Posted by Tom Fornelli
Over the last few days rumblings of great change in the world of college football have spread throughout the country as we are once again on the precipice of conference-ageddon. However, the big changes that may be in store for the future aren't limited to the alignment of conferences.
A report in the Seattle Times on Friday says that the athletic directors of the schools in the Big Ten and Pac-12 took a straw poll, and they would be in favor of altering the current BCS system.
Bringing in a fifth BCS bowl game -- likely the Cotton Bowl -- and then moving to a "plus one" format in which the top four teams in the BCS rankings would partake in a mini-playoff of sorts.
The semifinals would take place in two of the BCS bowl games on a rotating basis with the winners moving on to the national championship game.
"They just haven't talked about the future as a group" BCS executive director Bill Hancock told The Seattle Times. "The intent is to do that after they (conference commissioners) evaluate the feelings on campus.
"My sense is that they're going to be open to anything that will make it better, short of an NFL-style playoff, as long as they stick with their principles — maintaining the bowl system and remembering that these are college athletes."
Now this isn't the first time that such a plan has been hatched, as both the ACC and SEC proposed a similar format in 2008 and didn't get much support from the other four BCS conferences. Still, considering that the Big Ten and Pac-12 are now on board with the idea, unless the ACC and SEC have changed their minds, this idea may have more traction this time around.
Of course, going to a plus one would not solve every problem in the college football postseason, and it would likely create new ones. Travel concerns for the teams advancing to the title game and lengthening the season are just some of the concerns that will be brought up. Still, the fact that it seems like both sides of the playoff debate seem to be working on a compromise is a good indication for all involved.
Even if it does just mean that the argument will turn from "this team deserved to be ranked in the top two" to "this team deserved to be ranked in the top four."