Be still my heart. The ACC is apparently pursuing something I mocked the other day, according to Tech AD Dan Radakovich.
Regarding a possible bowl alliance for the ACC champion, Radakovich said that will be a topic of discussion for a conference call of league athletic directors this week. He said that league associate commissioner Michael Kelly has been working on “trying to set something up similar to what you had seen announced last Friday with the Southeastern Conference and the Big 12.”
“Similar” is an amorphous term. Unless you think matching up against Boise State in the Orange Bowl every year is something that will change D-1 football as we know it.
One thing to keep in mind as these lock-ins proliferate – if the postseason does go to a plus-one format, the more bowls that match up teams based purely on conference affiliation and not rankings, the harder it’s going to be to achieve a consensus on the top two teams after the bowl games are played. Now there’s a formula for stability.
5 responses to “Game changer”
“Similar”? Okay. Sorta like my five-year-old’s coach-pitch baseball league has a double-elimination tournament that is “similar” to that of SEC baseball.
Perhaps they should just commit to playing the winner of the Notre Dame vs. Navy game every year.
Actually, this seems like even more of a backdoor into a superconference. I’m assuming BCS rankings will still determine who plays in the NCG. Wont the Rosevowl and Champuons bowl have the same effect on SOS as the Conference chapionship game did, and perhaps even more? When in the last 10 years would this not have guaranteed teams from the Big 4 conferences play in the NCG? Keep in mind Boise would never have been able to prove itself because they would never have played a marquee BCS game
The phrase ‘sloppy seconds’ comes to mind.
In this case it’s “sloppy thirds”.