"play-in" game for BCS game?

[claw]

what do you think of this idea?

http://www.sltrib.com/sports/ci_7708542

[utenation]

Agreeing to something like this makes you part of their plan and it also shows you agree our conferences aren't as valuable.

By doing this, you'll never have a chance to play on equal ground..

[lankytoad]

Agreeing to something like this makes you part of their plan and it also shows you agree our conferences aren't as valuable.

By doing this, you'll never have a chance to play on equal ground..

Spot on. Anyone that disagrees with this point, hasn't been paying attention to college football over the past decade.

[RodneyDangerfield]

Bsu would have won in 2006. Hawaii would have won in 2007.

Yeah, and my sister is prettier than your sister, and my dad can beat your dad at golf, and and and. Maybe, maybe not. Actually, the only part of the story that makes any sense is the proposed bowl game pitting the champions from the MWC and the WAC. Currently, the ONLY bowl game with those conference affiliations is The New Mexico Bowl. Hopefully the NMBowl directors realize that with a lot of hard work, some luck and a lot of determination, their bowl could actually BE the game between the conference champions.

[IdaUte]

Agreeing to something like this makes you part of their plan and it also shows you agree our conferences aren't as valuable.

By doing this, you'll never have a chance to play on equal ground..

No truer words have been spoken.

[MWC-CHI]

Sounds like a workable plan.

I think Kurt Kragthorpe has a point.

My suggestion is the TWO HIGHEST NON-AQ CONFERENCE CHAMPIONS play in for that spot unless one team is in the Top 12 in the Final BCS Standings. And, for the loser has to be placed in a contingent bowl.

[lankytoad]

I read the article again, just to make sure I wasn't being completely unreasonable the first time. It's offical, that's the worst idea ever!

[utenation]

Sounds like a workable plan.

I think Kurt Kragthorpe has a point.

My suggestion is the TWO HIGHEST NON-AQ CONFERENCE CHAMPIONS play in for that spot unless one team is in the Top 12 in the Final BCS Standings. And, for the loser has to be placed in a contingent bowl.

So you agree it's a good idea that the rest of the conferences(that don't have an AQ shot), should view themselves as damaged goods and have 50 or more teams fight for one BCS Bowl slot? Other conference teams only have to be better than 8-11 teams in their conferences to earn a BCS bowl bid..

Why not continue to send teams that have 130 SOS's and beat some of the worst CFB teams in the country to get a BCS Bowl and have the BCS honks chase their tails on more ways to keep them out? I hate Hawaii's shot at a bowl because I value competition but if we're going to play by their rules, I say run with it.. The BCS is is the biggest sham on the planet..

While we're at it, let's take a charity tour of football campuses at teams like Duke, Baylor, Vanderbilt, Mississippi and Syracuse and hand over any profits gained for the year through hard work and peanut budgets. Maybe they can combine that with their annual BCS check each year give the US government defense spending a run for most amount of money wasted by this country.

I agree, this is a fantastic idea compared to having my legs dipped into radiocative waste..

[bluerules]

Why would the WAC agree to this?

We get in every year now and I see no reason why it will stop being that way.

The MWC is a shell of its former self.

The other non-cartel conferences are arguably worse although CUSA has a pretty good argument they are better then the MWC.

[pacougar]

Why would the WAC agree to this?

We get in every year now and I see no reason why it will stop being that way.

The MWC is a shell of its former self.

The other non-cartel conferences are arguably worse although CUSA has a pretty good argument they are better then the MWC.

At first this post kind of irritated me. Then, I decided I was in complete agreement with at least some of it. You see, if two years in a row constitutes every year, BYU beats Utah every year. Yea, kind of like the logic.

GO COUGARS!

[utenation]

Why would the WAC agree to this?

We get in every year now and I see no reason why it will stop being that way.

The MWC is a shell of its former self.

The other non-cartel conferences are arguably worse although CUSA has a pretty good argument they are better then the MWC.

See but here's where you're wrong.. Whenever a MWC and WAC team have had equal records going into a possible BCS bowl game, the MWC has won by a long shot (see 2004).. We've also made a top 6 cut, the best you've managed is 8th going unefeated..

All we have to do is start scheduling like WAC "powerhouses" and we'll get the bowl.. We all know our conference play is ranked higher, so I guess the only problem is, we can't duplicate Hawaii's magical run and play 8 or 9 D1AA quality teams..

The blueprint is there, the question is, do we want to degrade oursleves like the WAC has..

[bluerules]

See but here's where you're wrong.. Whenever a MWC and WAC team have had equal records going into a possible BCS bowl game, the MWC has won by a long shot (see 2004).. We've also made a top 6 cut, the best you've managed is 8th going unefeated..

All we have to do is start scheduling like WAC "powerhouses" and we'll get the bowl.. We all know our conference play is ranked higher, so I guess the only problem is, we can't duplicate Hawaii's magical run and play 8 or 9 D1AA quality teams..

The blueprint is there, the question is, do we want to degrade oursleves like the WAC has..

Actually I am not wrong, the pollsters are wrong.

BSU would have crushed Utah in 2004 and all the WAC needs to do is make sure the MWC champion has to play at least an average team and there is no worries. We cant let Utah get away with playing 3 weak BCS teams with a 16-19 combined record and the cupcake MWC schedule.

