The Best of Both Worlds

Two years ago, I outlined a bowl/national championship plan that resulted in both a real title game and reinstated the importance of the traditional big January 1 bowls. The worst thing about the BCS is that it basically neutered all the great major bowls outside of the "championship game" bowl, and since 2006, neutered ALL of the major bowls. The BCS turned the grand old Cotton Bowl into an older Insight Bowl for all intents and purposes. The BCS turned the Orange Bowl into (a usually disappointing) ACC champion vs. least appealing at-large "BCS" team showcase.

To wit, here's a breakdown of the number of times each traditional "major" bowl had a realistic say in the title picture from the 13 years pre-BCS (1985-97) vs. the 13 BCS years to date (1998-2010):

Pre-BCS
COTTON - 1985, 1990, 1993
FIESTA - 1986, 1988, 1995
ORANGE - 1985, 1987, 1988, 1990*, 1991, 1993, 1994, 1997,
ROSE - 1991, 1994, 1997
SUGAR - 1985, 1988, 1989, 1992, 1996
*UPI/coaches champ Georgia Tech played in the Citrus Bowl that year, while AP champion Colorado won the Orange

BCS
COTTON- none
FIESTA- 1998, 2002
ORANGE- 2000, 2004
ROSE- 2001, 2003, 2005
SUGAR- 1999, 2003

As we all know, since 2006 we've had an extra game - not a "plus-one", just an extra game - creatively called the "BCS Championship Game", held on a rotating basis in one of the cities that also host another BCS bowl which is bizarre and renders the host BCS bowl totally irrelevant and almost an afterthought.

For those that don't want to refer to the entire plan I outlined many moons ago, here's the gist with some tweaks:

1- We play five major bowls on Jan. 1 (two games) and Jan. 2 (three games) - Cotton, Fiesta, Orange, Sugar, Rose
2- Each BCS conference has an auotbid for it's champ (Cotton- Big East, Fiesta- Big XII, Orange- ACC, Sugar- SEC, Rose- Pac 10 vs. Big 10)
3- That leaves 4 at large-spots, which are chosen based on the 4 highest ranked available teams in the final regular season BCS poll; the only rules are no rematches, and a champion of a non-BCS conference ranked #8 or higher must get selected.
4- The bowls (except Rose) select at-large placements based on the BCS ranking of the host team, like seeding in a playoff (i.e. a #1 Oklahoma would play the lowest ranked of the 4 at-large opponents in the Fiesta, a #2 Alabama would play the second lowest ranked at large team in the Sugar, etc, etc) as long as they don't violate the rematch rule.
5- After the Five Bowls, run the BCS poll again on the morning of Jan.3; #1 and #2 then play the next Friday night (7 to 13 days after the Jan. 2 bowls) in the BCS Championship Game - held in a different warmish-weather city (or northern dome city) each year that doesn't also host a BCS bowl (i.e. Tampa, Atlanta, Nashville, Houston, San Diego, Minneapolis, Indianapolis, St. Louis)

No, my plan is not a playoff, but it still gives you a 1-vs-2 game, there are no 37-day layoffs between end of regular season and national title game, and it makes the major bowls actually matter again.

Let's see how the plan would have played out this year. Here were your final BCS regular season standings:

1-Auburn (SEC champ)
2-Oregon (Pac 10 champ)
3-TCU (at-large, Mtn West champ)
4-Stanford (at-large)
5-Wisconsin (Big 10 champ)
6-Ohio State (at-large, co-Big 10 champ)
7-Oklahoma (Big XII champ)
8-Arkansas (at-large)
9-Michigan State (at-large, co-Big 10 champ)
10-Boise State (at-large, WAC champ)
13-Virginia Tech (ACC champ)
NR-Connecticut (Big East champ)

And here is how the bowls would have looked:

SUGAR- Auburn (#1-SEC Champ) vs. Ohio State (3rd highest at large; 4th highest at-large Arkansas violates the rematch rule)
ROSE- Oregon (#2-Pac 10 champ) vs. Wisconsin (#5-Big 10 champ)
FIESTA- Oklahoma (#7-Big XII champ) vs. Arkansas (4th highest at-large)
ORANGE- Virginia Tech (#13-ACC champ) vs. Stanford (2nd highest at-large)
COTTON- Connecticut (unranked Big East champ) vs. TCU (highest ranked at-large)

So, we have four great matchups and a layup for TCU. The Orange matchup did happen in reality. But with my plan the game actually meant something, with Stanford playing for a shot at the title game if one or more of Auburn, Oregon, TCU lost. My proposed Fiesta is better than the real one by a mile. My proposed Sugar is better than the real one. My proposed Rose is what the Big 10 and Pac 10 want all-along and it's just as good a matchup as the real one. The only game that is worse than the real one is the Cotton, but in my plan the Cotton is a BCS bowl with the subsequent big payout. And TCU would've been playing for a shot at the title if Auburn and/or Oregon lost their bowl, whereas in their Rose Bowl win this year they knew they had no chance to win the national championship. So with my plan, 4 of the 5 BCS bowls would have had a say in the national title picture while the 5th was just a great matchup (Oklahoma-Arkansas) that was better than the actual one that occurred (Oklahoma-UConn).

