This story has some quotes from Jim Delaney Big Ten commish from the Detroit News. http://www.detnews.com/2004/college/0406/18/college-187688.htm Michigan board: bowl system won't change under expanded BCS Associated Press ANN ARBOR -- The expansion of the Bowl Championship Series might not ensure a true national championship game, but it will preserve the college football bowl system, Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany said Thursday. Delany and NCAA president Myles Brand spoke to the University of Michigan’s Board of Regents at the invitation of university president Mary Sue Coleman and athletic director Bill Martin. Brand discussed topics ranging from academic reform and Title IX to institutional support of athletic departments. The debate about college football and whether it should maintain its current bowl system or institute an NFL-style playoff has been a hot one, particularly during the six seasons the BCS has existed. University presidents have resisted pressure to create a playoff and will continue to do so, Delany said. “We have come in for our fair share of criticism, some of it justified, some not,” the commissioner said. “We believe in the bowl system and the Rose Bowl. We do not believe in a college playoff. “To the extent that we’ve dented the Rose Bowl tradition, it’s because we believe in the bowl tradition.” The BCS began in 1998, as the Rose, Fiesta, Sugar and Orange bowls joined with the six major football conferences (Big Ten, Pac-10, Big 12, Atlantic Coast, Southeastern and Big East) to create a national championship game between two teams ranked atop the BCS standings. The championship game is rotated among the four bowls, with each playing host once every four years. The current BCS contract expires after the 2005 season. The BCS last week announced a revamped format featuring five games at the existing four sites starting in the 2006 season, with the bowl that hosts the national championship game also holding an earlier postseason game. Under the new model, the championship game still will rotate between the Sugar, Fiesta, Orange and Rose bowls, but it will be played about a week after the other four games. The name of the championship game has yet to be determined. Delany said the BCS has endured its share of controversy for several reasons. The championship game has not always matched the best teams. Last season, Southern Cal, the nation’s No. 1 team according to the two major polls, did not play in the national title game because it finished third in the BCS rankings. The BCS also has been criticized because it has not included teams from smaller conferences. The fifth game opens two more at-large berths that can be offered to teams from other conferences, but the BCS has not tweaked the formula by which the top two teams are selected. “We are in a position where we are trying to figure out what the next cycle of postseason football will include, and I expect the process will conclude next fall,” Delany said. “There are five sets of negotiations. This probably has as many moving parts as any other transaction I have been involved in. “I can tell you our presidents did not want a college football playoff; the networks did. Our presidents did not want an additional game; the networks did.” Delany also said the system honors the bowl traditions of the Big Ten, allowing the conference to be in the Rose Bowl every year unless one of those two teams is ranked No.1 or No.2. “We have re-established the Rose Bowl tradition, which we believe is an important part of our history,” Delany said. “We agreed to dent it to stabilize the postseason, but this is the opportunity to re-establish our tradition the way it existed from 1947 until 1997, and we are excited about it.”
Does anyone really think that if LSU was in the place that USC was last year would anyone be going through all this trouble to change the BCS? I think not.
I think so. The SEC is right up there with the other bcs conferences in power. Combined it may not match the big 10/pac 10/rosebowl influence, but it is right up there. Since the supreme court freed tv contracts from the ncaa the big10 and pac10 and rosebowl have been in an alliance in tv deals for football.
My first thought as to why Big Ten officials are opposed to a playoff system is that they love/need the Rose Bowl to give them the sort of unique, national exposure they can't get anywhere else. Being locked in to the "Granddaddy of them All" nearly every year is pretty nice. Ohio State in 2002 nonwithstanding (b/c they beat a truly talented Miami team), most Big Ten teams get waxed in bowls because they can't compete with the speed most southern and west-coast teams have. Better to be embarassed in the Citrus Bowl by an SEC team (unless that SEC team is Florida or Tennessee, cause they'll lay down like dogs) than in a playoff game that'll generate more interest.
Exactly what trouble are they going through? The existing BCS contract is set to expire in 2005 so they are working on the new BCS contract. There is no grand conspiracy to screw LSU. If you want to blame someone for this ridiculous 5th BCS bowl garbage, blame Tulane and the other non-BCS schools. They are the ones crying about being left out of the system, went to Congress last year for hearings, and will sue everyone if the new contract doesn't give them a better chance of getting a BCS bowl bid.
And let me add that most Presidents of SEC schools have been opposed to a college playoff system for years ... not sure what the new SEC Commish thinks about a playoff, but it's not his decision.
Yeah, the vast majority of bcs conference presidents don't want a playoff. The truth is that 1 and 2 met in the sugar bowl last season, even though LSU and USC should have played each other in the sugar bowl, but why should the 65 schools of the bcs split the money with Tulane, La Tech, and other schools when in most cases the bcs in its current and new form will match up the 1 and 2 teams at the end of the year. The next thing the bcs needs to do is to make it harder for Notre Dame to get in the bcs. Treat ND like they currently treat Marshall or Tulane to force them to join a conference. Just wait if the bcs doesn't play hardball with ND, an 8-3 ND will screw over an 8-3 or 9-2 LSU out of a bcs game.
The BCS is much more than just naming 1 and 2 for the championship game. There is big money in the other 3 BCS bowl games as well, which is what the non-BCS schools want to be a part of. Those schools got the attention of Congress last year, which scared the BCS into adding another game and giving these schools a better chance. I don't agree with it, but I believe that's why they added a 5th BCS bowl.
If they would just do the "plus-one model" for the NC, how in the fork would that affect the bowl system ? It would give us a true NC without having to change the bowl system at all.
