At least that’s the indication that Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany and Conference USA commissioner Britton Banowsky gave during Thursday’s IMG Forum at the Marriott Marquis.
“Some of the people that don’t have (BCS AQ status), say they don’t want it,” Delany said. “Some of the people that do have it, don’t really care about it. Maybe it needs to be reconsidered. I’m not wed to it. I’m wed to the 1-2 game and I’m wed to the Rose Bowl. I’m not wed to the (BCS AQ) selection process or the limitations.”The current BCS format expires after the 2013 season. There is growing speculation that when the new format is voted on and established in 2014, it could simply be reduced to only pitting the No. 1 and No. 2 teams in a bowl game or a Plus-One model (the top four teams would be seeded in the bowl games).
Either the Plus-One or without the Plus-One model would allow the other current BCS bowl games – Fiesta, Sugar, Orange and Rose – to simply align with whichever conferences they want and would not be required to select teams based on a BCS ranking.
"I feel strongly it’s been a negative driver from our perspective,” Conference USA commissioner Britton Banowsky. “I hope to be involved in a BCS we do it in a way where we can create a more happy BCS without these class systems. I think it’s possible to do it. In a competitive format that requires teams to be competitive teams in order to participate.”
Added Delany: “As long as I can go to the Rose Bowl, I don’t really care,” Delany said.
Notre Dame athletic director Jack Swarbrick isn't in favor of the Plus-One model, but expects change in 2014.
“(Without the BCS AQ format) takes so many forms, it's hard to draw a conclusion from that," Swarbrick said. "You could fashion a version which probably would be good. It doesn’t take a lot of imagination to fashion a version that might not be good."