By Brian Murphy
Idaho President Duane Nellis is a member of the 12-man BCS Presidential Oversight Committee. He participated in the meetings that resulted in the presidents approving a four-team playoff beginning with the 2014 regular season.
Nellis talked to the Idaho Statesman after the vote.
Here are the highlights:
— "We tried to reach consensus around the proposal that had been elevated by the commissioners. The commissioners had been working on details of a proposal with feedback, so I think first of all, there was a general overview of the proposal that was out there. We had a lot of discussion, dialogue and debate. There was a strong consensus for what has come out of the dialogue."
— "Plus-one was discussed. But I think this four-team format that’s been approved here today is something that is best for college football at the FBS level.
— "The other thing that to me is positive for schools that might be in the Mountain West or the WAC are the three additional bowls, in addition to the Champions Bowl, the Orange Bowl and the Rose Bowl. With the separate championship game, it will provide more access points.
– "Assuming rankings would have held, Boise State under this new format would have been in one of the bowl games this past year when they were closed out unfortunately. Based on the structure, according to this analysis, there are five non-AQ schools in the last 12 years that would have made into in this new system assuming that things worked out with the selection process."
— Nellis said the Rose Bowl would have a Big Ten/Pac-12 match-up, the Champions Bowl would have a SEC/Big 12 match-up and the Orange Bowl would have an ACC team if those teams and/or bowls are not involved in the semifinals.
— "Details still need to be worked out. Questions about revenue sharing and access. Who is going to be on the selection committee? What criteria are they going to use? That's still to be worked out."
— On revenue: Nellis said there was "quite a bit of dialogue. There's still a lot more work to be done. We'll send it back to the commissioners and have them work on different options."
— On how much debate there was between the "power conferences" and the "smaller leagues" over revenue: "There was good debate, I’ll say, about that. But I think in the end, everyone came to the same positive consensus. Those programs that are still called the mid-majors and those in the majors all came to agreement that this is best for college football, helping move us forward. It creates a playoff system, it moves us beyond the BCS in some ways. It creates some excitement and new opportunities for all of us."
Become a fan of the Statesman on Facebook.