PDA

View Full Version : Four-team playoff proposal heads into homestretch



cdj
06-21-2012, 12:52 AM
If the long slog toward a college football playoff were the Tour de France, the only thing left would be the ceremonial victory lap down the Champs-Élysées.
The guy in the yellow jersey, sipping champagne as he rides? That would be Mike Slive.

This Tour de Playoff has been a tour de force for the SEC commissioner. Four years after his playoff push was rejected by the Big Ten's Jim Delany and others, Slive has forced change upon a resistant sport.

"I am delighted with the progress," Slive said Wednesday.

The tough climbs through the BCS mountains largely have gone the way he envisioned. So have the sprints, the time trials and just about every other stage of the grueling journey from bowl system to something better.

That was the logical conclusion Wednesday, when the commissioners of the 11 Division I football conferences appeared together on a podium to say they're carrying a unified call for change to the last group that needs to sign off on it. They're taking a seeded, four-team playoff proposal to the BCS Presidential Oversight Committee for its hoped-for approval next week in Washington, D.C.

After 143 years, Tuesday could be the day the bowl establishment is overthrown as the method for selecting a national champion. Set your calendars accordingly.

Specifics of the plan were not publicly discussed Wednesday, as commissioners asked for time to debrief their member schools before discussing the details in the media. But sources told Yahoo! Sports that the plan calls for the "best four" teams to be chosen, likely by a selection committee, with added weight given to conference champions. That's also a win for Slive, since it does not limit the potential playoff field to only conference champs. At present, the SEC is the most likely conference to have more than one team finish in the top four of whatever ranking system is used.

Link (http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ncaaf--four-team-playoff-proposal-now-heading-into-the-homestretch.html;_ylt=AqKuUDr_NidmZaBQEhbDykg5nYcB )

ram29jackson
06-21-2012, 04:56 AM
best 4 from the SEC LOL

until this gets to like 8 or 10 teams, it cant be taken seriously.

morsdraconis
06-21-2012, 05:28 AM
best 4 from the SEC LOL

until this gets to like 8 or 10 teams, it cant be taken seriously.

Without skipping teams for not winning their conference, I completely agree.

psusnoop
06-21-2012, 06:20 AM
Without skipping teams for not winning their conference, I completely agree.


I'm so ******g tired of hearing about the SEC.

I'd have liked to see more teams but this is a start towards that in my opinion. Once they realize the windfall of profits they surely will take this up another notch or two :up:

Money talks

souljahbill
06-21-2012, 07:18 AM
I'm so ******g tired of hearing about the SEC.

Haters gonna hate. :D :p

#SECCountry

psuexv
06-21-2012, 09:14 AM
Haters gonna hate. :D :p

#SECCountry

:nod:


Penn State overall is 9-5 against current SEC teams since playing their first SEC team in 1959. Since joining the Big Ten in 1994, Penn State is 4-2 against the SEC.

souljahbill
06-21-2012, 09:27 AM
What's Penn State's record vs. the SEC the past 5 years?

#DirtySouth #SECCountry #IReallyCouldntCareLessAboutTheSEC #IOnlyCareBecauseILiveInBatonRouge

baseballplyrmvp
06-21-2012, 09:28 AM
What's Penn State's record vs. the SEC the past 5 years?

#DirtySouth #SECCountry #IReallyCouldCareLessAboutTheSEC #IOnlyCareBecauseILiveInBatonRouge

iirc, :USC: is 14-0 against big10 and sec teams in the bcs era. i'd call that dominance. lol

psuexv
06-21-2012, 09:34 AM
What's Penn State's record vs. the SEC the past 5 years?

#DirtySouth #SECCountry #IReallyCouldntCareLessAboutTheSEC #IOnlyCareBecauseILiveInBatonRouge


2-1 :)

2006 Outback Tennessee 20-10 W

2009 Capital One LSU 19-17 W

2010 Outback Bowl Florida L

souljahbill
06-21-2012, 09:39 AM
iirc, :USC: is 14-0 against big10 and sec teams in the bcs era. i'd call that dominance. lol

The same USC that paid Reggie Bush and spent the last 2 years or so on probation?

#SECCountry #IHaveNoClueWhyImDefendingTheSEC #CUSAAllTheWayBaby #SouthernMissToTheTop

psusnoop
06-21-2012, 09:40 AM
What's Penn State's record vs. the SEC the past 5 years?

2-3 dating back to the end of the 2006 season.


