(06-30-2012 09:08 AM)Bull Wrote:  So if I understand you all correctly, there is STILL an aq here... all the conferences with BCS tie-ins get that slot automatically. AQ may be dissolved but the tie in still takes precedence (no matter what the ranking). And since the BE was the only AQ conference without a tie in... AQ only really went away for the BE.

Also, all this selection committee garbage is only partially in play... they will select for the playoffs and any BCS bowl slots remaining open AFTER the tie-in's fill their slots.

Is that right? If so, I see now how we are kind of getting the shaft... Truthfully, it's more the ACC being incredibly lucky, not the BE really getting hosed. Clearly the BE and ACC were 5 and 6. They have just found a loophole to allow the ACC to hang on.

Yep I think the ACC deal puts the nail in the coffin in terms of contract terms. There is still AQ and the Big East has lost it. The Big East would have a hard time arguing otherwise in court. The Boise buyout pretty much just dropped to 1M

To avoid anti trust lawsuit from the Big East, MAC, MWC, CUSA, WAC, Sun Belt,Notre Dame,Navy, Army and BYU there has to be a spot available to those teams if they qualify. The question will be of the 12 spots 10 going to the big 5 and 2 between the rest. Taking Boise State out of the at-large Non-AQ pool and into the Big East spot just makes it easier for a team like Nevada, Southern Miss or Ohio to get that last spot with an unbeaten regular season and top 12 ranking after winning their conferences.

Isn't the kicker the selection committee though, and the SOS argument? They could never take another MAC, MWC, CUSA, etc. team again if they wanted to. Especially now, if hte BE is actually on the outside, they will own any chance of getting the non big-5 slot.

(06-30-2012 12:14 PM)OhioBobcatJohn Wrote:  To avoid anti trust lawsuit from the Big East, MAC, MWC, CUSA, WAC, Sun Belt,Notre Dame,Navy, Army and BYU there has to be a spot available to those teams if they qualify. The question will be of the 12 spots 10 going to the big 5 and 2 between the rest. Taking Boise State out of the at-large Non-AQ pool and into the Big East spot just makes it easier for a team like Nevada, Southern Miss or Ohio to get that last spot with an unbeaten regular season and top 12 ranking after winning their conferences.

Access is access. One spot constitutes access. Most years where a non-Big-5 team lands a spot it will be a Big East team. By reclassifying the Big East as a non-AQ, the Big-5 have essentially simply allowed the spot typically claimed by the Big East to be considered a non-AQ spot, even though most of the time the Big East will claim it. Essentially, for the current non-AQ's (CUSA/MW/SB/MAC), they just lost 90% of thier access and the Big East lost thier guaranteed access.

(06-30-2012 12:16 PM)Bull Wrote:  Isn't the kicker the selection committee though, and the SOS argument? They could never take another MAC, MWC, CUSA, etc. team again if they wanted to. Especially now, if hte BE is actually on the outside, they will own any chance of getting the non big-5 slot.

Exactly. The Big East has simply been reclassified as a non-AQ and will receive the non-AQ slot 90% time it actually ends up being claimed by a non-AQ. Access for both is reduced, but its virtually eliminated for the non-AQ conferences not named Big East..

(06-30-2012 12:22 PM)attackfrog Wrote:  

(06-30-2012 12:14 PM)OhioBobcatJohn Wrote:  To avoid anti trust lawsuit from the Big East, MAC, MWC, CUSA, WAC, Sun Belt,Notre Dame,Navy, Army and BYU there has to be a spot available to those teams if they qualify. The question will be of the 12 spots 10 going to the big 5 and 2 between the rest. Taking Boise State out of the at-large Non-AQ pool and into the Big East spot just makes it easier for a team like Nevada, Southern Miss or Ohio to get that last spot with an unbeaten regular season and top 12 ranking after winning their conferences.

Access is access. One spot constitutes access. Most years where a non-Big-5 team lands a spot it will be a Big East team. By reclassifying the Big East as a non-AQ, the Big-5 have essentially simply allowed the spot typically claimed by the Big East to be considered a non-AQ spot, even though most of the time the Big East will claim it. Essentially, for the current non-AQ's (CUSA/MW/SB/MAC), they just lost 90% of thier access and the Big East lost thier guaranteed access.

DING DING DING...you got it...Frank nail it you really have 3 open spots under the new deal...most years one of the spots is going to either the BIG EAST or ND. In years that both have over 2 losses then it will go to either a 3rd or 4th Big XII, SEC, B1G or Pac 12 school or a 2nd ACC school...it is what it is.

