Well...It's Happening...

[AUChizad]

Can't believe no one has mentioned this yet...

http://espn.go.com/blog/sec/post/_/id/45036/consensus-met-on-four-team-playoff

CHICAGO -- The BCS commissioners and Notre Dame athletic director Jack Swarbrick on Wednesday endorsed a seeded four-team playoff model for college football that would begin for the 2014 season.

The commissioners' consensus must be approved by the BCS presidential oversight committee, which meets June 26 in Washington, D.C. If approved, the four-team playoff would replace the BCS system, which has been in place since 1998.

"We're very unified," Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany said. "There are issues that have yet to be finalized. There's always devil in the detail, from the model to the selection process, but clearly we've made a lot of progress."

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/bcs-commissioners-back-playoff-plan-183307700--ncaaf.html

BCS commissioners settle on plan for playoff
By RALPH D. RUSSO

CHICAGO (AP) The BCS commissioners are backing a playoff plan with the sites for the national semifinals rotating among the major bowl games and a selection committee picking the teams.

The plan will be presented to university presidents next week for approval.

Once the presidents sign off - and that seems likely - major college football's champion will be decided by a playoff for the first time starting in 2014.

''We are excited to be on the threshold of creating a new postseason structure for college football that builds on the great popularity of our sport,'' Notre Dame athletic director Jack Swarbrick said Wednesday.

All 11 commissioners stood shoulder-to-shoulder behind Swarbrick, who read the BCS statement from a podium set up in a hotel conference room.

The commissioners have been working on reshaping college football's postseason since January. The meeting Wednesday was the sixth formal get-together of the year. They met for four hours and emerged with a commitment to stand behind a plan.

''I think we're very unified,'' Big Ten Commissioner Jim Delany said.

The commissioners refrained from providing specifics of the plan in their announcement.

Pac-12 Commissioner Larry Scott did say the two semifinals would be worked into the existing major bowls and the site of the national championship game will be bid out to any city that wants it, the way the NFL does with the Super Bowl.

People with firsthand knowledge of the decision tell The Associated Press the semifinals of the proposed plan would rotate among the major bowls and not be tied to traditional conference relationships.

They also said that under the plan a selection committee would choose the schools that play for the national title.

The people spoke on condition of anonymity because the commissioners did not want to reveal many details before talking to their bosses.

''I am delighted,'' said SEC Commissioner Mike Slive, who has supported a four-team playoff for years and whose league has won the last six BCS titles. ''I am pleased with the progress we have made. There are some differences, but we will work them out. We're trying to do what is in the best interest of the game.''

There was some debate about whether to have semifinal sites rotate between the current BCS bowls - the Orange, Sugar, Rose and Fiesta - or link the sites of the games to traditional conference affiliations. By linking sites to leagues Southeastern Conference teams could host games at the Sugar Bowl in New Orleans and Pac-12 and Big Ten teams could host games at the Rose Bowl in Pasadena, Calif.

But the logistical issues that come with not having the sites for the semifinals set in advance were too big a problem. Now it will be possible for Ohio State and Oregon to play a semifinal in Miami, the site of the Orange Bowl.

How the teams will be selected has also been hotly debated; the current Bowl Championship Series uses a combination of polls and computer rankings.

There are still major details to be worked out, such as who exactly makes up the selection committee, but college football will take a page from college basketball, which uses a committee of athletic directors and commissioners to pick the teams for its championship tournament.

Scott has pushed for conference champions to be given preference for the playoff, but said he was comfortable that a committee would emphasize that and strength of schedule. He stopped short of saying the committee was part of the proposed plan.

''My position has evolved on that,'' Scott said about the selection committee. ''There's a positive impression about the role that the basketball committee has played for basketball, and I think there's been a consensus that the current (football) system is pretty flawed in a lot of ways.''

The 12-member BCS Presidential Oversight Committee meets Tuesday in Washington. The commissioners and Swarbrick all stressed that ultimately the decision lies with the presidents. And that they will have more than just one model to talk about at their meeting.

