PDA

View Full Version : Mountain West Conference pushing for an automatic BCS birth


montrose
01-26-2009, 01:04 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=3861079

Report: MWC seeks boost in BCS status
ESPN.com news services

The nine-team Mountain West Conference is pushing for an automatic berth into the high-stakes, big-money BCS bowl mix, USA Today has reported.
Mountain West

Three teams in the conference, including undefeated Utah in sixth, TCU in 11th and BYU in 16th, finished among the top 25 in the final 2008 BCS standings, and the league's schools will press for a meeting of their presidents, chancellors and Mountain West commissioner Craig Thompson with Atlantic Coast commissioner and current BCS coordinator John Swofford, according to the newspaper.

"The argument I will hear back is, 'Craig, here it is. It's done. It's been agreed to. It's signed,'" Thompson said of a possible reply from the BCS regarding its legal obligations. "That doesn't mean you can't put it on the table.

"One of the options would be to visit with the BCS coordinator ... just to lay out our position."

He adds: "I would not be optimistic. As I explained to them [the Mountain West presidents], it's a series of legal contracts among 11 conferences, four bowls, two TV partners with yet another TV partner coming in. I would not see much of a relaxation."

The BCS bowl games' payout for each team's school is $17 million -- more than five times what teams in second-tier bowls garner.

For his part, Swofford recalled that the Mountain West was among the 11 conferences that agreed to the current model, which "incorporates the strength of a league as a whole over a series of years," the USA Today report says.

BCS coordinator duties are rotated among the commissioners from the Big East, Big 12 and SEC. Six conferences -- the Big East, Big Ten, Big 12, Pacific-10, SEC and ACC -- name champions that automatically qualify for the BCS' five bowl games.

Utah, Swofford told USA Today, "had a terrific season this year, and the BCS provided an excellent platform to showcase their team."

According to the report, an opening exists for a nonqualifying conference to gain the automatic status temporarily based on a BCS formula that includes "the number of top 25 teams, finish of the highest-ranked team and average rank of all teams over a four-year period."

But the Mountain West will be vying for the highest level of qualifying status, USA Today reported.

DomCasual
01-26-2009, 01:07 PM
The BCS sucks.

Dudeskey
01-26-2009, 01:24 PM
The BCS sucks.

So does the Mountain West... Just sayin'

Rock Chalk
01-26-2009, 01:24 PM
BCS does suck but no way in hell does one good MWC year mean they should get an automatic berth in a BCS Bowl.

WyoLaw
01-26-2009, 01:30 PM
BCS does suck but no way in hell does one good MWC year mean they should get an automatic berth in a BCS Bowl.


One good year. HAHA!! What a bad memory you have.

ludo21
01-26-2009, 01:31 PM
BCS is a terrible system, but MWC does not deserve an auto bid just because they have had a good season.

WolfpackGuy
01-26-2009, 01:31 PM
No waiting for 9 months and you get a year's supply of Pampers.
I'm sure the ladies will love it.

houghtam
01-26-2009, 01:32 PM
The current BCS system sucks, and even though the top team of the MWC has strung together several good seasons, they don't deserve to get in.

Because they don't generate 1/10 of the money the other conferences do.

There, I said what everyone else was afraid to.

Rock Chalk
01-26-2009, 01:36 PM
One good year. HAHA!! What a bad memory you have.

I have a great memory and the MWC does not consistently put up 3+ good teams year in and year out.

Maybe to ****ty non-BCS conferences they put up good teams every year.

DomCasual
01-26-2009, 01:42 PM
There are a couple teams in the MWC that don't belong in the MWC. The top teams in the conference have pretty consistently been as good as some of the BCS teams this decade. You'll argue against the MWC, but feel fine with the Big East? Please.

DomCasual
01-26-2009, 01:43 PM
I have a great memory and the MWC does not consistently put up 3+ good teams year in and year out.

Maybe to ****ty non-BCS conferences they put up good teams every year.

Neither does the PAC-10 and Big East, but they're in.

snowspot66
01-26-2009, 01:44 PM
Self sustaining system. Kids want to go to the automatic bid conference schools because they are the big name conferences. It's a recruitment advantage. Kids start seeing these other schools in the big bowl games and it will even that out a bit. The extra cash they would have to put into their program would go an even further distance in getting talent because they could really upgrade their facilities.