Just make sure each MWC team has scheduled a top WAC or CUSA power and we can be assured they will lose enough games to be out of the BCS hunt. <_<

[SF Poke]

I don't post often, and I hate to come to Utah's defense .. But, no way, no how would BSU beat Utah '04. Any year for BSU for that matter, even the 06 team would get blown out by 04 Utah.

I'm pretty tired of hearing how good the WAC is... You have had two teams in two consecutive years that have played quality football. Congratulations. Probably half the MWC has had similar seasons long before the BC$ was even around. Give it a break, and stop making it so obvious that this is the first time your teams are even worth talking about.

[utenation]

We cant let Utah get away with playing 3 weak BCS teams with a 16-19 combined record and the cupcake MWC schedule.

But you can let Hawaii get away with beating teams that have a combined record of 48-140(34%)? Now playing D1AA teams is bad enough but most D1A programs try and play better D1AA teams.. "Powerhouse" Nothern Colorado finished at 1-11 and "World Beater" Charleston Southern ended at an eye catchng 5-6..

Hawaii fans should be proud they got to watch such competitive programs this season... Not to mention barely pulled out about 4 games against these slugs...

Too late to hide the blueprints fellas.. Welcome to the world of 130+ SOS...

[pacougar]

Actually I am not wrong, the pollsters are wrong.

BSU would have crushed Utah in 2004 and all the WAC needs to do is make sure the MWC champion has to play at least an average team and there is no worries. We cant let Utah get away with playing 3 weak BCS teams with a 16-19 combined record and the cupcake MWC schedule.

Just make sure each MWC team has scheduled a top WAC or CUSA power and we can be assured they will lose enough games to be out of the BCS hunt.

Can't argue this one either. bluerules is all knowing, and pollsters are stupid. I mean shoot, pollsters put a team that played the worst schedule in the country and barely escaped powers like Louisiana Tech, San Jose State, the last place team in the PAC 10 in the top ten. Not to mention they gave up 37 points to USU. Pollsters don't know near as much as bluerules.

[Greyshirt]

I like this idea because...

We get to keep our conference at 9 while having the benefits of auto bid. I'd think of it as being in a 12 member conference where the other 3 members are always in a separate division and at season's end the top member of each "division" holds a title game (play-in game) for the BCS bowl. We don't have to bring in a BSU, a Fresno, or a UTEP, or Hawaii and hope to become an AQ conference.

It would be even better with a full, non deluded payout as the current non AQ conferences receives when eligible.

[MWC-CHI]

So you agree it's a good idea that the rest of the conferences(that don't have an AQ shot), should view themselves as damaged goods and have 50 or more teams fight for one BCS Bowl slot? Other conference teams only have to be better than 8-11 teams in their conferences to earn a BCS bowl bid..

Why not continue to send teams that have 130 SOS's and beat some of the worst CFB teams in the country to get a BCS Bowl and have the BCS honks chase their tails on more ways to keep them out? I hate Hawaii's shot at a bowl because I value competition but if we're going to play by their rules, I say run with it.. The BCS is is the biggest sham on the planet..

While we're at it, let's take a charity tour of football campuses at teams like Duke, Baylor, Vanderbilt, Mississippi and Syracuse and hand over any profits gained for the year through hard work and peanut budgets. Maybe they can combine that with their annual BCS check each year give the US government defense spending a run for most amount of money wasted by this country.

I agree, this is a fantastic idea compared to having my legs dipped into radiocative waste..

It's a one game shot. You never know how it will turn out. Just ask Michigan.

[utenation]

I like this idea because...

We get to keep our conference at 9 while having the benefits of auto bid. I'd think of it as being in a 12 member conference where the other 3 members are always in a separate division and at season's end the top member of each "division" holds a title game (play-in game) for the BCS bowl. We don't have to bring in a BSU, a Fresno, or a UTEP, or Hawaii and hope to become an AQ conference.

It would be even better with a full, non deluded payout as the current non AQ conferences receives when eligible.

Greyshirt,

What would happen the next time it came time to ask for more equality? Now we lose ground on dropping the ranking down to 12 from 6.

And how soon would they start implementing requirements on our section? Say minimum ranking requirements?

Anytime you agree to less of the pie, that can only be used as more footing for them to push us out.. As far as excitement, this would be great but a playoff is the only answer and misfits like Hawaii will only push that issue. How many 2-3 loss BCS teams are steamed at a pathetic Hawaii team getting in over them?

[MWC-CHI]

If the current rules were in place from the get-go, the 2004 Utes would not have been the 1st to break in to the BCS.

Tulane in 1998 was #10.

Marshall in 1999 was #12.

Miami (Ohio) in 2003 was #11.

[Greyshirt]

Greyshirt,

What would happen the next time it came time to ask for more equality? Now we lose ground on dropping the ranking down to 12 from 6.

And how soon would they start implementing requirements on our section? Say minimum ranking requirements?

Anytime you agree to less of the pie, that can only be used as more footing for them to push us out.. As far as excitement, this would be great but a playoff is the only answer and misfits like Hawaii will only push that issue. How many 2-3 loss BCS teams are steamed at a pathetic Hawaii team getting in over them?

long term... I agree with you. HOWEVER... as of today, I believe that our champion, year in and year out, would beat any non-AQ chump (champ).

Long term wise, I'm not too worried when 85% of college football fans want a play-off system. It becomes inevitable and becomes an issue of when not if. These people in power are getting older with each year that passes (just ask Yoda) and soon they'll retire and get replaced with new thinking presidents (i.e., Florida) open to the obvious.