http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry...2/33203093

- eliminating automatic qualifier status for all conference
- allow the top 10 teams in the final BCS standings at the end of the season to play in BCS bowls no matter what conference affiliation (hello to three Big Ten and three SEC schools "earning" BCS slots every year).
- no details on how the money would be divided up (I think we all know exactly how it would be divided up)

(11-09-2011 11:35 AM)UofLgrad07 Wrote:  http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry...2/33203093

- eliminating automatic qualifier status for all conference
- allow the top 10 teams in the final BCS standings at the end of the season to play in BCS bowls no matter what conference affiliation (hello to three Big Ten and three SEC schools "earning" BCS slots every year).
- no details on how the money would be divided up (I think we all know exactly how it would be divided up)

Funny how this comes about while the Big East is using the AQ to rebuild. Hmmm. Face it the ACC, SEC, Big 10 and Definately the Big 12 do not want the Big East around any more. But then where would they get their replacement teams.

I won't even mention the ESPN angle behind this news.

(11-09-2011 11:35 AM)UofLgrad07 Wrote:  http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry...2/33203093

- eliminating automatic qualifier status for all conference
- allow the top 10 teams in the final BCS standings at the end of the season to play in BCS bowls no matter what conference affiliation (hello to three Big Ten and three SEC schools "earning" BCS slots every year).
- no details on how the money would be divided up (I think we all know exactly how it would be divided up)

If that's the way it's going to go, then the BCS schools should have to earn those top ten ranking by playing only other BCS schools. Let's stop the charade that the twelve game schedule has become. When a BCS school has an OOC that includes 1 FCS, 2 MAC/WAC/SB/C-USA/MWC all at home and 1 other BCS school, it's a joke.

That would be bad news for Notre Dame, the Big East, and the ACC which makes me believe this isn't happening.
Would the Rose Bowl leave the BCS all together then? One issue I have with this is that it makes winning a conference championship meaningless.

(11-09-2011 11:46 AM)Mestophalies Wrote:  

(11-09-2011 11:35 AM)UofLgrad07 Wrote:  http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry...2/33203093

- eliminating automatic qualifier status for all conference
- allow the top 10 teams in the final BCS standings at the end of the season to play in BCS bowls no matter what conference affiliation (hello to three Big Ten and three SEC schools "earning" BCS slots every year).
- no details on how the money would be divided up (I think we all know exactly how it would be divided up)

Funny how this comes about while the Big East is using the AQ to rebuild. Hmmm. Face it the ACC, SEC, Big 10 and Definately the Big 12 do not want the Big East around any more. But then where would they get their replacement teams.

I won't even mention the ESPN angle behind this news.

Well, if the ACC wants this than they are slitting their own throat in the process.

(11-09-2011 11:48 AM)bearcatlawjd Wrote:  One issue I have with this is that it makes winning a conference championship meaningless.

If you aren't good enough to either win your conference or at least make your conference's championship game, then you have no business being in a BCS bowl in my opinion.

(11-09-2011 11:35 AM)UofLgrad07 Wrote:  http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry...2/33203093

- eliminating automatic qualifier status for all conference
- allow the top 10 teams in the final BCS standings at the end of the season to play in BCS bowls no matter what conference affiliation (hello to three Big Ten and three SEC schools "earning" BCS slots every year).
- no details on how the money would be divided up (I think we all know exactly how it would be divided up)

This is really targeting Big East. The other five power conferences don't want Big East to absorb all good western divisions and have a western division. Ultimately, the other five want to separate BE football and basketball schools so anybody else could be No. 1 again. And now BE growing bigger threatens their goal.

(11-09-2011 12:06 PM)ArQ Wrote:  

(11-09-2011 11:35 AM)UofLgrad07 Wrote:  http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry...2/33203093

- eliminating automatic qualifier status for all conference
- allow the top 10 teams in the final BCS standings at the end of the season to play in BCS bowls no matter what conference affiliation (hello to three Big Ten and three SEC schools "earning" BCS slots every year).
- no details on how the money would be divided up (I think we all know exactly how it would be divided up)

This is really targeting Big East. The other five power conferences don't want Big East to absorb all good western divisions and have a western division. Ultimately, the other five want to separate BE football and basketball schools so anybody else could be No. 1 again. And now BE growing bigger threatens their goal.

They (ESPN and other five) know it is unlikely to change anything, but this will make those western schools to think harder before joining Big East. BCS AQ may be gone when they join. Nicely done, ESPN!

Quote:“I think there is growing sentiment to eliminate the automatic qualification part of the BCS,” Neinas told CBSSports.com this week. “You can see what’s happening. They [conferences] are gerrymandering all over the place under the intent to maintain an automatic qualification. History has shown you don’t need that if you are qualified.”

