Leach's support of playoffs makes him unpalatable for UCLA

[MikeWaters]

according to this guy:

http://www.tulsaworld.com/sports/art..._B1_Techs10041

[Surfah]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

according to this guy:

http://www.tulsaworld.com/sports/art..._B1_Techs10041

True that. If you saw the Si article this week on a playoff, the Pac 10 commish is against it. In fact they wouldn't support a + 1 type deal either. They won't give up the Rose Bowl. They feel like they gave enough when they joined the bowl alliance.

[A-Train]

Why would any of the Powers that be want to fix the system. If you are the SEC, Big 10 or Big 12 you are making $40 million + just from BCS games and that will happen regularly. PAC 10 usually has 2 teams participating as well so there is no need for the Commissioners or Presidents to change the format. The NCAA has to grow a pair of nads and change it but it just won't happen unless we have a couple of years in a row where there is a complete mess.

[Flystripper]

Originally Posted by A-Train

Why would any of the Powers that be want to fix the system. If you are the SEC, Big 10 or Big 12 you are making $40 million + just from BCS games and that will happen regularly. PAC 10 usually has 2 teams participating as well so there is no need for the Commissioners or Presidents to change the format. The NCAA has to grow a pair of nads and change it but it just won't happen unless we have a couple of years in a row where there is a complete mess.

The SEC, Big 12, and ACC are not pleased that the Pac 10, Big 10, and Big East don't have a championship game. I think if there is change, it will happen in that area more so than an actual playoff. The conferences with a championship game don't want a playoff but they do want all the BCS conferences to play by the same rules to get in.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by Flystripper

The SEC, Big 12, and ACC are not pleased that the Pac 10, Big 10, and Big East don't have a championship game. I think if there is change, it will happen in that area more so than an actual playoff. The conferences with a championship game don't want a playoff but they do want all the BCS conferences to play by the same rules to get in.

That is good. Because it means BYU has a chance in conference expansion.

[OrangeUte]

Originally Posted by A-Train

Why would any of the Powers that be want to fix the system. If you are the SEC, Big 10 or Big 12 you are making $40 million + just from BCS games and that will happen regularly. PAC 10 usually has 2 teams participating as well so there is no need for the Commissioners or Presidents to change the format. The NCAA has to grow a pair of nads and change it but it just won't happen unless we have a couple of years in a row where there is a complete mess.

my understanding is that the ncaa can't fix it b/c to do so they need 50% of division 1 school presidents to vote for it. something like 66 of the 120 or so D1 teams are bcs teams - the ncaa isn't going to change it b/c it can't.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by OrangeUte

my understanding is that the ncaa can't fix it b/c to do so they need 50% of division 1 school presidents to vote for it. something like 66 of the 120 or so D1 teams are bcs teams - the ncaa isn't going to change it b/c it can't.

Mack Brown and Mike Leach have come out publicly in support of a playoff.

[HuskyFreeNorthwest]

Originally Posted by surfah33

True that. If you saw the Si article this week on a playoff, the Pac 10 commish is against it. In fact they wouldn't support a + 1 type deal either. They won't give up the Rose Bowl. They feel like they gave enough when they joined the bowl alliance.

I think there is some growing unrest in the P10 with the Rose Bowl putting a screw job on the P10 twice in the last 4 years. Cal in 2004 the Mack Brown cry your way into the BCS. The 2007 tradition means everything pick of Illinois, despite the fact the Rose Bowl ignored that very tradition in the Mack Brown cry-athon year.

[A-Train]

Originally Posted by Flystripper

The SEC, Big 12, and ACC are not pleased that the Pac 10, Big 10, and Big East don't have a championship game. I think if there is change, it will happen in that area more so than an actual playoff. The conferences with a championship game don't want a playoff but they do want all the BCS conferences to play by the same rules to get in.

SEC, Big 12, and ACC don't have problems with the others not having a championship. They make a ton of $$ off the championship games. The SEC brings in over $150 million net a year for their conference. I would say the school presidents are pretty dang happy about the current situation.

[Flystripper]

Originally Posted by A-Train

SEC, Big 12, and ACC don't have problems with the others not having a championship. They make a ton of $$ off the championship games. The SEC brings in over $150 million net a year for their conference. I would say the school presidents are pretty dang happy about the current situation.

They like their championship game but they don't like that other conferences don't play one and get = access to the BCS. They will never give up their championship game but they will continue to whine that the Big 10, Pac 10, and Big East don't have one.