Yes, there could still be controversy; if Auburn, Oregon, TCU all won their hypothetical bowl matchups, TCU would still have been left out. So at worst we still would have had the same BCS national title game that we had a week ago, only with my plan the BCS bowls either had better matchups and/or meant something in the national title race. With the ACCFR plan, we get our title game and we get our meaningful big bowls back.

The Exorcism of Wide Right/Left

Just one week after young Dustin Hopkins' entry into the Seminoles' tortured field goal history, he calmly drops a nuke on all of that nonsense...

Well that was quite entertaining

Yesterday was quite possibly the most exciting weekend in the ACC in many moons. Throw out the Boston College-Wake Forest meh-fest and you had 5 games that all went down to the wire. We had:

• a home team rise up like Lazarus in the 4th quarter to steal a game it had no business winning
• a low-scoring, kinda sloppy, defensive struggle
• a shootout with a basketball score from the the cellar dweller programs
• a freshman QB in his first start lead his team to a last minute win
• yet another crotch punch delivered to one program's fanbase in another last-second loss (Wide Right IV?)

In the whole scheme of things it means little; the division races are basically the same as they were last week and the league will have at most two teams ranked in the Top 25 after this weekend. Nonetheless, this was crackerjack entertainment for anyone looking for some fun football.

And this also seems very familiar...

VIRGINIA TECH (7-2 overall, 5-0 ACC)

The Virginia Tech Hokies, after non-conference pratfalls in the first week(s) of the season, regroup in time to roll through their ACC brethren en route to another league crown.

LSU obliterated the Hokies in early 2007; three months later they were ACC champions. East Carolina turned the tables on Tech in the first game of the '08 season; 90 days later they were celebrating their second straight league crown. The boys from Blacksburg stumbled not only to likely BCS title game participant Boise State in Week 1 of the '10 campaign, but let that hangover beat them again 5 days later in the form of James Freaking Madison. And here we sit two months later as Beamer's crew is 5-0 in the ACC and basically a lock to win the Coastal crown.

What is it about Virginia Tech that makes them so prone to non-conference gaffes while methodically plowing through the ACC? It's not quite so simple. Simply losing at LSU in '07 was no disgrace; but getting butchered was. Still , that LSU team won the national championship that year. And the Hokies, en route to the ACC title, did lose a home conference game later that fall in one of Matt Ryan's miracles. In 2008, Tech stumbled out of the gate to ECU....and proceeded to stumble three more times in ACC play to Boston College, Florida State and Miami. ACC champion in 2008, certainly, but hardly in dominating fashion. And that's really it as far as Tech's pattern of losing early out of conference then winning the league. Will it happen again this year? Probably. Let's just hope they win the Orange Bowl this time.

This seems very familiar

ESPN Thursday night. Florida State at NC State.

For the fourth consecutive time, and fifth overall since FSU began ACC play in 1992, the biennial (not biannual, apparently) Wolfpack-Seminole showdown in Raleigh will highlight ESPN's broadcast on a Thursday evening. And despite all the jitters among the Seminole faithful, the arrangement has been successful for the Noles, who have won three of the four previous Thursday-at-Carter-Finley meetings. Nonetheless, the best Thursday night throwdown between the two was the lone Pack victory, a 24-20 grinder in 2006 that had all sorts of subplots and effects, namely:

• it was then-Wolfpack head coach Chuck Amato's (NCSU letterman '65-'69) last victory in that capacity as NCSU promptly went on a 7-game skid to end the season
• yes, the Chuck Amato who was Florida State's linebackers coach prior to (1982-99) and following (2007-09) his stint as skipper in Raleigh
• it was - debatably - when en-masse finger pointing shifted from Jeff Bowden to Bobby Bowden regarding the slip in the Seminole program; the Jeff experiment as Florida State's offensive coordinator was put out to pasture a month later
  
• it was the beginning of FSU's second slide of the decade - from middle-lower end Top 25 program to perennial six-loss/unranked unit

Soooo.....lots of curious recent history here. Do I have a preview or prediction for tonight? No, I most certainly do not. A prediction is pointless since both teams have had 12 days to prepare, both teams are coming off subpar efforts, both teams have (thus far) performed better than expected, both teams are playing for the clear division lead, and both teams sport the two best quarterbacks in the league - recent struggles be damned.