" Penn State overall is 9-5 against current SEC teams since playing their first SEC team in 1959. Since joining the Big Ten in 1994, Penn State is 4-2 against the SEC."

E, PSU lost to Bama twice in regular season and Florida in the bowl game.

baseballplyrmvp
06-21-2012, 09:41 AM
The same USC that paid Reggie Bush and spent the last 2 years or so on probation?

#SECCountry #IHaveNoClueWhyImDefendingTheSEC #CUSAAllTheWayBaby #SouthernMissToTheTop

reggie bush NEVER received money from :USC:. /cheapshotfail

souljahbill
06-21-2012, 09:41 AM
2-1 :)

2006 Outback Tennessee 20-10 W

2009 Capital One LSU 19-17 W

2010 Outback Bowl Florida L

Aren't there suppose to be some games vs. Alabama on that list?

#OOOOOOOOOOOH #HeTalkingAboutYoMomma #YouGonnaTakeThat #DontTalkNoStuffWontBeNoStuff

Edit-Ninja'd

souljahbill
06-21-2012, 09:43 AM
reggie bush NEVER received money from :USC:. /cheapshotfail

Technicality.

morsdraconis
06-21-2012, 09:44 AM
:smh:

How about actually talking about the thread instead of retarded fan e-penis shit?

baseballplyrmvp
06-21-2012, 09:45 AM
Technicality.

receiving money from 2 wannabe sports agents who have no affiliation to a university is technically the same thing as being paid by the university to you? :smh:

souljahbill
06-21-2012, 09:53 AM
receiving money from 2 wannabe sports agents who have no affiliation to a university is technically the same thing as being paid by the university to you? :smh:

Now, I know we're on a message board so one can not really tell what people's intentions are but I was just kidding (I was hoping the #SillyCommentsBehindAHashtag would relay my intent). I honestly don't care about the SEC, who did or didn't pay Bush, Penn St.'s record vs. the SEC or any such nonsense. I only follow LSU, kinda, and it's mostly because my wife works there.

gschwendt
06-21-2012, 09:59 AM
I notice no one is posting their records against SBC...

#youscurd

baseballplyrmvp
06-21-2012, 10:05 AM
I notice no one is posting their records against SBC...

#youscurd

:nod:

souljahbill
06-21-2012, 10:19 AM
I notice no one is posting their records against SBC...

#youscurd

I know I'm scared to admit the BEATDOWN Middle Tennessee gave Southern Miss in the New Orleans Bowl a few years ago. That game had me cursing my tv like a mad man. Our defense could NOT stop that QB. I think his name was Dasher or something like that. We even jacked his leg up and he STILL whooped our ass.

psuexv
06-21-2012, 10:28 AM
Now, I know we're on a message board so one can not really tell what people's intentions are but I was just kidding (I was hoping the #SillyCommentsBehindAHashtag would relay my intent). I honestly don't care about the SEC, who did or didn't pay Bush, Penn St.'s record vs. the SEC or any such nonsense. I only follow LSU, kinda, and it's mostly because my wife works there.

I took your comments as hurtful and mean. Of course you may have noticed that I only posted numbers that made my team look good ;)

JBHuskers
06-21-2012, 11:40 AM
If the BCS can agree on it and now take it to the university presidents, why wait til 2014. Just do it now.

psusnoop
06-21-2012, 11:57 AM
If the BCS can agree on it and now take it to the university presidents, why wait til 2014. Just do it now.

They need the extra year to allow as much publicity and media to get their hands on this to drive the price skyrocketing for 2014. That will set the price moving forward and rushing into this year wouldn't make sense from NCAA's standpoint.

cdj
06-21-2012, 12:30 PM
If the BCS can agree on it and now take it to the university presidents, why wait til 2014. Just do it now.

A minor thing called contracts are in the way. ;)


When word of this broke yesterday evening, media-types on Twitter were wetting themselves with excitement. (Whether you agree or not with playoffs or the structure, the media has been a huge catalyst in making it happen.) However, as time went on, some media started to question the selection process (committee) and started to claim that the change is only being made for money and it still isn't entirely 'fair.' (Some complaining about OOC scheduling, for example.) :fp: Some of them rode this train for years and they just now realized there may be some issues with it? Great work.


Being on the selection committee might be the worst job out there. Get one "controversial" selection and you'll have media and fans digging through your entire life history, trying to establish some tie to that team (or conference) to besmirch your name and qualifications.

