CuseLegacy
Moderator
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 97,909
- Like
- 157,843
Swofford optimistic about playoff
• The ACC commissioner favors bowl involvement in the format.
BY DAVID MORRISON
Staff Writer
ACC commissioner John Swofford is optimistic his peers are on board with a four-team, three-game “mini-playoff” for college football.
“If you’re one that likes that concept ... you should be cautiously optimistic,” Swofford said.
Four years ago, Swofford said, he and SEC commissioner Mike Slive floated a similar idea to fellow commissioners. That discussion lasted “about two minutes.”
But now the FBS commissioners, who met last week, not only have an idea of what system to consider — two semifinals and a national championship game, setting aside eight- and 16-team proposals — but a renewed emphasis on creating an alternative to the BCS, which has been deciding championships since 1998.
Swofford and commissioners will present four-team playoff proposals to their schools over the next six weeks. Their hope is to reach a consensus for a shift to a playoff system starting in the 2014 season by the time the BCS’ presidential oversight committee meets in late June.
They’ve set July 4 as a deadline for approval. Swofford believes they should have a plan in place by then, but he also said they’ll take as long as needed.
“The more the discussion narrows as to how to do it, the more challenging it will become,” Swofford said. “We’ve got a process in front of us and some tough challenges in terms of the details before this is a reality.”
The main issues are the sites for the playoff games and how the four participants would be chosen.
Swofford said the selection process was largely tabled until the committee is more certain about the playoff’s format.
As for host sites, Swofford said he — along with most of the ACC — favors working within the bowl structure as opposed to playing on-campus semifinals or bidding out the games to cities, two other proposals that have gained steam.
“The infrastructure is already there, the tradition and history is there, those communities and bowls have been very supportive of college football for many, many years,” Swofford said. “My preference is to look there first, but understand that there are different ways to skin the cat, so to speak. We certainly don’t want to close ourselves off to other approaches .”
The advantage of a four-team playoff is that two more teams would have a chance to win a national championship, a plus for power conferences such as the ACC, SEC, Big 12, Big Ten and Pac-12.
The ACC has had one team — Virginia Tech, in 2007 — finish in the top four in the pre-bowl BCS rankings since the conference took its current shape in 2005. Miami, Virginia Tech and Florida State would have made multiple appearances in semifinals had this system been in place since the BCS’ inception.
Swofford said this round of change could help solve BCS missteps, such as the inflexibility of its matchups and the midweek scheduling of games after New Year’s Day.
“The BCS championship game is the most highly criticized successful event I’ve ever been around,” Swofford said. “There are things we could do, even if we stayed with the status quo, that would improve it considerably. But some people have gotten worn down by the criticism of the system and by the fact that so many fans would really like to see some type of playoff.
“It still could stay status quo, or similar to the status quo. But for the first time, we see there’s a lot of support for a significant change.”
• The ACC commissioner favors bowl involvement in the format.
BY DAVID MORRISON
Staff Writer
ACC commissioner John Swofford is optimistic his peers are on board with a four-team, three-game “mini-playoff” for college football.
“If you’re one that likes that concept ... you should be cautiously optimistic,” Swofford said.
Four years ago, Swofford said, he and SEC commissioner Mike Slive floated a similar idea to fellow commissioners. That discussion lasted “about two minutes.”
But now the FBS commissioners, who met last week, not only have an idea of what system to consider — two semifinals and a national championship game, setting aside eight- and 16-team proposals — but a renewed emphasis on creating an alternative to the BCS, which has been deciding championships since 1998.
Swofford and commissioners will present four-team playoff proposals to their schools over the next six weeks. Their hope is to reach a consensus for a shift to a playoff system starting in the 2014 season by the time the BCS’ presidential oversight committee meets in late June.
They’ve set July 4 as a deadline for approval. Swofford believes they should have a plan in place by then, but he also said they’ll take as long as needed.
“The more the discussion narrows as to how to do it, the more challenging it will become,” Swofford said. “We’ve got a process in front of us and some tough challenges in terms of the details before this is a reality.”
The main issues are the sites for the playoff games and how the four participants would be chosen.
Swofford said the selection process was largely tabled until the committee is more certain about the playoff’s format.
As for host sites, Swofford said he — along with most of the ACC — favors working within the bowl structure as opposed to playing on-campus semifinals or bidding out the games to cities, two other proposals that have gained steam.
“The infrastructure is already there, the tradition and history is there, those communities and bowls have been very supportive of college football for many, many years,” Swofford said. “My preference is to look there first, but understand that there are different ways to skin the cat, so to speak. We certainly don’t want to close ourselves off to other approaches .”
The advantage of a four-team playoff is that two more teams would have a chance to win a national championship, a plus for power conferences such as the ACC, SEC, Big 12, Big Ten and Pac-12.
The ACC has had one team — Virginia Tech, in 2007 — finish in the top four in the pre-bowl BCS rankings since the conference took its current shape in 2005. Miami, Virginia Tech and Florida State would have made multiple appearances in semifinals had this system been in place since the BCS’ inception.
Swofford said this round of change could help solve BCS missteps, such as the inflexibility of its matchups and the midweek scheduling of games after New Year’s Day.
“The BCS championship game is the most highly criticized successful event I’ve ever been around,” Swofford said. “There are things we could do, even if we stayed with the status quo, that would improve it considerably. But some people have gotten worn down by the criticism of the system and by the fact that so many fans would really like to see some type of playoff.
“It still could stay status quo, or similar to the status quo. But for the first time, we see there’s a lot of support for a significant change.”
