|
|
     
|
Add Boise State and give Mountain West an automatic BCS bid - Jan 06, 2009 | 14:03:32
posted by: Howard Smith
The success of Utah and other Mountain West Conference football programs over the last couple of seasons got me thinking about whether the conference deserves to be considered for a seventh automatic BCS bid. Under the current BCS system, six conferences (ACC, Big East, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-10, SEC) get automatic bids to fill the 10 BCS game slots, with the other four teams as at-large selections. Frankly, the Mountain West has a legitimate argument to be included with the automatic qualifiers, especially if it added football power-Boise State as the tenth team in the conference. Since its inception in 1999, the conference has been trying to distinguish itself from the Western Athletic Conference (the majority of the Mountain West's teams came from the WAC). Utah's recent BCS bowl game wins (over Pittsburgh in the 2005 Fiesta Bowl and Alabama in this year's Sugar Bowl) have certainly helped the conference make its mark. But it's not only Utah that has enjoyed regular season and postseason success. The Mountain West went 6-2 against the Pac-10 this season (the Pac-10 went 5-0 in its bowl games this year). In the last two bowl seasons, the conference has combined for a 7-3 record in its bowls. Yes, I know these numbers are all about the specific matchups, and in many of the bowl games, the league's teams didn't face top-tier competition. Nevertheless, these records indicate the Mountain West's football teams can compete with the "big boys." The Mountain West's 7-3 mark over the last two years doesn't look so bad when you put it next to the Big Ten's 4-11 bowl record during the same two seasons. While one could justify Mountain West's inclusion as an automatic BCS bowl conference in its current nine-team formation, the argument is certainly enhanced if it brings in Boise State as the league's tenth team. Over the last couple of years, there have been rumors about this possibly occuring in the near future (or even adding three total teams to make 12 Mountain West league members). Everybody knows about Boise State's smurf-turf blue field and dramatic win over Oklahoma in the 2007 Fiesta Bowl. But it's more than that. The Broncos win a lot (a combined 35-4 record over the last three seasons), and they would certainly help legitimize the Mountain West even more on the national level. If Boise State was a Mountain West member-institution this season, the league would have four teams ranked in the top 16 in the BCS standings, including an undefeated Utah squad that will most likely finish in the top four when the final rankings are released. Sounds like a BCS-automatic-bid-worthy league to me. Doesn't it to you? To be honest, though, it seems unlikely the league will be given an automatic BCS bid in the near future because of the money factor. Why would the existing six BCS conferences want to include the Mountain West, made up of mostly small-market schools? Additionally, after the recent Orange Bowl, where the matchup between Virginia Tech and Cincinnati drew the lowest BCS bowl game ratings in history, the last thing the current BCS conferences would want is to lock-in another automatic qualifier each year. So, what do you think? Does the Mountain West deserve a guaranteed spot among college football's elite each year? 
CommentsI think the entire BCS system needs to be eliminated. When will the NCAA finally admit to, and take action on this? Start a 16 team playoff! Doug, there's little disputing that a college football playoff would be a great event. However, from the outside looking in (because the NCAA has nothing to do with the decision; it is at the hands of the college presidents), I'm convinced more than ever that a playoff will not occur in the near future. In December, I attended the IMG Intercollegiate Athletics Forum in New York, where this very issue was discussed in great detail. Here is what I wrote after the conference.
It is beyond me why the Big East deserves and auto bid. Since BC and VT bolted, this is not a strong conference, nor is the ACC for that matter. Neither VT nor Cinncinnati should have been in a BCS bowl game and could not have beater either Boise St. or TCU. But then whole BCS thing is not logic; it's just money... All NCAA issues are at the hands of the college presidents. Is there anything in the NCAA by-laws that specifically prohibits the membership from regulating post-season play the FBS? as long as there is no playoff system yes Yes and CUSA, Sun Belt, WAC and MAC should have an automatic bid too. The rules for are not the same for all D1 conferences and it needs to be changed. The BCS cartel must include everyone with the same rules or it must die. Based on what Howard wrote above. I think it should come to a vote, of ALL FBS schools as to whether or not to have a playoff system! Fine, the Big 10 and Pac 10 may only have 1 'yea' vote perconference, what about the other 9 conferences in the mix? and the ~56 non-AQ conference schools -- seems they get no say in this at all? only the 63 AQ schools plus Notre Dame? And to just segregate out one school and shun 5 conferences is just wrong and wreaks of a legal issue, IMO. Many of the coaches (including top BCS ranked coaches) are saying this system is broken, so why can't we get it fixed? I can near guarantee that if you implement a playoff system similar to basketball, the TV ratings and $$$$ would surpass what they get now. Like what was said before it will be a change in university presidential attitude to get things changed. Not sure why the NCAA doesn't run the show the way they do in other divisions or in other sports. They missed the boat on making tons of money. Here's my take on a "transition" to a more fair system. It's a switch to a playoff and still somewhat unfair. Meant to be that way. First step into changing things to a more fair system. Too many people want to go straight from one end of the spectrum to the other. Forcing huge changes always produced the opposite force. Slow down and thing small. Baby steps. http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/apex_pirate/blog/posts/74528 How about get rid of the BCS entirely? Why should a conference get an AUTO BID if they don't have the best teams in the country?? we need a PLAYOFF PLAYOFF PLAYOFF SYSTEM, UTAH IS THE REAL NATIONAL CHAMPION OF THE 2008 SEASON, NOT FLA OR OK! I think that strengthening the MWC by adding Boise State is likely the most reasonable chance they have at getting an automatic BCS berth. The MWC could argue they should at least receive a chance to play the Big East champ, or even the Pac 10 champ the last game of the season for an automatic bid. The MWC is increasingly strong, while the Big East, ACC, and Big 10 are increasingly weak, so while it may take some time, I think it is inevitable that they will eventually convince everyone they are as deserving as the other BCS schools. The case for Boise State is best done by emulating the BCS conference criteria. According to this data, the MWC performed at a BCS level in 2008, but has not maintained BCS level for the required 4 years. Boise State would give them some breathing room. A far greater need is an improved national championship system. Post a Comment |
  
It means that two very good teams with very good coaches made it to the final game.
- Marie
   
|
