they don't play anybody year in and year out on the road now in the conference. With OU vs Texas at neutral site every year. And then drop off to Tech, Okie State....year in and year out.

I thought about this alittle bit yesterday. Texas and OU are now basically in a second rate conference probably on par or worse than MWC.

Should they keep their BCS AQ status...LOL!

The fact that Texas and OU are in that conference makes it first rate. If they're not, it's second rate. Just like the Big Ten would be withou Ohio State & Michigan, Pac 10 without USC &UCLA, SEC with Florida and Alabama.

(06-15-2010 11:05 AM)MichaelSavage Wrote:  The fact that Texas and OU are in that conference makes it first rate. If they're not, it's second rate. Just like the Big Ten would be withou Ohio State & Michigan, Pac 10 without USC &UCLA, SEC with Florida and Alabama.

Would not go that far with the SEC.....pretty sure that LSU, Auburn and Georgia could do ok without UF and Bama......but it is a valid point for other conferences.....the SEC is the only conference in America that does not heavily rely on one or two teams to carry their national appeal.

PAC 10 with sanctions against USC is far and away the worst conference in the BCS. I can't name one pac 10 team I would say should be in the top 15 unless they add Utah.

Aside from the disciplinary issues, Oregon is a top football program under Chip Kelly. Plus Phil Knight's bankrolling it.

(06-15-2010 11:16 AM)MichaelSavage Wrote:  Aside from the disciplinary issues, Oregon is a top football program under Chip Kelly. Plus Phil Knight's bankrolling it.

That is true, they could be a top 15 program. I still wouldn't put the pac 10 ahead of any other BCS conference.

Washington and Oregon are probably top 15

UCLA, Stanford are upcoming and stable now that their coaches have been there a few years.

And I don't think the Big 12 is just a two-team conference although the perception is that it is OU, UT and everyone else. The Big 12 just a few years ago was considered the strongest conference in college football. And they have constantly had 4 to 5 teams ranked in the Top 25. Colin didn't make a good comparison and losing Nebraska and Colorado definitely does not make the Big 12 a 2nd rate conference.

(06-15-2010 12:37 PM)BlazerOfUAB Wrote:  And I don't think the Big 12 is just a two-team conference although the perception is that it is OU, UT and everyone else. The Big 12 just a few years ago was considered the strongest conference in college football. And they have constantly had 4 to 5 teams ranked in the Top 25. Colin didn't make a good comparison and losing Nebraska and Colorado definitely does not make the Big 12 a 2nd rate conference.

Fair point as KSU, KU, Missouri, Oklahoma State and Texas Tech have all spent time in the Top 10 at different points during the past few years.

(06-15-2010 11:16 AM)MichaelSavage Wrote:  Aside from the disciplinary issues, Oregon is a top football program under Chip Kelly. Plus Phil Knight's bankrolling it.

Masoli is out, which will seriously hamper the Ducks early in the season. If they lose a few early season games in a row, it could turn into a big losing streak they'd rather not have. Losses are contagious at times, and you never know what can set it off...

(06-15-2010 11:00 AM)dgrace4cards Wrote:  they don't play anybody year in and year out on the road now in the conference. With OU vs Texas at neutral site every year. And then drop off to Tech, Okie State....year in and year out.

I thought about this alittle bit yesterday. Texas and OU are now basically in a second rate conference probably on par or worse than MWC.

Should they keep their BCS AQ status...LOL!

Sorry bub, when was the last time Nebraska or Colorado won the Big XII? This doesn't make them a second rate conference at all. I hate to trumpet, but I've been saying this for a long time. Colorado is completely irrelevant as far as competition in the two main sports, and Nebraska has floundered about until the great hire of Bo Pelini, who Notre Dame should have went after with pots o' gold. Sure losing Nebraska is a sting, but not a poisonous one. My questions is: why isn't the Big XII going out to get BYU and Utah?

esayem, Nebraska has been improving steadily under Bo Pelini. It wouldn't surprise me at all to see them competing for the Big Tin crown in the near future...

Like most talking heads, Cowherd equates "BCS worthy" with "must play for national championship at least every other year." You just can't set the bar that high. The purpose of the BCS is to accumulate all the revenue among the smallest safe majority of FBS schools. SOOOOOOOOOOO, that means roughly the best 65 to 70 programs must be in the system.

Aside from about 4 programs that are out but should be in and maybe 4 programs that are in but should be out, the BCS is set up exactly as it should be to do the job it is asked to do.