The new BCS model will likely be that the top four teams get placed into two specific bowls with the winners going to an additional bowl to decide the national champion. UC has already proven they can get to this level even in a conference that was only considered the sixth best by most national pundits. This is what UC can sell to recruits. If they go 12-0 in the new Big East they will be a top four team and will make the BCS playoffs. And in my opinion UC will have an easier time making the BCS playoff in the Big East than the Big 12. What's more liekly ... UC going 12-0 in the new Big East or going 11-1 or better in the Big 12?

(02-16-2012 08:54 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  ACC 2-13 in BCS Bowl games. Just keep that in mind.

ESPN conviently neglects that fact.

(02-16-2012 08:05 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(02-16-2012 01:31 AM)WarningSigns Wrote:  Final BCS rankings:

2011 - Boise State (7)
2010 - Boise State (10), TCU (3)
2009 - Cincinnati (3), TCU (4), Boise State (6)
2008 - Utah (6), Boise State (9), TCU (11), Cincinnati (12)

What do you doomsayers think the new rules will look like that would prevent Big East or non-BCS teams from sniffing a BCS bowl?

The only way the new rule is killer is if it gives the bowls complete discretion on who they take. I think the Big 10, SEC, and PAC 12 (maybe) would be fine with this. I think the Big 12 would be split. I cannot see any other conference being ok with this.

Plus if they go to a plus 1 system, the bowls will not have an option on those teams. UC could certainly recruit for playing in the plus 1.

Agreed, and I have a hard time seeing them go back to bowls just picking whoever the hell they want. It'd be completely regressive and bad for college football in general.. that WOULD be killer and too many schools would be against it.

Using the BCS rankings instead of AQ would be less advantageous for the BE but more even for all the conferences. Downside is they use the self-interested coaches poll.

(02-16-2012 08:05 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(02-16-2012 01:31 AM)WarningSigns Wrote:  Final BCS rankings:

2011 - Boise State (7)
2010 - Boise State (10), TCU (3)
2009 - Cincinnati (3), TCU (4), Boise State (6)
2008 - Utah (6), Boise State (9), TCU (11), Cincinnati (12)

What do you doomsayers think the new rules will look like that would prevent Big East or non-BCS teams from sniffing a BCS bowl?

The only way the new rule is killer is if it gives the bowls complete discretion on who they take. I think the Big 10, SEC, and PAC 12 (maybe) would be fine with this. I think the Big 12 would be split. I cannot see any other conference being ok with this.

Plus if they go to a plus 1 system, the bowls will not have an option on those teams. UC could certainly recruit for playing in the plus 1.

That's my point and concern. You could finish however high you want, but I believe the BCS is going bye-bye. I see a revision back to the old days.

I see in no more than 10 years a move to 4 16 team super conferences who say hell with the NCAA.

So your prediction is superconferences with bowls having 100% discretion on who they take? Definitely don't see that combination happening.

Though I hate the superconference idea, it would be the first step towards a true NFL style playoff. Superconferences would be the opposite of a revision to the old days.

I see superconferences as a possibility, bowls choosing whoever they want as an unlikely, and both together as nearly impossible.

We could end up on the wrong side of the fence if it went to superconferences and we weren't included in the 64 teams. Bowls choosing whoever they want would put UC and 85% of college teams on the wrong side of the fence. But there are tons of new rules and systems being talked about, many of which would leave us just fine. Its incredibly premature to assume that the end of the AQ means we are going back to the 80s.

(02-15-2012 10:15 PM)bearcatmark Wrote:  Billy_Bearcat has consistently been a negative Nancy Z when it comes to Bearcat football. I like the direction the program is heading and the league has done a nice job bringing in program whose football success in recent history has surpassed that of those who left.

I am extremely positive with the program and the 2 figures at the helm...I'm very negative about the outside forces that can put a stranglehold on it though.