Should be an interesting game though, if for no other reason than it's the first Florida State-NC State matchup sans any Chuck Amato involvement since 1964, a span of 23 games (1965-69, 1992-2009)

I see things haven't changed much

Well hello there. And to those three diehards who keep checking this space daily to see if my hibernation is over - loves ya Mom, Dad and random stranger!

So it's been a season and a half since I've regaled humankind about ACC football and lo and behold, we still suck according to everyone at ESPN, Yahoo/Rivals, CFN, SEC blogs, most blogs, most message board posts (spelling/grammar very optional), Girl Scout troop 442-Brandon, FL and Lady Gaga (allegedly). And it is time for me to offer a rousing defense.

They're right. But so what.

For the 318th consecutive season, all ACC teams were eliminated from serious national title contention by week 3.

Coincidentally, for the 318th consecutive season, the ACC (thus far) has played a ridiculously unbalanced non-conference slate: ACC #8 Clemson at BCS #1 Ahttp://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gifuburn; ACC #12 Duke hosting defending BCS champion and current BCS #7 Alabama; ACC #10 Wake Forest at BCS #13 Stanford....just to give you three games from one singular weekend (the enthralling yet inevitably soul-devouring Week 3).

What I wouldn't give to see a weekend where Florida State hosts Northwestern, Miami welcomes Vanderbilt, Virginia Tech entertains Colorado, NC State faces a suspension-depleted Washington in St. Louis....and, oh, let's say Georgia Tech makes an easy road trip to Kansas (wait...what? Retract).

This is not to defend the ACC's overall performance; the Jackets' afore-referenced facepalm in Lawrence is turning out to be one of the biggest non-conference gakks in recent memory (KU vs. three mediocre Big XII teams and North Dakota State = 34pt loss on average; KU vs. top-half ACC team and defending league champ = 3pt win). The Hokies' loss at home to James Madison (that's the 1-3 in the FCS Colonial league James Madison, mind you), despite all the "five days after the Boise loss blah blah blah" justification, was catastrophic for the conference as well since that Tech team is likely to win the dang league in the end. And the team the Hokies are likely to beat for that ACC crown, Florida State, endured a 47-17 dear-God-make-it-stop beating at Oklahoma; the same Oklahoma site where Utah State and Air Force took the Sooners to the wire in the weeks prior and after the FSU visit.

So yes, things have not changed all that much. The ACC keeps sabotaging itself through scheduling, through comically yet easily predictable poor play and tone-deaf self-promotion. At least I can pick up right where I left off.

Still, it is good to be back. For how long, I can't say. But the juices are flowing again.

Adios, muchachos

Five months have gone by since my last post here, and I am acutely aware that this project has run it's course for now. I have neither the time, energy, interest nor desire at this stage of my life to continue this fun little corner of cyberspace. I will not stop following and watching ACC football, but for now I am done blogging about it.

If work and life obligations become less intensive in the future, I will certainly fire this baby back up again. But for now, I bid you farewell.

2009 ACC Schedule Released

Here it is. And yes, I had a very nice sabbatical from blogging...thanks for asking.

Some quick thoughts:

--too many 1-AA/FCS opponents (13); Duke, NC State and UNC are major offenders as they each play two this upcoming season

--either the ACC is bent on destroying Randy Shannon's career, or The U is on a suicide mission; their first four games are @Florida State (Labor Day), Georgia Tech (Thursday), @Virginia Tech, Oklahoma. Will Shannon even make it to November?

--there are a number of intriguing non-conference matchups on tap, aside from the annual rivalry games...Duke @ Kansas, Pitt @ NC State, Florida State @ BYU, USF @ Florida State, Maryland @ Cal, Rutgers @ Maryland, Miami @ USF, TCU @ Virginia, Stanford @ Wake Forest, Nebraska @ Virginia Tech and most importantly Virginia Tech-Alabama at the site of Tommy Bowden's coaching demise

--except for Miami-Oklahoma, I don't see any guaranteed beatdowns of ACC teams in out of conference action

Apologies in advance to Florida and Oklahoma

The ACC has been assigned to provide the officiating crew for tomorrow night's BCS Championship Game.

Loved this little capsule:

It's likely that ACC veteran Jack Childress will head the crew. Childress is no-nonsense, but sometimes he likes to throw the flag a little too much. If he is the head referee, with any luck, he will let some emotions flow and simply separate players.

Stating that Jack Childress "likes to throw the flag a little too much" is akin to saying the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima destroyed a few buildings.

So long Jags, we hardly knew ye...

