Play Fantasy The Most Award Winning Fantasy game with real time scoring, top expert analysis, custom settings, and more. Play Now
Blog Entry

TCU, another reason automatic BCS bids need to go

Posted on: January 2, 2011 10:01 am
 
After seeing TCU beat Wisconsin, I think the small teams have gotten more ammunition of proving to the world that the BCS is a flawed system and that smaller non-traditional programs can hang in with the big boys. I know there have been constant arguments by fans on both sides on why a smaller school like Boise State should be in the BCS and while the old school fans say their record is flawed due to strength of schedule. I understand both arguments as both sides make a valid point. Ohio State has a tougher schedule than Boise State. However, how can fans of Ohio State still denied teams like TCU aren’t good, or their record is inflated when they still beat some good teams. It’s true that TCU schedule isn’t the toughest, but winning on the road in Utah and then winning the Rose Bowl against number 5 Wisconsin says a lot. And since there will be no playoffs in the near future for college football, I think at least they should get rid of conference tie ins into the BCS and allow the best rank teams play. 


If there is one thing the BCS has taught us is smaller schools can hang in with the big boys. I’ve heard arguments that the teams they play weren’t prepared or motivated to play because they aren’t in the national championship is a load of bull. When Utah beat Alabama in the 2009 Sugar Bowl, they proved they can play with the big boys and that they earned their ranking and their spot in the BCS. Saying Nick Saban didn’t prepare well is insane. A good coach and a good team is always ready when they step on the field, even if it’s a meaningless game. And if they lose it’s because they didn’t play the best and fans saying “it doesn’t matter” or “we weren’t ready” is just making excuses. They were out beaten that day, and Utah showed they were ready and they rose to the occasion. It isn’t just Utah in 2009, but Utah beat Pittsburgh in the Fiesta Bowl in 2005. Boise State upset Oklahoma in the 2007 Fiesta Bowl. I think we have seen enough of the small teams proving they can hang with the big boys, and that the BCS needs some reforming in the near future. 


Also the conference tie ins have gotten ridiculous. When 8-4 UCONN got a Fiesta Bowl berth because the Big East is guaranteed a BCS Bowl is pathetic. I don’t blame TCU for moving to the Big East as their football team will be favorites to win the Big East in the near future. Originally giving automatic bids to the BCS conferences wasn’t a bad idea. It’s similar to division titles in the NFL, but the biggest difference between the NFL and NCAA is that not every conference in college football gets an automatic BCS bowl. When a better MWC or WAC has more rank teams than the Big East, or even ACC at times, then it shows the automatic bids need to go. UCONN isn’t the first team who didn’t deserve to go. #19 Virginia Tech   was another example of an automatic that didn’t deserve to be there. I know Virginia Tech won, but going 9-4 isn’t the best record in football, and there were more deserving teams that were left out. One more example was #22 Florida State who got an Orange Bowl birth with an 8-4 record because they won the ACC. I like Bobby Bowden, but they were more deserving teams that should of gone over his.


The biggest issue in college football nowadays is the old traditional conferences being the best isn’t always the case. In the last decade there has been more diversity in college football in which programs rise and fall on a constant basis. Long gone are the days when Norte Dame and Miami always have the best team each year. Since we are still running under the impression the old divisions should be good is a lie. The Big East and ACC are too inconsistent to deserve an automatic bid every year, and because of their automatic bid, there are good teams each year get snubbed because of the limited amount of spots. If anything that needs to be change in the near future for college football is getting rid of the automatic bids. it should be reformatted by only allowing the top 10 play, or at least have a top 12 ranking in case a school already accepted another bowl bid before the season ended. But seeing un-rank schools, or schools in the upper teens and low twenties is sad. 
Comments

Since: Jul 2, 2010
Posted on: January 22, 2011 7:30 am
 

TCU, another reason automatic BCS bids need to go

TCU isn’t an example of the BCS working for the benefit of the mid majors. The only reason they were in a BCS bowl is because they were in the top 4, otherwise they could be rejected from the BCS has there is nothing guaranteeing them in outside the top 4 spots in the BCS.
You have no idea what you are talking about.  This is not the threshold for a mid major to earn an invite.