BABronco
01-26-2009, 01:47 PM
Self sustaining system. Kids want to go to the automatic bid conference schools because they are the big name conferences. It's a recruitment advantage. Kids start seeing these other schools in the big bowl games and it will even that out a bit. The extra cash they would have to put into their program would go an even further distance in getting talent because they could really upgrade their facilities.

Agreed! :thumbs:

DomCasual
01-26-2009, 01:50 PM
Ladies and gentlemen, your Big East Football Champions:

2004: Pitt; BC; Syracuse; West Virginia
2005: West Virginia
2006: Louisville
2007: West Virginia
2008: Cincinnati

Ugh.

Kaylore
01-26-2009, 01:50 PM
I have a great memory and the MWC does not consistently put up 3+ good teams year in and year out.

Maybe to ****ty non-BCS conferences they put up good teams every year.

Yeah Alec, and all the conferences in the Big East are rockin' it year in and out.

La Caspa Del Diablo
01-26-2009, 02:01 PM
Neither does the PAC-10 and Big East, but they're in.

The Big East is the strongest argument for MWC's case.

If you want to put the Pac-10 in this mess, lets also throw the Big Ten and ACC in for good measure.

DomCasual
01-26-2009, 02:10 PM
The Big East is the strongest argument for MWC's case.

If you want to put the Pac-10 in this mess, lets also throw the Big Ten and ACC in for good measure.

Agreed, to a degree. The PAC-10 is a good comparison because there are a lot of PAC-10/MWC games each year (because of the proximity). The MWC always does pretty well in those games.

I'm not even that much of a MWC fan. I just think the BCS is a joke, and it's bad for sports. Despite having attended BYU, I could never get that excited about following a team you knew wouldn't have a real shot at winning the big prize.

DomCasual
01-26-2009, 02:10 PM
The Big East is the strongest argument for MWC's case.

If you want to put the Pac-10 in this mess, lets also throw the Big Ten and ACC in for good measure.

Just out of curiosity, what does La Caspa Del Diablo mean?

GoHAM
01-26-2009, 02:14 PM
Self sustaining system. Kids want to go to the automatic bid conference schools because they are the big name conferences. It's a recruitment advantage. Kids start seeing these other schools in the big bowl games and it will even that out a bit. The extra cash they would have to put into their program would go an even further distance in getting talent because they could really upgrade their facilities.

Agreed, plus with an automatic berth into the BCS the national networks would start paying more attention to the MWC which in turn would create more buzz, raise the national awareness of the MWC and lead to a better talent base for the MWC. This in turn would generate more money for the league and extend the fanbase of the BCS and allow them to push off the calls for a playoff system by saying they are taking steps to "tweak" their impossibly broken system.

La Caspa Del Diablo
01-26-2009, 02:20 PM
Just out of curiosity, what does La Caspa Del Diablo mean?

The Devil's Dandruff

gunns
01-26-2009, 02:32 PM
I have a great memory and the MWC does not consistently put up 3+ good teams year in and year out.

Maybe to ****ty non-BCS conferences they put up good teams every year.

3+ good teams year in and year out? So what's the criteria for a good team? The final standings? The teams they play? The fact they play in a certain conference? Because I'm looking at the final standings for MWC and they are as good if not better than the other conferences.

You're deluded if you think the BCS conferences play better talent. Overall they may play one good team depending on the year. Alabama, from the SEC, was thought to be #1 for quite awhile this season, Utah shellacked them, then all of a sudden they weren't really that good. What's the problem with giving teams that prove themselves a chance at what other schools get a chance at. And non-BCS schools might just generate a lot more income if they were given the same chance. Most of what's being said here by everyone is opinion.

WyoLaw
01-26-2009, 03:04 PM
You'll argue against the MWC, but feel fine with the Big East? Please.

My thoughts exactly.

La Caspa Del Diablo
01-26-2009, 03:31 PM
I'm not even that much of a MWC fan. I just think the BCS is a joke, and it's bad for sports. Despite having attended BYU, I could never get that excited about following a team you knew wouldn't have a real shot at winning the big prize.

