College Football Works on BCS

College football leaders are not pretending they can fix their sport during three days of spring meetings at a plush desert resort, but Monday was a start.

Restoring credibility after two off-the-chart controversial years and finding a new system to choose a national football champion were the lead topics during daylong meetings involving bowl championship series officials.

On the credibility front Grant Teaff, executive director of the American Football Coaches Assn., told the BCS that his voting coaches would probably make their final votes public next year as a condition of remaining in the BCS system.

Last year, the coaches’ anonymity and integrity came under fire during a controversial BCS standings point battle between California and Texas for the final automatic BCS bowl berth, worth roughly $16 million to participating teams.

Teaff said revealing votes was the last thing most coaches want to do.

“You all would have a field day with that,” Teaff told reporters after his meeting with BCS leaders at the Royal Palms resort hotel. “I’ll be going on vacation right about then. But the situation basically calls for it because of what took place last year.”

Teaff said AFCA is withholding an official announcement until it knows what the new BCS formula will be.

The BCS has to revamp its three-part standings formula because Associated Press pulled its media poll out of the system in December.

The BCS is considering another human poll to replace the media poll and on Monday heard proposals from two groups offering to administer it: the National Football Foundation/College Football Hall of Fame and the National Assn. of Collegiate Directors of Athletics.

The new poll might include retired coaches, former administrators and willing media.

“There are enough names,” BCS coordinator Kevin Weiberg said. “The question is how many people would be willing to participate. I don’t think there will be an answer for you here.”

The BCS also may decide to continue the BCS standings with only the coaches’ and a computer component.

“That’s not an option we’ve taken off the table,” Weiberg said.

Teaff, however, said AFCA was opposed to this idea because it would increase the scrutiny on the coaches.

“Our preference would be not to stand alone,” Teaff said.

There is also still some discussion about replacing the BCS standings with a panel similar to the NCAA basketball tournament selection committee.

Weiberg said the BCS must at least “narrow the options” at these meetings and must have a new formula in place by mid-July.

“No conclusions drawn today,” Weiberg said, “but a lot of opinions stated.”