Jeff Jagodzinski has been fired for interviewing with the New York Jets.

Shockingly, no outside candidates are beating down Eagle AD Gene DeFillippo's door for an interview. It appears that the new BC football boss will likely be OC Steve Logan, DC Frank Spaziani or OL coach Jack Bicknell Jr. Don't be surprised to see Spaz leave if Logan gets the job, or vice versa. And if Bicknell gets tabbed, Spaz and Logan may both pack up and leave.

Strange things are afoot at Boston College

Jeff Jagodzinski to be fired if he interviews with the New York Jets?

I have no idea what Jags' contract allows and doesn't allow, but there are ways to handle situations quietly and without ultimatums, and then there's the BC way. I don't know how Jags and BC come back from the brink, and the Eagles can ill afford to have a second straight messy coaching departure.

Tom O'Brien's move to Raleigh two years ago makes a hell of a lot more sense now, doesn't it?

Stay tuned.

Time Machine: The 2006 Bowls under the ACCFR Plan

Following up on my bowl/playoff manifesto, I'm going back through each BCS year to see how my system would have played out versus what actually happened. For those who don't care to read over my plan, here's the gist:

1- We play five major bowls on Jan. 1 and Jan. 2 (Cotton, Fiesta, Orange, Sugar, Rose)
2- Each BCS conference has an auotbid for it's champ (Cotton- Big East, Fiesta- Big XII, Orange- ACC, Sugar- SEC, Rose- Pac 10 vs. Big 10)
3- That leaves 4 at large-spots, which are chosen based on the 4 highest ranked available teams in the final regular season BCS poll; the only rules are no rematches, no teams from the same conference in a bowl, and a champion of a non-BCS conference ranked #8 or higher must get selected.
4- The bowls (except Rose) rotate each year on the order of at-large placements
5- After the Five Bowls, run the BCS poll again; #1 and #2 then play the next Friday night (7 to 13 days after the bowls) in the BCS Championship Game.

No, my plan is not a playoff, but it still gives you a 1-vs-2 game and it makes the major bowls actually matter again.

Let's see how this plan would've worked in 2006. Here were your final regular season BCS rankings:

1- Ohio State (Big Ten champ)
2- Florida (SEC champ)
3- Michigan (at-large)
4- LSU (at-large)
5- USC (Pac 10 champ)
6- Louisville (Big East champ)
7- Wisconsin (at-large)
8- Boise State (at-large)
10-Oklahoma (Big XII champ)
14- Wake Forest (ACC champ)

We don't have a comparable order-of-selection to use since the BCS treated the title game like a bowl and they didn't have the Cotton included, so based on the picking order I used for 2007, we back up and find the order of selection in '06 to be Fiesta, Cotton, Orange, Sugar. Given that, these would've been your 2006 BCS bowls:

FIESTA- Oklahoma (Big XII champ) vs. Michigan (highest ranked at-large)
COTTON- Louisville (Big East champ) vs. LSU (2nd highest ranked at-large)
ORANGE- Wake Forest (ACC champ) vs. Wisconsin (3rd highest ranked at-large)
SUGAR- Florida (SEC champ) vs. Boise State (4th highest ranked at-large)
ROSE- Ohio State (Big Ten champ) vs. USC (Pac 10 champ)

That's a helluva lineup; the Orange Bowl doesn't look sexy, but Wisconsin should have been in a BCS bowl in '06 rather than Notre Dame (who you'll recall got trounced by LSU in the Sugar Bowl). Wake-Wisconsin would actually have been a good matchup in terms of styles of play. That Louisville-LSU Cotton Bowl would have been a treat, with both teams in striking distance of the title game with a win. How about Florida vs. Boise? Nice! Oklahoma vs. Michigan would have been a curious game. And once again, USC would've taken care of Ohio State and the Buckeyes wouldn't have sullied an actual title game.

After the Five Bowls, the BCS Championship Game likely would have paired Florida and USC, or perhaps Florida and LSU. But what if the Broncos had upset the Gators? Boise State-USC for the title? Perhaps. Or maybe LSU-Michigan.

The ACCFR plan again would have been a massive improvement over what actually took place in 2006. On to 2005...

Time Machine: The 2007 Bowls under the ACCFR Plan

Following up on my bowl/playoff manifesto, I figured I should test it against the wackiest year we've ever seen in college football - 2007. For those who don't care to read over my plan, here's the gist:

1- We play five major bowls on Jan. 1 and Jan. 2 (Cotton, Fiesta, Orange, Sugar, Rose)
2- Each BCS conference has an auotbid for it's champ (Cotton- Big East, Fiesta- Big XII, Orange- ACC, Sugar- SEC, Rose- Pac 10 vs. Big 10)
3- That leaves 4 at large-spots, which are chosen based on the 4 highest ranked available teams in the final regular season BCS poll; the only rules are no rematches, no teams from the same conference in a bowl, and a champion of a non-BCS conference ranked #8 or higher must get selected.
4- The bowls (except Rose) rotate each year on the order of at-large placements
5- After the Five Bowls, run the BCS poll again; #1 and #2 then play the next Friday night (7 to 13 days after the bowls) in the BCS Championship Game.

