Playoffs are real! What does it mean for BC?

The college presidents finally approved a four-team football playoff. It has been a long time coming and some details are still to be determined, but this will change the college postseason for the better. I also think that this system benefits a school like BC. First the good news.


1. We don't have to be perfect. Under the old system BC needed to go undefeated and hope that only one other BCS team also went undefeated. The polling system always favored the traditional powers. There will still be plenty of bias in the selection committee, but supposedly there will be a formula that incorporates win-loss, strength of schedule, and conference championships. In this world a 11-2 ACC Champion BC team might earn a playoff spot. This also means that any great BC team (13-0, 12-1) will surely be in.


2. We still have a seat at the table. The ACC has been damaged in this process. It's the Big Four and us. That will hurt in recruiting and in rankings. But at least we are still at the big table. The ACC will have its turn on the selection committee and we can still pitch access to the playoffs to recruits and fans. 


3. An expanded playoff is coming. Everyone is quick to point out that the Presidents don't want playoff creep and that it will be a four-team format for 12 years. I think it will stay at four teams for five years at the most. There will be too much public pressure to expand and too much money to ignore. An eight-team playoff is even better for BC financially and access wise.


4. The ACC will be rewarded for playing nine conference games. Strength of schedule is a factor in the selection. With the ACC playing nine games, we will get a SOS benefit that other conferences don't when they play patsies. This also might have BC rethink its annual FCS game. 


This is the bad news. 


1. The ACC is still poachable. Florida State or Clemson might have an easier path to the playoff from the ACC, but there is no built in advantage like there might have been under a strict conference champion provision. As long as other conferences offer more money, schools might leave.


2. There will be a human element to the selection committee. There will be bias and subjectivity. BC will always face an uphill battle against the power brokers. I know that we will be the "5th" team at least once in my lifetime. 


3. The bowl system lives on (sort of). The old boys running the playoff protected their cronies at the bowls. They're less important and will face new financial pressure, but the bowls still live on. And their distaste for BC and our travel reputation will not go away. So this means that is will always be playoff or bust for BC.

BCS changes and what it means for BC

The BCS meetings start this week and plenty of changes are being reviewed. While the degree of change is unknown, the direction of the meetings is great news for BC.

Semifinals Call it a Plus+1. Call it a playoff. It doesn't matter. It seems like there is finally consensus to have have a mini-postseason. A four team playoff will still be a political nightmare that would nearly always exclude a team like BC, but it is a start. Once Pandora's Box is open, the 4-team playoff will expand to an 8 or 16 team playoff. That format would give BC hope.

Home playoff games The bowls are fighting hard, but it looks like some portion of the playoff would be on campus. That would be huge for a team like BC. Bowls are never really neutral sites for us. We always travel far and don't bring fans. I know a home playoff game will be a rare occurrence at Alumni, but it is still better than playing in an empty pro stadium. I also think that home playoff games will lead to home Conference Championship games. Do you think 2007 and 2008 might have been different if the ACC Championship games were played at BC?

Minimizing the importance of "travel reputation" This movement sounds like it will kill the lower tier bowls. It also sounds like all ADs are tired of buying huge blocks of tickets. That means that the non-playoff bowl games that remain will need good TV. BC -- when playing well -- is a great TV draw. The culling of the smaller bowls, might mean BC plays in fewer bowls, but does anyone really care? I think excitement and travel related to a bowl would improve if it was a true honor.

More shared money The playoffs will mean more money. It will also be more evenly split among the major conferences. That's great news from BC and could allow us to upgrade our facilities.

The ACC sent Georgia Tech's Dan Radakovich as its representative so Gene won't have a seat at the table this week. But I hope he is a strong supporter of playoffs. It is the only solution for BC. And one day we will have a coach who can get us to the playoffs again.

Allow me to rant about the BCS and the ACC's role

I love college football but I really hate the current BCS and bowl system. There are a million reasons to dislike it but my major gripe is that there are now only 12 teams eligible for the national championship and they all happen to be in the SEC. Heck, Alabama showed tonight that you don't even have to win the SEC to win a national championship. This isn't me hating the SEC due to an ACC inferiority complex. It is me hating on a system that is not decided on the field and where one conference is now benefiting from money, marketing and media hype. It would be like the World Series was only decided between the Red Sox and Yankees every year. I want a playoff. I want home playoff games and I want automatic qualifiers from all the major conferences. If we keep this slow march towards a "plus 1" and keeping the bowls and allowing six or seven SEC teams in BCS games, then most of the ACC will be squeezed out. College football will only be a power group of 40 or so schools. We need a playoff and the ACC needs to lead the charge. The conference needs to do it for the money and do it for the survival of the other 120 schools playing FBS (DIA) football.

The ACC could lead the change but we have gutless apologizing leadership. The conference, its coaches and its media members are constantly defending ACC football. Who cares? We don't oversign like the SEC teams. We have more admission restrictions. Of course our football will suffer a bit. Because we are not a collection of tradition football powers and because we have a group of private schools, we will never travel as well to bowl games. I know all the ACC teams got rolled in bowl games, but once again it doesn't matter. The bowl games are quirky neutral site games after long layoffs. If we had a real playoff, I am sure a hot ACC team would make a run on occasion.

Instead our leaders sit by and allow ESPN to prop up the bowl system and the SEC to be the primary beneficiary simply because they deliver ratings and hype. The regular season doesn't matter. Alabama just proved that. History doesn't matter or else they wouldn't have ruined the bowls. Academics don't matter or else SEC's would try to graduate their players. Cheating doesn't even matter. Look at the slap on the wrist Ohio State got. So we ignore all these issues to keep the old boy network of bowl reps, coaches and ADs protected. Having 70 teams in bowls helps perception. Having say 16 playoff teams would ratchet up the pressure on coaches and ADs.

The ACC could lead for change. We could work with the other schools to get a playoff. We could lead by example and it would mean more money and a better chance at championships. Instead our gutless leaders will sit back and watch Alabama and LSU play for another title next year.

What Boise State's win means for BC

Now that they've cleared one hurdle Boise State will become one of the focal points of the college football season. "Will they go undefeated?" and "Should they be in the BCS Championship Game?" will be debated endlessly. In a way a Boise State run might be just what college football and BC need. If you get a Paper Tiger, small-market champion, the TV networks and the power conferences might finally break down and get a true playoff. BC needs to support any playoff effort since we are nonfactors in the bowl process. Under the current system BC will only get into the title game with a perfect season. With a playoff, we would only have to win the ACC. A playoff is more merited based. A playoff doesn't care about ticket sales. A playoff might mean home games at Alumni. A playoff will mean more money. BC needs to get behind the playoff movement. All that said, I think Boise will lose a regular season game this year and fall out of the discussion.

Meanwhile Virginia Tech looked like the team we have come to know so well. Plenty of speed, but stagnant offense and certainly vulnerable. That game will be a huge test for Spaz. Not only does he need to get the team ready for their first ACC game, but he also needs to develop a game plan that is not as conservative (cowardly?) as last year's VT game. Even with our problems, it is a winnable game.