JBHuskers
06-21-2012, 12:45 PM
Who really honors a contract now a days :D

ram29jackson
06-21-2012, 12:48 PM
iirc, :USC: is 14-0 against big10 and sec teams in the bcs era. i'd call that dominance. lol

:D because they have been just as dishonest as SEC schools

souljahbill
06-21-2012, 12:52 PM
I saw on The Herd the other day when Les Miles was on the show that one year (09 maybe?), 1-2 would have been easy but 3-4 would have been a headache because there were, like, 5 or 6 schools with 1 loss in the next tier of schools. He was making the point that we'd go from 1 school being pissed off that they got left out to 2, 3, or 4 teams being pissed off that they got left out.

psuexv
06-21-2012, 01:06 PM
I saw on The Herd the other day when Les Miles was on the show that one year (09 maybe?), 1-2 would have been easy but 3-4 would have been a headache because there were, like, 5 or 6 schools with 1 loss in the next tier of schools. He was making the point that we'd go from 1 school being pissed off that they got left out to 2, 3, or 4 teams being pissed off that they got left out.

Just take this past year as an example. You would have had LSU at the #1 seed and then had Stanford, Oregon, Alabama, Boise State, and Oklahoma State that would have been fighting for those 3 spots.

psuexv
06-21-2012, 01:08 PM
Yeah here are the Week 15 BCS standings from '08


1 Alabama 12-0
2 Oklahoma 11-1
3 Texas 11-1
4 Florida 11-1
5 USC 10-1
6 Utah 12-0
7 Texas Tech 11-1
8 Penn State 11-1
9 Boise State 12-0

souljahbill
06-21-2012, 01:21 PM
^^^^

I would HATE to be on the selection committee for THAT!

psuexv
06-21-2012, 01:36 PM
^^^^

I would HATE to be on the selection committee for THAT!

Especially with 2 undefeated non-BCS teams on there.

SmoothPancakes
06-21-2012, 02:46 PM
Yeah here are the Week 15 BCS standings from '08

Conference champions. They need to have, likes mors has said before, multiple tiers of selection. Tier 1 - Conference champions (in the top 4, top 6, top 8, wherever you want the cut off line). Tier 2 - A non-conference champion in the top 4 (Texas would qualify here if there was still an open slot). Tier 3 - Be in the top 8 or top 12.

If you go with conference champions in the top 6, you have Alabama, Oklahoma, USC, and Utah. Texas, Florida and Texas Tech didn't win their conferences, so they aren't considered in Tier 1 selection.

psuexv
06-21-2012, 03:03 PM
I don't necessarily agree with the conference champion thing. Without every team that is in contention playing every other team in contention, you really can't punish a team for losing it's conference championship game to team that none of the other teams have played. In the '08 example, say Florida was in the ACC and probably would have went undefeated(simply for argument sake). They would be sitting at 12-0 and probably a lock to make the playoff. But because they are not and were probably the 2nd best team in the country and they lost to the #1 team in the country they don't get in over a Utah team that won a substandard conference.

There's a reason that pro sports have wild card teams and even then, that system isn't perfect and they look to expand more wild card teams.

morsdraconis
06-21-2012, 03:15 PM
The problem is, without conference champions being the main barometer, you'll never have a non-BCS team in the playoffs. As much as I love the fact that with WVU in the Big 12, we're guaranteed a spot if we win out (or lose early and then win out), it fuckin' sucks to be someone like UCF or Boise State that doesn't have a prayer of getting into the top 4, no matter if they win out or not.

SmoothPancakes
06-21-2012, 03:15 PM
I don't necessarily agree with the conference champion thing. Without every team that is in contention playing every other team in contention, you really can't punish a team for losing it's conference championship game to team that none of the other teams have played. In the '08 example, say Florida was in the ACC and probably would have went undefeated(simply for argument sake). They would be sitting at 12-0 and probably a lock to make the playoff. But because they are not and were probably the 2nd best team in the country and they lost to the #1 team in the country they don't get in over a Utah team that won a substandard conference.

There's a reason that pro sports have wild card teams and even then, that system isn't perfect and they look to expand more wild card teams.

Well, no system is going to be perfect. But watching Alabama, Oklahoma, USC and Utah would be a lot more fun than watching Alabama, Florida, Texas and Oklahoma in a nothing but Big 12 vs. SEC showdown. Fuck that. What the hell's the point of even playing if two conferences are going to monopolize the entire fucking playoff.