No, my plan is not a playoff, but it still gives you a 1-vs-2 game and it makes the major bowls actually matter again.

As for 2007, these were the final regular season BCS rankings:

1- Ohio State (Big Ten champ)
2- LSU (SEC champ)
3- Virginia Tech (ACC champ)
4- Oklahoma (Big XII champ)
5- Georgia (at-large)
6- Missouri (at-large)
7- USC (Pac 10 champ)
8- Kansas (at-large)
9- West Virginia (Big East champ)
10- Hawaii (at-large)

This played out perfectly in terms of placing teams in the Five Bowls. We don't have a comparable order-of-selection to use since the BCS treated the title game like a bowl and they didn't have the Cotton included, so for the sake of this analysis, let's say the picking order in '07 would've been Cotton, Orange, Sugar, Fiesta. Given that, these would've been your 2007 BCS bowls:

COTTON- West Virginia (Big East champ) vs. Georgia (highest ranked at-large)
ORANGE- Virginia Tech (ACC champ) vs. Missouri (2nd-highest ranked at-large)
SUGAR- LSU (SEC champ) vs. Kansas (3rd-highest ranked at-large)
FIESTA- Oklahoma (Big XII champ) vs. Hawaii (4th-highest ranked at-large)
ROSE- Ohio State (Big Ten champ) vs. USC (Pac 10 champ)

That is a mighty fine collection o' bowl games, if I do say so myself. Based on how the actual bowls played out last year, two things are fairly certain: 1) We would not have seen Ohio State in my plus-one BCS title game, and 2) That West Virginia-Georgia game would have been a clinic. After these hypothetical bowls played out, the following week's BCS Championship Game likely would have pitted LSU-Oklahoma or LSU-Georgia...or maybe Georgia-USC...how about USC-Kansas? Any one of those would've been much better than the LSU-Ohio State clunker we actually had last year. And it's important to note that teams like Virginia Tech, Kansas, Mizzou, USC and Ohio State would have conceivably been playing for a spot in the following week's BCS title game as well; the hypothetical Orange Bowl, Sugar Bowl and Rose Bowl each would've had a playoff atmosphere while still maintaining the bowl system and tradition.

In the actual BCS system last year, we got a Virginia Tech-Kansas Orange Bowl exhibition in which neither team had a shot at the title, we had a USC-Illinois Rose Bowl atrocity, Georgia drilled an overmatched Hawaii in the Sugar, and #6-in-the-BCS Missouri didn't even get into a BCS bowl.

My plan is better.

The ACCFR Bowl & National Championship Plan

Another year, another controversial BCS #1 vs. #2 winner take all title game. 10 years into the BCS, and we've had exactly three non-controversial title games - Florida State vs. Virginia Tech in 1999, Ohio State vs. Miami in 2002, Texas vs. USC in 2005. Not a great track record for what was supposed to be a cure-all.

That said, I don't mind the controversy. It's part of the fabric of college football, just as polls and bowls always have been. The problem with the BCS is not the lack of clear-cut title games; it's that it's effectively neutered the other major bowls that don't host the 1-vs.-2 game. And since 2006 and the addition of the "BCS Championship Game", none of the major bowls have any say in the national title discussion. They've become a dumping ground for disappointed teams and have resulted in uninspiring matchups far too often in the last several years.

Remember 15, 20, 25 years ago when we watched the Orange Bowl, Rose Bowl, Fiesta Bowl, Sugar Bowl and Cotton Bowl on one glorious day? New Year's Day was the capstone of the college football season, and there was a good chance that 3 or 4 of those games played a part in the national title discussion. On top of that, the conference tie-ins with specific bowls gave each member of each league a goal to shoot for...if you were an SEC team - Sugar Bowl. Big 8? Orange Bowl or bust. Southwest Conference? Cotton Bowl! Bowls are part of college football tradition, and part of that tradition is Oklahoma and Nebraska in all those classic Orange Bowls. Alabama and Georgia in those Sugar Bowls. Ohio State, Michigan and USC in a million Rose Bowls. Texas in the Cotton Bowl.