I used to believe '84 BYU was the classic of example of how a mid-major could win a National Title. However, when the Cougars won it, it was an entirely different college football landscape. There were 20+ Independent teams at the time and there weren't any superconferences like you have today (SWC, Big 8, smaller SEC).

'08 Utah was a superior team to '84 BYU and they could only get a #4 ranking in the coaches. That ticked me off.

Division 1-A (FBS) should either let MWC, C-USA, WAC, MAC and Sun Belt into the fun or let them play at Division 1-AA (FCS) where they can actually compete for a title with Montana, Applachian St., Youngstown St., etc.

You're right, I don't see how having the mid-majors in their current purgatory benefits the fans of those programs. If you are a MAC program, the best you can do is earn a trip to lovely Detroit every December.

Pick Six
01-26-2009, 03:44 PM
No waiting for 9 months and you get a year's supply of Pampers.
I'm sure the ladies will love it.

LOL

24champ
01-26-2009, 03:58 PM
Been saying for a while now....

gyldenlove
01-26-2009, 04:04 PM
Why does the ACC have an automatic berth? ever since the bottom fell out of Miami that division has sucked.

I can see the argument for Big-12, Big-12 and SEC, they consistently put up good teams, but ACC, Big-East and PAC-10 are just not good enough. I don't think USC's success is enough to warrant that division getting as much attention as it does.

24champ
01-26-2009, 04:13 PM
I have a great memory and the MWC does not consistently put up 3+ good teams year in and year out.

Maybe to ****ty non-BCS conferences they put up good teams every year.

The MWC is going to add Boise State as a Member to its conference either this summer when the MWC presidents meet up for review, or the next time they have a review in a couple years. I think it's best to leave Boise State in the WAC for now while they can pile up wins and have perhaps a better shot to play in a BCS game with a weak conference than being in the MWC.

The reason is, as stated in the article, the BCS reviews the strength of the Conference over the years by rankings and wins. However if the BCS says, we'll add you if you add BSU to the conference...then BSU will be added.

But that's where it stops for expansion. I don't want the MWC to be a WAC-16 conference...which was the reason the MWC members left the WAC.

The MWC isn't going to get AQ status immediately, but Thompson is setting the stage for down the road.

La Caspa Del Diablo
01-26-2009, 04:19 PM
I can see the argument for Big-12, Big-12 and SEC, they consistently put up good teams, but ACC, Big-East and PAC-10 are just not good enough. I don't think USC's success is enough to warrant that division getting as much attention as it does.

I am assuming you meant the Big Ten among the conferences that should be included?

BTW, the Big Ten hasn't won a Rose Bowl in nine years. They just finished the bowl season at 1-6. When was the last time the Big Ten won a big game against another conference?

BroncoMan4ever
01-26-2009, 04:37 PM
**** the BCS lets get a playoff going. Utah got screwed this year and i don't give a **** what anyone thinks.

Irish Stout
01-26-2009, 04:46 PM
I have a great memory and the MWC does not consistently put up 3+ good teams year in and year out.

Maybe to ****ty non-BCS conferences they put up good teams every year.

They have consistently put up more good teams over the past decade than the Big 12 north, so maybe they should kick out the Big 12 North and Baylor and add the MWC. Your argument is just as ridiculous as mine.

MWC is not a great conference, but its not a bad conference either like Big East... its probably better than the PAC 10 considering the consistency of the Utah schools, the staying power of TCU, and the random toss up you get out of one of the three front range schools. Put em into the BCS permanently and you'll get a lot more high school kids eager to attend a MWC school, therefore making their programs all the better.

SureShot
01-26-2009, 05:07 PM
Well since the Pac-10 and MWC don't play a conference championship game they can play each other for the automatic bid.

DBroncos4life
01-26-2009, 05:19 PM
Well since the Pac-10 and MWC don't play a conference championship game they can play each other for the automatic bid.

Thats a damn good answer there.

Tombstone RJ
01-26-2009, 05:20 PM
Why does the ACC have an automatic berth? ever since the bottom fell out of Miami that division has sucked.

I can see the argument for Big-12, Big-12 and SEC, they consistently put up good teams, but ACC, Big-East and PAC-10 are just not good enough. I don't think USC's success is enough to warrant that division getting as much attention as it does.

$$$$$ that's why.

