Tuesday’s hot reads: Tweaking the BCS a bit
The first New BCS Format is in the books now, and I guess it did its trick, although I’d pay to see a Florida-USC matchup. OK, I wouldn’t pay to see it, but I’d watch the commercials. OK, I wouldn’t watch the commercials, but I’d watch the game.
But future events are scheduled through 2010, and by “future events” we mean routine stompings of the Midwest. In the spirit of working within the system, though, I have three changes that would improve the BCS:
1. The Big Ten’s business structure. Here’s an amazing note: Between the Ohio State-Michigan game Nov. 18 and the Ohio State-Florida I-guess-you-call-it-a-game-but-it-sure-didn’t-look-like-one last night, eight NFL teams — the ones involved in playoff games last weekend – each played eight games. Half a season! And the Buckeyes are supposed to come out firing? The last time they entered a game after this kind of layoff, their opponent was Northern Illinois in the season opener.
This time, before The Game-o Supremo, much was made of their 50-day layoff. Next season, if they (or Michigan) make it back, know how much time off they’ll have? Fifty-one days. But the BCS championship date ain’t changing from Jan. 8. The solution: Add a 12th team to the Big Ten, split into six-team divisions and have a championship game. It’s so easy, if the conference can rid itself of the idea that football should exist as it did in 1953. Not likely, though.
2. The matchup system, a.k.a. The Notre Dame thing. I get it. The Irish pull in ratings, so under this system they deserve to be there even when they don’t deserve to be there (which will be the case more often than not). But they cannot continue to play the 2007 LSUs and 2006 Ohio States of the world, each of whom are clear top-three teams. Otherwise, the results will be predictable blowouts, which I guess isn’t an entirely bad thing. Of course, to admit this, and to accept a Wake Forest-type matchup, would require a shred of humility on the Irish’s part. So … never gonna happen.
3. The announcing teams. Let’s say you own a restaurant — the Fox restaurant — that’s renowned for its pizza. You have a famous and kooky chef who knows everything there is about pizza. Now let’s say there’s a big-money chili cook-off, but you don’t have a chili expert and your pizza guy’s knowledge is limited to the fact that chili consists of beef and some other stuff. Do you: A) stick the pizza guy in the chili cook-off; B) hire someone who has never made pizza or chili; or C) HIRE SOMEONE WHO KNOWS THE INTRICACIES OF CHILI.
For me, the answer is C. For Fox, the answer has been a mixture of A (Terry Bradshaw et al.) and, very painfully, B (with Barry Alvarez, who seemed thoroughly bored to be there, and Charles Davis, whose main duty seemed to be telling us all the times he was right). They were an annoying enough tandem that they overshadowed Thom Brennaman’s redemption from his baseball work. Fox needs to think very, very seriously about renting out the Nessler/Griese or Lundquist/Danielson teams from the other networks — CBS does it during the basketball tournament — or get a piece of the regular-season schedule just for this occasion.
OK, that’s about it on that, for now. To the morning recap …
- Ann Killion asks the right Raiders question. It isn’t who should get the Raiders job, it’s who’d want it?
- Steve Sarkisian had his Q&A with Al Davis. Here’s my suspicion: He isn’t getting the job — because if he were, he wouldn’t be talking openly to reporters. It’s a win-win because Davis gets to do what he loves best, sitting back and talking football, and the USC quarterbacks coach suddenly becomes the hot name for the 2008 hiring season.
- Anyone still feel bad for Bode Miller? The U.S. Ski Association kindly asks that you don’t: “A large percentage of those people hate his guts. I don’t care if they love him or hate him; it’s good for our sport.” Yeah, he’s kind of like Muhammad Ali without the humor, timely performances, athleticism or charisma. … Actually, speaking of peccable timing (that’s the opposite of impeccable, right?), the U.S. is doing pretty well now that nobody’s watching.
- T.O. fires his publicist. Gee, and she did such a bang-up job. She isn’t talking, though, which leads me to believe she has 50,000 reasons why she should keep her mouth shut.
- Finally … for everyone who wondered when Mike Nolan took the field goal on fourth-and-one, why not? Here’s your why not.


Let’s solve the two problems of your points #1 & #2. On the SEC/Big 12 conference championships day, the Big Ten (11) champion can play Notre Dame as a play-in to the BCS. Call it the BCS Midwest Regional … or is that too much like a playoff system for the BCS conferences …
The Big 11 could easily add another college but their stuck trying to get Notre Dame. Some paperwork and college agreements, Big 11 adds Iowa State from the Big 12. The Big 12 could offer Colorado State or get TCU to join them.
Lets hope the Big 11 conference does something positive from the embaressment of having Ohio State and Michigan blown out after too long layoffs. Doesn’t the arguing about OSU and Michigan seem stupid today.
USC better be careful in years ahead as well. Pac 10 needs a conference championship game.
If ever college football playoff happens, the conferences must fix themselves with championship games. The BCS can’t force that. Money from media and place to play those new conference championships games has to be worked out. Its possible, now more than ever. The goal, polling is evil and let play on the field determine champions. Future college playoff would be between 8 teams at the beginning. Four BCS bowl winners and champions of other bowls as “at large” teams.
Colleges would still have 30 days off prior to bowl games and playoffs. BCS bowl games wouldn’t be worse, but better. Bowl winners would be in the playoffs.