My Proposal
Bill Hancock Addresses BCS Proposal
by utesfan100 on Sep 2, 2010 12:07 AM EDT
in My Proposal
5 comments
Last month, BCS Executive Director Bill Hancock agreed to address questions related to core concepts of the BCS proposal I drafted last year. Basically this involved crafting the ideas into individual questions on each component rather than a cohesive design uniting them all.
Before the questions could be addressed, BYU launched a swirl of activity that Hancock was able to navigate and still find time to honor this request, and answer a few questions added on after the original questions were addressed.
So, without further interruption, here is the E-mail interview with Bill Hancock:
The first topic I would like to look at is in regards to your statement at the MAC media day regarding a playoff needing to include 16 teams so all conference champions could be included.
With eleven conferences and a few independents, wouldn't a twelve team format be sufficient and allow first round byes for the top four champions in the BCS standings to maintain a competitive edge for all teams late in the season?
Couldn't the field be narrowed by requiring conference champions to earn nine regular season FBS wins to qualify for a tournament? This would typically narrow the field to 7-8 teams and be a standard that gives all FBS teams an opportunity every year.
Bill's response: Most importantly, I am personally not in favor of a playoff because it would diminish the greatest regular season in sports, and would drastically change the popular bowl system that thousands of students and fans enjoy every year. Also, the consensus of the university presidents, conference commissioners, athletics directors, coaches and student-athletes does not support any kind of playoff. With such strong feelings from the people with the most deep understanding, a playoff is not going to happen. But if, at some point in the distant future, those groups change their minds and the NCAA membership does decide it wants a playoff consistent with the other sports' NCAA championships, then a 16-team format seems to be the minimum-sized bracket that would achieve something close to the current balance of automatic qualifiers and at-large teams that participate in those other NCAA events.
Actually, an awkward 24-team bracket would come closest to matching the AQ/at-large ratio of the 68-team Division I Men's Basketball Championship. A playoff bracket of that size would require five weeks to complete, thus subjecting fans to excessive travel costs and athletes to additional weeks of preparation and other students to more weeks of distraction at a time period encompassing final-exam periods and the holidays. It would also weaken the regular season in untold ways, and it would end the bowl system. Do folks really want to see that? I doubt it.
On August 6th SEC Commissioner Mike Slive discussed a "Flexible Final" format with Clay Travis. Have you had any discussions with Commissioner Slive about any such plans?
Bill's response: I have not.
The next topic involves the opinions of the university presidents. Many people have ideas about changes they would like to see but don't have access to the university presidents who would ultimately decide on any changes. Part of my proposal was to implement a formal survey of university presidents and athletic directors to provide an official reference for people interested in these two questions.
What aspects of the BCS contribute most to the overwhelming support it has received among the university presidents and AD's?
Bill's response: Many factors contribute to those groups' support of the BCS. In my opinion, the most important are (1) it allows a bowl game between the top two teams, (2) it preserves and enhances the importance of the regular season, (3) it preserves the bowl system that benefits 70 universities each year, and (4) it fits within the academic calendar.
What are the most commonly mentioned areas for improvement among university presidents and AD's?
Bill's response: The vast majority of presidents and athletics directors are quite happy with the current system. Of course, the group has always been open to new ideas, and that will continue. But I don't sense any groundswell for significant change. As for logistics, personally I believe the group needs to evaluate the dates of the games when the time comes to consider the BCS structure for 2015-2018.
Revenue sharing, why the Cotton Bowl is not a BCS bowl, should the Bowls count for BCS AQ determination and more topics are addressed in the full interview.
BCS Revenue Sharing Proposal
by utesfan100 on Aug 22, 2010 3:13 AM EDT
in My Proposal
8 comments
The BCS Revenue Sharing Process
The BCS new contract distributes roughly $180 Million among the FBS conferences. Additional money is given to FCS leagues. Army and Navy receive a negligible portion of the pie.
Six spots are taken and one is usually taken by the MWC or Boise State. The remaining three spots pay out $6 Million each, leaving $162 Million to be shared.
