldn't mind a 16 team playoff, but it's more like they'll start with a Plus 1 or even a 4 team playoff. I could eventually see it getting as high as an 8 team playoff, but any more after that and the stubborn assholes in the NCAA might say it doesn't "protect the importance of the regular season." Morons.

 

[Davi323]

Apparently, NCAA President Mark Emmert says he would support a 4-team playoff. While appearing to be relatively insignificant, it actually could be extremely significant. Right now, the FBS level national championship is completely mythical. Hypothetical. There is no "official" FBS championship like there is in every other sport, ever, because the NCAA does not administer a playoff like it does with the other divisions, nor does it officially recognize the championship. FBS Champions are crowned by newspapers and sportswriters, not the NCAA.

Now, if the NCAA President is supportive of a 4 team playoff, it could indicate a willingness on the part of the NCAA to start officially recognize the winner as champion. This would mean the end of the mythical championship, and instead be an actual, legitimately recognized one. That would be a major change. Mark Emmert supporting it doesn't automatically mean that the winner would be officially recognized, but it does seem to be a rather large step towards that direction.

 

[ITurnGirlsGay]

Now, what kind of change is coming? In a perfect world, a 16 team playoff would be the ideal scenario with the 12 winners from each conference and 4 wild card teams, however, I can see how this could possibly hurt the college football regular season as well which is the one great difference college football has that no other sport has. Their regular season does matter, and every week they do a fantastic job of setting up one or two games that feel like HUGE, national championship caliber games. I don't think college football will ever risk losing that, so I think what we are going to eventually end up with is a scenario where we dismiss the Automatic Qualifying crap from conferences, and we get an 8 team playoff where the teams with the best 8 records go at it for the title. Of course other things will come into play, such as strength of schedule, that will bust up ties and such, but I really think this is what we will eventually get, and it will be fantastic. However, I think what we will first get, the first stepping stone toward this larger goal, will be the plus one system, which will work for me greatly. Imagine if we had the plus one this year: Okie State vs Bama, and LSU vs Stanford, with the winners of those games playing for the title. Who wouldn't have wanted to have seen that this year?

I'd like to take a moment to focus on this statement. This is the common point of emphasis used by those that don't want a playoff. Not saying that those who want a playoff aren't concerned with this as well, but what, exactly, is worth protecting?

The regular season? Not anymore. There are only three schools in the entire FBS that refuse to dilute their schedules with horrid gimme games against FCS opponents: USC, UCLA, and Notre Dame. Everyone else is scheduling them like it's going out of style.

Pac-12 has seen an increase of 600% in FCS opponents, the B1G has seen a 358% increase. 1 in every 4 non-conference games played by the SEC are against FCS opponents. Big 10 plays 21% of its games against FCS opponents. The national average of non-conferences games played against BCS conference teams is 36% and dropping.

For instance, here's is Georgia's non-conference schedule for this up-coming season:

09/01 - Buffalo
09/15 - Florida Atlantic
11/17 - Georgia Southern
11/24 - Georgia Tech

Boy, they really broke the fucking bank with that schedule. That should be sponsored by Hostess.

Here's their 2013 non-conference schedule:

08/31 - at Clemson
09/07 - Appalachian State
09/21 - North Texas
11/30 - at Georgia Tech

Slightly better with the addition of Clemson, but again they're scheduling bullshit FCS opponents.

Georgia is just an example of what happens nation-wide. Teams schedule bullshit opponents because the fear of a loss is too great. That's not protecting the regular season, that's littering it with garbage.

As James Madison and Appalachian State proved, these aren't gimme games per se, but those are the only two instances out of how many games played against FCS opponents? Those are statistical outliers.

As far as I am concerned, there's nothing to protect at this time. The regular season is saturated with these types of matchups and the ones that are made against FBS opponents are usually made against Sun Belt, MAC, & C-USA teams. They're not exactly playing tough opponents like teams used to in the days before the BCS was invented.

Honestly, college football was better under the old bowl system. At least teams pretended to give a shit during the regular season, unlike now.

Your national champion Crimson Tide played Kent State, North Texas, and Georgia Southern.

Think about this for a second. As you pointed out with the Plus 1 model, it would have featured Alabama-Oklahoma State and LSU-Stanford. Can you figure out what's wrong with that? Here, I'll help you.

ALABAMA AND STANFORD DIDN'T WIN THEIR CONFERENCE.

How in the world is Oregon out of a Plus 1 model because they dared to schedule LSU as an OOC game that resulted in a loss, but Stanford is in, despite the fact that they played Duke, San Jose State, and Notre Dame (who has become a staple on their schedule), just because they have one less loss than Oregon?

Nothing about that protects the regular season. Part of the regular season is winning your conference, something Oregon did, but under the Plus 1 model, Stanford is in, Oregon is out.

That's not protecting the regular season, that's trashing it with teams that scheduled the easiest opponents they could find to avoid a loss.

There's nothing left to protect about college football's regular season. It's as much of a joke as the BCS.