It will only be 4 teams but it is a start. The money of course will do the talking. http://msn.foxsports.com/collegefootball/story/bcs-commissioners-reach-consensus-on-2014-playoff-plan-062012
8) Uh...oh. Here we go... "And while no one said it outright Wednesday, it seems likely the playoff’s participants would be chosen by a selection committee tasked with picking the best four teams, but with strong consideration given to conference champions." So Arizona State wins the 12Pac and Iowa wins the Big Ten, but the committee picks USC and Ohio State anyway for higher TV ratings. Watch it happen...
Wait until once beaten Alabama gets in over one of those you mentioned Jo'Co. That will set off the howls. Hopefully the selection committee will be forced to use BCS like data in their selection process so it's not just an opinion by the committee.
I have to think a four team playoff is better than a two team playoff. And it sets the table for further expansion down the road. I also think neutral sites are best.
Interesting about the SEC/Big 12 alliance. The SEC steals two teams from the Big 12 then the two conferences announce an annual bowl game and form a united front to shape the format for the playoff.
8) So how is this different from the BCS? The big four conferences have hunkered down. They'll make an accomodation for Notre Dame and the rest will be locked out...again...
I think it would be rare that an unbeaten Boise or Utah ( under the old alignment ) would be left out of this new 4 team format.
The problem won't be too many unbeaten teams, how many times have we had more than 2 unbeaten teams...a few times but I can't remember if we've ever had more than 4 unbeaten teams. The problem will be with the once beaten teams.
That's why I think the BCS ranking format is still very important to retain. This 4 team selection cannot be completely at the whim of the committee or the process will be vilified by those that do not make it in. Name a #5 team in the final regular season official BCS rankings that everyone thought should have been in the BCS Title game.......has there been any? All one loss teams are absolutely not equal.
I was looking at the last couple of seasons and how they might have played out in a 4 team setup. Last year if you go by the reg season rankings, then it's LSU ( a no brainer), Alabama, Ok State, and Stanford. 1 undefeated and 3 1 loss teams. Simple? But what about Oregon? They beat Stanford late in the season, were the Pac12 champion and played a tougher non-conf schedule. So is this where the committee steps up and says tougher schedule/head to head/conf champion...trumps higher ranking and fewer losses? Go back to 2010....3 unbeatens...they're in no doubt. Auburn, Oregon, TCU...but what about #4 who between Stanford the #4 team, and Wisconsin #5 and Ohio State #5 all 1 loss teams. Is the B10 going to throw a fit when the Pac12 gets 2 teams in and it's Champion isn't in the playoff? Would the B10 commish, or committee member bring pressure to jump Stanford since the Pac12 will have 2 teams if Stanford gets the nod via rankings. What would the committee do with the revelations of tattoogate on Ohio State. I don't remember the timing of the break of the scandal, but if the committee say jumps Ohio State over Stanford and Wisconsin then later finds out about Tattoogate what do they do?
On the #4 slot issues you bring up Terry from what I gather the conference championship achievement will win out and weigh heavily with most other things being equal or close to equal. One loss Stanford would not beat out the Big Ten's one loss Champion for the #4 slot. The cool fun thing about this is that we now have a brand new debate going fervently in CFB and that is......who should be selected in the #4 slot??? Let the debates begin....... :wink: 8)
The Bowl Alliance was, being kind, false advertising. The BCS was, again being kind, insider trading. What will happen with this format? I have no idea, but I have little faith in the old guard to do the right thing. The moment they broke away from the old bowl format, they should have done what the rest of college football does.. have a real playoff.
So who would you guys put on the selection committee? Two individuals I have a lot of respect for are Tom Osborne and Bill Curry. To do the job correctly whoever sits on the committee will have to watch a lot of games. I'm not sure how much time some of the older guys would be willing to spend on preparation.