I recall reading somewhere many moons ago that it was very important that the BCS leagues stay the majority in college football (it's currently 67-52 in favor of the BCS schools). If the Big East were to lose their automatic bid, then it would be 60-59 in favor of the non-BCS schools (that's with Notre Dame as a BCS school and Army/Navy as a non BCS).

I don't remember why exactly it's important though. Is a playoff, or any major system change, based upon majority rule or something? Are we talking more solid grounds for a lawsuit if college football becomes ruled by a minority of schools? I don't quite understand the problem apart from the obvious unfairness of it. Maybe a lawyer or NCAA official on the board here can fill me in. :)

And here's another problem, since the NCAA decided to lift the 15k attendance 1-A requirement, what's to stop an influx of 1-AA schools making the upgrade? It happens almost every year, Boise State, Buffalo, USF, UConn, Marshall, Florida Int'l and Florida Atlantic have jumped here recently. Western Kentucky is talking with the MAC about a possible invite. Appy State is apparently upgrading facilities. 1-A football is a regular topic at UMass. If history is any indicator, a steady pace of 1-AA schools moving up will close that non BCS/BCS gap within the next two or three decades. What happens then? Giving a mid-major conference an auto-bid would fend off the problem for a decade or so. But then 10 years later you have the same issue.

I guess I would like to know and understand the severity of the situation before I delve too deep into possible solutions/countless unpredictable scenerios. So again I ask, why is it so important that BCS > non BCS?

I think having a majority of the schools in the BCS is important to the network value of the BCS series. If too many schools are left out then the BCS can't really be representative of college football.

Don't worry, I predict when the rules for the keeping an autobid are finalized, they will be crafted to comfortably allow the Big East to retain its bid and possibly even give the Moutain West a bid. If they make the bar for BCS membership that might put one of the big 5 in danger of losing a bid and they don't want that.

Kit-Cat Wrote:I think having a majority of the schools in the BCS is important to the network value of the BCS series. If too many schools are left out then the BCS can't really be representative of college football.

Don't worry, I predict when the rules for the keeping an autobid are finalized, they will be crafted to comfortably allow the Big East to retain its bid and possibly even give the Moutain West a bid. If they make the bar for BCS membership that might put one of the big 5 in danger of losing a bid and they don't want that.

I agree, though I think idea that the Mountain West is next in line for a BCS bid is more of a fans creation then reality. Utah had a great run, but C-USA (even the new C-USA) and the MAC are as close to getting a BCS bid or better access to a BCS bid then the MWC is. If the MWC were close to getting a bid then C-USA wouldn't be the only non-BCS conferences with a seat of some sort at the BCS table and the MWC would have slightly more access then they have now to having input in the BCS.

Quote:I predict when the rules for the keeping an autobid are finalized, they will be crafted to comfortably allow the Big East to retain its bid and possibly even give the Moutain West a bid.

I agree that they'll bend over backwards to keep the Big East in. As long as the BCS exists, I think the Big East will be a full member, but the non-BCS schools will still eventually outnumber the BCS schools. That is inevitable with the lax requirements to jump from 1-AA to 1-A.

Of course by the time that happens, the BCS could very well not exist, or be so drastically changed that the majority/minority problem is no longer relevant.

nflsucks Wrote:And here's another problem, since the NCAA decided to lift the 15k attendance 1-A requirement, what's to stop an influx of 1-AA schools making the upgrade?

On Otto Fad's D-1aa site he quotes the Big Sky commish saying they move up as a conference.


[quote]Asked whether it was time for the Big Sky to prepare for such a move, commissioner Doug Fullerton cited the dwindling support for I-AA-stabilizing I-A standards.

“If the standards are indeed not going to stay in place,

Quote:I think having a majority of the schools in the BCS is important to the network value of the BCS series. If too many schools are left out then the BCS can't really be representative of college football.

What would happen as a result of that?

15 D1-AA schools have gone 1-A in the past 15 years. At that very easily calculated rate, the non-BCS schools would/will become the majority in about 20 years.

Hmm... I guess the more I think about it, the farther off this 'problem' really is. The only immediate threat to the BCS schools becoming the minority would be if a league all jumped together from 1-AA to 1-A, a very unlikely scenerio.

If being the minority were that big of a problem, giving one other conference an automatic bid would push the problem away yet another 20 years as 10 or so schools jump from the have not to the have column. Of course being in the majority would have to be very very important for the Big 6 to make such a move, and I'm not entirely convinced it is.

[quote]“If the standards are indeed not going to stay in place,

Cat's_Claw Wrote:

Kit-Cat Wrote:I think having a majority of the schools in the BCS is important to the network value of the BCS series. If too many schools are left out then the BCS can't really be representative of college football.

Don't worry, I predict when the rules for the keeping an autobid are finalized, they will be crafted to comfortably allow the Big East to retain its bid and possibly even give the Moutain West a bid. If they make the bar for BCS membership that might put one of the big 5 in danger of losing a bid and they don't want that.

I agree, though I think idea that the Mountain West is next in line for a BCS bid is more of a fans creation then reality. Utah had a great run, but C-USA (even the new C-USA) and the MAC are as close to getting a BCS bid or better access to a BCS bid then the MWC is. If the MWC were close to getting a bid then C-USA wouldn't be the only non-BCS conferences with a seat of some sort at the BCS table and the MWC would have slightly more access then they have now to having input in the BCS.

No way.

The moutain west is top to bottom much better than CUSA, MAC, or any other non BCS conference for that matter. Just look at the Sagarin's.....the MWC finished above CUSA every year and in some seasons the Big East.

TCU left CUSA for the Mountain West because at least that conference has an outside shot at an automatic bid. CUSA and the MAC have no shot with all the dead weight at the bottom.

i could see the mwc getting bcs auto esp w/ the 5 bcs bowl being created. which would most likely place the big east champ vs the mwc champ. it lookin more and more clearer w/ big east losing auto bid to the orange bowl.

The greater possibility is that the leagues will expand to include the Utah and Boise State in the Pac-10(12) the Big Ten will be forced to change it's name and pick up either Notre Dame or a MAC school and the Big East will expand to twelve in football ( maybe say, Memphis, Marshall, ECU, UMASS) giving the BCS 72 teams and keeping the Majority needed to keep the NCAA from voting the BCS out of existance.

who knows?