The Big Ten and Pac-12 presidents have both expressed support for the so-called plus-one model, which gives the BCS a new look by selecting the championship game participants after the bowls are played instead of creating a pair of national semifinals.

''I'm comfortable both of those will still be discussed at the president's meeting,'' Delany said.

Discussed, yes. But unless something unexpected happens in Washington, a playoff will take another step to becoming a reality.

http://espn.go.com/blog/sec/post/_/id/45051/sec-power-will-grow-with-coming-playoff

SEC power will grow with coming playoff
June, 21, 2012

By Edward Aschoff

We finally (almost) have our college football playoff.

And the SEC couldn't be any happier.

After it seemed as if SEC commissioner Mike Slive might have to bend a little more than expected in a playoff compromise, according to reports, he exited Wednesday's BCS meetings with that big patented smile he owns.

When the BCS commissioners and Notre Dame athletic director Jack Swarbrick announced that they had endorsed a seeded four-team playoff model for college football that would begin for the 2014 season, they did so with the idea that those four teams would be selected under the "best four" method. A committee will select the four teams by considering certain criteria such as conference championships and strength of schedule.

So it won't be just conference champs. It's like that hybrid model people were talking about it. Regardless, it's something that if passed by the BCS presidential oversight committee, which meets June 26 in Washington, D.C., will give the SEC even more power than it already has.

Now, the SEC is almost guaranteed a spot in the four-team playoff with its conference champ. Period. Now, getting No. 2 in will be a little more difficult but the past tells us it can happen. Remember, the wording is that conference champs will be considered, so it isn't a given that all four will be champs every year.

Realistically, having two teams from the SEC, or any other conference, in this four-team playoff won't happen that often. According to ESPN Stats & Information, if a four-team playoff were determined by BCS standings, the SEC would have had two teams in a playoff three out of the 14 years under the BCS. So would have the Big 12.

But that was under the BCS, which is all but dead. If the oversight committee passes this model, the BCS will go away and a much more sensible committee will be formed to pick the best four teams to play for a national championship.

One hope some commissioners have is that conferences won't be grandfathered into a "wild-card" spot or spots. Picking the top four should be about the current season, not past accomplishments. But we can't sit here and think that most committee members won't struggle when it comes to pitting a No. 4 SEC non-champ against a No. 5 conference champ from, oh, let's say the ACC. Then, past body of work might outweigh a championship in a conference still trying to push itself to the big boy's table.

It might not happen every time that scenario occurs, but it could, and Slive has to like that.

But one way the league could help its argument for placing two teams in the playoff is to increase those schedule strengths. We could see teams ditch the cupcakes for some real meat more often.

I'm not suggesting that Alabama-Texas or Florida-USC will become the norm, but occasionally you might see it. You might even see more SEC teams travel outside of the Southeast to play games (gasp!). For fans of real competitive college football that's certainly a plus. And if you knock off one of the other major conference's top teams, that will only increase the SEC's chances of getting another playoff team.

Slive entered the BCS meetings holding the strongest cards and even when it seemed like he might have to give a little, he emerged on top. The SEC is all but guaranteed a spot in the playoff each year and now has increased its championship odds with the chance of getting two or maybe even three (which would be a rarity of rarities), leaving other conferences yet again looking up at him and his southern empire.

[AUChizad]

I'm leery of this "more sensible committee".

I'm glad they're eliminating the coach's poll, which is worthless. I know they're getting rid of the computers, which I'm not so sure about.

I wonder how unbiased this committee can really be. Especially if it's a considerably smaller pool than the AP voters. Yeah, you have dipshits int he AP that vote their hometeam #1 and vote against their rivals, but they're few and far between, and get averaged out for the most part.

If we're looking at a panel of 10 ex-coaches, and Fulmer votes Tennessee #1 every week, that's going to wildly affect the polls.

Hopefully, the idea is to cull that kind of dumbassery, but will it work?

I'll be very interested in the specifics of how this committee will work exactly.

[Townhallsavoy]

The committee = the same people responsible for keeping the BCS money flowing to the same schools. 

