(11-20-2013 08:53 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 06:29 AM)ChrisLords Wrote:  

(11-19-2013 01:42 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  In the 15 year history of the BCS, every single bowl selection has been 100% for its self-interest without regard to the other bowls. Bowl organizers aren't paid to help out other bowls - they're getting paid to sell the most tickets to their own bowl. The Sugar Bowl is more than happy to let the Orange Bowl die on the vine if it means that a few more upper level seats are sold in New Orleans. The only way an SEC team doesn't go to the Sugar Bowl is we have a 2011 situation with 2 SEC teams in the national championship game.

Well, there was 2009, the one year that the 2010 Fiesta bowl took TCU vs. Boise State so that 2 BCS bowls wouldn't have an AQ vs. non-AQ match up.

actually they did that because the alternatives weren't all that great- Fiesta got TCU and Boise and they actually had a very solid tv rating. Best case for them would have been like a Iowa/TCU game- which wouldn't have been all that attractive. They didn't do that just to not have 2 AQ vs non-AQ games.

Yep, the Fiesta surely didn't fall on it sword to protect other BCS bowls, these bowls look out for themselves. They took Boise/TCU because they thought it was the best matchup for themselves under the circumstances.

(11-19-2013 06:16 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  

(11-19-2013 02:22 PM)orangefan Wrote:  Assuming Bama v Florida St. in the NCG, the order of picks will be:

1) Sugar (to replace Bama)
2) Orange (to replace FSU)
3) Orange
4) Sugar
5) Fiesta

This would likely leave the rest of the BCS lineup as:

Rose: Ohio St. (B1G) v. Oregon (P12)
Sugar: Clemson (1) v. UCF (AAC/4)
Orange: Auburn/Missouri (2) v. Oklahoma St./Michigan St./Stanford (3)
Fiesta: Baylor (B12) v. Fresno St./NIU (Non-AQ/5)

At the start of the BCS era this would have been possible, but they added a rule years ago that if a bowl loses its conference champ to the national championship game, it gets first dips at the 2nd team from that conference. Granted, both Sugar and Orange could say they were OK with this, but I think the Sugar wants SEC and Orange would want Clemson.

Here is the actual BCS Rule:

"3. If a bowl loses a host team to the NCG, then such bowl shall select a replacement team from among the automatic-qualifying teams and the at-large teams before any other selections are made. If two bowls lose host teams to the NCG, each bowl will get a replacement pick before any other selections are made. In such case, the bowl losing the No. 1 team gets the first replacement pick, and the bowl losing the No. 2 team gets the second replacement pick. If the Rose Bowl loses both the Big Ten and Pac-12 champions to the NCG, it will receive two replacement picks.

A bowl choosing a replacement team may not select:

A. A team in the NCG, or

B. The host team for another BCS Bowl;

Further, when two bowls lose host teams, the bowl losing the No. 1 team may not select a replacement team from the same conference as the No. 2 team, unless the bowl losing the No. 2 team consents."

I read the last paragraph to prohibit the Sugar Bowl from inviting Clemson, so that if Florida St. is in the NCG, the Orange Bowl is guaranteed to have Clemson available to it.

Thus, my chart should be revised as follows:

Assuming Bama v Florida St. in the NCG, the order of picks will be:

1) Sugar (to replace Bama; cannot select Clemson)
2) Orange (to replace FSU)
3) Orange
4) Sugar
5) Fiesta

This would leave the rest of the BCS lineup as:

Rose: Ohio St. (B1G) v. Oregon (P12)
Sugar: Auburn/Missouri/SCar/TAMU (2) v. UCF (AAC/4)
Orange: Clemson (1) v. Oklahoma St./Michigan St./Stanford (3)
Fiesta: Baylor (B12) v. Fresno St./NIU (Non-AQ/5)

(11-20-2013 11:04 AM)orangefan Wrote:  

(11-19-2013 06:16 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  

(11-19-2013 02:22 PM)orangefan Wrote:  Assuming Bama v Florida St. in the NCG, the order of picks will be:

1) Sugar (to replace Bama)
2) Orange (to replace FSU)
3) Orange
4) Sugar
5) Fiesta

This would likely leave the rest of the BCS lineup as:

Rose: Ohio St. (B1G) v. Oregon (P12)
Sugar: Clemson (1) v. UCF (AAC/4)
Orange: Auburn/Missouri (2) v. Oklahoma St./Michigan St./Stanford (3)
Fiesta: Baylor (B12) v. Fresno St./NIU (Non-AQ/5)

At the start of the BCS era this would have been possible, but they added a rule years ago that if a bowl loses its conference champ to the national championship game, it gets first dips at the 2nd team from that conference. Granted, both Sugar and Orange could say they were OK with this, but I think the Sugar wants SEC and Orange would want Clemson.

