That is interesting. It would certainly get the BCS out of a lot of the controversy that surrounds it, that is who get the prized bids to the high $$$ Major Bowls. It would bounce it back to those Major Bowls and how that will work out is up in the air. Certainly the Major Bowls will still want some sort of guarantee as to who plays in their Bowl. For example the Sugar Bowl is not going to sign up with CUSA, they are going to want a SEC team in that bowl as the host. The Rose Bowl will go back to wanting a B10/Pac10 matchup in their bowl. The Fiesta Bowl will most likely want a B12 host and the Orange Bowl a ACC team. I doubt if the Big East will be able to get a guaranteed contract with any bowl, so there will be 3 slots out there for "at large" type of teams in the Major Bowls. There will be no rules against taking more than 2 teams from the same conference into the Major Bowls that will be good for the B10 and SEC as they have schools who travel very well with lots of fans. In the past Wisconsin has been a ranked team as the #3 team in the B10 and not been able to go to a major bowl for that reason, I believe some SEC teams have also been burned by that rule. For the Irish I don't think it helps us all that much in terms of getting into major bowls, but without the BCS rules on the money split we could go back to getting the full share of Bowl revenue and not having to share it. It could also result in the Cotton Bowl competing with the Fiesta Bowl for the B12 champion and getting back into the Major Bowl business.
KP, If this were professional sports, we would be in 100% agreement. I do agree that after the main event, the others mean nothing toward standings... however, this is college sports. The games mean a lot to the fans of the teams playing. :wink: I remember Spurrier saying you can't spell Citrus without a U and a T. This old Tennessee boy would love going to the second place SEC bowl game these days. :roll:
I think last year's Fiesta Bowl was a perfect example of why the BCS is beginning to struggle. UConn fans just didn't want to buy tickets to a bowl in Arizona where their team was going to get smoked. The school was obligated to buy thousands of tickets but they went unsold. Instead of being a financial boon to UConn, it was a significant drain. With the economy struggling, I can see this type of problem happening again.
Tom, The games are entertaining but other than the championship game, does it really matter if the rest of them are BCS bowls or just bowls? :?
I hear ya..... The other BCS Bowls are only slightly less interesting than beofre because with all of the old conference tie-ins the top two teams only occasionally played each other and so more than one bowl determined who the #1 team would be at the end. The top bowls used to be quite a prize prestige wise. Still are for those that don't get to go.........like Florida....
The BCS has been getting away with this illegal scam for years now... and now they are finally under so much pressure, they'll just take their one game and run. Why do you guys continue to buy into this ****?
Because it's light years ahead of the way the national championship used to be decided. Florida's last two BCS Championships would have never occurred pre-BCS because Ohio State and Oklahoma would not have been available to play the Gators in the Sugar Bowl....which is where the Gators would have been. And I am not a believer that a playoff necessarily yields the best two teams at the end. It's too much luck of the draw and home field advantages awarded based on that BCS bugabooo........perception.
I'm with both kp and MCG. I want a playoff, but picking two teams by any method beats what we had before. We will eventually get a playoff.