[Editor's note: The following is a merger of two e-mails, one to Commissioner John Swofford and antoher to the office of Virgina Tech President Charles Steger.]

Commissioner John Swofford,

Ten ACC teams in ten bowls in the same year. WOW! I am writing to you today to present my postseason ideas. I have already presented the attached plan to Bill Hancock and the new BCS Coordinator John Marinatto. I am also writing you because I believe that the scope and vision of this plan are beyond the jurisdiction of the BCS alone.

The attached plan includes formal NCAA rule changes that would have allowed the following current ACC members to have participated in two bowls:

Virginia Tech in 2008, 2007, 2006, 2005, 2004, 2002, 2000 and 1999;

XXX

To the Office of President Charles Steger,

Congratulations on your solid Chick-fil-A Bowl win! I am writing to you today, as a member of the BCS Presidential Oversight Committee, to present my postseason ideas. I have already presented the attached plan to Bill Hancock but believe that its scope and vision are beyond the jurisdiction of the BCS alone.

These plans would have allowed Virginia Tech to have been eligible for a second bowl in 2008, 2007, 2006, 2005, 2004, 2002, 2000 and 1999; including an opportunity to compete for a championship in 2007.

Additionally, the following ACC members would have been eligible for a second bowl game since 1998:

[BOTH]

Miami (FL) in 2005, 2003, 2002, 2001 and 2000; FSU in 2003, 2002, 2000, 1999, 1998; Georgia Tech in 2007, 2005, 2003, and 2002; Boston College in 2007 and 2005; Virginia in 2007 and 1998; Maryland 2002 and 2001; and Wake Forest in 2006.

An alternate version of these rule changes would allow the NCAA to establish guidelines to clarify their constraints on any proposed tournament and bring the certification of any future tournament under the supervision of the NCAA Championship/Sports Management Cabinet.

In addition to the teams the ACC qualified for the BCS National Championship Game, Virginia Tech in 2007 and Miami (FL) in 2000 would have been included in the championship tournament that is offered.

That is 29 more high profile bowl games and 2 more championship opportunities over the past 12 years relative to what the BCS generated for the current ACC members.

These NCAA rule changes would need a conference, such as the ACC, to sponsor them to be considered. Your conference’s support of the plus-one proposal of 2008 suggests that you are open to improvements, like my tier based plus-one design.

With Department of Justice interest in the BCS, hiring a Director of Research and Development to study the constraints on the postseason and implement design improvements for 2014 is a prudent course of action. This is the heart of my plan.

This plan is publicly available at http://www.bcsevolution.com/pages/prathers-postseason-plan. I would greatly appreciate any insights you have regarding the college football postseason my research has overlooked. This E-mail will also be posted publicly at BCS Evolution, and I would be delighted to offer you an opportunity to respond to these efforts.

I can be reached at benjamin.prather@gmail.com.

Thank you for your time,

Ben Prather