While the MWC and WAC have had been more successful in their bowl games, especially in the BCS bowl games, but they still don’t get an automatic qualifying spot.
Wrong again - AQ status is a conference issue, not an issue for individual teams.
There is a fair set of criteria for a conference to earn AQ status - you don't even have to be in the top 1/2, 6 out of 11 will do.

Most of the BCS and older and more successful bowl games always have better payouts.
Wrong again - the BCS payouts are not from the individual bowls, it is based on a percentage of the entire BCS income varying with the number of mid majors invited.

There have been more worthy teams not getting a bowl spot due to AQ status.
Wrong again - the BCS was never designed for this.  Remove the AQ status and there is no BCS.  Remove the BCS and these teams will never get to play in these bowls.

but other BCS schools have gotten screwed out of the BCS over the AQs of the Big East and the ACC.
Wrong again - under the old system, most of these schools would not receive an invite to the top 4 bowls.  The BCS rules are rather clear.  They didn't get screwed out of anything, but a lot of schools and mid majors did get a chance they would have gotten otherwise.

The BCS is shambles
Wrong again - while there may be fluctuations from year to year, overall the ratings and sponsorship is increasing - the BCS is doing what it was meant to - hardly shambles.

 the guidelines you mention of the AQ status aren’t being followed
Wrong again - they are being followed (law suits would be flying otherwise).  They even began releasing information.

explaining that the system is good for conferences is wrong as it has protected more weaker conferences than helping stronger conferences
Wrong again - any conference can earn AQ status, and any conference can also lose AQ status.


Face it, you are too lazy to look up the operation of the BCS, just throwing BS in hopes nobody notices you have no idea what you are talking about.



Since: Jan 4, 2008
Posted on: January 13, 2011 2:43 pm
 

TCU, another reason automatic BCS bids need to go

TCU isn’t an example of the BCS working for the benefit of the mid majors. The only reason they were in a BCS bowl is because they were in the top 4, otherwise they could be rejected from the BCS has there is nothing guaranteeing them in outside the top 4 spots in the BCS. 


If a conference lost it’s AQ, then how much longer do we as fans have to deal with the Big East and ACC. Both conferences have been the worst of the BCS conferences in the last few years. While the MWC and WAC have had been more successful in their bowl games, especially in the BCS bowl games, but they still don’t get an automatic qualifying spot. While that’s going on, we see low ranking ACC teams go, or non-ranking Big East teams in the BCS. I have no idea where you got the idea they lose their AQ status has no one has lost or gain AQ status since the BCS inception back in 1998.


When it comes to payouts for the bowl games, each bowl game has their payouts. Most of the BCS and older and more successful bowl games always have better payouts. But why should more money go to mediocre conferences like the Big East? Their fan bases for football aren’t that strong begin with. There is no reason why they should be guaranteed in the BCS every year when they have weaker fan bases, weaker teams, and not providing the best games to college football. 


Overall the BCS is a failure. There have been more worthy teams not getting a bowl spot due to AQ status. It’s just not TCU, but other BCS schools have gotten screwed out of the BCS over the AQs of the Big East and the ACC. Mizzou, OK State, Texas A&M were all more deserving teams over UCONN, and even VT. VT is a good team, but Mizzou and OK state had better years and didn’t lose to a mediocre mid major team at home. The BCS is shambles, and the guidelines you mention of the AQ status aren’t being followed, and explaining that the system is good for conferences is wrong as it has protected more weaker conferences than helping stronger conferences. 



Since: Jul 2, 2010
Posted on: January 12, 2011 1:58 am
 

TCU, another reason automatic BCS bids need to go

AQ status is a conference issue, not a team issue.  The BCS has provisions for individual teams outside the BCS having a good year.

Any conference can earn AQ status thru a fair set of criteria.  They don't even need to be in the top 1/2 - 6 out of 11 will do.  An inability of a conference to gain AQ status is not evidence the criteria needs to be lowered.

Any AQ conference can lose their status if their performance drops too far.

Without AQ status there would be no BCS.
The mid majors would have no chance to play in these bowls.
The mid majors would lose a revenue stream.
The mid majors would have less chance of winning a title under the only alternative being offered (conference bowl tie ins)

The bowls want and need AQ conferences to be successful.
If it wasn't for the payout, there would be nothing to separate them from the other bowls.
They need to maintain interest across the largest fan bases, not just the few teams chasing a ranking in the top 8.