But now, thanks to the BCS, we've had bastardizations like Miami vs. Nebraska in the Rose Bowl, Big 10-runners up in the Rose Bowl, Ohio State vs. Texas A&M in the Sugar Bowl, and the Cotton Bowl has been relegated to also-ran. Sugar, Fiesta and Orange Bowls are now being pushed to Jan. 3 and beyond. The national title game isn't even a bowl now. I'm a traditionalist...I want some semblance of the old bowl system back, played on the same day (for the most part), not spread out over a week and all ending well after midnight. I'm anti-playoff; you can't have a playoff that incorporates the bowl tradition, and quite frankly a playoff is not going to happen as none of the puppet-masters want one. Still, I also want a national title game...a Super Bowl of college football. But the right way.

And I have a plan.

THE ACCFR BOWL AND NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP PLAN
To begin...this plan has to be realistic; there's no conference realignments involved and it simply modifies current systems already in place. I'm sure you've seen the core of this plan discussed and/or posted elsewhere, but I've incorporated my own tweaks to it. Basically, it's Plus-One. Keep the "BCS" moniker if you want to. First, we add another bowl game to the BCS-lineup; I'd prefer the Cotton, but Capital One (if they change back to Citrus) or Chick-fil-A (if they change back to Peach) will do. For purposes of this discussion, we're saying Cotton Bowl. All six BCS conference champions are guaranteed a bowl slot; have a problem with the ACC or Big East automatically getting a bid? Tough...that's the reality of the situation. This plan is something that is not only possible, but also an improvement over the current BCS and previous systems. Anyhoo, here's the BCS bowl lineup if I had my way:

ROSE- Big Ten champ vs. Pac 10 champ
ORANGE- ACC champ vs. at-large
COTTON- Big East champ vs. at-large
FIESTA- Big XII champ vs. at-large
SUGAR- SEC champ vs. at-large

Three of the games are played on Jan. 1 while the other two are played on Jan. 2. This will rotate each year. The at-large spots are filled using the BCS rankings; no more #4 BCS team getting relegated to the Holiday Bowl while #15 Notre Dame gets into the Sugar Bowl. There are three rules for the at-large picks: no rematches, no bowls matching teams from the same conference, and a non-BCS conference champion rated #8 or better MUST get selected. That's it. If 4 of the at-large teams are all from the Big XII, so be it (although that would throw a kink into the no-rematch thing in the Fiesta, probably); if at large teams make up #3 through #7 and #8 is WAC winner Boise State, then #6 and #7 don't get in. And to hell with Notre Dame jumping ahead in line; if they want in, finish as one of the four best at-larges or join the Big East or Big Ten and win the conference. This plan is about making these major bowl games matter again, it's about putting the best teams in them, it's about re-establishing old traditions and starting a few new ones, and it's also about including the little guy if he's earned it.

After the Five Bowls are played, we run the BCS poll again; #1 and #2 then get to play the following weekend in the BCS Championship Game, held in a major city not connected to the Five Bowls. Hold it in Charlotte one year; then St. Louis; then Tampa; then San Diego, etc, ala the Super Bowl and Final Four. If this happens to result in a rematch and/or matches up teams from the same conference, that's fine...the results of the bowl system played out that way.

Of course there will be controversy, but you thin the controversy claims through the Five Bowls. Let's take a look at how this year's bowl lineup would look with the ACCFR system (but first, let's look at the final regular season BCS standings as it relates to my bowl scenario):

1- Oklahoma (Big XII champ)
2- Florida (SEC champ)
3- Texas (at-large)
4- Alabama (at-large)
5- USC (Pac 10 champ)
6- Utah (at-large)
7- Texas Tech (at-large)
8- Penn State (Big Ten champ)
12- Cincinnati (Big East champ)
19- Virginia Tech (ACC champ)

The at-large teams are placed into the bowls on a rotational basis, in much the same way BCS bowls choose opponents for the tie-in teams now; the only catch is that there's no choice. Bowl 1 in the rotation must choose the highest ranked at-large opponent unless it violates the rematch rule, and so on. The current BCS rotation is skewed now because they treat their title game like a bowl, and it doesn't jive with my idea because the Cotton's not involved. For the sake of moving along with this analysis, let's say that this year the picking order would be Orange, Sugar, Fiesta, Cotton.

