That’s the question that SEC commissioner Mike Slive asks in an Atlanta Journal-Constitution article appearing today about considering a “plus-one” format for the BCS. By “plus-one”, the story means either one of two models:
• The four current BCS bowls (Rose, Fiesta, Sugar, Orange) would stay in place but host their traditional champions: SEC to the Sugar, Big Ten and Pac-10 to the Rose, ACC to the Orange, Big 12 to the Fiesta. After those four games are played, another set of BCS standings would determine the two teams in the championship game.
• The top four teams in the BCS standings would engage in a four-team playoff in two of the four bowls on Jan. 1, with the winners advancing to a championship game a week later.
It’s hard to tell where Slive stands on this, especially when he says incomprehensible nonsense like “I‘m not married to the current format we have but I could be married to it”, but it sounds like he’s willing to explore the possibility of a “plus-one” setup down the road.
The big question, of course, is, will it stop there? And at least Slive seems to be saying the right things – for now:
… Slive said he doesn’t envision an eight- or 16-team playoff in the future because games would have to be played during final exams in December and the presidents have made it clear they want football to be a one-semester sport. There’s also concern that a playoff would hurt the quality of the regular season. [Emphasis added.]
“There is a serious discussion that needs to take place but I don’t think it’s so much about whether or not we can have a playoff,” Slive said. “I think the discussion should be, ‘Is 1 versus 2 enough for college football?’
And that depends on your viewpoint, doesn’t it?