I don't buy that this playoff or committee or conferences or meetings or whatever else they're claiming to do has any intention of making college football more fair.  Just like the BCS, it's going to be about making more money and keeping the same teams competing for that money. 

As discussed before on this site, a four team playoff doesn't solve anything.  It's still based on subjective measures. 

[GH2001]

The committee = the same people responsible for keeping the BCS money flowing to the same schools. 

I don't buy that this playoff or committee or conferences or meetings or whatever else they're claiming to do has any intention of making college football more fair.  Just like the BCS, it's going to be about making more money and keeping the same teams competing for that money. 

As discussed before on this site, a four team playoff doesn't solve anything.  It's still based on subjective measures.

Ask yourself though - is there any real way to get subjective measure out of it totally? There will never be a perfect system. I think Greg Doyel may have said it yesterday, but Football needs an RPI like College BB. There will always be subjective judgement, but at least a playoff of sorts let's it get settled on the field to a degree. Just like the BCS was an improvement over its predecessor. Auburn would have had a shot at the 1983 NC if the BCS had existed then. Before the BCS, crowning the champ was totally subjective, as there wasn't even a title game at all. Just a vote. Personally, I would like an 11 game season with an 8 or 16 team playoff. No Conf Title games. Just a regular season Conf Winner.

[Townhallsavoy]

Ask yourself though - is there any real way to get subjective measure out of it totally? There will never be a perfect system. I think Greg Doyel may have said it yesterday, but Football needs an RPI like College BB. There will always be subjective judgement, but at least a playoff of sorts let's it get settled on the field to a degree. Just like the BCS was an improvement over its predecessor. Auburn would have had a shot at the 1983 NC if the BCS had existed then. Before the BCS, crowning the champ was totally subjective, as there wasn't even a title game at all. Just a vote. Personally, I would like an 11 game season with an 8 or 16 team playoff. No Conf Title games. Just a regular season Conf Winner.

The NFL, the NBA, the MLB, the MLS, the NHL - all function just fine crowning a champion based on objectivity. 

[The Six]

Excuse me but Notre Dame - JOIN A CONFERENCE ALREADY!

[GH2001]

The NFL, the NBA, the MLB, the MLS, the NHL - all function just fine crowning a champion based on objectivity.

They are all around 30 teams. D1 CFB is 120. I'm not sure 5 team divisions are feasible in college.

I still think for college sports, the NCAA BB Tourney has it about as good as you can ask for.

[barkndog]

The new four team bracket has been leaked:

[Buzz Killington]

The new four team bracket has been leaked:

They misspelled Notre Dame and USC.

[JR4AU]

The NFL, the NBA, the MLB, the MLS, the NHL - all function just fine crowning a champion based on objectivity.

With 120 teams, and only about 1/4 of them EVER being able to even hope to compete for a NC, it will never be just like any of those leagues.   No other system/league is littered with so much worthless fodder.  College football can, with it's current make up, never crown a true champion the way it's done in those leagues.  I hate it all.  Go back to polls and bowls.  I don't give a fuck if there's 5 teams that can claim a NC in one season based on some legit poll.  College football is unique, and always has been.  They should quit playing around at mimicking the other leagues and just be college football.

[GH2001]

They misspelled Notre Dame and USC.

Underrated hustle here folks.

Except they actually misspelled Notre Dame twice.

[AUChizad]

While you guys were busy bitching about the Saints, this happened.

http://www.foxnews.com/sports/2012/06/27/bcs-gets-boot-in-favor-4-team-playoff/

BCS gets boot in favor of 4-team playoff

Published June 27, 2012

Associated Press

WASHINGTON –  The best way to determine a major college football champion seemed so obvious to so many for so long. Just have a playoff.

Now the people in charge of making that decision are on board, too.

Come 2014, the BCS is out. Playoffs are in.

A committee of university presidents approved a plan Tuesday for a four-team playoff put forward by commissioners of the top football conferences.

For years, the decision-makers had balked at any type of playoff because they said it would diminish the importance of the regular season. If only two teams had a chance to win a championship in the postseason, even one loss could be too many. That made for some high stakes regular-season matchups. As recently as 2008, Southeastern Conference Commissioner Mike Slive proposed the type of plan adopted Tuesday, and it was quickly shot down.

