(06-26-2010 08:55 AM)Shannon Panther Wrote:  After digging into the numbers, I have to agree. On average the MWC trails the other 6 conferences badly and considering we are already 2 years into the evaluation. From the looks of it, they can't get there from here.

The MWC is by far the strongest non-AQ and is planning to change the revenue distribution formula so that it benefits the conference which places a school in a BCS game.

With Boise in the MWC (something I'm still trying to get adjusted to) most of the top BCS buster candidates reside in the MWC.

The MWC made 9.8 million from the BCS last year finishing as the highest rated non-AQ conference + placing a school in a BCS bowl.

Under the new BCS agreement, the MWC should make even more money, approaching close to a full BCS share.

I would think the MWC is a net winner in the realignment.

(06-26-2010 02:29 PM)Airport KC Wrote:  With Boise in the MWC (something I'm still trying to get adjusted to) most of the top BCS buster candidates reside in the MWC.

Actually they have same percentage of BCS busters now as they did before; 50%. They have two of the four teams who have busted the BCS, and represent three of the six non-ACQ BCS appearances.

(06-26-2010 04:28 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(06-26-2010 02:29 PM)Airport KC Wrote:  With Boise in the MWC (something I'm still trying to get adjusted to) most of the top BCS buster candidates reside in the MWC.

Actually they have same percentage of BCS busters now as they did before; 50%. They have two of the four teams who have busted the BCS, and represent three of the six non-ACQ BCS appearances.

Before:
MWC Utah/TCU
WAC Hawaii/Boise

After
MWC Boise/TCU
WAC Hawaii

That is 3/4 all time BCS appearances are now in the MWC.

Other Buster-Types over the last 15 years:

BYU, AFA, CSU, Fresno, Houston, ECU, USM, Tulsa, Tulane, Marshall, Miami, BGSU, Toledo, Northern Ill.

Five of the MWC's 9 schools have made a top 25 run, more than any other conference.

While Utah is now in the Pac 10, they still had two BCS busting appearances. Also, Boise's came in the WAC, which is important to consider, because had they been in the MWC last year, one of the two would not have made it. And based on the Fiesta Bowl, I'd say TCU woudl not have made it.

(06-26-2010 11:41 AM)omnicarrier Wrote:  Can't see the Fiesta being too crazy about that or having the Big East as an anchor conference.

Still think there is an outside chance that IF this comes about (Cotton elevated to BCS status), the Big Ten and the Pac-12 threaten to take the Rose and now the Fiesta with them and blow up the BCS altogether.

Cheers,
Neil

...and the playoffs that result would be the best thing to ever happen to college football.

I wish we could just go to 7 AQ conferences, add a BCS bowl, and call it a day. None of the other conferences are close to BCS status, so go to seven and move on.

If they have 2 more strong years at the top, it would seem they can get in with the exemption. Appears there are alot more hoops to jump through than originally thought to get no. 7.

The MWC could also request a waiver for the 3rd criteria. Just sayin'.......

(06-26-2010 10:07 PM)BlazerOfUAB Wrote:  The MWC could also request a waiver for the 3rd criteria. Just sayin'.......

Wai vers are available only if they rank in the top 6 in criteria 1 (Champ rank) & 2 (average rank). They are a distant 7th in the 2nd measure. They are within 50% of the SEC in the 3rd measure.

They can ask for a waiver, but under BCS qualification standards, they don't have a case.

(06-26-2010 08:38 PM)Tampa Bearcat Wrote:  

(06-26-2010 11:41 AM)omnicarrier Wrote:  Can't see the Fiesta being too crazy about that or having the Big East as an anchor conference.

Still think there is an outside chance that IF this comes about (Cotton elevated to BCS status), the Big Ten and the Pac-12 threaten to take the Rose and now the Fiesta with them and blow up the BCS altogether.

Cheers,
Neil

...and the playoffs that result would be the best thing to ever happen to college football.

More likely the return of the Old Bowl system will be the result with the polls deciding the national champ, not a playoff.

