I personally would love a playoff, but from my reading of the Big10/Pac10 consortium they are 100% against it, though not against some BCS modifications. Also BCS is 100% against a playoff, but not against BCS modifications. IMHO playoffs are probably still 10 years away, but you can be absolutely sure there will be some modifications within the next two years in the BCS setup, whether tinkering with the formula, whether for redefining conference access, or even a special fifth bowl, etc.

I tend to be a practical guy, interested in things that have a fairly good chance of happening in the near future... First open up the process by becoming more inclusive and accessible, that will create the political climate for a movement toward playoffs down the road....

:)

I think the modification will happen and that a fifth bowl is a good possibility. Money won't be as critical a deterrent to that issue, though, from the BCS schools poiint of view; They'll simply begin teiring the formula and the funds that go towards the fifth bowl game will likely come at the expense of the general funds spread among the non-BCS members already. I've heard one reporter note they'll add a fifth bowl and try to formulate play-in system, ranking or rotation based system for the four non-BCS leagues to shoot for. Word is the BCS is already working with TV and bowl execs to study possibilities, but that nothing would be announced until after some of the conference realignments are sorted out.

The non-BCS schools are partly to blame for their exlusion because they willingly keep their memberships to inferior conferences. If Tulane was an independent in 1998, it likely would have played a tougher schedule (quite a few SEC schools probably). This would have brought up their power points easily and, had they stayed undefeated despite the tougher card, they likely would have been in the BCS.

So ask yourself: why do schools like Tulane, Louisville, TCU, etc., settle for memberships in lower conferences? I has to be a financial reason. Obviously they make more money in C-USA than they would as independents.

So all along the "big" non-BCS football schools have had two choices:
[list][*]Join a minor conference, which has a sure-thing moderate payout each year, but little to no hopes of ever getting the big BCS bucks.
[*]Go indy & schedule the big boys. No guarantee of any payout whatsoever, but a chance to get a piece of the BCS pie. Also leaves more chance for a BCS conf invite.

Virtually every school outside of the BCS has chosen the first one. That led to almost every bowl having tie-ins, making it harder now to go indy and succeed.

Here's how the Louisvilles and the Cincys and the Tulanes and the BYUs will get "their share:" DISBAND C-USA, MWC, & WAC. That way, BYU won't be a "mid-major"--they'll just be BYU, however good or bad that may be.

After considering all that, I think it's their own fault. If they go independent, they can schedule tougher opps but probably lose a few more games (and maybe even get shut out of bowls altogether because of tie-ins [partly their fault too]...or stay in the conferences, go undefeated occasionally on weak schedules, and blame everyone but themselves that no one takes them seriously.

None of the non-BCS football schools are forces to be reckoned with. Ignore them and they'll go away.

C-USA, MWC, & WAC will never produce a national champion. However, Cincy, L'ville, TCU, Tulane, Air Force, BYU, CSU, & Fresno (& maybe more) all have the power (& connections) to go indy, schedule tough schedules, and get into the BCS. Will they put their money where their mouths are? Probably not. And it's their own fault.

Unite and Join the Anti-BCS movement o.k. for the first in ump-teen years we can finally settle it on the field. Yes there needs to be revamped BCS with a fith bowl and yes cusa and mwc needs to be in but do we really need a movement for this. Do like everyelse does sue them.

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

C-USA, MWC, & WAC will never produce a national champion. However, Cincy, L'ville, TCU, Tulane, Air Force, BYU, CSU, & Fresno (& maybe more) all have the power (& connections) to go indy, schedule tough schedules, and get into the BCS. Will they put their money where their mouths are? Probably not. And it's their own fault.


WAC did produce a national champion in 1984. It was BYU

unite and destroy the bcs!!! Not going to happen the don't have enough power this will be a leagal battle for years to come.

