Change coming to BCS?
Interviews with conference commissioners, athletic directors and television industry officials revealed that change to the current structure of college football's postseason is imminent.
[...] to realize just how varied the attitudes are about a potential four-team playoff, consider that just four years ago the sport's power brokers barely discussed the idea when it was raised at the Bowl Championship Series meetings.
There are so many factors to consider — television money, university presidents, bowl relationships, title sponsorships, academic concerns, health concerns, travel dollars, the egos of conference commissioners and preserving tradition — that few involved are even guessing at what the outcome will be.
"Everyone knows that the winds of change are blowing through college football's postseason," said Robert Shelton, the executive director of the Fiesta Bowl.
The idea of a four-team playoff — a Final Four of football — is considered by many a viable option, and perhaps the most realistic one.
[...] there are three other possibilities: tweak the current BCS formula; eliminate the entire BCS except for a No. 1 versus No. 2 game; play the bowl games as they currently exist and reseed everyone after those games for a championship game between the No. 1 and No. 2 team.
In the wake of the perception that ESPN had a strong role in conference realignment, network executives are worried about how their role in a potential postseason change could be viewed.
A playoff would drive up the value of the postseason programming exponentially, although it would most likely devalue other bowl games.
Delany said that so much time was dedicated to the sexual abuse scandal at Penn State in the last meeting of Big Ten presidents that he did not have a clear idea of what they thought of a change to the postseason.
Would cities like Dallas, Miami and Indianapolis bid for the semifinal and final games, reminiscent of