PonyFans.com

With our move to CUSA, the dialogue around a long-term fix for BCS has diminished. Having said that, here is a challenging article suggesting that now is the time to complete the rationalization of the BCS conferences. Note the comments on Big Ten, PAC 10, Big East, and WAC especially.

Not perfect suggestions, but it highlights that College FB we may not be done with what the BCS and non-BCS schools and conferences need to do to "fix" the problem, including an alternative to playoffs with a requirement for a Conference Championship Game for all Div. 1A conferences. Reaction?

http://www.foxsports.com/content/view?contentId=1912716

Anyone who has delusions of the Pac 10 expanding with Utah or BYU isn't too credible friend...

USC's color analyst (Paul MacDonald) told me that Mike Garrett said that the new BCS would probably be a combination of the old Bowl system and the current BCS, with a Championship game scheduled after the Bowls.

Probably just Garrett's opinion, but here is what he said...

The Rose would regain its Pac 10/Big Ten match-up; flexible partnerships would exist in the other bowls: the Big XII with the Fiesta, the SEC with the Sugar and ACC with the Orange...

...after the Bowls the top 2 schools in the standings would play a championship game the week in between NFL Championship weekend and the Super Bowl. If it fell on a year with no break between the two, the college game would be played on the Saturday of NFL Championship weekend.

No comment on non-BCS inclusion.


To tell you the truth, the BCS conferences aren't going to include the non-BCS schools (including the Big East) unless they can provide incremental revenue. Unfortunately, the non-BCS schools have used the strategy of complaining without offering any solutions.

Best case scenario given the fixed units in this equation, would be for the non-BCS conferences to have a BCS play-in game in December, and have the champions that don’t qualify for the BCS to play one another in Bowls, with the revenue contributed to the BCS pot. I think if they could provide incremental revenue, the BCS would consider giving them an automatic spot. The non-BCS conferences would probably have to agree to take the $4.5M payoff that a second BCS conference team receives also.

thanx for the update 'water'........

i'm so fed up with the whole ^%$# mess.....the bcs was put together with the networks to exclude everyone else plain & simple...they're whole intent is to exclude the rest of us no matter how u look @ it.......u either dissolve the bcs-bs or u keep it...GET IT THRU YOUR HEADS - PEOPLE!!! U EITHER ACCEPT IT OR KILL BEFORE IT KILLS U B/C THEY AIN'T INVITING ANYBODY ELSE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! CAN'T U UNDERSTAND THAT!!!!!!

i laugh at the people who say the non-bcs commissioners & presidents/chancellors want to be collegial (sp.) with their brethren & work out a compromise...HA HA AH LOL...hell...were the bcs commissioners & presidents collegial with the the non-bcs'ers WHEN THEY SCREWED THEM WITH EXCLUSION???????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

%^^%$#^&&&^%$ NO!!!!!!!!!

FOLKS - THIS IS WAR!!!!!!!

we & all the rest got screwed & they can't seem to understand that!!! this is war & you either dissolve the ^^%$ thing or keep it...there's no modification to be done!!!!

TULANE'S COWEN IS THE ONLY DAMN LEADER WITH THE GUTS IN THIS GAME & ALL THE REST ARE SHEEP BEING LED TO SLAUGHTER & EXTINCTION OF OUR COLLEGE FOOTBALL PROGRAMS!!!!!!!!! FOLKS - THAT WAAAS THE INTENT OF THE BCS WHETHER U LIKE IT OR NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! EXCLUSION & FINALLY - EXTINCTION TO DIV 2 OR 3!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

WAKE UP! EARTH TO NON-BCS COMMISSIONERS & PRESIDENTS, ET AL.......

the sad thing is that 'our' leadership either don't understand that or they're just damn slow.......like they say, i guess too much education can be dangerous!!!!

then again...when was the last time u saw any type of leadership or anything decisive coming from a university today!!! ESPECIALLY FOR THE GOOD OF ALL!!!!!!!!!! HA!

we're being excluded & killed off & we don't even know it yet!!!

there's my rant for today!!!!

HAVE A NICE DAY!!!!

N&C:

As the sayings goes, " Besides that Mrs. Lincoln, how did you enjoy the play?"

LOL LOL

it was actually pretty good.

thanx for asking.

Seems to me that the simplest answer involves the old rule in business, crime and politics, "FOLLOW THE MONEY!" The present system, bad as it is, could be tolerated IF ONLY the big shot schools divided the TV big bowl money up more equitably with the nonBCS conference schools. Presently, they play almost 20% of their season's games against nonBCS schools. Why not devise a system that pays a healthy chunk to the teams playing the big games, a considerbly lesser amount to the conference those teams represent, and then have a very significant amount left over to give to the nonBCS schools? It's all about money, isn't it?

u got it big-boy!

Yes it is. And because of that, no way the Big East loses it's bid. If it did, despite the mediocre nature of the teams, a lot of advertisers would cut advertising budgets, which ESPN and ABC won't tolerate.

It is interesting however, as virtually every person I have chatted with in my position has said that they would up their budget for ad space in an NCAA football tourney; most indicate that they'd pay even more than the NCAA B-Ball tourney, so I'm not exactly sure why the BCS presidents are so married to the BCS; they're teams would still retain the lion's share of the revenue and the tourney spots, though fewer schools would participate in the post season.

I have heard ideas pitched about somehow adding the fifth bowl game, and that the highest ranked Non-BCS team (note- not conference winner) would be invited. Not sure how much truth is in it, but the idea has been floated to advertisers.

It may also be interesting to see what happens, since my company is reviewing what it spends on advertising in terms of all media outlets, including college sports. There is definitely a feeling of diminishing returns when it comes to college sports, and college football in particular. That pot of gold will likely be smaller, at least in terms of actual value if not in real dollars.