Here is the actual BCS Rule:

"3. If a bowl loses a host team to the NCG, then such bowl shall select a replacement team from among the automatic-qualifying teams and the at-large teams before any other selections are made. If two bowls lose host teams to the NCG, each bowl will get a replacement pick before any other selections are made. In such case, the bowl losing the No. 1 team gets the first replacement pick, and the bowl losing the No. 2 team gets the second replacement pick. If the Rose Bowl loses both the Big Ten and Pac-12 champions to the NCG, it will receive two replacement picks.

A bowl choosing a replacement team may not select:

A. A team in the NCG, or

B. The host team for another BCS Bowl;

Further, when two bowls lose host teams, the bowl losing the No. 1 team may not select a replacement team from the same conference as the No. 2 team, unless the bowl losing the No. 2 team consents."

I read the last paragraph to prohibit the Sugar Bowl from inviting Clemson, so that if Florida St. is in the NCG, the Orange Bowl is guaranteed to have Clemson available to it.

Thus, my chart should be revised as follows:

Assuming Bama v Florida St. in the NCG, the order of picks will be:

1) Sugar (to replace Bama; cannot select Clemson)
2) Orange (to replace FSU)
3) Orange
4) Sugar
5) Fiesta

This would leave the rest of the BCS lineup as:

Rose: Ohio St. (B1G) v. Oregon (P12)
Sugar: Auburn/Missouri/SCar/TAMU (2) v. UCF (AAC/4)
Orange: Clemson (1) v. Oklahoma St./Michigan St./Stanford (3)
Fiesta: Baylor (B12) v. Fresno St./NIU (Non-AQ/5)

Thanks....great info. I think you got it right

I'll say a sleeper this year for the Orange Bowl should they win out. USC. I think we will see them making a pretty good jump up in the polls the next few weeks if they can win. Their computer numbers aren't bad and would just go up. And yes, I think the Orange woudl take them over Stanford.

(11-19-2013 10:28 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(11-19-2013 07:46 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-19-2013 02:22 PM)orangefan Wrote:  Assuming Bama v Florida St. in the NCG, the order of picks will be:

1) Sugar (to replace Bama)
2) Orange (to replace FSU)
3) Orange
4) Sugar
5) Fiesta

This would likely leave the rest of the BCS lineup as:

Rose: Ohio St. (B1G) v. Oregon (P12)
Sugar: Clemson (1) v. UCF (AAC/4)
Orange: Auburn/Missouri (2) v. Oklahoma St./Michigan St./Stanford (3)
Fiesta: Baylor (B12) v. Fresno St./NIU (Non-AQ/5)

If you think the Sugar would take Clemson (or any ACC team, ever) over any SEC team, you are smoking some serious sh*t. The ACC is the laughingstock of the BCS era.

And what makes you think any BCS bowl is going to want Clemson after they lost to South Carolina?

Clemson has one of the best traveling fan bases in the country. Besides, a 10-2 Clemson team is still very attractive. Who would the OB take in front of them? 2 loss Mich State? 2 loss Stanford? UFC? Please.

What are you? A UCN fan. That's UCF, and why not, or are you one of those elitist idiots? Let's just say it's a good thing for UNC that they don't play UCF this year, I think we both know that would end badly for UNC.

(11-20-2013 11:48 AM)stever20 Wrote:  I'll say a sleeper this year for the Orange Bowl should they win out. USC. I think we will see them making a pretty good jump up in the polls the next few weeks if they can win. Their computer numbers aren't bad and would just go up. And yes, I think the Orange woudl take them over Stanford.

SC's at 25, and they have Colorado and UCLA left. No way they get to 14.

(11-20-2013 12:18 PM)CPslograd Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 11:48 AM)stever20 Wrote:  I'll say a sleeper this year for the Orange Bowl should they win out. USC. I think we will see them making a pretty good jump up in the polls the next few weeks if they can win. Their computer numbers aren't bad and would just go up. And yes, I think the Orange woudl take them over Stanford.

