***If there isn’t seeding, try this scenario on for size: let’s say that the #1 team is Michigan and the #2 team is USC—the lone two undefeated teams in the nation.***
There isn’t even the need for a BCS if it is that easy. It is when it gets complicated like this year. And, if the BCS isn’t going to seriously try to find the “best” team that year, then they need change the name. I might suggest B$S.
I will admit that your scenerio of simply getting the top 8 rankings has its problems. Somehow, though, I don’t think any plus 1 format would be that simple. Take the Pac-10, Big-10, Big-12, SEC, ACC, & Big East champs. Add 2 at large, just like the BCS WAS, and you have a credible plus format. If you go 8-4-2, then it really doesn’t matter if you have a traditional rose bowl save for the fact that you guarantee the Pac-10/ Big-10 winner a final 4 spot.
But, then, again, the Rose bowl wasn’t even the most exciting game Jan 1 and that should bother a great many Pac-10 fans. It used to be that the bowl was a treat for fans and teams. Now, a more discriminating fan wants more.
I think the Pac-10 and Big-10 need to realize that we are just 1 debacle BCS away from something and they might ought to be a little more proactive in shaping that something or they might not much care for the end result.
I remember when Cal was ranked No. 2. Okay, I WENT to Cal, I would give my eye teeth to see Cal in the Rose Bowl. I wear blue and gold. I drive my friends batty between August and November.
But there was no way, no how, that I thought Cal was the second-best college team in the nation. I figured they were setting them up for a BIIIIIG drop when they lost.
Which they did. That week.