This is a direct slam on the Big East. The Big East really needs to sue the Big 12, Chuck Neinas, the individual member institutions at this point.

Quote:West Virginia has been sued by the Big East to fulfill its obligation to give 27 months notice before leaving the league. Big 12 sources are upset that Missouri intends to leave by July 1, 2012. Neinas remarked that it was “awful short notice” by the school.

But having WVU do it to the Big East was ok?

No, this is the Big XII & SEC. In the end I just can't see the Pac 12/Big 1G putting an end to their Rose Bowl relationship.

The ACC would be hurt as well as the BIG EAST. The ACC took Pitt & Syracuse and with all due respect to the Panthers & Orange it wasn't because of Football but Basketball.

I don't think this will happen. The system is already viewed by enough people as rancid. Doing something to lock even more teams out of the system and shovel even more $$$ in the direction of those who've been getting it all along will definitely cause an outcry that won't die down so easily. You'll have too many inquiries from some powerful politicians from states whose major sports are played in the BE (NJ, CT, ID), as well as KY's most powerful politician, and don't forget supporters of the service academies. These are teams that have followed the rules, done everything they can possibly do, and are increasingly having the rug pulled out from under them. If the BCS system wants to survive in any form, it can't do anything more to alienate people in power. There has to come some point where the justice system gets involved and starts asking questions about anti-trust laws, monopolies, fair competition, racketeering, non-profit status, etc. The big conferences definitely don't want that to happen.

After giving it more thought, maybe it's best in the long run if the major conferences really do try to push things too far. It's the only way change will ever happen.

I commented on this same story on the expansion/split board. Unless you see a "change to the BCS" directly coming from the mouth of Jim Delany, it's all pointless speculation. The Big Ten might have a champ ranked lower than #10 this season. Do you think that they would EVER agree to a system to give up their Rose Bowl slot? NO F**KING WAY. The ACC and Big East both had champs ranked lower than #10 last year. Are they agreeing to give up their AQ slots? NO F**KING WAY.

Dodd himself put the caveat in the article that it wasn't known how the Rose Bowl (which, by extension, includes the Big Ten and Pac-12) and other AQ commissioners felt about this, which means this is basically just Neinas talking. Someone else has pointed out that Neinas has direct interests in two leagues that have been or will be poached: the Big 12 and the MWC/C-USA alliance. So, of course he'd want changes to the AQ system in order to prevent further conference realignment! (Exception: Neinas is totally cool with conference realignment that has the Big 12 raiding the Big East.)

It's already enough that the Big Ten, Pac-12 and Rose Bowl would be against this. Without them aboard, we'd see a return to a Bowl Alliance, and if there's one thing worse than the BCS, it would be regressing to the Bowl Alliance. The fact that ACC and Big East would also NEVER vote for a "top 10" rule is extra ammunition in killing this proposal. Anything that doesn't guarantee the Big Ten/Pac-12/Rose Bowl triumvirate is a non-starter. If a proposal involves a bunch of people in power voting AGAINST their self-interests, then that proposal probably won't work. Call me crazy.

(11-09-2011 01:27 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  I commented on this same story on the expansion/split board. Unless you see a "change to the BCS" directly coming from the mouth of Jim Delany, it's all pointless speculation. The Big Ten might have a champ ranked lower than #10 this season. Do you think that they would EVER agree to a system to give up their Rose Bowl slot? NO F**KING WAY. The ACC and Big East both had champs ranked lower than #10 last year. Are they agreeing to give up their AQ slots? NO F**KING WAY.

Dodd himself put the caveat in the article that it wasn't known how the Rose Bowl (which, by extension, includes the Big Ten and Pac-12) and other AQ commissioners felt about this, which means this is basically just Neinas talking. Someone else has pointed out that Neinas has direct interests in two leagues that have been or will be poached: the Big 12 and the MWC/C-USA alliance. So, of course he'd want changes to the AQ system in order to prevent further conference realignment! (Exception: Neinas is totally cool with conference realignment that has the Big 12 raiding the Big East.)

It's already enough that the Big Ten, Pac-12 and Rose Bowl would be against this. Without them aboard, we'd see a return to a Bowl Alliance, and if there's one thing worse than the BCS, it would be regressing to the Bowl Alliance. The fact that ACC and Big East would also NEVER vote for a "top 10" rule is extra ammunition in killing this proposal. Anything that doesn't guarantee the Big Ten/Pac-12/Rose Bowl triumvirate is a non-starter. If a proposal involves a bunch of people in power voting AGAINST their self-interests, then that proposal probably won't work. Call me crazy.

As I said before, ESPN and its pawns know they can't change BCS, they just want to scare some western teams from joining Big East. It is the best interest of them to kill off one or two conferences so there are only four superconferences remains. They need to kill Big East first, then divide Big 12 to three parts for Big 10, Pac14 and ACC to expand to 16..

