Close the books on the BCS era. Like it or not, it's done. In hindsight, I think the BCS era has provided the best opportunity ever for "have not" schools to elevate themselves for a season or two to win some big games. In fact, schools like Utah, Louisville and TCU ran with these opportunities and secured their place being members of one of the P5 conferences.

I'll miss the BCS to be honest about it. It made the best of an otherwise curious situation where you had such a large disparity between schools. Despite the fact that people thought it was exclusionary - and no doubt it was - it still had that avenue for schools to transform themselves. That is basically gone today. It's a shame because while there are a number of schools that I would not want my alma mater to share a conference with, these schools deserve some avenue to shoot for the brass ring. Despite the new format appearing to look "open", I really don't expect to see it work out very well in practice.

Good luck to the G5 schools who are on the cusp. Hopefully things work out for your schools in the end.

Yeah it's weird I think the BCS will be remembered pretty poorly- but it really transformed the game. It's now so much more of a national game than it ever was before. and it helped in a large measure the smaller leagues- especially in these last 8 years where we had several BCS busters.

Has the BCS really helped the G5 conferences? No doubt it helped the teams that busted the BCS, but I question whether the leagues as a whole benefit.

Take this year's UCF as an example. Their team's profile goes way up, like Boise, Utah, and TCU when they won BCS games. The AAC, though, only benefits if a few other teams from that conference break through and get a "CFP" bowl win in the new system. If it's only UCF that keeps "busting", then it becomes like Boise and the WAC, where the general perception is that they're "too good for the league."

Think back to 1997.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1997_NCAA_D...all_season

Only 7 non-AQ teams went to bowl games that year. Big West Utah St played CUSA Cincy- and then 5 others- with no team they played better than 7-4.
CUSA 2/7 teams went bowling
Big West 1/6
MAC 1/12
WAC 3/16

MAC had 4 3 loss teams sitting home from any bowl games.

(01-07-2014 05:00 PM)stever20 Wrote:  Think back to 1997.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1997_NCAA_D...all_season

Only 7 non-AQ teams went to bowl games that year. Big West Utah St played CUSA Cincy- and then 5 others- with no team they played better than 7-4.
CUSA 2/7 teams went bowling
Big West 1/6
MAC 1/12
WAC 3/16

MAC had 4 3 loss teams sitting home from any bowl games.

Great point stever.

(01-07-2014 04:38 PM)Wedge Wrote:  Has the BCS really helped the G5 conferences? No doubt it helped the teams that busted the BCS, but I question whether the leagues as a whole benefit.

Take this year's UCF as an example. Their team's profile goes way up, like Boise, Utah, and TCU when they won BCS games. The AAC, though, only benefits if a few other teams from that conference break through and get a "CFP" bowl win in the new system. If it's only UCF that keeps "busting", then it becomes like Boise and the WAC, where the general perception is that they're "too good for the league."

Well the problem is the MWC is mostly the WAC, the AAC is mostly the CUSA, the CUSA is mostly the Sun Belt, the Sun Belt is mostly recent move-ups, the WAC is gone and the MAC is still the MAC.

(01-07-2014 05:00 PM)stever20 Wrote:  Think back to 1997.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1997_NCAA_D...all_season

Only 7 non-AQ teams went to bowl games that year. Big West Utah St played CUSA Cincy- and then 5 others- with no team they played better than 7-4.
CUSA 2/7 teams went bowling
Big West 1/6
MAC 1/12
WAC 3/16

MAC had 4 3 loss teams sitting home from any bowl games.

The MAC was a tweener FBC/FCS conference back then in most peoples eyes. They are the group of G5 schools helped the most since the advent of the BCS.

(01-07-2014 05:00 PM)stever20 Wrote:  Think back to 1997.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1997_NCAA_D...all_season

Only 7 non-AQ teams went to bowl games that year. Big West Utah St played CUSA Cincy- and then 5 others- with no team they played better than 7-4.
CUSA 2/7 teams went bowling
Big West 1/6
MAC 1/12
WAC 3/16

MAC had 4 3 loss teams sitting home from any bowl games.

This is completely unrelated to the BCS. The reason more non-AQ teams go bowling is because so many new bowls were created---mostly by ESPN Regional in an effort to create cheap programming that generated solid ratings. These are low paying smaller bowls which were more or less made for TV events. For all the abuse the G5 heap upon ESPN, the fact is, ESPN is the one providing bowls for deserving G5 teams---not the BCS.

The BCS, along with its predecessor, the Bowl Coalition, literally destroyed the non-AQ conferences by banding togther and excluding them from the biggest games in the nation. Largely due to the efforts of Tulane president Scott Cowen and a coalition of university presidents he founded, the BCS was reformed to create access for the G5 schools. A game was added and clearly defined criteria were established to determine when a G5 schools was "worthy" of automatic qualification to a BCS bowl--thus, the process of BCS busting" was born.

In its final form, the BCS was certainly an improvement over the original bowl coalition as well as the first generation BCS. In its final form, at least the BCS gave the G5 something to shoot for.

I still find it surprising, that with a booty of over 85 million dollars from the CFP playoff to split amongst themselves---the G5 failed to work together to create a series of 3 bowls for their respective champions. By setting aside 10 million from the fund each year, the G5 could have created 3 bowls for the 4 G5 champs not heading to the G5 BCS slot.

Bowl #1= G5 champ #2 vs whatever selection you can get for 2.5 million.

Bowl #2= G5 champ #3 vs whatever selection you can get for a 2.5 million dollar payout

Bowl #3= G5 champ #4 vs G5 champ #5.

