Playoff in 2011?

[Flagstaffsooner]

http://newsok.com/article/3085153

Report: Could BCS be scrapped for Plus-1 playoff?

From staff and wire reports

Could college football be close to announcing a true national semifinal and championship playoff format? According to a report in Tuesday's New York Post, support has grown for a "Plus-1” format, which could be played as early as 2011.




"The overwhelming sense is that that's where we're headed,” a source told the newspaper. "There's simply too much money at stake and there's been too much debate with the current system.”
The new format would create two semifinal games in the Orange, Sugar, Rose and Fiesta Bowls on a rotating basis with a new bowl for the championship game. The seedings would come from rankings similar to the system already in place.
Why do it? It could eliminate controversies like the one caused by Oklahoma in 2004. The Sooners, ranked No. 2 going into the 2004 title game, was blown out by USC in the championship, while Auburn finished the season unbeaten. In 2003, OU also was at the heart of BCS controversy, losing to Kansas State and LSU in the postseason, leaving the Tigers and USC to argue over the title.

[OUDoc]

LINK?



;)

[snp]

http://www.nypost.com/seven/07172007/sports/a_football_final_four_sports_lenn_robbins.htm

This link is a little bit more informative.

[OUDoc]

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."

Why does the Rose get away with this? I'll never understand that.

[Landthief 1972]

Why does the Rose get away with this? I'll never understand that.

Because there's a lot of ******s with a lot of money out in Kah-lee-FOR-neah. I mean, we ARE talking about about an entity tied to the NCAA.

NCAA = money-grubbing whores

[dougsooner]

This may clear up some issues like the one mentioned about Auburn but it will create others like what would have happened in 2000 when we were the only undefeated team after the bowls. Why would a team if they were the only 13-0 (or 12-0 if it is a big11 team since they can't seem to find a way to have a true conf. champ) have to play another game against a 1 loss team? What if the 1 loss team wins?? Now you have several 1 loss teams. The NCAA failure rate just keeps rising!

[silverwheels]

The Rose Bowl organization's bloated view of its own self-worth is pretty disgusting, and the viewpoints of Pac-10 and Big Ten fans aren't far behind. I want to see a post-season tournament for many reasons, and watching those Rose Bowl crybabies have to give in is one of them.

[MojoRisen]

I just assume play for it - someone will win and that team would have been the best at the end of the year.

[Edmond Sooner]

I hope it happens, but I won't be holding my breath. Too many $$$'s floating around the Rose Bowl situation/charade for our California brethren to part with.

[birddog]

Why does the Rose get away with this? I'll never understand that.

all the dudes involved in the rose bowl are like 102 years old. i would hope when the torch passes that they don't continue their "notre dame" complex.

[HTown77095]

Because there's a lot of ******s with a lot of money out in Kah-lee-FOR-neah. I mean, we ARE talking about about an entity tied to the NCAA.

NCAA = money-grubbing whores

Thanks for the new sig Landthief :)

[Fraggle145]

I am just glad they arent going to 8 teams. I think 4 is enough. Once you lose once you lose your right to complain. JMO.

Also I bet Jerry finds a way to get the Cotton Bowl involved in that since it is moving to Jerry-World and I read in another page, that it will bring the BCS Bowl total to 6.

[Stoop Dawg]

Why would a team if they were the only 13-0 (or 12-0 if it is a big11 team since they can't seem to find a way to have a true conf. champ) have to play another game against a 1 loss team?

Because being undefeated doesn't make you the best team in the country.


What if the 1 loss team wins??

Then they are the champion.

[silverwheels]

The current system is about EXclusion; look at last year and 2004: an undefeated team (or 2...or 3) was left out of the "National Championship Game" because only 2 can get in. So, those teams that were left out, which may have had as much right as anyone to play for the championship, didn't even get a sniff of it. A post-season tournament is about INclusion: if a team doesn't deserve to be there, then most likely they'll get beat. I think a team that wins a tournament would be a more proven winner than one who wins the BCS. Of course there are flaws in both systems, but with the tournament, at least all teams that went undefeated would get a shot.

[NormanPride]

I'm all for a system that gets teams to play better competition during the season without the fear of losing opportunities later in the season. The BCS is killing OOC schedules.

[TheUnnamedSooner]

A plus one at the bowls is tough b/c it will be hard for fans to travel to 2 games. I still think that #1 seed should play #4 seed at #1's home field and #2 play #3 at #2's home field and the winners of those two games gets to play in the national championship game at one of the mentioned bowls. The losers are still guaranteed a BCS bowl. It gets the #1 and #2 teams an extra home game and doesn't make the fans travel to 2 games....

[Jdog]

A plus one at the bowls is tough b/c it will be hard for fans to travel to 2 games. I still think that #1 seed should play #4 seed at #1's home field and #2 play #3 at #2's home field and the winners of those two games gets to play in the national championship game at one of the mentioned bowls. The losers are still guaranteed a BCS bowl. It gets the #1 and #2 teams an extra home game and doesn't make the fans travel to 2 games....

I agree that the travel has been the biggest hurtle. I admit that I wasn’t there last year, but the big12 championship game usually has a lot of empty seats. High seeds should get home field advantage.

[goingoneight]

A USC team that survives 2 or 3 losses to real opponents will destroy any tOSU who played to 12-0 and fought for dear life. Most people don't want to see the BCS go because either their team has been spolied by it, or they are afraid undefeated seasons will never happen. Champions are one thing and one thing only... the best. And being the best doesn't mean you're not human. If Oregon or Miami beat you early in the season, you survive to play for it all and win, have you or have you not made up for the losses and played better than the teams you lost to?