WASHINGTON -- A playoff system could be used in major college football and the so-called "plus-one" model for determining a national champion should be reconsidered, the head of the Bowl Championship Series told Congress on Wednesday. When House Subcommittee on Commerce Trade and Consumer Protection Chairman Cliff Stearns, R-Fla., pointed out that lower divisions have playoffs for football, BCS coordinator Kevin Weiberg said: "It certainly, congressman, is possible to have a playoff at the Division I-A level, as well. We have chosen not to go down that path." Between jokes about needing tickets for bowl games and remarks about more important matters they could be addressing, lawmakers on the subcommittee -- which examined steroids in professional sports earlier this year -- made clear they are not interested in pursuing legislation. But they did want to know why Division I-A football is the only college sport without a playoff system. "Why can't it do it? Why can't it do it?" asked Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas. "We're not going to introduce a playoff bill after this hearing. But I hope this hearing causes discussion. I would like to see the NCAA and the major conferences and the BCS come together on their own to develop a playoff system." Wyoming Rep. Barbara Cubin, who sits on the subcommittee, told witnesses that the current system discriminates against teams in the Mountain West. The University of Utah Utes, for example, were undefeated last year but were outside the top two spots. "If you're from the Mountain West you're not going to have the chance to play for the national championship," Cubin said. "If you had a playoff it seems to me that might reflect the ability of the players a little bit more." There are 28 bowls, and four are in the BCS: the Rose, Orange, Fiesta and Sugar. Those take turns hosting a championship game between the Nos. 1 and 2 teams in the BCS standings, based on two human polls and computer ratings. The "plus-one" concept, where the fifth game of the BCS format would be a championship game with two teams advancing from the first four bowl games, was considered in 2004. Weiberg, the commissioner of the Big 12 and one of six witnesses Wednesday, testified that the "'plus-one' model is one that deserves review. It is not one, as of yet, that has had full opportunity for review." He said he's open to changing the current setup but noted that school presidents would have to approve playing extra postseason games -- something they have shown no inclination to do. Weiberg is in his final season as BCS coordinator. Southeastern Conference commissioner Mike Slive starts a two-year tenure in 2006. Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany, Rose Bowl management committee chairman William Johnstone and other witnesses offered several arguments against playoffs: They would abandon tradition, diminish the importance of the regular season, lower the economic impact of some bowls, and create academic conflicts. "The bowls are not perfect, and the Bowl Championship Series is not perfect," Football Bowl Association chairman and Alamo Bowl CEO Derrick Fox said. "But a playoff system is dangerous." Barton questioned the concern about academics, citing a recent report that said 41 percent of this year's bowl-bound college football teams fall below the NCAA's new academic benchmark. "Let's [not] use [academics] as an excuse not to have a playoff system -- and then ignore it," Barton said. He also wondered aloud whether money is the biggest reason there isn't a playoff. "Doesn't it really boil down to that the major bowls ... don't want a playoff system because you think it's going to impinge on the money that the big bowls make?" Barton said. Delany responded that "an NFL-style football playoff would provide three to four times as many dollars to the Big Ten as the current system does. There is no doubt in my mind that we are leaving hundreds of millions of dollars on the table." The BCS was created in 1998 by the six most powerful conferences. Since then, the system has been tweaked to make it easier for teams from smaller conferences to qualify for the top games. Cubin said Wyoming's victory over UCLA in last year's Las Vegas Bowl shows that the system should be changed. "Wyoming went to the Las Vegas Bowl and played UCLA, and UCLA was furious they had to play Wyoming -- and then we whupped 'em," said Cubin. "People's opinions don't necessarily reflect what the results will be."
I'm all for a playoff, but seriously, doesn't the US Congress have a few more pressing issues to deal with?
Well, since they screw up everything they touch anyway, I just as soon have them working on something that's already screwed up.
Am I the only person who realizes that a "plus-one" system is just as flawed as the current system? Yes it would have worked in '03, but this season came dangerously close to being the type of season where it would not work. Suppose LSU and VaTech had won their Conf CG. Then you have USC & UT as 1-2 (easy) LSU, Penn St., Va Tech, Miami, Oregon, W.VA. all at one loss. That's 6 teams for 2 spots. Each team with an at least somewhat legitimate claim to be in the mix. Who you gonna take? Now you have just as much controversy as in '03 and '04. Who gets left out? Remove Miami and Oregon for not winning their conference, but you still have a very good Va. Tech and an unkown W.Va. Someone is getting the shaft.
I am sure they do have other things that they could be worried about, but if them doing this gets us closer to a Plus One system or playoff system, then by all means use my tax money !!!! It will be the first time I felt my tax money was actually used for something I want !!!
You will always have that argument, no matter how many teams in a playoff. If you have an 8 team playoff, the 9th and 10th teams may have the same record as the 8th team that got in the playoff. I view a plus-one system as a good first step, not the final step. I would prefer an 8 team playoff.
Nobody outside of those respective teams will care who the 4th, 5th etc.. teams were. Anybody could tell you who really got the shaft for the 2nd slot in '04, 03, 01, 00, and even '98. Miami lost twice btw, that was how Va Tech sneaked in the CON CG.
The it hurting the regular season is a WEAK argument. Here is how you do it: Make EVERY confrence play a championship game, make Norte Dame join a confrence either Big 10 or Big East and allow NBC to offer that confrence the same contract that Norte Dame has, Both teams that make the confrence championships make the playoffs but those championship games will produce the seedings along with records. Just like in basketball break the playoffs into regions and use the bowls as sites to play at. AND get rid of the NEW 12th game added to season that way we do not have to play TULANE for the next 10 years.
