Overlooked in all of this is that the BCS conferences control an enormous number of bowls besides the big 4 normally mentioned
the way the formula is stacked it is virtually impossible for a non-BCS school to qualify for a championship game & so remote to rank #6 or higher that it's not worth mentioning.
I don't think control would be the right word, as the bowl committees engage in contracts with whomever they wish. If the bowls feel the SECs 6th best school is more attractive for them than the MAC 3rd best, that's their call to make.
I agree with you that the formula for inclusion in the BCS is stacked, and I favor ramping down the requirements for non-BCS schools to make it in. I say take any undefeated non-BCS conference champion, or champions with 1 loss and rankings of 8 and higher. Or something like that.
on Today at 09:40:23, Cre55 wrote:
I completely disagree with you. The BCS conferences did not earn that money. 20 of 64 teams earned that money. Has Duke, Vandy, UConn, Arizona, Oregon St. northwestern etc... earned that money? If TCU was in the Big 12 would they not finish higher than kansas, baylor, iowa st. every year? If byu or Utah were in the PAC 10 would they not be middle of the pac and even win it sometimes (at least as much as cal, stanford, ariz, oregon oregon st.)? If Marshall was in the big east would they not be in the running most years? Hell in the last 10 years Purdue has won the Big10.
Lets be real here there are 20-25 teams in college football who are perennial winners. They are responsible for the money. The only difference between the other 40-45 bcs teams and the non-bcs teams is they have access and revenue sharing while the others don't. Its as plain and simple as that. The Non-BCS teams want that same advantage that is all they are asking for.
You're partially correct saying not every BCS member school "earns" their share. Except for these facts; The BCS pays out money to non-BCS conferences as a stipend to support college football, every year, guaranteed. Not much, maybe $42 million as a whole since the BCS started, but it's money to all 1-A programs. Also, if you were to add more members to BCS conferences, or swap the Dukes and Vandys of the world with Marshall and So. Miss, you'd still have to have someone finish dead last in each conference! Not even the SEC can find a home for its last place team, erego some schools are always going to float near the bottom. That's up to the conferences who they want, and many of the schools that are regarded as poor football programs more than make up for it in other sports, academics or community participation.
In the end, the schools that would likely have been going to the Orange, Rose, Fiesta and Sugar Bowls, and getting the $ for going there, are probably the same ones that in fact are going there. And those schools get the lions share of the money, moreso than their conference counterparts unless the conference rules dictate as such. And, IMO, neither play-offs nor an abandonment of the BCS will change this fact, or just barely if at all.