BCS Commissioners Still Considering 20-Team Event

Yes, it looks almost certain that the 2014 season will be capped by a four team playoff.

But, the BCS big wigs are considering other changes than simply how many teams will be playing for the National Championship.

Another almost certain change is that conferences will no longer be given AQ status. Say "Bye, Bye" Big East. Bowls also expressed a desire to get out of their contractual champions if they are ranked low enough (see the Orange Bowl's disappointing marriage with the ACC).

Revenue distribution will also be a hotly debated question. The "little guys" have been applying pressure on the major conferences this last decade about opening up BCS access (and money). Even with the big mid-major programs leaving those conferences (Boise State, TCU, Utah, BYU), there will continue to be pressure for more "equal" sharing of BCS revenue.

It may surprise you to hear that the BCS is considering expanding from 10 teams to 20. Who would be advocating this expansion? Conference leaders from the lower rung of the FBS, of course. The MAC commissioner would enjoy a guaranteed spot in a "BCS" game (even if it is only against the Sun Belt champ in a third-tier bowl). It would also create an opportunity to share revenue to "lower" conferences through bowl contracts.

How exactly would a 20-team event with all 11 conference champions work? Let us see.

The 10 BCS Bowls

If you are tossing the champions of the Sun Belt and MAC into an expanded BCS then one obvious consequence is that not all BCS bowls will be created equal.

The Sugar Bowl is not going to want to go from hosting second place teams from the Big Ten and SEC one year to hosting unranked mid-major programs the next. There will be tiers; either two or three tiers.

The first tier will be the current four BCS bowls (the Rose, Fiesta, Sugar and Orange). Two of these bowls will serve as semifinals according to the most likely playoff proposal being considered.

The second tier will get the second portion of teams, mostly those ranked No. 9 to No. 16. The Cotton and Capital One bowls would be obvious entrants into this tier; the third bowl here could be a western bowl like the Holiday or an eastern one like the Chick-fil-A or maybe a new northern bowl in Big Ten territory.

The third tier will not necessarily be the next most prestigious bowls. The third tier will be mostly hosting the lower ranked champions. Rather than selecting three permanent sites, the prestige of hosting a "BCS" bowl may rotate or be bid on each year, keeping one of the three bowls in each of the three regions of the country (West, South, North).

So, who goes where?

Selection Committee

Now, the idea of a "selection committee" will immediately draw thoughts of the NCAA basketball tournaments. For certain, the selection into the actual playoff will have to be done by a more transparent process. But, the selection to the remaining BCS bowls can then be done by selection committee to ensure equitable and exciting matchups.

Other consideration that the BCS leaders are considering is getting rid of the two-team limit imposed on conferences. Naturally, with a 20-team event this would go by the wayside. But, who exactly would be eligible to play in the BCS after the 11 conference champions are determined?

The simple solution is just to make all Top 25 teams in the BCS standings at-large-eligible. There would then be caveats to encourage the selection of higher ranked teams and discourage the selection of every SEC team available.

What type of at-large qualifications would make sense?

At-Large Eligibility

1. Only teams in the Top 25 BCS in the standings are eligible for an at-large invitation to a BCS bowl

2. Eligible teams will be given a number (N) depending on their BCS rank in relation to other teams from their conference (for example in 2011: No. 2 Alabama would be given N=2, No. 6 Arkansas would be given N=3, No. 9 South Carolina would be given N=4, etc...)

3. Teams with N+2 can only be chosen if all N teams are also chosen

4. Teams with N+1 can only be chosen if all higher ranked N teams are also chosen

2011 At-Large Example:

No. 2 Alabama (N=2)

No. 4 Stanford (2)

No. 6 Arkansas (3)

No. 7 Boise State (2)

No. 8 Kansas State (2)

No. 9 South Carolina (4)

No. 11 Virginia Tech (2)

No. 12 Baylor (3)

No. 13 Michigan (2)

No. 14 Oklahoma (4)

No. 16 Georgia (5)

No. 17 Michigan State (3)

No. 19 Houston (2)

No. 20 Nebraska (4)

No. 22 Penn State (5)

No. 24 Texas (5)

No. 25 Auburn (6)

Nine at-large teams will be chosen to join the 11 conference champions in the BCS. Mathematically, some teams will be guaranteed a BCS spot while others will be hopelessly left out. Here is a break-down of such teams:

Guaranteed: No. 2 Alabama (2), No. 4 Stanford (2), No. 7 Boise State (2), No. 8 Kansas State (2), No. 11 Virginia Tech (2), No. 13 Michigan (2)

Eligible for last 3 spots: No. 19 Houston (2), No. 6 Arkansas (3), No. 12 Baylor (3), No. 17 Michigan State (3), No. 9 South Carolina (4, can only be selected if Houston is also selected)

Mathematically Eliminated: No. 14 Oklahoma (4), No. 20 Nebraska (4), No. 16 Georgia (5), No. 22 Penn State (5), No. 24 Texas (5), No. 25 Auburn (6)

The Selection Committee will determine which of the teams above will participate in the BCS based off of many factors.

As a note, all Independent teams ranked in the BCS Top 25 Standings will be given an N=2. 

Big Ten, Pac-12 and Rose Bowl Considerations

After putting forth an awkward proposal that would make the Rose Bowl a third semifinal every year, considerations have to be made about how the prestige of this bowl can be maintained. What is good for the goose is good for the gander, and maintaining a strong Rose Bowl maintains the prestige of college football as a whole.

After speculating on the possibility myself, ESPN reporter Mark Schlabach confirms that the sites for the semifinals might stay up in the air until the final BCS Standings are released. If the SEC champion places among the top two then, they will play in the Sugar Bowl as a semifinal game; if the Big Ten or Pac-12 champion places among the top two, then the Rose Bowl will be a semifinal; and so on.

Coupled with the desire of some bowls (read: the Orange Bowl) to be able to select whomever they want, it is conceivable that these conference ties will ONLY be used to determine which bowls host semifinals. The Selection Committee will, of course, continue to ensure that the Rose Bowl gets the top Big Ten and Pac-12 talent available wherever possible.

This also opens the door to combining the first and second tiers of the BCS. The Cotton or Capital One Bowls may have a chance to host a semifinal if a team like Houston goes undefeated and finishes among the top two. The selection committee would still give preferable matchups to the more traditional bowls, but the semifinals would have the potential to be held in one of seven BCS sites.

Let us look at an example BCS slate for 2011: 

Example 2011 BCS Slate

TIER I:

Sugar: No. 1 LSU vs. No. 5 Oregon

Fiesta: No. 3 OK State vs. No. 2 Alabama

Rose: No. 4 Stanford vs. No. 10 Wisconsin

Orange: No. 8 Kansas St vs. No. 15 Clemson

TIER II:

Cotton: No. 6 Arkansas vs. No. 7 Boise State

Capital One: No. 13 Michigan vs. No. 9 South Carolina

Chick-fil-A: No. 11 Virginia Tech vs. No. 23 West Virginia

TIER III:

West: UR La Tech vs. No. 19 Houston (Poinsettia Bowl)

South: No. 18 TCU vs. No. 21 Southern Miss (Independence Bowl)

North: UR Arkansas St vs. UR Northern Illinois (Motor City Bowl)