JBHuskers
06-21-2012, 03:29 PM
The problem is, without conference champions being the main barometer, you'll never have a non-BCS team in the playoffs. As much as I love the fact that with WVU in the Big 12, we're guaranteed a spot if we win out (or lose early and then win out), it fuckin' sucks to be someone like UCF or Boise State that doesn't have a prayer of getting into the top 4, no matter if they win out or not.

Those type of teams have never really had a prayer regardless. They're elminated from BCS contention before one snap has been taken.

psuexv
06-21-2012, 03:30 PM
Well, no system is going to be perfect. But watching Alabama, Oklahoma, USC and Utah would be a lot more fun than watching Alabama, Florida, Texas and Oklahoma in a nothing but Big 12 vs. SEC showdown. Fuck that. What the hell's the point of even playing if two conferences are going to monopolize the entire fucking playoff.

And this is part of the problem. Money and entertainment drive it, but it truly should try to put the best teams in the country against each other. Sports should 1st and foremost be about the players playing the game.

psuexv
06-21-2012, 03:35 PM
The problem is, without conference champions being the main barometer, you'll never have a non-BCS team in the playoffs. As much as I love the fact that with WVU in the Big 12, we're guaranteed a spot if we win out (or lose early and then win out), it fuckin' sucks to be someone like UCF or Boise State that doesn't have a prayer of getting into the top 4, no matter if they win out or not.

This is why it needs to be more teams, even though you will still have people on the outside looking in. Just like Hoops. Teams get mad they didn't make the bubble, but they at least have more games to "plead" their case. Win more and you're in.

souljahbill
06-21-2012, 03:57 PM
Well, no system is going to be perfect. But watching Alabama, Oklahoma, USC and Utah would be a lot more fun than watching Alabama, Florida, Texas and Oklahoma in a nothing but Big 12 vs. SEC showdown. Fuck that. What the hell's the point of even playing if two conferences are going to monopolize the entire fucking playoff.

But what if they were the best 4 teams? Do we want the best 4 teams or the best 4 champs?

ram29jackson
06-21-2012, 04:54 PM
But what if they were the best 4 teams? Do we want the best 4 teams or the best 4 champs?

:D dont start that again :D

morsdraconis
06-21-2012, 05:34 PM
But what if they were the best 4 teams? Do we want the best 4 teams or the best 4 champs?

If you didn't win your conference, you obviously aren't better than someone who did win their conference. We're talkin' about the difference between a team with 0 loses versus a team with one loss. 0 loss team should ALWAYS be picked ahead of 1 loss team. I don't give a damn if it's Toledo with an undefeated season where they played nothing but MAC teams and Div 2 schools. They went undefeated and they deserve their chance.

souljahbill
06-21-2012, 06:45 PM
If you didn't win your conference, you obviously aren't better than someone who did win their conference. We're talkin' about the difference between a team with 0 loses versus a team with one loss. 0 loss team should ALWAYS be picked ahead of 1 loss team. I don't give a damn if it's Toledo with an undefeated season where they played nothing but MAC teams and Div 2 schools. They went undefeated and they deserve their chance.

LOL! Alabama begs to differ.

morsdraconis
06-21-2012, 07:25 PM
Well, Alabama should have beat them to begin with. They had their chance so too fuckin' bad for them because, otherwise, last season didn't matter at all. It was LSU and Alabama after about half of the season was over with. What was the point of the rest of the season?

Season is TOTALLY different if their first game actually meant something, but it didn't, thus the UTTER bullshit that was last season.

SmoothPancakes
06-21-2012, 07:37 PM
Well, Alabama should have beat them to begin with. They had their chance so too fuckin' bad for them because, otherwise, last season didn't matter at all. It was LSU and Alabama after about half of the season was over with. What was the point of the rest of the season?

Season is TOTALLY different if their first game actually meant something, but it didn't, thus the UTTER bullshit that was last season.

And here it was "oh heaven forbid" back in 2006 with the potential Ohio State-Michigan rematch. But then you go to last year, "eh, oh well". I'm fucking sick of this fucking bias bullshit with the conferences.

JeffHCross
06-21-2012, 11:05 PM
Who really honors a contract now a days :DInsurance Agents?

Oh wait.


^^^^

I would HATE to be on the selection committee for THAT!
SBNation's Bill C broke down what the selection committee would have been faced with (http://www.sbnation.com/ncaa-football/2012/6/21/3105594/college-football-playoffs-selection-committee), 1998-2011. A very interesting read. Very few years that it's "easy".

souljahbill
06-22-2012, 01:24 AM
SBNation's Bill C broke down what the selection committee would have been faced with (http://www.sbnation.com/ncaa-football/2012/6/21/3105594/college-football-playoffs-selection-committee), 1998-2011. A very interesting read. Very few years that it's "easy".
Someone is ALWAYS on the outside looking in. When we eventually get to 8, number 9 and 10 are gonna be pissed as well.

