Bowl games do NOT want to be part of a playoff system and it is entirely understandable. They have to sell out their stadium and they want at least one team from their area, preferably two. The Peach Bowl can always sell out a game with South Carolina and Florida. What the hell would they do with Boise State and Oregon? Traveling fans don't travel very far in large numbers.
Check out these threads from last season... Playoff System Other thread about Playoffs Link to previous Thread First the re-alignment Then the playoff Plan
A playoff system MUST be authorized by the NCAA, and that won't happen unless all the conference champions are represented. Sorry that some here don't like that, but it's the truth. So we can forget about a +1 system involving 4 teams. Currently the NCAA allows bowl games, but does not dictate who goes to them. The BCS is an agreement between the member conference to fill certain bowls. The fact the BCS claims to have a National Championship Game isn't binding on the NCAA, which still does not award a NC. If you have a 12 or 16 team playoff, you can get all the conference champions. You then can use some sort of RPI to seed the teams and select at any large teams. Now, back to the original question: what would it take for us to get a playoff? I think it would require an undefeated BCS conference team getting passed over for the BCSCG by a team with one loss. For example, what happens if Ohio State, LSU & Kansas win out. LSU will probably end up higher ranked than Kansas and would play tOSU. In that case, why would the Big XII stay in the BCS? If the Big XII jumps ship, the Big East would follow, since they see the possibility that the same thing could have happened to USF. The agreement falls apart, and presidents who want a playoff might be able to forge a coalition to change the vote at the NCAA. I am not holding my breath. We are more likely to get official recognition of the title belt mentioned in another thread. GEAUX TIGERS
Your second paragraph is a counter-argument to your first paragraph. In other words, a 4-team playoff does not have to be an official NCAA tournament. Rather, it could easily be a modification of the BCS system. That is what I have been assuming would happen with such a system.
Hold up... where are you getting your info? 2006 Final BCS Poll 01 Ohio St 02/03 Michigan 03/02 Florida (moved up to avoid a Michigan v Ohio St rematch) 04 LSU 05 USC 06 Louisville 07 Wisconsin 08 Boise St 09 Auburn 10 Oklahoma 11 Notre Dame 14 Wake Forest 20 BYU Michigan gets in because I automatically include any team ranked 2nd, though that is up for debate. If we were to simply use the final BCS rankings without adjusting for the adjustment made by voters, indeed Michigan, LSU, and Wisconsin would be left out. Also, Oklahoma, Notre Dame, and Wake Forest would be left out because they weren't rated high enough in the final poll. Your problem is with lower ranked teams getting in, but you must understand that the rankings have inherent flaws. When multiple teams from the same conference are rated highly, there is a chance that their rating is inflated by proximity to other highly rated teams. By taking samples from as many conferences as possible (under the restriction that BCS teams must be in the top 6), the possibility for error is reduced significantly. What I'm proposing is a hybrid of using conference champions/diversity and rankings to invite teams into a playoff. If Michigan, LSU, and Wisconsin were left out, public sentiment wouldn't be strong for those teams as they didn't win their conference. If a conference's champion isn't in the top 6, if another team from that conference were eligible I would invite that team. The point is, getting the most diverse spread of teams from the top. Sure Michigan fans would make a fuss. LSU fans and Wisconsin fans would be complaining too. But none were top dogs of their conference - each had their chance and didn't capitalize. The cost for including those teams is watering down the regular season and sometimes including teams that don't belong. The cost for not including those teams is a little controversy, but much less than we have now, with fundamental flaws like no USC in 2003, no Auburn in 2004, removed. In the long run, not including Michigan, LSU, and Wisconsin is what is best for college football.
Secondary bowl games shouldn't be a part of the playoff. The should exist independently, similar to the way they are independent of the BCS currently. The BCS bowls could be part of the playoff 3 out of 4 years, with 1 year existing outside of the playoff as a normal bowl game.
I think that could be worked around. The BCS conferences are in the position of power and don't really need the NCAA to recognize their champion anyway. I think the NCAA and BCS could work together on this.
I meant it to be part of the same arguement. The NCAA would still have to sanction such a game. Remember, it was the NCAA that would not allow a game between LSU & USC in Feb of 2004. Right now, 43% (51 of 117) of the Div 1-A schools do not belong to the BCS. If the NCAA sanctioned a +1 game, those school presidents could revolt, meaning they would only need to siphon off 8 school presidents to put a full playoff in place, and they already have Florida on board. The tradeoff those 8 presidents would have to make is to include all the conferences. Boise State was happy to get to the Fiesta Bowl last year, but opening the field to 4 teams only gets them closer to getting ticked off when they are left out of the chance to play for the MNC. I really don't see a 4 team playoff happening. GEAUX TIGERS
But what I am saying is that the existing bowls, specifically the BCS bowls, are already allowed/sanctioned. So in my hypothetical playoff system (OK, it's just one of many of my hypothetical playoff systems ), the BCS rankings would still be used, and the existing BCS bowls would host the necessary playoff games. For example, #1 would play #4 in the Rose Bowl, and #2 would play #3 in the Orange Bowl. The winners of those games would play a week later in the Sugar Bowl. This has a side-effect of allowing two teams ranked lower than 4 to go to the remaining BCS bowl, which many schools will like. They could also stick with the new system where each year one BCS bowl location hosts their normal bowl game and then the national championship game. Such a plan gives teams a better chance at making the playoffs - 4 teams make it rather than 2 teams. What you are not considering is that we already have a playoff - it's currently limited to 2 teams. So Boise State would have twice the opportunity to make it with a 4-team playoff rather than the status quo.