Four years later, minds changed.

"It's a great day for college football," BCS Executive Director Bill Hancock said. "As soon as the commissioners realized they could do this and protect the regular season, the light went on for everybody."

The move completes a six-month process for the commissioners, who have been working on a new way to determine a major college football champ after years of griping from fans. The latest configuration is certain to make even more money for the schools than the old system — and it still won't satisfy everyone. Some will think it's too small and, yes, there are some who liked things just the way they are.

"There were differences of views," Virginia Tech President Charles Steger said. "I think it would be a serious mistake to assume it was a rubber stamp."

Nebraska Chancellor Harvey Perlman was the most notable holdout. He had said that he preferred the status quo or a tweak of the Bowl Championship Series. Perlman said the playoff still wouldn't be his first choice, but he was not going to stand in the way of progress. After the commissioners presented their proposal to the presidents, it took the CEOs about an hour and a half to come to a decision.

"This is the package that was put forth and we will strongly support it," Perlman said.

Instead of simply matching the nation's No. 1 and No. 2 teams in a title game after the regular season, the way the BCS has done since 1998, the new format will create a pair of national semifinals.

The BCS has been a constant target for criticism. Lawmakers have railed against it. A political action committee was formed dedicated to its destruction. The Justice Department looked into whether it broke antitrust laws. Even President Obama said he wanted a playoff.

Now it's a reality.

No. 1 will play No. 4, and No. 2 will play No. 3 on Dec. 31 and Jan. 1. The sites of those games will rotate among six bowls. The Rose Bowl in Pasadena, Calif., is guaranteed a spot, and the to-be-determined site of the newly formed bowl created by the SEC and Big 12 is likely to be another, Slive said.

The other current BCS bowls — the Orange, Sugar and Fiesta — are not yet guaranteed spots in the rotation, but will get first crack at bidding for them. The Cotton Bowl, played at the $1.1 billion Cowboys Stadium in Arlington, Texas, has long wanted to be part of the BCS and will no doubt push to be a part of the rotation, possibly as host to the Big 12-SEC game.

The winners of the semis will advance to the championship on the first Monday in January that is six or more days after the last semifinal. The first "Championship Monday" is set for Jan. 12, 2015.

The site of the title game will move around the way the Super Bowl does, with cities bidding for the right to host.

The teams will be selected by a committee, similar to the way the NCAA basketball tournament field is set. The men's tournament has 68 teams, and 37 at-large bids.

The football committee will have a much tougher task, trying to whittle the field down to four. This season, 125 schools will play at the highest level of college football.

Among the factors the committee will consider is won-loss record, strength of schedule, head-to-head results and whether a team is a conference champion. The selection committee will also play a part in creating matchups for games at the four sites that do not hold a semifinal in a given year.

"I think it's tremendous progress," said Washington State coach Mike Leach, a playoff proponent. "Five years ago there wasn't even dialogue about a playoff. Instead of diving in the water, they dipped their toes in. I think it's' going to be ridiculously exciting and it's going to generate a bunch of money. I wish they dived in."

Leach predicted that the playoff field would eventually grow.

Arizona coach Rich Rodriguez, on the other hand, was happy to keep it small, and wants it to stay that way.

"I may be in the minority. I think we had a pretty good thing going," he said. "If it stays at four I think it will be fine. Think it will be pretty exciting."

No one has put a hard number on it yet, but this new format figures to more than double the TV revenue of the current BCS and Rose Bowl contracts. Those pay out about $155 million annually.

The commissioners want to lock in this format for 12 years with a television partner. The current BCS deal with ESPN runs through the 2013 season. The new format will be presented to potential TV partners in the fall, starting with ESPN.

There are still some details to work out, such as who will be on the committee and how exactly the money will be distributed among the conferences. But everybody in charge is on board.

While lower divisions of college football already have a playoff, the highest level has for decades used bowls and polls to determine its champion. Those days are coming to an end.

"A milestone that's good for college football," Atlantic Coast Conference Commissioner John Swofford called it.