NatureBoy
06-23-2012, 10:28 PM
http://www.sectalk.com/board/public/imported_images/i1261.photobucket.com/a.jpg

;):P

souljahbill
06-25-2012, 10:48 AM
http://img.tapatalk.com/a6937816-877f-aa53.jpg
The further I get into this book, the more it convinces me that a 16-team playoff is the way to go. All the conference winners and 5 at-large bids (and if the WAC ceases to exist, 10&6). Higher seeds get home field through the semi's with the NC game being bid out anywhere (Hello Jerry World!). Whomever is not in the playoffs can play in bowl games.

ram29jackson
06-25-2012, 01:18 PM
Someone is ALWAYS on the outside looking in. When we eventually get to 8, number 9 and 10 are gonna be pissed as well.

So what ?

8 Is infinitely more realistic then 4 any day.

souljahbill
06-25-2012, 02:13 PM
So what ?

8 Is infinitely more realisic then 4 any day.

Realistic?

morsdraconis
06-25-2012, 02:46 PM
Realistic?

To get a realistic national champion? Absolutely.

ram29jackson
06-25-2012, 02:57 PM
Realistic?

:D

souljahbill
06-25-2012, 04:04 PM
So with 4, it's imaginary?

ram29jackson
06-25-2012, 04:11 PM
So with 4, it's imaginary?

no, there is just obviously less debate with 8 teams as opposed to 4. Its simply alot closer to the truth than 4 teams would be.

morsdraconis
06-25-2012, 04:37 PM
So with 4, it's imaginary?

With 4 teams, you still have 2007 and 2008 with a team that theoretically has every right to be in the mix for the championship as the top 4 did.

With 8 teams, you get EVERYONE that deserves to be in those talks participating in a playoff that gives those teams a REAL chance to winning the national championship.

souljahbill
06-25-2012, 05:09 PM
With 4 teams, you still have 2007 and 2008 with a team that theoretically has every right to be in the mix for the championship as the top 4 did.

With 8 teams, you get EVERYONE that deserves to be in those talks participating in a playoff that gives those teams a REAL chance to winning the national championship.

There's no way EVERYONE will be happy with 8. You're never going to eliminate the argument. You're only going to change it cause I guarantee you, 1-5 will be easier then 6-8 and #9 and 10 are gonna be pissed.

ram29jackson
06-25-2012, 05:18 PM
There's no way EVERYONE will be happy with 8. You're never going to eliminate the argument. You're only going to change it cause I guarantee you, 1-5 will be easier then 6-8 and #9 and 10 are gonna be pissed.

sure 9-10 would bitch but so what? Very simple = 8 is better then 4 and closer to the truth. At some point there may well be a top 20 but until then, 4 has to start it but/and 8 would still be better LOL

morsdraconis
06-25-2012, 05:33 PM
The argument is minuscule when you include 8 teams. The argument basically would go from deserving teams not getting in to teams feeling like they are snubbed because conferences would be fighting over how many teams they could get in at a time.

Just looking at 2011 and 2010's breakdowns, there would be some INCREDIBLY interesting football to be played in the playoffs:

2011:


#1 LSU (13-0) vs #8 Kansas State (10-2)
#2 Alabama (11-1) vs #7 Boise State (11-1)
#3 Oklahoma State (11-1) vs #6 Arkansas (10-2)
#4 Stanford (11-1) vs #5 Oregon (11-2)


2010:


#1 Auburn (13-0) vs #8 Arkansas (10-2)
#2 Oregon (12-0) vs #7 Oklahoma (11-2)
#3 TCU (13-0) vs #6 Ohio State (11-1)
#4 Stanford (11-1) vs #5 Wisconsin (11-1)

souljahbill
06-25-2012, 05:36 PM
Now list the people left OUT the playoffs.

That's what I'm arguing. Not how many teams are in but that no matter how many teams you put in, there will ALWAYS be someone who deserves a shot that'll be left out.

morsdraconis
06-25-2012, 05:42 PM
Now list the people left OUT the playoffs.

That's what I'm arguing. Not how many teams are in but that no matter how many teams you put in, there will ALWAYS be someone who deserves a shot that'll be left out.

They should win more games more regularly.