SC's at 25, and they have Colorado and UCLA left. No way they get to 14.

They're actually at 23 not 25. They have several games coming up where the loser will fall behind them. Let's just say this- I don't know if USC will get to 14, but I think end of the day they would be looking at 16-17 at the worst case.

(11-20-2013 12:18 PM)CPslograd Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 11:48 AM)stever20 Wrote:  I'll say a sleeper this year for the Orange Bowl should they win out. USC. I think we will see them making a pretty good jump up in the polls the next few weeks if they can win. Their computer numbers aren't bad and would just go up. And yes, I think the Orange woudl take them over Stanford.

SC's at 25, and they have Colorado and UCLA left. No way they get to 14.

Actually I think USC in the Rose Bowl would be more likely. If they win the South and beat Oregon they are in. And Stanford would likely be sent as an at large.

Stanford has zero chance of being an at large team. If it was the Fiesta choosing 1st maybe, but the Orange selects 1st.

(11-20-2013 11:04 AM)orangefan Wrote:  1) Sugar (to replace Bama; cannot select Clemson)

You didn't need to dig up a special BCS rule to know that the Sugar wasn't going to take Clemson over an SEC team. That was a given.

Lots of this thread is ridiculous. BCS Bowls are VERY loyal to their anchor conferences. The only exception this year would be the Fiesta (since they're losing the Big 12 next) but they're last in line so they're stuck. Barring Florida St or Alabama losing, the only drama is whether the Orange takes the local UCF or takes their new future partner in the Big Ten.

Unless Bama or FSU lose, the BCS bowls will be:

Orange: Clemson vs. UCF/Mich St/Wisconsin
Sugar: Auburn/Mizzou/TAMU vs. UCF/Mich St/Wisconsin
Rose: Ohio St. vs. Oregon
Fiesta: Baylor/OK St vs. Fresno/NIU

NCG: Bama vs. Florida St

If the Orange takes UCF, the Sugar will take a Big Ten team. If the Orange takes a Big Ten team, the Sugar will take UCF.

(11-20-2013 05:22 PM)Metropolis777 Wrote:  Lots of this thread is ridiculous. BCS Bowls are VERY loyal to their anchor conferences. The only exception this year would be the Fiesta (since they're losing the Big 12 next) but they're last in line so they're stuck. Barring Florida St or Alabama losing, the only drama is whether the Orange takes the local UCF or takes their new future partner in the Big Ten.

Unless Bama or FSU lose, the BCS bowls will be:

Orange: Clemson vs. UCF/Mich St/Wisconsin
Sugar: Auburn/Mizzou/TAMU vs. UCF/Mich St/Wisconsin
Rose: Ohio St. vs. Oregon
Fiesta: Baylor/OK St vs. Fresno/NIU

NCG: Bama vs. Florida St

If the Orange takes UCF, the Sugar will take a Big Ten team. If the Orange takes a Big Ten team, the Sugar will take UCF.

You bring up a very interesting point. If say Alabama loses and Baylor makes the title game(FSU vs Baylor)- does the Fiesta instead of grabbing a Oklahoma St in the game replace them instead with a Stanford or another Pac 12 team? This may be the one scenario that gets Stanford in the BCS quite frankly!

(11-20-2013 05:22 PM)Metropolis777 Wrote:  Lots of this thread is ridiculous.

Blame silly inferiority-driven ACC fans who have the temerity to post that the Sugar Bowl would actually prefer Clemson (!!!) to an SEC team.

(11-20-2013 12:38 PM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 12:18 PM)CPslograd Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 11:48 AM)stever20 Wrote:  I'll say a sleeper this year for the Orange Bowl should they win out. USC. I think we will see them making a pretty good jump up in the polls the next few weeks if they can win. Their computer numbers aren't bad and would just go up. And yes, I think the Orange woudl take them over Stanford.

SC's at 25, and they have Colorado and UCLA left. No way they get to 14.

Actually I think USC in the Rose Bowl would be more likely. If they win the South and beat Oregon they are in. And Stanford would likely be sent as an at large.

ASU would have to lose out, SC would have to win out, and UCLA would have to beat ASU, lose to USC, and both UCLA and ASU drop below USC in the BCS rankings for USC to have a chance to rep the South. If UCLA beats ASU, I don't see a loss to USC dropping them below USC in the BCS rankings.

