We’re counting down the hours until No. 1 LSU and No. 2 Alabama meet -- for the second time this season -- in the BCS national championship in what I’m sure we’re all hoping is a great game.
If it’s not, or if LSU wins again, questions are going to be raised as to why Oklahoma State wasn’t given a chance to top the Tigers when Alabama had two. You know our stance on this by now; we’re part of the crowd stumping for change.
Come tomorrow, that change may begin, even if it’s at a modest pace.
The BCS will meet Tuesday to discuss ideas about a possible change to major college football’s p0stseason format. Before anybody gets excited, a full-blown playoff is the least likely of scenarios to be enacted, given that BCS executive director Bill Hancock still operates under the idea that the regular season would somehow be lit on fire, beaten with a blunt object and destroyed if a, say, an eight-team playoff were employed.
Because a rematch totally preserves the “every game counts” philosophy.
But a plus-one model, which has been gaining momentum over the past couple months among university presidents, athletic directors and conference commissioners, is absolutely in play. However, one of the most powerful men in college athletics, Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany, adamantly remains opposed to a change in postseason format.
That may not ever change.
Still, there’s too much frustration and discontent toward the current format building that the powers that be will, eventually, have to do something. The logistics of change (i.e., whether to play the games at a neutral site or home stadiums, financial distribution, etc) will come in time.
The BCS is set to be re-evaluated after the 2013-14 year anyway. At the rate at which playoff discussions move, it’s a good thing they’re getting a head start now.