And a long time coming.

[AUChizad]

http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2012/06/death_of_bcs_ensures_there_won.html

Death of BCS ensures there won't be another 2004 Auburn. Or does it?

Published: Tuesday, June 26, 2012, 9:31 PM
Mike Herndon, Press-Register By Mike Herndon, Press-Register

Where were you when the BCS died?
       
Dan Wetzel, who co-wrote the book "Death to the BCS," tweeted that he was mowing his lawn. I was timing Lane Four at my daughters' swim meet. Bret Eddins, whose undefeated 2004 Auburn Tigers would have gotten a shot to play for a national title had Tuesday's fatal blow landed a decade ago, was still in Auburn.

But he wasn't thinking about the past.

"You don't worry about your ex-girlfriend," Eddins said Tuesday. "You enjoy being with your wife."       

The BCS died Tuesday evening when the BCS presidential oversight committee approved a four-team playoff to begin in 2014. Ten of the 11 commissioners who recommended the plan may have thought they were preventing one conference from commandeering the national championship game all for itself - like the SEC did last year. 

But what they really did was make sure there won't likely be another 2004 Auburn Tigers.       

Although Eddins, who played defensive end on that squad, isn't so sure.       

"The first or second year, there will be five undefeated teams," he said with a laugh.       

It could happen, but not likely with five teams from major conferences - like the 2004 dilemma when Southern Cal, Oklahoma and Auburn all went undefeated with only two spots available in the BCS title game.

Auburn, which had four Players go in the first round of the next year's NFL draft, was the odd team out, leaving Eddins to later tell the Sporting News: "We would have kiled them."

Who was "them?" Anybody.

Not only did Tuesday's approval from the college presidents expand the field from what was essentially a two-team playoff under the BCS, it changed the method for how those teams will be selected.

Out are the Harris poll and computer rankings. In is a selection committee.

The big questions now are deciding who will sit on that committee and the guidelines they'll be given to make their selections. Strength of schedule is expected to be factored in, and conference championships will be taken into account.

Striking the right balance in those guidelines will be the most important factor in assuring that the four best teams in the country meet in the new playoff.

"It's going to be very interesting how it works out," Eddins said, "if it's legitimately the four best teams, the best teams from the four best conferences or the best teams from four different parts of the country."

However it works out, it won't change what happened - or what didn't happen - in 2004. But Eddins, who now sells surgical equipment and lives in Auburn,  is fine with that.

Being the odd team out in the old system didn't change what the Tigers accomplished that year, either.

[AUChizad]

http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2012/06/auburns_2004_snub_set_this_pla.html

Auburn's 2004 BCS snub really set this college football playoff train in motion

Published: Wednesday, June 27, 2012, 5:03 AM

Kevin Scarbinsky, Birmingham News

BIRMINGHAM, Alabama - Oh, sure. Alabama and LSU deserve a lot of credit. If they hadn't been the two best teams in college football in 2011, we wouldn't be standing here as fans knee deep in confetti with empty champagne bot­tles littering the floor.

If they hadn't forced the biased polls and the flawed computers to acknowledge the obvious and pair the Tide and Tigers in the BCS Championship Game, we wouldn't be counting down the days until major college football stages its first play­off to cap the 2014 season.

All the BCS Presidential Oversight Committee did Tuesday by giving the final approval to a four-team seeded playoff was finish what Nick Saban and Les Miles started.

Wait. In truth, Saban and Miles simply ran with the ball they were handed. Another coach got that ball rolling. So, while we're handing out cigars, send one to Tommy Tuberville, too.

And don't forget Jason Campbell, Carnell Williams, Ronnie Brown and the rest of the 2004 Auburn football team. Those guys did everything a team can do and went down in history with nothing to show for it. They exposed the fatal flaws in the BCS better than Dan Wetzel in his groundbreaking book that became a rallying cry, "Death to the BCS."

By shutting down the rest of the SEC, going undefeated and still getting shut out of the national championship game, that Auburn team really set in motion the events that led to Tuesday's historic decision.