TCU is an example of the BCS working for the benefit of the mid majors providing an opportunity they would not have otherwise.  It is not a reason to restructure the BCS.



Since: Jan 8, 2008
Posted on: January 2, 2011 7:00 pm
 

TCU, another reason automatic BCS bids need to go

People go to the BCS website and read.  BCS is a separate business that has contracts with each supporting conference.  Schools only get invited.  BCS is a business.  If TCU want to go the NC they have to enter another conference.  That's why they are going to the BIG EAST. The schools are under contract to sell those tickets or its coming out of their pocket.  



Since: Jan 2, 2011
Posted on: January 2, 2011 6:17 pm
 

TCU, another reason automatic BCS bids need to go

As a long time TCU fan you still have to look objectively. As proud as i am for their accomplishment in the Rose Bowl, you cant say that James Madison was an early season favorite to play in the orange bowl just because it beat Virginia Tech. The discussion to whether or not the smaller 1A schools can hang in unquestionable and is proven in the fact that the reason TCU even received a bid for the Rose Bowl was because of teams like Utah and Boise State. So when the rose bowl was mandated to take the next BCS eligible non-AQ school in the next 5 years they only waited for the first year of the rule. Wisconsin did expose the smaller size of the TCU defense but in the end defense is what won the game with two offensive greats. no doubt that wisconsin was the best team for the big 10 to play in the rose bowl after beating ohio state and they have nothing to be ashamed of.



Since: Jul 9, 2010
Posted on: January 2, 2011 3:12 pm
 

TCU, another reason automatic BCS bids need to go

The suggestion for an "and 1" system should be used. They already play the Championship game a week later so just put #1 vs #4 and #2 vs #3. The next week Jan 8. the winners play. who cares if #5 complains. everything stays the same. That would catch any undefeated's of note. Auburn plays Stanford and Oregon plays TCU. we know Wisconsin does not belong at #5. If the best 2 teams are from 1 conference this gets them in. ( 2 pac 10 teams) or SEC, Big 10, etc. Just my opinion



Since: Jul 9, 2010
Posted on: January 2, 2011 3:11 pm
 

TCU, another reason automatic BCS bids need to go

The suggestion for an "and 1" system should be used. They already play the Championship game a week later so just put #1 vs #4 and #2 vs #3. The next week Jan 8. the winners play. who cares if #5 complains. everything stays the same. That would catch any undefeated's of note. Auburn plays Stanford and Oregon plays TCU. we know Wisconsin does not belong at #5. If the best 2 teams are from 1 conference this gets them in. ( 2 pac 10 teams) or SEC, Big 10, etc. Just my opinion



Since: Jan 25, 2008
Posted on: January 2, 2011 2:02 pm
 

TCU, another reason automatic BCS bids need to go

Didn't need TCU to beat Wisc to know that the BCS is a joke. Old news. I'm not sure what TCU's gripe is here, they got in the BCS, got preferential treatment to be slotted in the Rose Bowl and won the game. If they were already in the Big East and went undefeated, they still would have been left out of the BCS title game. 



Since: Jan 4, 2008
Posted on: January 2, 2011 11:19 am
 

TCU, another reason automatic BCS bids need to go

I agree with everything you said kiddude. UCONN had heart, but not enough talent to win. UCONN was a good team, but not good enough for the BCS. It does bother me how TCU with an unbeaten season has no shot at the title. At least with a playoff format we could see who is the best and end the argument on TCU not deserving to be there. The whole "playoffs aren't practical" in college football is a load of bull since they have playoff formats in Division 2 and 3 football. 



Since: Apr 4, 2008
Posted on: January 2, 2011 11:12 am
 

TCU, another reason automatic BCS bids need to go

Ditto to nearly everything you said.  UConn played OU with alot of heart, but it was plain to see from the very start of the game that they weren't going to match up well or stop OUs offense.  I refuse to take any credit away from UConn, they're a good team and have improved remarkably recently, but good teams should not play in bowl games for the elite, and UConn is not elite.  Boise State or Nevada would have given OU a much better challenge.  By the way, by playing an undefeated season, shouldn't TCU feel just a bit miffed by having no shot at the national title when they knocked down every obstacle in their way, including an ELITE Wisconsin team?

The BCS system is still very flawed and needs to be fixed.


The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com