(06-30-2012 12:28 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(06-30-2012 12:22 PM)attackfrog Wrote:  

(06-30-2012 12:14 PM)OhioBobcatJohn Wrote:  To avoid anti trust lawsuit from the Big East, MAC, MWC, CUSA, WAC, Sun Belt,Notre Dame,Navy, Army and BYU there has to be a spot available to those teams if they qualify. The question will be of the 12 spots 10 going to the big 5 and 2 between the rest. Taking Boise State out of the at-large Non-AQ pool and into the Big East spot just makes it easier for a team like Nevada, Southern Miss or Ohio to get that last spot with an unbeaten regular season and top 12 ranking after winning their conferences.

Access is access. One spot constitutes access. Most years where a non-Big-5 team lands a spot it will be a Big East team. By reclassifying the Big East as a non-AQ, the Big-5 have essentially simply allowed the spot typically claimed by the Big East to be considered a non-AQ spot, even though most of the time the Big East will claim it. Essentially, for the current non-AQ's (CUSA/MW/SB/MAC), they just lost 90% of thier access and the Big East lost thier guaranteed access.

DING DING DING...you got it...Frank nail it you really have 3 open spots under the new deal...most years one of the spots is going to either the BIG EAST or ND. In years that both have over 2 losses then it will go to either a 3rd or 4th Big XII, SEC, B1G or Pac 12 school or a 2nd ACC school...it is what it is.

Isn't that what we hope will happen, but no guarantee? There is nothing stopping the committee from giving those 3 'available' slots to Big 4 schools, using the SOS argument. Right? I'd be much, much more comfortable if they put in writing that 1 of 12 slots is RESERVED for non 'big 5' schools. (Not that we have a real 'big 5 anyway, but just to play along...)

(06-30-2012 01:13 PM)Bull Wrote:  

(06-30-2012 12:28 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(06-30-2012 12:22 PM)attackfrog Wrote:  

(06-30-2012 12:14 PM)OhioBobcatJohn Wrote:  To avoid anti trust lawsuit from the Big East, MAC, MWC, CUSA, WAC, Sun Belt,Notre Dame,Navy, Army and BYU there has to be a spot available to those teams if they qualify. The question will be of the 12 spots 10 going to the big 5 and 2 between the rest. Taking Boise State out of the at-large Non-AQ pool and into the Big East spot just makes it easier for a team like Nevada, Southern Miss or Ohio to get that last spot with an unbeaten regular season and top 12 ranking after winning their conferences.

Access is access. One spot constitutes access. Most years where a non-Big-5 team lands a spot it will be a Big East team. By reclassifying the Big East as a non-AQ, the Big-5 have essentially simply allowed the spot typically claimed by the Big East to be considered a non-AQ spot, even though most of the time the Big East will claim it. Essentially, for the current non-AQ's (CUSA/MW/SB/MAC), they just lost 90% of thier access and the Big East lost thier guaranteed access.

DING DING DING...you got it...Frank nail it you really have 3 open spots under the new deal...most years one of the spots is going to either the BIG EAST or ND. In years that both have over 2 losses then it will go to either a 3rd or 4th Big XII, SEC, B1G or Pac 12 school or a 2nd ACC school...it is what it is.

Isn't that what we hope will happen, but no guarantee? There is nothing stopping the committee from giving those 3 'available' slots to Big 4 schools, using the SOS argument. Right? I'd be much, much more comfortable if they put in writing that 1 of 12 slots is RESERVED for non 'big 5' schools. (Not that we have a real 'big 5 anyway, but just to play along...)

1. As long as ND has 2 or fewer losses they are getting one of those spots.

2. If the BIG EAST Champ has 1 loss they are likely in...2 it is dicey and 3 forgetaboutit. You forget it is SOS & Conference Champs with if all being "equal" conference champ being the tie breaker.

They will throw us a bone just to keep us "quiet". As long as the SEC, B1G, Pac 12 & Big XII have two in the Top 6 Bowls they will be fine and if a 3rd get in as well. The ACC is just happy it champ doesn't have to worry bout ranking to into the Top 6 Bowl Game.

(06-30-2012 01:13 PM)Bull Wrote:  

(06-30-2012 12:28 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(06-30-2012 12:22 PM)attackfrog Wrote:  

(06-30-2012 12:14 PM)OhioBobcatJohn Wrote:  To avoid anti trust lawsuit from the Big East, MAC, MWC, CUSA, WAC, Sun Belt,Notre Dame,Navy, Army and BYU there has to be a spot available to those teams if they qualify. The question will be of the 12 spots 10 going to the big 5 and 2 between the rest. Taking Boise State out of the at-large Non-AQ pool and into the Big East spot just makes it easier for a team like Nevada, Southern Miss or Ohio to get that last spot with an unbeaten regular season and top 12 ranking after winning their conferences.

