The BCS solution

After hearing about all the debates and discussion going on about the BCS system and how unjust it is and how we need a playoff system, I figured there should be some way everybody can collaborate and find a very good system the FBS can utilize as the playoff. A while back, as I was laying down, my mind began piecing together bits of ideas and requests. I found that my idea kept the tradition of all the BCS bowl games, gives at-large candidates a right into the BCS national championship game, and most importantly, sets forth a minimal number of additional games to be played (which has long been a factor in arguments against a playoff system). I realized that I may have found an excellent solution to the problem. Here's my idea:

Basically, the winner of each of the four BCS bowls go on to face each other in a "final four" and then into a national championship game. But it's not that simple. In my draft, I have two spots in separate bowl games reserved for at-large candidates. The other two bowls will host the top two BCS ranked conference champions on opposite sides of the bracket. The Rose Bowl will feature either the #1 or #2 ranked conf. champ. If the Pac-12 is either #1 or #2, then the other school playing them will be from the Big Ten. If the #1 and #2 teams are neither from the Big Ten or PAC-12 (i.e. any other conference champion) as it was last year with the SEC and Big-12 as #1 and #2 top ranked conference champs respectively, the number #1 team (SEC) would play the higher ranked of Pac-12 and Big Ten champ. The text in italics indicate that if the Big Ten and Pac-12 are both ranked #1 and #2 in the country, the #1 team plays in the Rose Bowl against another automatic-qualifying conference champion and the #2 team plays on the other side of the bracket in the Fiesta Bowl against the Big-12 champ or Sugar or Orange Bowl (Sugar bowl and Orange bowl can alternate bracket positions) . In the Fiesta Bowl, the Big 12 conference champ is guaranteed a spot. They play either the #1 or #2 ranked team or play another conf. champion if they are that #1 or #2 team in the country. As previously mentioned, if when both the Pac-12 and Big Ten conference champs are the top two ranked conference champs, the Big 12 champ plays #2 Big Ten/Pac-12 champ if they are ranked lower than one of the "At-Large" winners or selected team. Otherwise, the Pac-12 champ would play in the Sugar Bowl (as illustrated in the example graphic below) or Orange Bowl against said "At-Large" opponent. The Orange bowl will play host to the ACC conference champion or one of any other automatic-qualifying conference champions remaining from selection. That team will play the winner of a match-up of "At-Large" candidates. The Sugar bowl features the last automatic-qualifying conference champion left (essentially, the lowest ranked conference champion), and they play the winner of another match-up of at-large candidates. The At-Large candidates will simply be the top four BCS ranked teams who are not conference champions. (If desired, the BCS may still wish to impose a 2-team limit per conference. Additionally, up for consideration may be that if 1 or 2 other conference champions rank in the top 25?/top 15?/top 10? of the AP polls (or other polls as determined), they receive the "At-Large winner" spot facing against the last one or two automatic qualifying conference champions)

NOTE/UPDATE: the BIG EAST lost their automatic qualifying spot so there are now only 5 teams who automatically qualify for the BCS/Playoff bowls. Under this new structure, the graphic below would be slightly off in this instance. To adate this dilemma,
1) the last automatic-qualifying conference champ spot could be given to the top ranked "At-Large" candidate with 4 other "At-Large" candidates (ranked #2-#5) taking the place of the two "At-Large" Match-ups,
2) The top two "At-Large" candidates would play in separate bowl games with a "At-Large" qualifying match-up between #3 and #4 to play in another bowl game (no two "At-Large" candidates play either other in a bowl game)
3) Only three "At-Large" candidates are chosen and they play against conference champions (as before, no two "At-Large" candidates play either other in a bowl game)

The format is relatively simple: it's simplistic, it rewards the top BCS teams, keeps bowl game traditions, ends the argument about a consensus national champion, and limits the number of games schools would need to play in a season. In addition, I believe it would also not impose significant monetary damages to the NCAA college football/BCS in revenues made through bowl games. Those elite games can and will still draw in nearly the same, if not greater, number of viewers considering the fact that it will continue matching up good teams. Moreover, a greater audience should be expected since the teams in the bowl game are now playing for more than a single bowl victory, but a chance at the national championship.