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

First Thursday night of football the non-BCS schools acquitted themselves pretty well. No-one expected Louisiana Tech to beat Miami, but--BOTH ACC TEAMS GOT BEAT (I guess thats why they need Miami and VT):

BYU (MWC) beats GT
NI (MAC) beats MD

8-)

C-USA, MAC, WAC, etc. serve as a home to a significant number of the 117 1-A football teams. Nowadays, making it as a independent would be extemely tough. That is why it is essentially down to Notre Dame and Navy as independents, and they are national-type teams with immense name recognition and tradition. They are also closely examining whether or not to affiliate. For basketball and many olympic type sports, conference affilliation is crucial.

The BCS needs overhauling and move more to equitable access. Just by being associated with a BCS affliliated conference, renders added revenue and recruitment advantages.

The cotton Bowl should be the fifth bowl its closer to MWC and CUSA if any of those make it. They would fit perfect for it

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

Unless you're Notre Dame or a service academy, going independent is NOT an option. It would be VERY difficult to make the "5 I-A Home Game" rule and attendance would suffer. (See TSU)

Oh just great the BCS has finally done it they have now brought in Congress freaking politicians go do something about the war and the budget.


WASHINGTON (AP) -- Two weeks into the new college football season, the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee said Thursday the system in which a national collegiate champion is determined needs to be changed.

"I think you're throwing the baby out with the bath water by allowing this to continue," Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., said of the NCAA's Bowl Championship Series, which excludes many schools from automatic bids to compete in the lucrative bowl postseason.


But even one of the most vocal opponents said Congress should not get involved.

"Whatever issues may exist, it really should be worked among the university presidents without the intervention of Congress," Tulane University's president, Scott Cowen, said in advance of Thursday's hearing. He founded an anti-BCS organization designed to get schools such as Tulane a better shot at one of the big year-end bowl games.

Former NFL quarterback Steve Young, who played at Brigham Young and for the San Francisco 49ers, among other professional teams, said the disparities hurt recruiting since athletes will sometimes choose to attend schools with a better shot of going to a bowl game.

"In soccer, basketball, baseball, tennis, golf, etc., equal access is granted. Not so in football," he said.

In the system's five-year history, no team from a non-BCS conference has played in a BCS bowl game, and BYU has been the only non-BCS school to win a national championship since World War II.

Cowen's Presidential Coalition for Athletic Reform and BCS representatives will meet Monday in Chicago to discuss the series' future. The current BCS contract expires in 2005.

Participants hope solutions will emerge within the next six months to a year. Proposals expected to be brought to the table include adding another one or two bowl games to the schedule.

Neither supporters nor detractors of the bowl system expect legislation to result, although the threat of an antitrust suit brought by a non-BCS school looms.

BCS supporters say the system does not violate antitrust rules because it is open to all schools through two at-large bids. Cowen said Thursday that an antitrust suit is possible if upcoming talks with BCS officials do not yield satisfactory results.

The BCS was established before the 1998 season to determine the national champion by matching the best teams in either the Rose Bowl, Sugar Bowl, Orange Bowl or Fiesta Bowl.

Only teams from the Atlantic Coast Conference, Big East, Big 12, Big Ten, Pacific-10, Conference USA, and the Southeastern Conference -- as well as independent Notre Dame and two at-large teams -- are allowed to participate in the big bowl games.

Tulane went undefeated in 1998 but was excluded from the BCS bowls because of its 11th place BCS ranking.

The projected revenue for the four 2004 BCS games is $90 million, but only about $6 million will go to the 55 non-BCS schools while more than $80 million ends up with the 62 BCS schools, the House committee said.

"This conglomeration of money and power is having a cascading impact far beyond major college football, as the de facto exclusion of non-BCS schools from major bowl games is resulting in those schools having lower athletic budgets, inferior athletic facilities, and rising deficits," said Rep. John Conyers of Michigan, the committee's top Democrat.

Interesting NCAA "political"article at http://www.al.com/sports/birminghamnews/rmelick.ssf?/base/sports/11376658395160.xml&coll=2