The conferences without an AQ are guaranteed a payout of 9%. They get an additional 9% if a second team qualifies. 9% is now $14.5 Million. This leaves $133 Million for the remaining.
Notre Dame receives 1/66 of this total, or $2 Million. This leaves $21.8 Million each for the 6 automatic qualifying conferences.
My thoughts are that if you are going to rank the conferences for automatic qualification determination, why not use this data to determine BCS payouts? I did not have the AQ criteria when I submitted my proposal last year. Here is my BCS revenue sharing plan.
My BCS Revenue Sharing Plan
Participation Revenue
Any conference champion ranked 14 or higher in the final BCS standings and selected to participate receives $8 Million.
Any other participant receives $6 Million.
The remaining money is divided proportionally to each share, determined as follows:
Conference Shares
The lowest ranked conference in each category receives one share per team, the next higher two shares per team, and so forth until all conferences are awarded shares. If conferences are tied they equally divide the range of shares per team they are tied for. The shares for the three category are added to receive a base share per team.
Each conferences' share is this base times the number of teams from that conference.
Independent Shares
Independents also receive a share, determined as follows.
Each independent is evaluated according to the three criteria and compared to the conference shadings (An adjustment of 2 is used for the Adjusted Top 25 Performance criteria.) The shares for each independent is then the sum of the shares per team of the highest conference scoring below where they would have scored in each category. If they are below the lowest conference, they get what the lowest conference got.
How different is this plan?
After the jump we will look at this plan based on the 2004-2007 evaluation the current process is based on, the 2006-2009 numbers I recommend as a rotating four year process, and 2008-2009 for what we know of the next evaluation window.
If I Were King 1998
by utesfan100 on Feb 22, 2010 8:26 PM EST
in My Proposal
0 comments
[Editor's note: This is a continuing look at what my design would look like for this year and will walk backwards one year per week, until the dawn of the BCS era. For other years and a better look at my design look here.]
Well, this series has reached the dawn of the BCS era. Without further ado, here is the final installment of how my designs would have compared to the BCS in each of the years it has existed.
Qualifying teams
Tennessee and Florida State would have qualified for being the top group of teams. Tulane would have qualified for being undefeated.
Since Tulane was not in the top 8 and would not have played three rounds the next group of teams would have been added. This next group of teams was Kansas State, Ohio State and UCLA.
Tournament
The following play-in games would be held on December 19th or 20th:
Tulane @ Kansas State, UCLA @ Ohio State.
The lowest ranked team to advance would play Tennessee in the Sugar Bowl. The other advancing team would face FSU in the Orange Bowl. The winners would advance to the National Championship Game.
Possible BCS Bowls
Rose: Wisconsin vs. Arizona
Fiesta: Texas A&M vs. Syracuse
Teams in bold would have been tied to that berth, italics indicate a BCS berth would have been guaranteed.
What actually happened and a tier based plus one next.
If I Were King in 1999
by utesfan100 on Feb 20, 2010 10:00 PM EST
in My Proposal
0 comments
[Editor's note: This is a continuing look at what my design would look like for this year and will walk backwards one year per week, until the dawn of the BCS era. For other years and a better look at my design look here.]
Qualifying teams
Florida State, Virginia Tech and Nebraska would have qualified as the top group of teams. Marshall would have qualified for being undefeated.
Since Marshall is not in the top 8 of the standings and would not face three rounds the next group of teams would be added. This group consisted of Alabama, Tennessee, Kansas State, Wisconsin, Michigan, Michigan State and
Florida.
Since this would expand the field past 8 teams the largest gap allowing a field between 5 and 8 would be used. This gap occurred between Alabama and Tennessee, so only Alabama would have been added.
Tournament
On December 19th or 20th Alabama would host Marshall for the opportunity to play Florida State in the Orange Bowl. Virginia Tech and Nebraska would play in the Wild Card Game. The winners would advance to the National Championship Game.
Possible BCS Bowls
Sugar: Tennessee vs. Southern Mississippi
Fiesta: Kansas State vs. Georgia Tech
Rose: Wisconsin vs. Stanford
Orange: Michigan vs. Miami(FL)
Teams in bold would have been tied to that berth, italics indicate a BCS berth would have been guaranteed.