A 9 position ranking which could easily be more than that if UCLA beats ASU is an awful lot to make up in one week.

Hard to see USC winning the division, it's not impossible, but it's damn unlikely. And ASU will be 10 point favorites or so against UofA anyway.

(11-20-2013 10:00 PM)CPslograd Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 12:38 PM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 12:18 PM)CPslograd Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 11:48 AM)stever20 Wrote:  I'll say a sleeper this year for the Orange Bowl should they win out. USC. I think we will see them making a pretty good jump up in the polls the next few weeks if they can win. Their computer numbers aren't bad and would just go up. And yes, I think the Orange woudl take them over Stanford.

SC's at 25, and they have Colorado and UCLA left. No way they get to 14.

Actually I think USC in the Rose Bowl would be more likely. If they win the South and beat Oregon they are in. And Stanford would likely be sent as an at large.

ASU would have to lose out, SC would have to win out, and UCLA would have to beat ASU, lose to USC, and both UCLA and ASU drop below USC in the BCS rankings for USC to have a chance to rep the South. If UCLA beats ASU, I don't see a loss to USC dropping them below USC in the BCS rankings.

A 9 position ranking which could easily be more than that if UCLA beats ASU is an awful lot to make up in one week.

Hard to see USC winning the division, it's not impossible, but it's damn unlikely. And ASU will be 10 point favorites or so against UofA anyway.

Actually all USC needs if for Arizona St to lose out, and USC to win out. USC would be 7-2 Arizona St and UCLA would be 6-3.

As far as the polls are concerned- if USC beats UCLA, a lot of voters will automatically put USC ahead of UCLA(no matter where they were before).

(11-20-2013 07:48 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 05:22 PM)Metropolis777 Wrote:  Lots of this thread is ridiculous.

Blame silly inferiority-driven ACC fans who have the temerity to post that the Sugar Bowl would actually prefer Clemson (!!!) to an SEC team.

My point on this was that I thought the Sugar might prefer an 11-1 school over a 10-2 school, particularly one that travels as well as Clemson. I misunderstood the BCS rule, though, that would prohibit the Sugar from taking Clemson, which I subsequently corrected. Obviously, the BCS rule contemplates that the Sugar might prefer Clemson, since they need to ban them from doing so.

(11-21-2013 09:03 AM)orangefan Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 07:48 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 05:22 PM)Metropolis777 Wrote:  Lots of this thread is ridiculous.

Blame silly inferiority-driven ACC fans who have the temerity to post that the Sugar Bowl would actually prefer Clemson (!!!) to an SEC team.

My point on this was that I thought the Sugar might prefer an 11-1 school over a 10-2 school, particularly one that travels as well as Clemson. I misunderstood the BCS rule, though, that would prohibit the Sugar from taking Clemson, which I subsequently corrected. Obviously, the BCS rule contemplates that the Sugar might prefer Clemson, since they need to ban them from doing so.

The rule was put in after the 2002 season. In that year, the title game was between #1 Miami and #2 Ohio St. Orange selected first and took Iowa. This made it where then the Rose couldn't take a Big Ten team, and they then had to have Washington St play Oklahoma. Orange then got USC- so they called that game Rose Bowl East.

(11-21-2013 09:03 AM)orangefan Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 07:48 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 05:22 PM)Metropolis777 Wrote:  Lots of this thread is ridiculous.

Blame silly inferiority-driven ACC fans who have the temerity to post that the Sugar Bowl would actually prefer Clemson (!!!) to an SEC team.

My point on this was that I thought the Sugar might prefer an 11-1 school over a 10-2 school, particularly one that travels as well as Clemson. I misunderstood the BCS rule, though, that would prohibit the Sugar from taking Clemson, which I subsequently corrected. Obviously, the BCS rule contemplates that the Sugar might prefer Clemson, since they need to ban them from doing so.

No, obviously, the BCS rule contemplates that *some* BCS bowl at *some* point in time might prefer *some* school from a non-anchor conference over a school from an anchor conference.

It was almost surely developed to protect the ACC from having its Orange slot taken by more desirable schools from another conference, like the SEC, not to protect the SEC and its Sugar tie from the ACC or specifically Clemson. No danger there, LOL.