I think this is an excellent step to take beyond the four-team playoff format that was designed and approved of earlier this summer. Do have any other suggestion on how we can successfully unite the needs of those pleading for a playoff system and the bowl traditionalists, as well as justice for the non-automatic-qualifying conference powerhouses (i.e. Boise State)?

BIG TEN UPDATE

Sorry that I've been out for a while. My computer crashed a while ago and I just recently got back online and nearly fully recovered. So I should be able to update more often than previous.

However, just this Saturday (12/4/11), the college football stage wrapped up the end of the regular season with all the conference championship games. For your info, if you've been living under a rock or been absolutely hammered (beer, homework or otherwise), here's a list of the champs for each conference:

PAC-12: Oregon
BIG TEN: Wisconsin
SEC: LSU
ACC: Clemson
BIG 12: Oklahoma St. (even though no championship game....rather Bedlam gave us our champ)
C-USA: Southern Miss
I leave Big East off of this because I consider them only a hair better than the Sun belt, WAC, and MAC conferences. This year, MWC and C-USA were far better producing TCU, Boise, Houston, and Southern Miss as very good fball teams.

Since this is a Big Ten Update, let's move right along and talk about the truly exciting BIG TEN Championship game we had Saturday and who were the winners and losers of the season and moving forward.

At the top of things, it was Wisconsin (UW) and Michigan State (MSU) heading off into battle for the Big Ten crown. The country knew of the power of UW and that they always put together a great football team. As of this century, they have been a traditional powerhouse fighting near the top for the Big Ten crown. However, many outside of the Big Ten, and even several within including myself, did not fully appreciate what MSU could really bring to the table. We saw them show up last season in a pretty big way. They were co-champs with Ohio State and UW but got a bowl outside the BCS because voters knew UW and Ohio State were the better teams at the time. Then, Michigan State got POUNDED by Alabama in the Capital One bowl. That proved they weren't really among the top #10 teams in the nation.

This year, they set forth an incredible feat beating both Ohio State and UW. (only loss to Nebraska). On the other hand, Wisconsin, as you may know, had those two "hail mary" losses to that same MSU team and Ohio State.
This BIG TEN championship turned out to be special from the onset because MSU upset UW on a last second hail mary pass that eliminated UWs chance at a National Championship appearance. Though with the sour taste in UW's mouth for all of that week, Ohio State did nearly the exact same thing the very next week and nearly eliminated UW from Big Ten consideration. Therefore, we knew it was going to be very interesting to see how UW would respond. In the first half of this game, it was deja vu for UW all over again. They got quick scores before MSU threw up a bunch of points and took an 8 point lead into half time. The second half had UW tie it up and MSU taking a touchdown lead again. This continued until UW made a good stop on MSUs offense with only a few minutes left in the game and then got a touchdown to 1 point lead (40-39). A two point conversion then gave them a 3 point lead (42-39). They stopped MSU again and got the ball with just over 2 minutes to go. MSU then made a great stop on 3rd and 4 to set up a UW punt. On the play of the game, one of the MSU defensive players rushed to block the punt but missed and scraped the leg of the UW punter. Feeling the mild interference of the rusher, Nortman, the UW punter, intelligently pretended the hit was bigger and spun into a fall. His Emmy-winning performance deserved a best-performing actor oscar award as well!! It was so well acted out. I thought it was too well done...thankfully the ref through the flag anyways. He DID get hit a little and he could have just spun the rest of the 90 degrees and fall down. He did like a full twirl. But if that's what it took to make sure the ref knew he was hit, so be it. THAT was truly REALLY bad for MSU!!! Turns out, Keshawn Martin had returned the punt all the way to the 1 yd line!! With the flag on MSU, the punt return was negated and UW was given 15 yds AND a 1st down on their current 4th down possession which they punted on. Thus, with the clock near 2 min and a 1st down, they just ran out the clock on runs. The game was all over and UW was going to the Rose Bowl!! ...and MSU....the Outback Bowl.