ORANGE- Virginia Tech (ACC champ) vs. Texas (highest ranked at-large)
SUGAR- Florida (SEC champ) vs. Utah (third highest at-large; second highest Alabama would violate the rematch rule)
FIESTA- Oklahoma (Big XII champ) vs. Alabama (second highest at-large)
COTTON- Cincinnati (Big East champ) vs. Texas Tech (fourth highest at-large)
ROSE- USC (Pac 10 champ) vs. Penn State (Big 10 champ)

Under the ACCFR system, the Orange Bowl would be a better game and would have meaning in that Texas needed to win to stay alive in the title game hunt, while the Hokies have added incentive to play giant killer. The Sugar Bowl would be a fantastic matchup, with both teams needing to win to make a claim to the title game. The Fiesta Bowl - wow; again, both teams need to win to stay alive. The Cotton Bowl would showcase Texas Tech's claim to the title game, while the Bearcats would not only play to win but also can play spoiler. The Rose Bowl would have the exact same matchup as the real Rose Bowl yesterday, but USC and maybe Penn State would've been playing for more under the ACCFR system.

This system is by no means perfect or foolproof, and if you're a staunch playoff proponent, all you see is controversy post-bowls. Oh well. No one can provide a "playoff" system that is realistic, that includes the bowls without neutering all tradition and meaning, and that doesn't require multiple fan bases to travel 3 straight weeks or more over Christmas and New Year's. The bowls are here to stay; the big ones make too much money to be tossed aside, and there's too much support for keeping them no matter what. The ACCFR plan is the best way to keep the big bowl system intact, while creating a playoff-type atmosphere in those games. And you still get a 1-vs-2 game afterward.

Pass this along. Let's move this from the drawing board to the Evil BCS board of directors.

Cataclysm Averted

Virginia Tech 20, Cincinnati 7

It certainly wasn't a thing of beauty, but it'll do...a 4-6 record in the bowl season, albeit very disappointing, looks light years better than 3-7. And the God-forsaken 1-9 thing in BCS games since it's inception is now a sterling 2-9. And in an interesting bit o' trivia, the two wins were over the two programs that payed in Miami last night; lest you forget, the first win was the Florida State victory over the-then Big East Hokies in that classic Sugar Bowl national title game in January 2000.

Thanks Hokies!

We Surrender

Sure, there are two games left in the ACC bowl season, but after the gargantuan pile of dung dropped today, it's quite evident that this has become a lost year for the ACC, impressive regular season be damned. To wit: LSU 35, Georgia Tech 3, halftime, in Atlanta, when Paul Johnson's brain was apparently surgically removed and replaced with the fried cerebral cortex of Crackhead Bob. Can one coach's heretofore sterling reputation be shredded in one single game? I say yes, based on what I've seen thus far. George O'Leary and Chan Gailey - heinous warts and all - never blew a game this badly, this early. This is an atomic bomb of a momentum killer for the Jackets.

Sure, Clemson and Virginia Tech may win their bowl games. But in all likelihood, they won't...and even if they win, there's nothing they'll do to counteract this New Year's Eve Catastrophe. No wonder I'm the only independent ACC football blogger; it's tough putting up with this bullshit over and over again.

EDIT - and there will be no previews of tomorrow's Gator and Orange Bowls. I don't give a crap anymore. Happy Damn New Year!

So things are not going very well...

3-4 so far in the bowls, with 3-7 looking far more likely than 6-4. A few thoughts...

--Wake 29, Navy 19 was what should've happened the first time in September, not in Deacs-Middies Redux. Nonetheless, a solid but less-than-sexy win over a not-to-be underestimated opponent (as Wake and Rutgers will attest to)

--West Virginia 31, UNC 30 is what started this little avalanche, I'm afraid. It was one of those evenly matched games that tends to tilt the whole conference's showing...what with Pat White having the game of his life and the Mountaineers still only winning by a point, you just kinda had that feeling that the breaks were not going to fall our way.

--FSU 42, Wisconsin 13 was entirely predictable to anyone not closely attached to the Seminole program (as those of us close to FSU are in a constant state of accepted-nihilism these days). First, it was sleek, southern football vs. grain-fed slow as curds flowing uphill mediocre Big Ten football. Second, FSU played like ass for the first half (as I thought they would) and still clunked it's way to a four-TD win (which I did not think would happen). So far, this is the shining beacon of the ACC bowl season. If that's still the case on Jan. 2, we gots problems.

--Cal 24, Miami 17 was fairly respectable, what with the Pac Ten's #4 team, basically playing at home, struggling vs. the ACC's 7th rated team that apparently had no idea that there's this kooky thing known as a "clock" in this sport. Still...close game, ACC loss. A pattern has now developed.

--Rutgers 29, NC State 23 was entirely predictable the moment Pack QB Russell Wilson was pulled due to injury, despite a 17-6 State halftime lead. Friggin Tim Tebow, Sam Bradford, Colt McCoy, Matt Stafford, Graham Harrell, John Parker Wilson, Chase Daniel, etc seemingly haven't missed a down all year to injury...God forbid an ACC QB goes through a season without several major organs and appendages obliterated. Oh yeah - close game, ACC loss. P-to-the-A-to-the-TTERN.

