The BCS system is unfair to lower conferences but the BCS conferences still deserve more money. This is how I think they should compromise.
1. Add the Cotton Bowl and have a post-bowl National Championship.
2. Have Seven Automatic spots and three at-large spots. The seven would be-
SEC, Big Ten, ACC, Big 12, Pac-Ten,
(Big East/ MAC) whichever champ is higher in BCS Ratings- to almost ensure somebody from the north
(MWC/ WAC/ C.USA/ Sun Belt)- whichever champ is higher in the BCS Ratings- to give them an equal chance.
3. Make the money distribution more fair. A more fair way to do it would be 13% to each of the main 5 conferences 10% to other 2 conferences that get a team in BCS bowls, and 3% to each of the 4 conferences with no team in the BCS Bowls, and a small bonus to the conferences with teams in the championship game. That would be fair.
This is just how I think the BCS should change. ;D

How about having enrollment and reclassifaction to start.

_________________
The Bear may be dead but he still hates Tennessee. Roll Damn Tide

TEXT
The Mann Plan

The plan isn't bad, but I think that there is a better way to protect the interests of the underdog, while giving the power confernces exactly what they deserve, and they do deserve a lion's share of the money.

Keep the BCS rankings, and the current 4 New Years Day games.

Allow for 5 automatic bids to the 4 BCS.

These bids should be given to the PAC 10, Big 10, Big XII, SEC, and the ACC champions.

Have 3 play in games for the 4 already scheduled BCS games.

The play in games should include the top three conference champions versus the top three highest BCS ranked teams, that aren't conference champions.

These games should be played at the home stadiums of the 3 higher BCS ranked teams.

These games could be played on the 2nd weekend in December.

The 3 winners of these games will then join the 5 conference champs in the New Years Day games.

Keep regional/traditional considerations going for these games.

This will be the beginning of a College World Series type tournament to be finished in two weeks time. I would suggest Omaha for all games played after New Years Day. Just Kidding. ;)

Actually, I would suggest that the four winners of the New Years Day games then play a semi-final, and final in succesive weeks.

The semi-finals should be played at home campuses, while the final could be bid on like the Olympics.

This tye of setup will give everyone what they want. Inclusion and more money for the lower conferences, and more money for the BCS conferences.

OSU Mann,

I like the Mann plan! :) It sounds like a good compromise. Welcome to to forum.

FBfan

GG, I think you are absolutely wrong, and let me tell you why:

The only tradional 1A conferences are the ACC, SEC, Big Ten, Pac-10, and Big XII (an expanded Big 8, no matter what they say). Every other school in 1A either:
--has recently joined a conference for bowl tie-ins
--has recently joined 1A
--is a member of an old conference that used to be a 1AA conference (MAC)
--used to be a member of a traditional conference and chose to leave.
--used to be a member of a traditional conference until it imploded, upon which some members of the conference abandoned them (SMU, TCU, Houston, Rice)
--is independent.


The BCS allows for two at-large teams. Right now, there are 63 teams "in" the BCS picture. That leaves 54 teams "out" of the picture. Every day each of those 54 has a constant choice between the following two:
A) Stay in the present conference, accept a relatively low strength of schedule, and moderate bowl tie-ins.
B) Drop out of the conference, declare independence, compile the toughest schedule possible.

Choice A guarantees the schools a little money--a safety net, if you will.
Choice B guarantees nothing, but allows more freedom and the guarantee that, if the school schedules a tough schedule and beats elite teams, they will be considered for the BCS.

Tulane played 8 Conf-USA games and went undefeated. Big deal.
Marshall went undefeated with 9 MAC games. Who cares?

Tulane was independent for almost 40 years--if they were independent and went undefeated against an acceptable schedule, you'd see them playing at home for the national championship this year.

If the BCS isn't fair, none of the 54 "have-nots" are in a position to say so.

Most of the 54 were independent to begin with. The BCS bowls were created by the traditional conferences, for the traditional conferences. The fact that they have opened the door 25% is more than a small favor to the schools that left them (Tulane) and no more than a favor to everyone else.

It's up to you to get your own piece of the pie. It isn't up to the Pac-10 or SEC etc. Schedule a tough schedule and win--that's the only way in.

I say realign IA and IAA. Let the major conferences have the BCS. Combine the remaining IA schools with the best of IAA and give them a good TV contract. Have a playoff system for both divisions.

Or eliminate IA and IAA divisions and let any school that is able to meet certain requirements (attendance, scholorships, etc) be in DI all others in D2.,

BCS BIDS:

1 - ACC
1 - SEC
1 - Big Ten
1 - Big XII
1 - PAC TEN
2 - at large
1 - shared [BE(ND)/CUSA/MAC/MWC]

BCS Bowls - Orange, Sugar, Rose, Fiesta

Way to go BigE. I have always thought something like this was the way to go. Have your certian number of conferences whose champion is good enough in the majority of years to have little argument they deserve to be there. Then offer one automatic bid to the conference champion (of all the other conferences) that has the highest BCS rating.

OR, HOW ABOUT THIS?

Give out six automatice bids to the six highest rated conference champions in the BCS standings no matter what conference they are from....then the other two are at large so long as #1-#6 get automatic bids, whether they are conference champs or not.

Bravo Bullet! ;D ;D ;D

How about no automatic bids to the BCS and let the BCS ratings take care of the eight bids. Top eight BCS rankings get the 8 BCS bids.

This would be a good compromise between BCS and non BCS as no conference gets an free ride.

My "Grand Compromise."

1. Eleven game schedule. Schools cannot complain about my other changes since the 2002 and 2003 schedules are 12, and the NCAA is suppose to go back to 11 anyway.

2. Have a National Championship GAME (NOT playoff[per say]). This game would be after the Jan 1 bowls and would use a modified BCS format.

3. Allow any top 20 team with at least 8 wins that is NOT in a conference championship game to play 2 bowl games provided that the 1st is on of before DEC 15. The reasoning is twofold. Obviously, minor bowls would take the oppurnity to get better teams, and the major bowls would pick from the winners. This would make the conference championships and minor bowls the 1st round of a playoff. Secondly, in the hyper/spin world of college recruiting, a 6-5 team that played in some minor bowl would tell recruits that their team "made the play-offs." They (6-5 and 7-4's) don't deserve to say that. They can play in A bowl, but they don't deserve a play-in game. We must have standards! ;D

The sum of these 3 changes would be to have a defacto playoff using the bowls without major changes or lengthening the season. It would NOT be ANYWHERE near perfect, or even Walgreens; ;) ;) but it would be a lot better than what we have. All without making too many people to upset.

FBfan

I've said and I will say it again the NCAA needs to go by enrollment and grandfather the ones that are already at 1-A in. There are alot of D2 schools that need to be Division 1-A ie California State at Los Angeles there a huge school

_________________
The Bear may be dead but he still hates Tennessee. Roll Damn Tide

Agreed. Any school over 10,000 needs to be Division I, whether FBS or FCS.

Interesting idea about having enrollment as a criteria. Check out http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0933958.html

Based on enrollment, I think Miami-Dade Community College has to have a serious shot at getting into the SEC! City of College of San Francisco should petition for admission to the Pac10.

Seriously though, New York University is Division III and has over 38,000. (Cal State LA only has 18,000.) Why fault a university that chooses to emphasize education, research, or arts over athletics?