Auburn fans didn't think SEC Commissioner Mike Slive did enough on their behalf at the time, but there was little he could do at that time. He did set out to make sure it wouldn't happen again. And now it won't.

It's fitting that the first four-team playoff in major college football will be played exactly 10 years after the worst injustice of the BCS era. Tuberville and his former players should be invited on the field before that title game to be recognized. Maybe one of them could execute the coin flip.

Heads, college football wins.

Tails, ditto.

It would be an appropriate tribute to a new plan that's as close to perfect as 11 conference commissioners and the Notre Dame AD could be expected to concoct and 12 college presidents could be counted on to rubber stamp.
Kevin Scarbinsky is a columnist for The Birmingham News. His column is published on Sunday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Friday.

One semifinal will be played on New Year's Eve, the other on New Year's Day, where they belong. It would be better if they were played on campus, where college football belongs, rather than at existing bowl sites, but rotating the semis at six different bowl games was the least objectionable bone to throw the bowl system.

The championship game will be played at a neutral site, which is exactly where it belongs. Alabama fans would be wise to scout out hotel locations in the Dallas area while in town for the 2012 opener against Michigan. If the first college Super Bowl isn't played at Jerry World, it'll be an upset.

The commissioners and presidents got it right again when they chose a selection committee to choose the teams rather than the hopelessly misguided mishmash of polls and computers. A committee of professionals chosen expressly for this task has a better chance to be transparent, accountable and as accurate as humanly possible.

There are still details to be decided and announced - - like how they'll split the king's ransom the playoff will generate -- but this inaugural blueprint looks like the best thing to happen to college football since Keith Jackson.

The playoff won't be perfect. Expect an annual debate about the last team in. It's even possible that one day, during the 12 years this plan is scheduled to be in place, five major college powers will go unbeaten in a given season. That would touch off another round of howling that would begin the march toward an eight-team playoff.

But it's highly unlikely that the champs of the SEC, Big 12, Big Ten, Pac-12 and ACC all will run the table at once, especially with a 12-game regular-season and a conference championship game to navigate.

It's far more likely that Auburn 2004 will go down in history as the last undefeated champion of a power conference to be denied a shot at a national championship. That may be of little consolation to Cadillac and company, but look at it this way. Because they suffered, some other special team down the road won't have to.

Consider it one more accomplishment for a team that did everything it was given a chance to do.

[AUChizad]

[GH2001]

The new four team bracket has been leaked:

With the new plan, this picture still applies.

Weren't LSU, Bama and Arky 1.2.3 at one point late last year? I would snicker if the SEC got in 3 teams.

[wesfau2]

The committee is the only troubling thing about this, in my opinion.

The human factor (polls/votes) was the glaring fuck up in the BCS formula.

[Godfather]

You know what my problem is with all this.  They keep using the excuse about not diminishing the regular season.  That is fucking bullshit.  Even if they went to an 8 team playoff the regular season in College Football and passion behind it will always be there.  WHY?

Because of the fans.  Fans are more vested in college football because most have a connection there.  They went to the school. (I am not taking away from those who haven't mind you, just using an example)  Tell an Auburn or Alabama fan that the regular meeting between them (when their records might be 7-4 vs 6-5) that it doesn't mean anything.  Tell USCe when they wallowed in mediocrity before Spurrier got there yet managed to have a sell-out crowd to every home game since always.  It's another excuse just like the one they used that said they didn't want to extend the season because they didn't want players to miss more school. 

I am glad we have at least something now!

But like Wes said they always have to throw in some stupid ass caveat that will fuck something up.  I really don't understand why they have to make things so fucking difficult.  Keep the polls in place (86 the Coaches and use a new commission of people who only watch games), keep the computers, ask the AP to re-participate and make the BCS final 4 the teams that will play in the playoff.

[War Eagle!!!]

Anytime you can post this in a thread is 

[Kaos]

Two things:

1) I was not bitching about the Saints.  I was laughing at them and their idiot Ewok. 

2) This new plan solves absolutely nothing.  Worse than it was before.  I'd prefer we eliminated the entire thing and went back to the old bowl system and (like GF said) multiple NCs every year.