|
BCS needs major surgery
By JOSH DUBOW
Associated Press Football Writer
Don't even bother with the
tweaks. The Bowl Championship Series needs a complete overhaul.
Another season of split champions showed that the complicated formula
designed to create a clear-cut champion in college football doesn't
guarantee a lucid finish much more than the old bowl system did.
Even if Southern California and LSU were both worthy of winning a
national title, that's no way to run a sport. Now it's up to the powers
in college football to figure out a way to fix this season's mess
without creating another.
Good luck.
"I think we need to avoid the use of the word tweak because there are
many different elements here," Pac-10 commissioner Tom Hansen said
Monday. "We might tweak one and radically change another. There needs to
be a thorough study of the process. We've done it before and we must do
it again."
The problem with making changes is there are so many constituencies at
hand ranging from BCS conferences to non-BCS conferences to bowls,
networks, advertisers, fans, media members, athletic directors,
university presidents, coaches and players.
And the goals of each group are often different.
"There's not a clear-cut answer that satisfies everybody involved," Rose
Bowl chief executive Mitch Dorger said. "It will take some very smart
people thinking through the issues with everybody's interests in mind."
The changes to the BCS will be operating on two fronts.
First there will be the alterations to the formula that picks the two
teams to play in the designated title game.
Second comes the big changes to be put in place for the new BCS contract
in the 2006 season, which could include a mini-playoff after the bowls.
There has been talk about taking the four major bowl winners and playing
two more rounds to determine a champion on the field. But Hansen said
the only plan being considered will be a one-game championship after the
bowls — a method the Pac-10 opposes.
"There won't be any two games plus one," Hansen said. "There will be a
review of the plusses and minuses of one additional game. The Pac-10
presidents and chancellors oppose it for two reasons. One being the
potential damage to the existing bowl games. The second being it would
be a probable first step to a more elaborate playoff next time around
and we're opposed to that."
There also is the question of how to set up the semifinals. The Pac-10
and Big Ten want to keep their traditional ties to the Rose Bowl, while
others prefer seeding the teams.
Even seeding will create problems.
"If we had four teams, somebody who was fifth would get left out," LSU
coach Nick Saban said.
Also, an extra game could prove unnecessary. Twice in the first six
years of the BCS, there were two major undefeated teams heading into the
bowls, creating an undisputed title game like the one last year between
Ohio State and Miami.
"This year it would have turned out that one extra game might have been
useful for the system," Dorger said. "I remind people that last year
that would not have helped. I don't think people should jump on the
bandwagon because it might have helped this year. There needs to be a
longer term view of the situation."
Maintaining the traditional bowl tie-ins followed by a championship game
would create the same sticky problem of how to pick the two teams.
That needs to be addressed immediately and expect changes to happen when
the six BCS commissioners meet in April.
The BCS was embarrassed when USC finished the regular season No. 1 in
both The Associated Press poll and the USA Today/ESPN coaches' poll but
was left out of the designated title game.
The Trojans were penalized by the computers for a perceived weaker
strength of schedule, which might not have been so accurate.
According to Hansen, if the strength of schedule factor were allowed to
differentiate between home and road games, USC would have made it to the
Sugar Bowl. That's one possible change for next season.
Instead, LSU beat Oklahoma
to win the coaches' poll, which was obligated to go to the winner of the
BCS title game, while USC won the AP poll.
"I think the BCS is going to change," USC quarterback Matt Leinart said.
"This can't happen, to have a split. You don't know who is the best
team."
This marks the third time
in six years that the consensus top two teams in the polls did not meet
in the BCS title game.
"I think we might very well lessen the role or prominence of computers,"
Hansen said. "If who's No. 1 and No. 2 teams in the polls is in
agreement then those two teams should be in. We should only go to other
factors if there's disagreement in the two polls."
But the underlying problem will always exist — no matter how many teams
are picked the top one left out will always have a complaint.
02/23/2007 10:40 AM
Copyright 2004 The
Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may
not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
|