Now here's another point that struck me cold. After finding that MSU was thrown dead into the Alamo Bowl, I found out that Michigan (UM) got a BCS bowl berth. Now here's a team that clearly lost to MSU on their best day. In fact, it was absolutely stupid, upsetting, and overall disappointing that they did place UM ahead of....get this....10-2 Kansas State (losses to Oklahoma and Oklahoma State) and 11-1 BOISE ST!!
What is more upsetting is that the rules for who gets into the BCS bowls puts bad teams in and leaves out top ranked teams. For instance, Arkansas, South Carolina, and Georgia are all teams that have ALREADY beaten or you know would beat all of West Virginia, Clemson, and Michigan....and likely Virginia Tech....the latter accounting for half of the current selected teams in the BCS. Due to the fact that the rules states that only 2 teams from each conference can make a bowl appearance, Ark, S. Car., and Georgia (all in the SEC) cannot appear since LSU and Alabama are playing. In fact, what is ABSOLUTELY grotesque is that the voters could have resurrected the failing of the BCS system by selecting Boise State in (an at-large candidate for a BCS bowl birth), and the same team who proved in the first game of the season and countless other times, that they can beat a top ranked team in the country (they themselves are ranked #7). West Virginia and Michigan are clearly unproven teams. Michigan didn't even play in their championship game!! You can say Alabama didn't either but you know why!!: they lost 1 game to THE #1 team....in OT. Michigan lost twice, one to Iowa and the other to MSU...both teams obviously NOT at the VERY top of the list. We are obligated to include West Virg. and Clemson based on the rules....I get that....Virginia Tech is a really good football club that just couldn't figure out Clemson...and they have been ranked as high as #5....#13 is Michigans highest ranking.

....and I think that THIS is the BIGGEST disappointment for me. Voters obviously had some special feelings for Michigan since they were a long-time-ago big football program. They need to WAKE UP and realize that they are not the tough minded, solid team today (that has gone to Alabama).

Who do you think would win #7 Boise State or #13 Michigan?!?!? If you realize that Boise State is 45-2 over the last 4 years, I think you would be hard pressed to take a dismal 25-23 record over the same 4 years. Granted, Michigan is in Big Ten and Boise in WAC/MWC.....but Boise's 45-2 dominating record indicates they DON'T lose....even to their annual elite, non-conference foe (be it Georgia this year, Virginia Tech the previous, or great Oregon team the third year back). You match Boise against Virginia Tech and THAT will be a really good matchup....you put Michigan versus Virgina Tech and that is just mediocre bc even if Michigan can win, they just don't play good, traditional football. It is that same weak mix of spread and power football. I mean you go with spread to the max (Oregon) or power (Alabama/LSU). More than that, they still don't have (as you can see) the skill and great coaching that defines the top programs.

What obviously probably happened was that Michigan obviously used their "political" (I MEAN MONEY) influence to BUY their way. I'm betting you someone got paid off!!! As we know, Boise State and Kansas State are definitely not as well funded as U of Michigan. Hopefully Urban Meyer and Ohio State can muff them back into the hole where they currently belong. HEY AND JUST TO ENSURE YOU KNOW I'M JUST NOT anti-Michigan, I'll come to respect them (AS I DID FOR MICHIGAN STATE!!!!!!!!!!!!) when they show up with a real team....so far the only playmaker is Denard....aren't you tired of hearing about im?!? Can you name anybody on defense?!? (besides an fair Mike Martin they keep pointing out).....NO...NO YOU CAN'T!!!