La Caspa Del Diablo
01-26-2009, 05:23 PM
MWC is not a great conference, but its not a bad conference either like Big East... its probably better than the PAC 10 considering the consistency of the Utah schools, the staying power of TCU, and the random toss up you get out of one of the three front range schools.

I am the biggest supporter of the MWC, but lets not go overboard with the Pac-10 hate here. You mention BYU-Utah-TCU as a pillar of strength for the MWC, but USC-Oregon-California has been a consistent trio for the Pac-10 this decade.

I think where the Pac-10 distances itself from the MWC and Big Ten are the middle-of-pack schools. It's a dogfight in the middle. Dennis Erickson (Arizona St.), Jim Harbaugh (Stanford) and Rick Neuheisel (UCLA) are big-time coaches who recruit well and they will give Oregon-Cal a run for their money in the short-term.

I haven't even mentioned the Oregon St. program that has been a consistent bowl team this decade with a BCS bowl win under their belt.

Washington is in the dumps right now, but they were the best Pac-10 program in the 90s and they have the tradition, prestige, facilities and alumni to restore the program.

Pac-10 is not in the same class as the SEC or Big XII, but I think they have a strong case for the #3-4 spot among conferences. They were also the only conference to finish their bowl season (5-0) undefeated.

jutang
01-26-2009, 05:43 PM
http://sportsrubbish.blogspot.com/2009/01/video-i-love-bcs-song-will-forte-on.html

For those that may have missed this

USMCBladerunner
01-26-2009, 05:56 PM
First off, the BCS suxs ballz. There is no National Champion in football without a playoff. Div I football throws it's hat in the ring with ice skating and gymnastics with their voting in a champ, except the criterion are more ambiguous with the NCAA.

I think the MWC has a case when the Big East and the ACC are so mediocre for so long lately. They would have a stronger case if they poached Boise State, Hawaii, and UNR, and trimmed off their dredges.

Oh for a playoff, where the only folks with a gripe is #13 or #17. And I won't really feel sorry for whoever that is.

fido
01-26-2009, 06:28 PM
yes, the bcs does suck....how tough would it be to have a playoff of conference champions only.....make the season count. According to this sight, there are only 12 fbs conferences....easy math there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_college_athletic_conferences

snowspot66
01-26-2009, 06:52 PM
They could bump it up to 16 easy and add a few wild cards. Only three extra games per season if you make it the championship. It's not like they play any football for a month and a half.

24champ
01-26-2009, 07:21 PM
I think where the Pac-10 distances itself from the MWC and Big Ten are the middle-of-pack schools. It's a dogfight in the middle. Dennis Erickson (Arizona St.), Jim Harbaugh (Stanford) and Rick Neuheisel (UCLA) are big-time coaches who recruit well and they will give Oregon-Cal a run for their money in the short-term.

I haven't even mentioned the Oregon St. program that has been a consistent bowl team this decade with a BCS bowl win under their belt.

Washington is in the dumps right now, but they were the best Pac-10 program in the 90s and they have the tradition, prestige, facilities and alumni to restore the program.

Pac-10 is not in the same class as the SEC or Big XII, but I think they have a strong case for the #3-4 spot among conferences. They were also the only conference to finish their bowl season (5-0) undefeated.

MWC beat UofA, UCLA, Washington, Stanford lost to TCU and ASU got beat by a UNLV squad that had no business beating ASU at all.

Your wrong about the middle of the pack teams in the Pac-10. Clearly they got their ass whupped by the MWC, save the BYU fiasco against UA in the LV Bowl. What REALLY separates the PAC-10 from other leagues is USC, that's it. Just USC.

24champ
01-26-2009, 07:32 PM
I think the MWC has a case when the Big East and the ACC are so mediocre for so long lately. They would have a stronger case if they poached Boise State, Hawaii, and UNR, and trimmed off their dredges.


Not gonna happen. The MWC presidents won't allow it for one, they like money and admitting more teams will only create the same travel and money headaches as the old WAC-16 had. It will not return to the old WAC.

The only reasonable move is BSU to the MWC, because of their football pedigree and close proximity to Wyoming, Utah, BYU etc.

10 teams is big as the conference will get.