It's better than the bullshit bowl system now that's developed by a bunch of pussy feel good fuckers that make money off of schools being too pussy to tell their team that they fuckin' suck and should play better instead of being happy about 6-6. How totally fucked is that principle when you're trying to help these kids build something for their life? You aren't a fuckin' winner at 6-6 and most definitely shouldn't deserve a reward for being 6-6.

Therefore, if you're left out of a 8 team playoff, I think it's time to do something about winning more games.

Now, if it's like 2007 or something where Boise State went undefeated and they would have gotten left out, well, that's god damn bullshit, but that's the biases of the poll system.

JeffHCross
06-25-2012, 10:02 PM
Someone is ALWAYS on the outside looking in. When we eventually get to 8, number 9 and 10 are gonna be pissed as well.Yep. But I can deal with that over #3 (or #2 in some years) not getting a shot. I mean, we talk every March about the #69 team that didn't get in the tournament, but rarely do you hear about that team after March. We're still talking about some of the teams that got screwed out of the BCS, nearly a decade later.


With 4 teams, you still have 2007 and 2008 with a team that theoretically has every right to be in the mix for the championship as the top 4 did.While true, I think Souljah was more picking on that "realistic" is not the right word at all.

FWIW, +1 to me in the 16 camp. Would let you give deserving conference champions an automatic qualifier, allow for plenty of at-large teams. And some proposals for 16 have even scheduled it such that the first round losers are able to go back into the bowl system for later bowls. That's pretty cool to me. As well, 16 worked well for FCS for years.


It's better than the bullshit bowl system nowPut the angry pills down, mors. :D The expansion of the bowl system (to include 6-6 teams) has nothing to do with trophies-for-everyone mentalities, and everything to do with $$$$$$$$ for the people organizing the bowls (not the schools).

Canes Fan
06-26-2012, 05:31 PM
So what do you guys think on the new 4 team BCS playoff?

morsdraconis
06-26-2012, 05:37 PM
We have ourselves a 4 team playoff starting in 2014. (http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ncaaf--football-playoff-approved.html;_ylt=Ahv5A90mqX1iH07mfnqGysk5nYcB)


The first playoff will take place after the 2014 season. There will be four teams, and the semifinals will be rotated among six bowl games over the life of the contract, with the championship game put up for bid. A selection committee will rank the teams, based on factors including head-to-head matchups.Semifinals will be held on Dec. 31 and Jan. 1; the championship game will be played on the first Monday that is at least six days after the last semifinal. The first playoff game will be Dec. 31, 2014.

morsdraconis
06-26-2012, 05:40 PM
Wrong place for this type of thread man.

Should have put this in here (http://www.thegamingtailgate.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?22-College-Sports-Discussion) or just talked about it in this thread. (http://www.thegamingtailgate.com/forums/showthread.php?5216-Four-team-playoff-proposal-heads-into-homestretch)

Canes Fan
06-26-2012, 05:41 PM
Sorry Im fairly new

morsdraconis
06-26-2012, 05:47 PM
No worries man. I'm sure it'll get moved to the correct place once one of the admins get on.

Unless, of course, you wanted to talk about what EA was planning on doing about adding this to the game. Then, this would be the correct thread for that. ;)

ram29jackson
06-26-2012, 05:49 PM
yawn...bracing the old guard for change they dont want with a 2 year waiting period.

they are afraid of losing their money...

Kingpin32
06-26-2012, 07:14 PM
Now I been following the 4 team playoff news, but I'm a bit confused. Is it gonna be 1 extra game, or are the 4 teams that are in the playoff playing an extra game including their bowl game?

gschwendt
06-27-2012, 09:17 AM
Dan Wetzel - The BCS finally has a stake driven through its heart, but the bowls and the big bucks still reign
http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ncaaf--four-team-college-football-playoff-bcs-presidents-oversight-committee.html;_ylt=Aol75naB7cdNE5kJC1Lcx785nYcB

souljahbill
06-27-2012, 10:07 AM
Dan Wetzel - The BCS finally has a stake driven through its heart, but the bowls and the big bucks still reign
http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ncaaf--four-team-college-football-playoff-bcs-presidents-oversight-committee.html;_ylt=Aol75naB7cdNE5kJC1Lcx785nYcB

I'm 15 chapters into "Death of the BCS." This article reads exactly like the book, calling everyone out on their BS. It's a good read.

ram29jackson
06-27-2012, 02:28 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xfAmP8zIY7s&feature=g-all-u