Blog Entry

Slive: plus-one will be "in mind" in BCS meetings

Posted on: December 23, 2011 3:59 pm
Posted by Jerry Hinnen

In 2008, SEC commissioner Mike Slive attempted to float a plus-one "playoff" proposal to revamp the BCS's method of determining a national champion. But even with the ACC's John Swofford also backing the idea and Slive wielding as much influence as anyone in college football, the proposal never got off the ground.

Ironically, that failure has done nothing but help Slive's league since then; buoyed (in part) by the conference's ever-growing reputation as the closest on-field product the college game has to the NFL, the SEC has won five straight national titles and will add a sixth when LSU faces off against Alabama on Jan. 9--a spot the Tide won in the polls over Big 12 champion Oklahoma State despite finishing second in the Tide's own division behind the Bayou Bengals.

So with the curent system playing to his teams' advantage like that, has Slive tempered his support for the plus-one? Judging from this interview with the Birmingham News, it doesn't sound like it:
"For the last six years, looking at it from our own prism, we were better off without it ... If I knew that for six more years it was going to work this way then I wouldn't be for the plus-one. But I think the law of averages catches up over time.

"Knowing that any team in our league with one or two losses is one of the top two teams in the country, then I'd have to think very hard about the plus-one absent other kinds of changes. There may be other changes that are laid out on the table that need to be clearly thought out. But we'll go to the table with the plus-one very much in mind." 
Slive added that he would be "interested" to discover if conferences other than his own (and Swofford's) would support the plus-one if re-introduced. The Big 12 appears to be on board in the wake of the Oklahoma State snub, and while Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott has not committed himself one way or another, his league's athletic directors have both voted in favor of one potential four-team playoff format and called the plus-one "inevitable." The Big Ten and Jim Delany may be the only holdouts, meaning that if Slive is still entirely behind the 2008 proposal (or something similar), there may be no stopping it when the BCS convenes in 2012.

Slive declined to discuss the likelihood of the dissolution of the BCS's automatic-qualifying status for conference champions, or other changes to the BCS selection process.

"There are lots of different ways to think about it and to overemphasize any one issue would be premature," he said.
Since: Dec 24, 2011
Posted on: December 24, 2011 1:08 pm
This comment has been removed.

Post Deleted by Administrator

Since: Oct 14, 2011
Posted on: December 24, 2011 10:31 am

Slive: plus-one will be "in mind" in BCS meetings

Fools keep hating and are in denial.  Best teams will keep winning whether it is a playoff, plus one or like it is now.  WE all know that are conferences are not created equal.  To try to make it sound as if the BIG10, PAC 12 or SEC Champion should be on equal footing with ACC CUSA MWC etc is asinine.  The system we have now is not the system wanted by SEC.  It is what it is and the SEC is just winning games because they are better teams overall.  When they change to plus one, it will be the same thing maybe 3 SEC in the final 4?

Since: Aug 11, 2008
Posted on: December 23, 2011 11:43 pm

Slive: plus-one will be "in mind" in BCS meetings

Will Boise State finally get into the BCS mix?

Since: Aug 4, 2008
Posted on: December 23, 2011 8:40 pm

Slive: plus-one will be "in mind" in BCS meetings

Doing away with the current bowl system and installing a playoff system would lose many of the college football fans. If we wanted a playoff system we could watch Sunday football.

This is Saturday football with lots of traditions that are eroding on a daily basis leaving most of the college enthusiasts with a bad taste in our mouth for all these changes that are not wanted.

I think the fans, alum and students would show their displeasure by not showing up on Saturday.

I don’t want my team playing in a playoff system. I didn’t really like the idea of the PAC-10 expanding to 12 teams, but they did.  There was nothing broke about the PAC-10.

Those that want a playoff system, must have their heads in the sand. The college basketball playoff  is the blue print for what would eventually happen to a college football playoff. We would  eventually have 50-60 teams involved in a playoff system with teams traveling all over the United States playing these playoff games.

The regular season would mean nothing and sub 500 teams would b getting into the playoffs.


Since: Sep 10, 2007
Posted on: December 23, 2011 6:17 pm

Slive: plus-one will be "in mind" in BCS meetings

Why a plus one?  Why not 5 conference champions plus three at large teams in an 8 team format? That would make 4 of the BCS bowl games into play off games. The winner of those games play each other in two new BC bowl games, and the winner of that will be a real championship game. 

Even in a plus one format, the undefeated Utah team that finished number 2 in the rankings after they destroyed Alabama would have been left out. 
I believe most fans would prefer a 16 team invite or even a 24 team set up with 8 of the teams (conference champions) getting a first round bye. The problem that the bowls have is each individual bowl committee wants to guarantee a sell out for revenue purposes.  An 8 game format could basicaly guarantee a sell out but I am not sure a bigger format could.  Asking fans to attend 3 bowl games at the end of the year would push pocket books rather thin. It is also very hard to plan travel costs when you don't know if you need to attend a game over a thousand miles away with only a week or two weeks notice.
This does not even include the conference championship games these teams are now playing.

My ideal scenario. 24 Teams get invites with the top 8 conference champions getting a first round bye while 16 at large teams face off in 8 regional games with the highest seed teams acting as hosts while playing in their home stadiums or at least as close to their home cities as possible. The winners of those 8 games travel to the conference champions houses and play them.  The regional seeding helps fill seats and justly rewards conference winners. The remaining 8 teams play in BCS named bowls with all of them most likely to be sell outs.


The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or