La Caspa Del Diablo
01-26-2009, 08:14 PM
MWC beat UofA, UCLA, Washington, Stanford lost to TCU and ASU got beat by a UNLV squad that had no business beating ASU at all.

Your wrong about the middle of the pack teams in the Pac-10. Clearly they got their ass whupped by the MWC, save the BYU fiasco against UA in the LV Bowl. What REALLY separates the PAC-10 from other leagues is USC, that's it. Just USC.

Simply put, MWC had a great year.

In the long-run, UCLA, Stanford, Arizona St. and Washington are going to out recruit the middle-of-the-pack teams in the MWC.

Just USC? Oregon was the #2 team in the country in 2001 and have been in the top 15-20 on an annual basis.

I love the MWC. I think they are at worst the sixth best conference in college football. But they aren't better than the Pac-10 based on one year of out-of-conference play.

GoHAM
01-26-2009, 10:30 PM
Simply put, MWC had a great year.

In the long-run, UCLA, Stanford, Arizona St. and Washington are going to out recruit the middle-of-the-pack teams in the MWC.

Just USC? Oregon was the #2 team in the country in 2001 and have been in the top 15-20 on an annual basis.

I love the MWC. I think they are at worst the sixth best conference in college football. But they aren't better than the Pac-10 based on one year of out-of-conference play.

I don't think anybody truly believes that the MWC is hands down better than the Pac-10 but remove USC from the Pac-10 equation and frankly I don't see much difference between the conferences.

I would be willing to bet that if there was a "MWC-Pac-10 super conference" the MWC teams would slot in nicely with the Pac-10 teams in conference standings. Meaning the MWC third place team would finish right around the PAC-10 third place finisher. Washington and Washington State would have finished in the bottom 4 w/ Wyoming and SDSU. UTAH USC, would have finished 1st and 2nd. etc.

The difference between these conferences just isn't that dramatic IMHO.

Spider
01-26-2009, 11:01 PM
i am pretty happy with the boarder war and the boot ........Special kind of rivalry there ;D
how can you not love ewe week ?

houghtam
01-26-2009, 11:25 PM
I think you people are missing the point. It doesn't matter how well the conferences or the teams in them actually do on the field.

As bad as the Big 10, Pac-10, Big East, and ACC do, they put people in the seats, both in the stadiums and on the couches. Those people buy stuff that's on the commercials and billboards.

Utah doesn't generate jack for revenue.

End of story.

nickademus
01-26-2009, 11:33 PM
I live in Albuquerque and there was talk on the radio of adding a few teams to the MWC at the end of the season. One of the teams mentioned was Colorado. I totally dismissed this at the time but if the MWC can get Boise St. I can see the appeal to CU it would make them the top dog in a new conference. that would get the MWC to ten but I am not sure where the other two teams would come from to get it to a 12 team league with a championship game. who knows maybe UTEP or something like that but its an interesting idea to say the least.

epicSocialism4tw
01-26-2009, 11:38 PM
Neither does the PAC-10 and Big East, but they're in.

Yeah, MWC are right there with both of those conferences and are just about as competitive as the Big 10.


They should create a new conference...

TCU, Utah, Boise State, BYU, Colorado State, Marshall, UCF, Hawaii

That conference deserves a bid.

La Caspa Del Diablo
01-27-2009, 12:19 AM
I don't think anybody truly believes that the MWC is hands down better than the Pac-10 but remove USC from the Pac-10 equation and frankly I don't see much difference between the conferences.

The top four programs in the MWC are right there with the best four of Pac-10 without USC. TCU, BYU, Utah and Air Force can hang with Oregon, California, Arizona St., and UCLA. I will give you that.

Programs 5-9 aren't close though.

Colorado St., New Mexico, Wyoming, San Diego St., UNLV

compared to

Oregon St., Stanford, Washington, Arizona, Washington St.



The Pac Ten is better even without USC.

epicSocialism4tw
01-27-2009, 12:23 AM
The top four programs in the MWC are right there with the best four of Pac-10 without USC. TCU, BYU, Utah and Air Force can hang with Oregon, California, Arizona St., and UCLA. I will give you that.

Programs 5-9 aren't close though.

Colorado St., New Mexico, Wyoming, San Diego St., UNLV

compared to

Oregon St., Stanford, Washington, Arizona, Washington St.



