BCS Releases Qualification Criteria

[huskerpony]

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5126561

SCOTTSDALE, Ariz. -- The Bowl Championship Series has released its formula for determining how conferences, such as the Mountain West, can earn an BCS automatic bid.

The BCS uses three criteria that measure conference strength over a four-year period. The criteria are: the ranking of the highest-ranked team in the final BCS standings; the final regular-season computer rankings of all the teams in a conference; and the number of teams in the top 25 of the final BCS standings.

Six conferences -- the Big East, Big Ten, Big 12, ACC, SEC and Pac-10 -- have automatic bids that are contractually bound through the 2013 season.

Another league could earn an automatic bid if it meets certain thresholds using those criteria.


Didn't know about the final computer ranking of all teams. That is good news for us in any potential expansion scenarios--since last year should at least be somewhat helpful and cracking the Top 25 isn't an absolute necessity in the next 2 years.

Something else I read earlier today said that these criteria are evaluated in relation to the current BCS conferences. So if they really want to keep the MWC out, they may have to dump the Big East (or if the Big East doesn't survive realignment). I believe the current setup allows for between 5 and 7 automatic qualifiers.

[huskerpony]

More details from Graham Watson:

http://espn.go.com/blog/ncfnation/post/ ... ed-sort-of

* The evaluation includes the following for each conference (1) the ranking of the highest-ranked team in the final BCS Standings each year (if a conference does not place a team in the final BCS Standings, then its highest-ranked team is determined by the conference member that has the highest average ranking in the computer rankings used in the BCS Standings), (2) the final regular-season rankings of all conference teams in the computer rankings used by the BCS each year, and (3) the number of teams in the top 25 of the final BCS Standings each year, with adjustments to account for differences in the number of members of each conference.

A conference will become the seventh automatic qualifier if it finishes among the top six conferences in both No. 1 and No. 2 and if its ranking in No. 3 is equal to or greater than 50 percent of the conference with the highest ranking in No. 3.

* Further, a conference will be eligible to apply to the Presidential Oversight Committee for an exemption if it finishes among the top six in both No. 1 and No. 2 and if its ranking in No. 3 is equal to or greater than 33.3 percent of the conference with the highest ranking in No. 3, OR

If it finishes among the top seven in either No. 1 or No. 2 and among the top five in the other and if its ranking in No. 3 is equal to or greater than 33.3 percent of the conference with the highest ranking in No. 3.

No. 3 above, the “Top 25 Performance Rating,” will be calculated as follows: Points will be awarded to the conferences based on their teams’ finishes in the top 25 of the final BCS Standings each year. Points will be awarded as follows:

Teams finishing 1-6: 4 points for each team
Teams finishing 7-12: 3 points for each team
Teams finishing 13-18: 2 points for each team
Teams finishing 19-25: 1 point for each team

The point totals will be adjusted to account for the size of the conference, as follows:

Conference membership Adjustment
12 or more members no adjustment
10 or 11 members points increased by 12.5 percent
9 or fewer members points increased by 25 percent

* The computations will be made according to the conference’s membership on December 4, 2011

[Stallion]

the criteria are good for only one non-BCS conference-if the BCS lanscape doesn't radically change in the interim. The only conference that has a chance to qualify is the Mountain West Conference and the representation by the Committee chief is that the MWC is on track to qualify if past results continue for 2 more years.

[Garret]

The MWC might be a little short of what it needs for #3 because they are dragged down by teams like UNLV. However, they are close to being there and Boise State has already publicly stated that they would be happy to join the MWC any time. In fact, Boise State's President openly talks about sending letters to every MWC school every year asking them to let BSU into their conference.

If none of the MWC's teams are taken away due to realignment, then the MWC will become an AQ conference. If they need to, they will take BSU and get well over the requirements needed for admission.

If the MWC loses a single team (say Utah to the Pac-12), they might get in by taking BSU. If they need to, they can grab 2 more teams to get to 12 teams--with an eye to their performance between 2008-2011.

[EastStang]

Hence the speculation as to why the MWC will get raided. Remember the last time the ACC raided the BE and got Va. Tech and Miami who had lots of BCS points. The BE then raided CUSA and got Louisville who added enough BCS points to keep them eligible. If Utah and BYU get sent to BCS conferences, their points count toward their NEW conference. That would leave the only point getters for the MWC as TCU and perhaps Boise (if they add them). That's what makes this season very interesting. If SMU for example can get into the top 18 this year and win CUSA, then that makes us an interesting candidate for the MWC under the same scenario (whom I would not want to join by the way). It also makes us an interesting candidate for the BE who may be trying to avoid purgatory and needs our points as well. They might be interested in TCU-SMU joining or adding Rice and UH as well for a western division to get in a foot into the DFW/Houston markets. The question would be whether the BE splits up their basketball brand or admits football only. If that's the case, we'd have to shop ourselves to other conferences for hoops and other Olympic sports. This time there might be some reality to these ramblings.

[Garret]

Yes, it is a race to see which school can rack up the BCS points to be attractive for conference realignment. The reason why Fresno State and Nevada have been rumored if the MWC wants more teams:

Fresno State:
2008: 7-6 (wins over Rutgers and UCLA)
2009: 8-5 (win over Illinois)

Nevada:
2008: 7-6
2009: 8-5 (VERY unsuccessful bowl game!)

Both Fresno State and Nevada played in bowl games in both 2008 and 2009...losing both years.

SMU's 2009 is a good start for getting some leverage in realignment, but it is too bad that 2008 counts equally.

[huskerpony]

I might be wrong about this--already drinking, so correct me if I am wrong! I don't think that bowl games count in this. Isn't there no final BCS ranking after the bowls? I am pretty sure that only a couple of the computer rankings put out a final ranking as well.

[Garret]

You are correct that bowl games do *not* count towards the BCS formula. However, conferences like to brag about that type of stuff and it shows that BSU, Fresno State, and Nevada have taken the bulk of the bowl spots for the WAC each year.