(11-09-2011 12:38 PM)brista21 Wrote:  

Quote:“I think there is growing sentiment to eliminate the automatic qualification part of the BCS,” Neinas told CBSSports.com this week. “You can see what’s happening. They [conferences] are gerrymandering all over the place under the intent to maintain an automatic qualification. History has shown you don’t need that if you are qualified.”

This is a direct slam on the Big East. The Big East really needs to sue the Big 12, Chuck Neinas, the individual member institutions at this point.

And what about it is untrue? The Big East wants to add teams in California and Idaho for the sole purpose of keeping a bid to the BCS, which is meaningless (outside of the $$$) unless its the National Title game.

(11-09-2011 02:26 PM)Bearcat_Bounce Wrote:  

(11-09-2011 12:38 PM)brista21 Wrote:  

Quote:“I think there is growing sentiment to eliminate the automatic qualification part of the BCS,” Neinas told CBSSports.com this week. “You can see what’s happening. They [conferences] are gerrymandering all over the place under the intent to maintain an automatic qualification. History has shown you don’t need that if you are qualified.”

This is a direct slam on the Big East. The Big East really needs to sue the Big 12, Chuck Neinas, the individual member institutions at this point.

And what about it is untrue? The Big East wants to add teams in California and Idaho for the sole purpose of keeping a bid to the BCS, which is meaningless (outside of the $$$) unless its the National Title game.

I think it is more like that Big East gives up half of its BCS auto bid to the best of Mountain West and Conference USA, which is now called Big East West Division. By doing so, the remaining Big East football stay together and keep Big East brand alive. And of course, the action won't hurt ourselves to keep No. 1 basketball conference title even after losing Syracuse and Pitt because those western schools only join to play football.

Isn't that about as hypocritical as it can be on the part of the commissioner of a conference with all kinds of candidates available in Texas and bordering states who instead just invited a school from the northeastern corner of a state that doesn't even border a state that borders a state that is adjacent to a state with a team in his conference? The closest school in the current Big 12 to Morgantown is Ames, Iowa, a mere 880+ miles by the most direct route - a mere 14-hour drive (unless you want to stop and eat or use the bathroom). And he has the nerve to accuse ANYBODY of gerrymandering?!

I think the Big 12 left itself wide open to a suit from the Big East after that interview Neinas gave in WV.

(11-09-2011 02:25 PM)ArQ Wrote:  As I said before, ESPN and its pawns know they can't change BCS, they just want to scare some western teams from joining Big East. It is the best interest of them to kill off one or two conferences so there are only four superconferences remains. They need to kill Big East first, then divide Big 12 to three parts for Big 10, Pac14 and ACC to expand to 16..

I disagree with this. While we might argue here that ESPN hasn't been very hospitable to the Big East, there are only two FBS conferences that don't have any type of contract with the network today: MWC and C-USA. There's absolute no interest on the part of ESPN in helping the MWC/C-USA Alliance out at all.

Superconferences are also DIRECTLY against ESPN's interests, too. If ESPN had its way, they'd actually prefer the college football world in 1990 with many conferences and power dispersed among them. ESPN doesn't get some type of discount by the ACC expanding with Big East teams. In fact, it's exactly the opposite. As these conferences grow larger, ESPN has to continuously pay more to each of those leagues in a logarithmic fashion.

Why do you think ESPN stepped in to save the Big 12 last year by paying a 10-team league without a championship game the same value as a 12-team league with a championship game? It's because they want absolutely, positively, NOTHING to do with superconferences. There might be some forces out there that would like to see superconferences formed, but ESPN definitely isn't one of them. They don't want to be in a position where they're only dealing with 4 superconferences because if one walks away to another network, that's a massive loss compared to today (and the conferences know that and will charge increased rights fees accordingly).

This thing from Chuck just won't fly. Like Frank said, without B1G and P12 behind this, it just won't happen.

If they gonna scratch the current BCS system, they might as well go to a 16 team playoff format. Currently, we got 11 conferences and 120 D1A teams with 4 D1A teams not in any conference. The playoff should have 11 champions and 5 at-large teams. If they want more at large teams, they can expand it to 32 teams with some conferences getting more than 2 teams into the playoff. It would be beyond pathetic if they only allow top 10 ranked teams into the BCS. For one thing, that top 10 ranking is partly based on human voting which is biased from the start and heavily influenced by ESPN and its B1G/SEC homers.

Just go straight to a 16 teams playoff already.

Neinas is one conference's commisioner. Don't forget that there are a lot of different players on the committee. Neinas doesn't control squat. He just represents the sentiments of several commissioners.

Ultimately this gets reviewed by Congress...then it gets really f%$## up.