The Pac Ten is better even without USC.



In name only.

Those schools have tradition (save Oregon St.) and large student bodies, but what have they done lately? The MWC schools have been building tradition and have been the better teams recently.

Boise St, TCU, and Utah are better than the top three Pac 10 schools. USC would be the best obviously, but I think that the next three in line would be MWC schools.

1. USC
2. TCU
3. Utah
4. Boise St.
5. Oregon
6. BYU
7. Cal

La Caspa Del Diablo
01-27-2009, 12:48 AM
In name only.

Those schools have tradition (save Oregon St.) and large student bodies, but what have they done lately? The MWC schools have been building tradition and have been the better teams recently.

Boise St, TCU, and Utah are better than the top three Pac 10 schools. USC would be the best obviously, but I think that the next three in line would be MWC schools.

1. USC
2. TCU
3. Utah
4. Boise St.
5. Oregon
6. BYU
7. Cal

Your rankings are a one year snapshot.

Flashback to 2007, BYU was the only one of those four schools you mentioned to finish in the AP Top 25 poll.

BroncoMan4ever
01-27-2009, 02:24 AM
The top four programs in the MWC are right there with the best four of Pac-10 without USC. TCU, BYU, Utah and Air Force can hang with Oregon, California, Arizona St., and UCLA. I will give you that.

Programs 5-9 aren't close though.

Colorado St., New Mexico, Wyoming, San Diego St., UNLV

compared to

Oregon St., Stanford, Washington, Arizona, Washington St.



The Pac Ten is better even without USC.

teams in the MWC aren't as publicized as teams from the PAC-10. the reason for a lack of talent isn't because the schools are bad or have bad programs, it's that they get absolutely no notice every year.

if you were to give teams in the MWC the same amount of publicity as other conferences you would see higher ranked prospects going to schools in the MWC, making the entire division better.

but with the BCS being in control of college football, publicized, overrated teams in weak divisions get handed everything.

the BCS is the reason we see the same 5 teams every single year competing for the number 1 ranking in the country whether or not they deserve it.

implement a playoff, and a smaller market team like Utah makes some noise in the playoffs, maybe wins the National Championship, and the entire conference would get better, because when recruits can see that even in the MWC they can compete for a National Championship, we will see top ranked players coming to that conference, leveling the college football playing field, and making the game more fun to watch and gives every team in every conference a shot at a national title.

i am sick of every year seeing a team like Utah, from a weaker conference go undefeated and teams like USC, Texas and Florida with 1 or 2 losses ranked ahead of them.

USC is a prime example of a team being a recipient of playing in a weak division, but because they have publicity on their side they get notice and high rankings.

BroncoMan4ever
01-27-2009, 02:28 AM
Your rankings are a one year snapshot.

Flashback to 2007, BYU was the only one of those four schools you mentioned to finish in the AP Top 25 poll.

the AP poll is bull****. there is never a true National Champion in college football, just a high profile school that the rankings decide is a Champion.

cutthemdown
01-27-2009, 02:30 AM
Our President said we need a playoff system. The BCS doesn't work. USC would have beaten any team IMO. Soon when 3-4 Trojans get picked on day one of draft you will know why. They were loaded with talent.

Obushma
01-27-2009, 02:49 AM
I find this post pretty funny as most of the people on this board are Big 12 north homers.

The MWC would wipe the floor with the Big 12 North, hell, they might as well give the top 6 teams from the MWC their spot. Utah, TCU, BYU, AF would clown stomp CU, Nebraska, KU, and Mizzou. How many BCS games has the B-12 N won in the last five years? The B-12 N is garbage.

epicSocialism4tw
01-28-2009, 12:02 PM
Your rankings are a one year snapshot.

Flashback to 2007, BYU was the only one of those four schools you mentioned to finish in the AP Top 25 poll.

No, I included all of those schools because they have been building on their tradition of excellence over the past 10-20 years. Particularly TCU, BYU, Utah, and Boise.

Inkana7
01-28-2009, 12:17 PM
Our President said we need a playoff system. The BCS doesn't work. USC would have beaten any team IMO. Soon when 3-4 Trojans get picked on day one of draft you will know why. They were loaded with talent.

I disagree. Florida is the best team in the country. Hands down.