--Maryland 42, Nevada 35 was entertaining and proved that the Fridge has one or two decent motivational tactics that he hasn't sold to Under Armor yet. The Terps led 28-13 at the half and 42-28 late so it wasn't exactly a nailbiter. A win is a win, but 42-21 would've been a little more impressive, no?

--Vanderbilt 16, BC 14 is something I should've picked automatically for five reasons: 1) Dominique Davis; 2) Dominique Davis; 3) Dominique Davis; 4) The Eagle D is a shell of itself after letting a lame VT offense crush them in the ACC title game; 5) the opponent was Vandy, in Nashville, in their first bowl since '82. And it was a close game, which apparently equates to loserville in ACC Bowl-land. And some of the calls in the game were of the "investigate officiating crew for possible wagering on the Commodores +3.5pts" variety. Still, in all the Vandy-love after this win, think anyone will mention they lost to Wake and Duke in the regular season? Hellz no.

I am not looking forward to tonight's Chick-fil-A home of yummy chicken strips and radioactive-yellow honey mustard Bowl. The Gator and Orange Bowls point toward destruction as well. Dammit.

Chick-fil-A Home of the 3 Mile Long Drive-Thru at Lunchtime Bowl Preview

GEORGIA TECH (9-3) vs. LSU (7-5)
Wednesday, 12/31/08, 3:30pm ET - Georgia Dome, Atlanta, GA
Series record: Georgia Tech leads 12-6; the Tigers won the last meeting 28-14 in the 2000 Peach Bowl
What may or may not happen: Beats the hell outta me. LSU's defense was clobbered throughout much of the year, but usually via aerial assault. The Jackets' rushing attack is something the Tigers' haven't yet seen, but the Bayou Bengals were much better against the run in 2008 than the pass. Tech was clearly in a groove on offense to end the regular season...but will the 4-week layoff result in some kinks? Will Jordan Jefferson at least not be the turnover pandemic that is/was The Jarrett Lee Experience? Can the Tech front seven contain RB Charles Scott? Was the loss of one of their co-DCs a few weeks ago a distraction or blessing for the Tigers? Too many questions, not enough answers until kickoff. If this game had been played anytime in October or November, the Jackets would win each time. But on Dec. 31 after personnel and coaching changes in Baton Rouge? Who the hell knows. Georgia Tech 24, LSU 22...I guess

Music City Dear God This Is A Game the ACC Must Not Lose Bowl Preview

BOSTON COLLEGE (9-4) vs. VANDERBILT (6-6)
Wednesday, 12/31/08, 3:30pm ET - LP Field, Nashville, TN
Series record: Boston College leads 2-0; the Eagles won the last meeting 19-6 in 1963
What may or may not happen: This is really all you need to know - Boston College ranks sixth nationally in total defense; the Commodores rank 118th in the nation in total offense. For the Eagles to lose, they would need to turn the ball over 5+ times, Vandy would have to play a clean offensive game, and special teams would have to totally and completely go the 'Dores way. It's not impossible, and you never know what a team's mindset will be after four weeks off and not being thrilled with their bowl destination. The Eagles dropped all the way to the ACC's 5th bowl slot after getting drilled by Virginia Tech in the ACC Championship Game (a game in which BC QB Dominique Davis was a special kind of horrid - here's hoping that performance was an awful fluke); Vandy dropped six of their last seven games, yet still earned the first bowl bid since 1982 - and it's 4 miles from their campus. Still, it can't be ignored that this is a defacto home game for the Commodores. Boston College 24, Vanderbilt 10

Humanitarian Would Be To Cancel This Dead In the Water Bowl Preview

MARYLAND (7-5) vs. NEVADA (7-5)
Tuesday, 12/30/08, 4:30pm ET - Bronco Stadium, Boise, ID
Series record: first meeting
What may or may not happen: I'm as disinterested in this game as the Terps apparently are. It's basically a rule of mine to pick against a team that is unhappy to be in it's bowl game unless said team is head and shoulders above it's opponent. And Maryland, losers to Middle Tennessee this year and to Virginia by a 31-0 score, are most certainly not head and shoulders above the Nevada Wolf Pack. Add that to the fact that the 7-5 (not 10-2 or 9-3, mind you) Terps have an inexplicable chip on their shoulder regarding how good they really are, and you have the makings of a bad, bad afternoon in Boise. If Maryland gets down early, I fully expect them to fold up shop and quit. If things go well for the Turtles early in the game, I think the motivation switch gets flipped on rather quickly. That said, I think Nevada takes control from the get-go. But I've been wrong more often than not in my bowl picks so far, and for the ACC's sake I hope I'm mistaken here as well. Nevada 28, Maryland 17