Access is access. One spot constitutes access. Most years where a non-Big-5 team lands a spot it will be a Big East team. By reclassifying the Big East as a non-AQ, the Big-5 have essentially simply allowed the spot typically claimed by the Big East to be considered a non-AQ spot, even though most of the time the Big East will claim it. Essentially, for the current non-AQ's (CUSA/MW/SB/MAC), they just lost 90% of thier access and the Big East lost thier guaranteed access.

DING DING DING...you got it...Frank nail it you really have 3 open spots under the new deal...most years one of the spots is going to either the BIG EAST or ND. In years that both have over 2 losses then it will go to either a 3rd or 4th Big XII, SEC, B1G or Pac 12 school or a 2nd ACC school...it is what it is.

Isn't that what we hope will happen, but no guarantee? There is nothing stopping the committee from giving those 3 'available' slots to Big 4 schools, using the SOS argument. Right? I'd be much, much more comfortable if they put in writing that 1 of 12 slots is RESERVED for non 'big 5' schools. (Not that we have a real 'big 5 anyway, but just to play along...)

Im the biggest critic of this slection committee crap. I personally think its simply a mechanism that can be easily used to keep the non-Aq's out of the playoff and limit thier participation in the major bowls.

That said, I think the higest ranking non-Aq champion (remember being a champion will be at least as important as strength of schedule) will find themselves in a major bowl as long as they are in the top 10-12. I think the BCS has figured out that a consistant and complete exclusion of the non-AQ's is more trouble than its worth. I honestly think the Big East champ will make a BCS Bowl on a pretty consistant basis. The BW champ, if they are deserving (top 10-12), then they will be there. I also think the other non-AQ's will very rarely make a BCS Bowl.

Frankly Im ok with that. Do we really want the Big East to get embarrassed in a Big BCS Bowl when the conference has a down year? I guess I'll look at that as this situations silver lining. I'll be honest. I do have some mistrust of the "selection committee" so I would prefer for us to negotiate a tie-in to one of the BCS Bowls conditioned on our champ being higher than say #15. I think that would guarantee us to be in the BCS most years , it would prevent the selection committee from tooling us over, and spare the bowl from having to take our champ in a weak BE year.

It's going to be:

1. SOS (The SEC will always have an advantage, followed by the Big 12 and B1G. ND will always have the biggest advantage here.)

2. W-L ( I don't think Oregon was a lock for a "Final Four" last year. They didn't go through USC in the CCG and they had a brutal loss at home late in the year. Plus the fact that Oregon already had a shot against LSU. Committee would have a tough decision here.)

3. Head to head (Take Bama/Fla in the SEC championship in 2008. Bama would have been ousted from the Final Four despite finishing 12-1 and #3 in the rankings that year.)

4. CC's (When in doubt, turn to this. Do you take the 12-0 Boise or 11-1 USC? Probably USC because of the factors above.)

5. Where, when, and how?

a) Where did you play the games? Home games against teams on short rest? Did you stack your slate with home games? Did you win any tough road games?

b) Late November games vs September?

c) Blowouts or competitive games?

(06-30-2012 10:13 AM)Cooglius Caeser Wrote:  

(06-30-2012 08:08 AM)Oh Really? Wrote:  

(06-30-2012 07:42 AM)Cooglius Caeser Wrote:  When I see CDOA people rationalize why Boise would be better off outside the BE it makes me not care about bowls, rankings, and revenue. All my mental energies go into seeing CDOA and Mountain Worst implode in a fiery explosion with an inter-galactic photon...reducing their members to 500 years of Yuma Puckernut Bowls and OCC games against Sul Ross University and the Cochise Fairgrounds Goat-Milking Institute.

Good luck with that bucko.... ECU could lose nearly half their fanbase and
still fill your stadium with what remains.
Boise would be better off in the west. So would Houston and SMU, quite frankly.

Your insecurities have wracked your CDOA brain cells. The Big East makes more money in basketball alone than all CDOA sports combined. CDOA has Tulane, UAB, and a few others that single-handedly doom everyone else's strength of schedule to damnation.

The new tv contract won't be as big as the b12's but it will dwarf any CDOA tv revenue 10x.

The Big East plays in some of the largest tv markets in te country...CDOA plays in front of Puckernock, NC.

And last, ECU could never fill our stadium...the signs on all of our ramps clearly state, NO HEE HAW ATTIRE PERMITTED!

Easy now, UH is still apart of C-USA and last time I checked we never dominated it, we're just improving.