The landscape of college football underwent a significant transformation following the 2010 season with the wave of conference realignment, resulting in discussions around the Bowl Championship Series (BCS) and the introduction of a playoff system. This post looks at the history of these developments and their impact on the college football landscape. Examining the implications of conference realignment on the bowl system and the eventual emergence of the College Football Playoff (CFP) sheds light on how the sport's traditional elements met the demands for change.

After the 2010 college football season, the discussions surrounding the BCS gained momentum, driven by calls for a more equitable postseason format that addressed the limitations of the existing system. Critics argued that the BCS lacked fairness and transparency in determining the national champion, prompting suggestions for a playoff structure. A primary catalyst for this debate was the significant reshuffling of conferences during the 2010s.

Amid this era of conference realignment, proponents of a playoff system faced resistance from traditionalists who cherished the longstanding bowl matchups and the status quo. Those who held influential positions in the world of college football, including the organizers of the New Year's Six bowls, dismissed the notion of a playoff system, citing concerns about its potential negative impact on players, fans, traditions, conferences, and the beloved bowl games.

One of the proposed playoff structures involved the creation of four 16-team conferences, each divided into two divisions of eight teams. Teams within a division would compete in a round-robin format, followed by a set number of cross-divisional games. The division champions would then advance to a Conference Championship Game, akin to national quarterfinals, hosted at designated sites.

Meanwhile, the New Year's Six bowls, steeped in tradition, were envisioned to maintain their roles as hosts for traditional matchups, preserving the essence of college football's heritage. These bowls would also alternate hosting the national semifinals, which would feature the four conference champions vying for a spot in the national championship game. The championship game itself would be held at a separate bid site.

The proposed playoff structure encountered skepticism from influential figures within college football at the time, who considered it a departure from the sport's time-honored traditions. However, the gradual acceptance of the idea of a playoff format led to its eventual implementation just four years later, marking a significant departure from the BCS system. This change, however, did not occur in time to prevent the disruption of symmetric conferences that could have preserved regional rivalries and traditional matchups.

The evolution of college football from the traditional BCS era to the implementation of the College Football Playoff system is a testament to the sport's adaptability and the push for change in response to shifting landscapes. The debates around conference realignment and the playoff structure highlight the delicate balance between preserving cherished traditions and embracing innovation. While the proposed playoff format faced initial resistance, it eventually found its place in the college football landscape, reshaping the postseason and creating new avenues for competition, excitement, and determination of the national champion.

Had the traditionalists in 2010 not fought so hard for a few bowl games, we might have avoided the mess of 2023. Maybe not, there is no way to retrospectively know if the conference(s) would have fractured anyway, but they stood a much better chance of staying together in a better structured realignment in 2010.

It is worth mentioning that the SEC would not necessarily have liked this concept because it would have limited them to one semi-finalist in the CFP instead of the two they generally seem to get under the new format; so it was not "only" bowl traditionalists that caused this mess, but had college football created a separate entity for the Power Conferences that was separate from the NCAA for football only, the bargaining power would have been better, the ability to align investments, revenues, etc. would have also been better, and the benefits to student-athletes could have been improved a decade earlier than it was.

From Aaron Heisen:

Former Oregon state high school 100m champ, Caleb Hagen is transferring from Tennessee. He ran a 10.66 100m in high school. This is badly needed depth for the 4x100. He has potential. Let’s see how he develops.

Wow, his son put on 30 lbs. He could be a sleeper of the class.

Login to view embedded media

With the news of Oregon moving to the B1G starting next August breaking Friday, I have changed a little bit what the topic would be today. It was always going to be a 3-2-1 article, but I decided to focus on the realignment move that was finalized Friday.

Today on the Inside Read, three observations, two questions, and one prediction about the move to the B1G for the 2024 season.

Hard hitting and mostly correct. Hope you all can access.

Login to view embedded media
Any word if Oregon has actual interest or if we are just a hat on the table? With Frazier committing to Georgia I wasn’t sure where Oregon would look to next.

This ranking blends the high school rank plus the final transfer portal rank into one:

Gave this its own thread because… Rich Brooks. No one knows our PNW corner of the PAC, its passions & its traditions, better than Brooks.

A year after predicting realignment’s impact, former Oregon coach Rich Brooks calls it a ‘sad day’

Oregon lands at No. 15 in the preseason coaches poll, as one of five ranked Pac-12 teams along with No. 6 USC, No. 11 Washington, No. 14 Utah and No. 18 Oregon State.


Thoughts? Fair ranking?

Sabrina is absolutely losing her mind on the Las Vegas Aces, 29 points with over seven minutes to go in the 3rd qrt!

Any top recruits whose consideration of Oregon suddenly increases with us moving to BIG in 24?

Right here:

The latest:

Is this what I think it is?

Speaking for myself of course, but I am within 4 hours of 3 Big Ten venues. This change gives us over here on the other side of the country a chance to see our Ducks without having to fly 13 hours.