All 4 G5 participants receive 1 million each. The bowls would be owned jointly by the G5 and any net profit would be split evenly among the group. That's way better than creating bottom tier bowls in the Bahamas. Oh well, another opportunity missed.

As far as the BCS being better for the G5 than the CFP---I think the CFP is marginally better for the G5. In the CFP, a BCS level game is guaranteed to the G5 as opposed to the BCS systems conditional access. Secondly, the BCS required a G5 member to be either #1 or #2 to have a shot at the championship game. In the CFP, a G5 can get a shot by being rated #4. Both are very difficult---but no current G5 schools have made it to #2 in the BCS era---but some have made it to #4 during that period.

The downside of the new system is the selection committee loaded with P5 buddies. That's going to be a HUGE problem for the G5.

I'm not sad to see it go at all!
but The funny thing to me is that all of
2013 BCS games were outstanding this year!
Go figure.

(01-07-2014 04:04 PM)C Marlow Wrote:  Close the books on the BCS era. Like it or not, it's done. In hindsight, I think the BCS era has provided the best opportunity ever for "have not" schools to elevate themselves for a season or two to win some big games. In fact, schools like Utah, Louisville and TCU ran with these opportunities and secured their place being members of one of the P5 conferences.

I'll miss the BCS to be honest about it. It made the best of an otherwise curious situation where you had such a large disparity between schools. Despite the fact that people thought it was exclusionary - and no doubt it was - it still had that avenue for schools to transform themselves. That is basically gone today. It's a shame because while there are a number of schools that I would not want my alma mater to share a conference with, these schools deserve some avenue to shoot for the brass ring. Despite the new format appearing to look "open", I really don't expect to see it work out very well in practice.

Good luck to the G5 schools who are on the cusp. Hopefully things work out for your schools in the end.

F* the BCS. It created a official unofficial divide among conferences that allowed the RICH to get exceedingly richer, created a large recruiting divide that was used by the schools with the "in" on it, and basically forced a lot of conferences to play non-traditional days to get any kind of tv coverage because "all the ones that mattered" locked up Saturday tv.

It singlehandedly was the starting domino for college realignment craziness that has ensued since its inception. I will not miss it at all.

That said, their solution of this "playoff" is basically the BCS wolf in sheep's clothing, with only 4 teams involved.

those conferences already were being excluded from the top games. Outside of Louisville's one Fiesta Bowl trip- when did any of them have any shot at all? My point is the other conferences weren't exactly rolling in great times equals with the power conferences like some make it out to be. Just not true in any shape or form.

(01-07-2014 11:12 PM)stever20 Wrote:  those conferences already were being excluded from the top games. Outside of Louisville's one Fiesta Bowl trip- when did any of them have any shot at all? My point is the other conferences weren't exactly rolling in great times equals with the power conferences like some make it out to be. Just not true in any shape or form.

Was there a glass ceiling in place before the creation of the BCS? Sure, BUT WITH THE BCS it was set in stone, and its permutations greatly worked over the conferences not granted with auto-bids.

(01-07-2014 11:19 PM)PirateTreasureNC Wrote:  

(01-07-2014 11:12 PM)stever20 Wrote:  those conferences already were being excluded from the top games. Outside of Louisville's one Fiesta Bowl trip- when did any of them have any shot at all? My point is the other conferences weren't exactly rolling in great times equals with the power conferences like some make it out to be. Just not true in any shape or form.

Was there a glass ceiling in place before the creation of the BCS? Sure, BUT WITH THE BCS it was set in stone, and its permutations greatly worked over the conferences not granted with auto-bids.

It already was set in stone. If it wasn't for the BCS- teams like Boise, TCU, Utah, and UCF NEVER happen. You don't have the Oklahoma/Boise game. The Utah/Alabama game.

(01-07-2014 11:22 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(01-07-2014 11:19 PM)PirateTreasureNC Wrote:  

(01-07-2014 11:12 PM)stever20 Wrote:  those conferences already were being excluded from the top games. Outside of Louisville's one Fiesta Bowl trip- when did any of them have any shot at all? My point is the other conferences weren't exactly rolling in great times equals with the power conferences like some make it out to be. Just not true in any shape or form.

Was there a glass ceiling in place before the creation of the BCS? Sure, BUT WITH THE BCS it was set in stone, and its permutations greatly worked over the conferences not granted with auto-bids.

It already was set in stone. If it wasn't for the BCS- teams like Boise, TCU, Utah, and UCF NEVER happen. You don't have the Oklahoma/Boise game. The Utah/Alabama game.

There was a difference, but it it was much more marginal.

Here is an example. In 1997, before the full damage of the BCS era had occurred, a 9-3 S Miss team from CUSA finished the year ranked at #19. That's right---a nonAQ ranked at #19 with THREE losses. That doesn't happen in the G5 today due to a lack of respect and the slow degeneration of the G5 recruiting base as a result of the non-AQ label. Compare 1997 S Miss with this years UCF. UCF had one loss to a top 10 team and could barely get to #16. They wouldn't be ranked at all with 3 losses.

As was pointed out earlier, CUSA only had 2 teams in bowls in 1997. But they failed to mention that there were only 7 football teams in the league that year and only 3 were bowl eligible. They also failed to mention there were only 20 bowls in total. Heck, in 1997 only 5 Big-12 teams were in bowls.

In 1997 the average power conference team made about 1 million dollars a year from TV. CUSA schools made about half that. Today, at the close of the BCS era that gap is closer to 20 million. The bowl coalition and later, the BCS, slowly has eroded the position of the non-AQ teams to the point that they are in danger of even staying in the same division as the P5. While the later years of the BCS era were more G5 friendly, the overall effect of the Bowl Coalition/BCS era was very bad for the non-AQs.