GO FOR 2

Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany officially announced that beacause of what he called ‘tweaking’ to the BCS rules, teams that were not in BCS-automatic bid conferences would have greater access to the Rose Bowl. The actual process for this is fairly complicated, but its a step in the right direction for the BCS and should help bring some much-needed excitement to a classic game which has grown somewhat stale.

Here’s how this all works: The Big-10 champion and the Pac-10 champion are contractually required to play in the Rose Bowl, unless one of those teams earns a birth in the BCS National Championship. If one of those champions (let’s be honest, Ohio State or USC) does go to the national championship, then another team qualifying for a BCS bowl game is chosen for the slot.

The change that Jim Delaney is referring to is that, between 2010 and 2013, if the Big-10 or Pac-10 champion goes to the National Championship – and there is a team from a Non-BCS conference which has earned a BCS bid, then the Rose Bowl must take that team.

So why does this have the potential to really spice up a game that has lost a lot of its luster? Well, of the past 6 games only 1 hasn’t included USC – and Texas or Michigan has been USC’s opponent 4 of the 6 times. Sure, the Trojans put on a great show, but it would be nice to see some new faces in this game. And the Non-BCS schools aren’t exactly pushovers, and they pull out all the stops when they finally get a chance to shine on the big stage – just ask Oklahoma and Boise State. The cinderella inspired moments and potential upsets that come with a small school are also good for sponsors and the bowl games themselves. Maybe Boise State’s fan’s don’t flock to a bowl game like an SEC school’s fans would, but a BCS bowl game is always going to have solid attendance. In the meantime, the potential for a game becoming an instant classic – being replayed on ESPN and talked about on blogs for years to come – is publicity that you simply can’t pay for.

In a broad sense, Non-BCS schools deserve a chance to play in the big-name, big-history bowl games, and this is a good start. Meanwhile, the annual USC-fest….I mean Rose Bowl…could potentially get some much-needed lifeblood and positive publicity from a game that’s a little out of the ordinary. Let’s face it, everybody wins.

Dr. Saturday over at Yahoo! Sports posted a pretty interesting article about how the smaller NCAA Football bowl games are surviving the tough economic conditions.

I have to admit, just the header of that article actually made me laugh. Why should any of us really care how these bowls are faring in the economy?? The economy CREATED these bowls. Do you really think the NCAA needs 34 bowl games, because every year there are at least 68 college football teams that deserve a post-season game? These games were created during economic boom periods when there was tons of money to be made in sponsorship and people had more disposable income to actually attend these games.

These games were created because sponsors had money, and the NCAA saw yet another chance to make money while their athletes don’t. So now the sponsors don’t have money, and the NCAA isn’t going to be making as much off this endless list of games…why don’t we just let the bowl games vanish? Does the Sheraton Hawaii Bowl really add that much to college football? Will you be heartbroken without the Roady’s Humanitarian Bowl? I didn’t think so, me either.

But if you need every game, and can’t stand the thought of a bowl vanishing, have no fear. The NCAA’s schedule shows that all 34 games are renewed for at least the 2009-2010 season. If they do decide to slash some games in two years, don’t expect any American banks or Automobile companies to step in and pick up the sponsorship again for games that they helped create…but hey, maybe you can get the government to just bail them all out…