Cheers,
Neil

(06-27-2010 10:02 AM)omnicarrier Wrote:  More likely the return of the Old Bowl system will be the result with the polls deciding the national champ, not a playoff.
Cheers,
Neil

Yup. Some people are still under the impression that a playoff would make more money than the bowl system. It would make more TV money, but the bowls pay out a lot more than they make from TV. Plus the bowls would just increase their payout before allowing a playoff. For BCS bowls, visitors spend a minimum of $100 million at the bowls, the cities they are in, and with their travel sponsors. If you turn it into a playoff, while you are likely to still sell out the games, they will be with local fans, who don't need to travel for a week, stay in hotels, eat in restaurants, rent cars, etc. So even if you tried to incorporate the bowl system into a playoff, with the exception of the championship game, you remove a majority of the traveling fans that spend the money at these cities, and the money dries up real quick.

(06-27-2010 01:44 AM)Shannon Panther Wrote:  

(06-26-2010 10:07 PM)BlazerOfUAB Wrote:  The MWC could also request a waiver for the 3rd criteria. Just sayin'.......

Wai vers are available only if they rank in the top 6 in criteria 1 (Champ rank) & 2 (average rank). They are a distant 7th in the 2nd measure. They are within 50% of the SEC in the 3rd measure.

They can ask for a waiver, but under BCS qualification standards, they don't have a case.

A league can apply for a waiver (exemption) before the Presidential oversight committee in two scenarios:

1. If it finishes among the top six in both criteria No. 1 (ranking of the highest-ranked team in the final BCS Standings each year) and criteria No. 2 (the final regular-season rankings of all conference teams in the computer rankings used by the BCS each year) and if its ranking in Criteria No. 3 is equal to or greater than 33.3 percent of the conference with the highest ranking in No. 3 (instead of 50% of greater which would mean an automatic qualification).

2. If it finishes among the top seven in either No. 1 or No. 2 and among the top five in the other and if its ranking in No. 3 is equal to or greater than 33.3 percent of the conference with the highest ranking in No. 3.

http://www.bcsfootball.org/news/story?id=5126859

The MWC easily qualifies for #2 after the first two years of this cycle. The conventional wisdom I've heard is that if the MWC is in a position to apply for an exemption with the Presidential oversight committee, it is likely that they will grant one, as that is the politically and perhaps legally most expeditious thing to do (particularly if another league has to apply for an exemption, too, which if the MWC has to by definition another league will, too.)

The question is if the league will be able to stay in the top 5 of the highest rated team category. No way we'll be able to catch up in the second category (although we are basically guaranteed to be in that 7th position needed for an exemption application), so the pressure is on to keep position in that first one. Losing Utah and gaining Boise hurts a bit in that category- in 2008 Utah was #6 and Boise #9 in the last BCS rankings and we move from 3rd to 4th with a 6.5 average. The BE is 5th at 7.5 and the Big Ten now 6th with a 9.0 average since the WAC is now out without Boise- http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/wr...index.html


This year looks good with both TCU and Boise poised for big years. But it'll come down to how the top teams in the conference perform the next two years. Ironically, even though it is the bottom of the conference holding us back in terms of qualifying outright for an autobid, they don't matter the next two years, as the gap between us and the 8th league is huge. It's only the top that matters.

(06-27-2010 10:31 PM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  2. If it finishes among the top seven in either No. 1 or No. 2 and among the top five in the other and if its ranking in No. 3 is equal to or greater than 33.3 percent of the conference with the highest ranking in No. 3.

http://www.bcsfootball.org/news/story?id=5126859

The MWC easily qualifies for #2 after the first two years of this cycle. The conventional wisdom I've heard is that if the MWC is in a position to apply for an exemption with the Presidential oversight committee, it is likely that they will grant one, as that is the politically and perhaps legally most expeditious thing to do (particularly if another league has to apply for an exemption, too, which if the MWC has to by definition another league will, too.)

Rule #2 will require one of the existing AQ conferences to apply for a wavier.

With Boise predicted to perform at a high level next season along with TCU the MWC should soon be an AQ conference.