Three at large spots would have required the BCS eligibility to be lowered to #18 and the official standings for that year were only released to 15. With three spots open it is possible the field might have required expanding to 22. Miami(FL), Southern Mississippi and Georgia Tech would have been likely candidates. Allowing a third team from a conference in the top 14 would have allowed Michigan State, Florida, Penn State, or Minnesota to be selected instead.
What actually happened and a tier based plus one next.
If I were King in 2000
by utesfan100 on Feb 8, 2010 10:39 PM EST
in My Proposal
0 comments
[Editor's note: This is a continuing look at what my design would look like for this year and will walk backwards one year per week, until the dawn of the BCS era. For other years and a better look at my design look here.]
Qualifying teams
Oklahoma, FSU and Miami(FL) would have qualified as the top group of teams.
Tournament
Florida State would have played Miami(FL) in the Wild Card Game for the opportunity to play Oklahoma in the National Championship Game.
Possible BCS Bowls
Orange: Virginia Tech vs. Georgia Tech
Sugar: Florida vs. Notre Dame
Rose: Washington vs. Purdue
Fiesta: Nebraska vs. TCU
Teams in bold would have been tied to that berth, italics indicate a BCS berth would have been guaranteed. Numerous Big 12, SEC and PAC 10 teams were ineligible due to their conferences quota of two bowls.
What actually happened and a tier based plus one next.
E-Mail Appeal to the ACC
by utesfan100 on Feb 4, 2010 3:00 AM EST
in My Proposal
0 comments
[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.
E-Mail Appeal to the SEC
by utesfan100 on Feb 3, 2010 3:00 AM EST
in My Proposal
4 comments
[Editor's note: This document merges two E-Mailes, one to SEC Associate Commissioner Charles Bloom and another to the Office of the University of Kentucky President Dr. Lee T. Todd, Jr. who represents the SEC on the BCS Presidential Oversight Committee]
Associate Commissioner Charles Bloom,
Congratulations on another excellent year at the top of the college football world! With the maximally allowed two BCS Bowl wins, one for the championship, the SEC continues to prove their worth on the field. I have recently examined the BCS revenue sharing plan and found that the SEC is the conference most negatively impacted by the BCS, making $0.4 million per team less than the Big East in 2010.
I am writing to you today 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.
XXX
To the Office of President Dr. Lee T. Todd, Jr.,
I have recently adopted a cat from the wild of a solid blue color, which I assume is an avid Kentucky fan. The University of Kentucky is known more for their academics and basketball than football, which is the topic of this contact.
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.
If I Were King in 2001
by utesfan100 on Feb 2, 2010 1:20 AM EST
in My Proposal
0 comments
[Editor's note: This is a continuing look at what my design would look like for this year and will walk backwards one year per week, until the dawn of the BCS era. For other years and a better look at my design look here.]
Qualifying teams
Miami, Nebraska, Colorado and Oregon would have qualified as the top group of teams. No other teams finished undefeated.
Tournament
Miami (FL) would host Oregon in the Orange Bowl while Nebraska and Colorado play in the Wild Card Game. The winners would advance to the National Championship Game. Colorado and Oregon may have been swapped to avoid a same conference semifinal.
Possible BCS Bowls
This year is the only year my design reverted to what the BCS accomplished. Due to the added games the BCS bowls would have been altered.
Fiesta: Florida vs. Maryland
Rose: Illinois vs. Stanford
Sugar: LSU vs. Virginia Tech*
*Virginia Tech would have become eligible as the field would have been expanded to the top 18 as not enough teams finished in the top 14 to fill all available spots. The BCS rankings only went to 15 that year, but the December 9th AP poll suggests Virginia Tech should have been in the top 18.
Teams in bold would have been tied to that berth, italics indicate a BCS berth would have been guaranteed. Numerous Big 12, SEC and PAC 10 teams were ineligible due to their conferences quota of two bowls.
What actually happened and a tier based plus one next.
Showing 1 - 8 of 26 Older
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
