They should exclude the weaker conferences, starting with the Big East and the ACC. I mean, if the BCS wants to exclude the WAC and the MWAC, out west, they should exclude the weaker conferences out east.
Any one see this today?
“Bleymaier is making a nearly unheard of offer in college football scheduling – Boise will bring its popular, high-profile, top-10 team to any stadium in any town to play any big name team in America in 2011. And they don’t have to return the date in Idaho.
So far, no one has bit.”
http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=dw-boise110709&prov=yhoo&type=lgns
It’s all about TV ratings. The day a WAC or MWAC team plays in a bowl game that gets better ratings than a BCS bowl the system will change, until then forget about it.
Any new conference will have a private school. So even if one is weak, you better include that in any figuring.
This is the biggest fraud in modern sports. Each conference has up and down seasons, I don’t think the ACC or Big Ten have a legitimate top 10 team this year. Boise State a year ago, and Utah in the Fiesta 3-4 years back were playing as well as anyone in the country. These small conference schools continuing to pay into a system that doesn’t represent them reminds me quite a bit of US taxpayers.
My proposal is the each year make each team that finished in the BCS Top 32, to play two games against other teams that finished in the Top 32, to be picked by random in a drawing before the season starts.
I wonder ...if teams from certain conferences can never make it to the championship game (no matter if they are undefeated)...should they put these conferences into a brand new Division where the can compete for a championships?
The BCS is nothing but BS.
If the question is if TCU could compete with the big boys, the answer, IMO, is an unqualified yes. Same for Cincinnati this year. But year in and year out TCU proves it belongs in the game.
Can anybody imagine a professional sports league in which the teams in the “weakest” division were told before the season started that no matter how well that division’s winner did during the regular season, they wouldn’t be allowed to participate in the playoffs? That’s pretty much how the BCS system is set up. Teams such as Boise St and Cincinnati could go undefeated, but they probably won’t be given the chance to play for the national championship because of the conferences that they play in. Since this seems to be the case, then why are teams from the “weaker” conferences even listed in the BCS rankings?
BYU is the main reason for the very existence of the BCS. When BYU won the national championship in 1985, the big conferences were desperate to find a way to prevent teams like BYU from even being considered for a national championship. They couldn’t afford to lose that kind of money again so, they eventually came up with the BCS. Now, only the big football schools will be considered for the national championship even when there are non-BCS teams with perfect records and BCS teams that have two, three or even four losses.
BCS teams/schools haven’t the guts to go to a playoff system because they know full well that anyone can beat anyone else on any given day so, they need the BCS to protect their fragile egos and pocket books. Its their ball and if they can’t play the way they want to play then they’re going to just take it and go home.
once that is done, Boise State will get the offers for larger universities to come and play games there ......and at that time, Bosie State can be national champs if they want.....
but the smurf field must go...