Who gives a crap what they think?

BCS rankings are what matters.

Sure, on paper all that matters are the BCS rankings.

But the Rose Bowl, the Big 10, and the Pac 10 are huge huge partners in making the BCS work. All three of these organizations are the most traditional-minded in all of college football. If the Rose Bowl is asked to take a team that infringes on seriously compromising that tradition, the Rose Bowl, Big 10 and the Pac 10 will belliache with a huge big fist on the BCS.

If they can get Michigan vs. Cal or a Michigan vs. USC (should USC stumble in their last 2 games), that is the best situation for the Rose Bowl, Big Ten, and the Pac 10 if they can get Cal in as a 2nd BCS team and take USC's place while they go after a National Championship in the Orange Bowl.

If not Cal or USC from the Pac 10, then they will pray, and I mean pray for Texas, Georgia, Miami, or even a Virginia Tech over a Utah, and god forbid Boise State. The Pac 10 absent from the Rose Bowl is a crime enough. Texas, Georgia, or a Miami, would at least be within long term traditional football powers.

If it was between Utah and Boise State, which would place the Rose Bowl at their wits end, they would take Utah over Boise State. But they would be miserable to do so.

If they were forced to take Boise State, the Rose Bowl, Big 10 and the Pac 10 would quit the BCS as fast as possible.

So politics would be played by these "traditional 3" to make sure they don't get Boise State.

Bisonfan, a couple of questions for you:

1. Who does the Rose Bowl have their tv contract with? (I'll give a hint: it's not FOX)
2. Who does the BCS have their tv contract with now? (I'll give you another hint: it's not ABC)

Fine, let the Rose bowl go independant. They have their own TV deal.

Good riddance!

Utah,

you don't work for any of these organizations. You're speculating on things you have no clue about.

Bisonfan, will take it that the many recent post you made are not speculating on subjects.

You comments of BE not having BCS automatic bid shows you lack of accuracy on making post.

Utah' post does make very good points and the health of the BCS totally depends on Big 10 and Pac 10. This of course bring the all importance of the Rose bowl into the equation.

Without the Big 10/Pac 10, the BCS is just a regional bowl alignment.

Since you already have the BE out of the BCS and further comments of lack of Rose bowl in the BCS, your accuracy of facts makes it hard for any of us to take you seriously.

No, I don't work for any of these three organizations.

But earlier this year, there were mumblings that the Rose had problems with taking a Marshall. This was when they were renegotiating the BCS contract and conceptualizing the new extra game (piggyback) that will start in 2006.

The Rose's attendance dropped off in the 2003 game when non-Big 10/Pac 10 school Oklahoma played Washington State. In the history of the BCS, 4 of the 6 years, the traditional Big 10/Pac 10 matchup took place. They don't want more than the 2 (2002 and 2003) Rose Bowls to be added to in this respect.

Since Miami, Nebraska, and Oklahoma has played in the Rose Bowl, the Rose, if forced, would definitely prefer a team of much more traditional nature than Boise State. At least a school that is Pac 10-like (Major state flagship university or a major traditional private). Bosie State became a 4-year university in 1969. They are not the flagship university for the state of Idaho. They are a commuter school that was a junior college up until 1969. They are like no team in the Big 10 or the Pac 10.

They have only been a Div. 1-A team since ~1996 or 1997. Michigan wants to play a school like them in the Rose Bowl, ala the Big 10. Jim Delaney, the Big 10 Commissioner was the biggest opponent in letting the non-BCS schools better access into the BCS.

There's enough hints that they would have serious problems with Boise State. The Fiesta may not have as much apprehension though.

Polling should not occur till the second week in October and the top 8 schools need to be in the BCS: such as USC, OKLA, AUB., CAL, UTAH, TEXAS, BOISE STATE, and GEORGIA or whoever.

The system needs to change:
(a) go by rankings
(b) BE being auto-included is nonsense
(c) Miami or FSU have easier ways to work into it way too often--don't play SEC, BIG 12, Big 10 demand type schedules

Moved to BCS Banter Forum: 1/4/2004

_________________


@ncaasports csi.com/facebook


Like the new CSI Userbar? Feel free to use it here and any other forums.
You can save and host it yourself or link from here.

Those who want a playoff should pray that U Al goes undefeated this season and still gets left out of the championship game. For the SEC to have an undefeated champion that did not get to play for the NC on 2 consecutive years would be an outrage!

Then you can pray that the same thing happens to a Big 10 team on a year that the Rose Bowl would hold the NC game.

That might (MAYBE) be enough to start the ball rolling for a + 1 game.

FBfan

Notable point, FBfan. Alabama has a tough road to hoe with games left against LSU, Auburn, and the SEC championship game. But if they get through those unbeaten, they do have a case for yelling if they are left out and it happening to the SEC two years in a road.

Figures, very early on the system is having USC and another Big 12 team all set up. An upset in this domain is possible too.

Miami has steadily moved upward. They have an awesome defense! It all shall be interesting.

Alabama will get knocked off and it will be USC vs. Texas.

My BCS picks right now:
Rose - USC vs. Texas
Sugar - Alabama vs. Penn State
Fiesta - Notre Dame vs. West Virginia
Orange - Miami vs. LSU

Yes, in a perfect world (not storm), the winners of the 5 power conferences would be joined by 3 wild cards in an 8 team playoff. We all know Big 10-Pac 10 should be in the Rose, ACC-? in the Orange, Big 12-? in the Fiesta and SEC-? in the Sugar. THEN the seeding and the semis, maybe reseeded.

So, as of now it would be:

USC-Penn St
Alabama-Va Tech
Texas-LSU
Miami-Notre Dame

Play them at all on New Years at 11,2:30, 5 and 8:30.

Article on "BCS begins to clear, but another storm could be on horizon" (Ralph Russo, AP, Nov. 6, 05):

http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/sports/13098700.htm

How 'bout this projection? Interesting take on what happens depending on what bowl gets to choose an at-large team.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/writers/stewart_mandel/11/08/mailbag/index.html

I apparently jinxed AL by my post. Too bad I did not do it just before the TN game! ;) If someone could only jinx USC and TX so that we would have 3 or more 1 loss teams. The BCS will stay the same as long as there are not multiple teams claiming the rights to the 2 spots.

Another possibility could occur if there are 2 unbeaten teams with 1 of them being a non BCS school. Worse yet, for the BCS, would be for there to be only 1 unbeaten team, but that team be a 12th ranked, non-BCS team that had not played anyone ranked higher than 15th and a SOS below 60.

FBfan