As already stated ad infinitum by the Big 12 commish, currently the rotating head of the BCS, the conference champ rule is dead and gone. The new evaluation, not yet developed, will revolve around the strength of the overall conference. Parts of the evaluation will likely include, # or percentage of conference teams in the Top 10, the Top 25, the Top 40, and not in the Top 40. Keeping this in mind, plus the fact that this year's rankings for teams not yet in their new conferences will count toward the new conference (not the old) here is how the current auto-bid conferences stack up against each other using the Final 2004 BCS rankings.

ACC -

Top 10 - 1 out of 12 or 8 %
Top 25 - 4 out of 12 or 33 %
Top 40 - 6 out of 12 or 50 %

BE -

Top 10 - 1 out of 8 or 12.5%
Top 25 - 2 out of 8 or 25 %
Top 40 - 4 out of 8 or 50 %

B10 -

Top 10 - 0 out of 11 or 0 %
Top 25 - 4 out of 11 or 36 %
Top 40 - 5 out of 11 or 45 %

B12 -

Top 10 - 2 out of 12 or 16.6 %
Top 25 - 5 out of 12 or 41.6 %
Top 40 - 6 out of 12 or 50 %

Pac-10 -

Top 10 - 2 out of 10 or 20 %
Top 25 - 3 out of 10 or 30 %
Top 40 - 4 out of 10 or 40 %

SEC -

Top 10 - 2 out of 12 or 16.6 %
Top 25 - 5 out of 12 or 41.6 %
Top 40 - 5 out of 12 or 41.6 %

As can be seen, the Big East this past year matches up well with the other conferences in all but the Top 25, where WVU (ranked #26) was a disappointment. Had they been ranked one position higher, the BE would have had 3 out of 8 or 37.5 % in this range.

For the benefit of C-USA, MW, or MAC readers:

MW -

Top 10 - 1 out of 9 or 11 %
Top 25 - 1 out of 9 or 11 %
Top 40 - 2 out of 9 or 22 %

C-USA -

Top 10 - 0 out of 12 or 0 %
Top 25 - 0 out of 12 or 0 %
Top 40 - 2 out of 12 or 16.6 %

MAC -

Top 10 - 0 out of 12 or 0 %
Top 25 - 0 out of 12 or 0 %
Top 40 - 3 out of 12 or 25 %

Rightly or wrongly, fairly or unfairly, the evaluation of the overall conference rather than focusing on the conference champs appears to help the Big East. Whether or not this trend continues when the conference is together next year remains to be seen.

While I am not happy with the Big East as currently constituted, I am extremely reticent about adding any new members not named Penn State or Notre Dame (yeah, I know, fat chance) until the auto-bid is secured in 2007.

Cheers,
Neil

Quote:While I am not happy with the Big East as currently constituted, I am extremely reticent about adding any new members not named Penn State or Notre Dame (yeah, I know, fat chance) until the auto-bid is secured in 2007.

-- Wow Omnicarrier...thanks for the information...although I'm not sure if Penn St would help at all with the conference strength right now :D ( kidding).....I think it will be interesting to see how this plays out this spring...people who read this board reguarly know that I want Army and navy in the BE but you put forth a good case for staying at 8....now if we could just solve that scheduling problem


Jackson

The criteria can get developed and proposed until the cows come home, but until they are acceptable to all 11 Div. 1A conferences they aren't worth the paper they're written on. The BCS leadership thought they could unilaterally dictate to the (at the time) non-BCS conferences back in the fall of 2003, too. Look at what happened. If the criteria are obviously slanted to someone's benefit and someone else's detriment, then they can either go back to the drawing board or we can start preparing again for court. The BCS leadership is acutely aware of this.

Also, when are you people going to stop crediting the Big East with Louisville's 2004 performance. I don't know on what basis you are deluding yourselves that this is appropriate or will be accepted, but it certainly doesn't come from reading actual BCS guidance. Louisville will no more get to export their 2004 ranking to the Big East than they will get to export their NCAA basketball tourney units.

tufinal4 Wrote:The criteria can get developed and proposed until the cows come home, but until they are acceptable to all 11 Div. 1A conferences they aren't worth the paper they're written on.  The BCS leadership thought they could unilaterally dictate to the (at the time) non-BCS conferences back in the fall of 2003, too.  Look at what happened.  If the criteria are obviously slanted to someone's benefit and someone else's detriment, then they can either go back to the drawing board or we can start preparing again for court.  The BCS leadership is acutely aware of this.

Also, when are you people going to stop crediting the Big East with Louisville's 2004 performance.  I don't know on what basis you are deluding yourselves that this is appropriate or will be accepted, but it certainly doesn't come from reading actual BCS guidance.  Louisville will no more get to export their 2004 ranking to the Big East than they will get to export their NCAA basketball tourney units.

This comes from comments made by Kevin Weiberg to the media in regards to schools migrating from one conference to another. He has stated on the record that if school A migrates from one conference to another then the conference that is gaining school A can use their BCS ranking.

All you have to do is go to the BCS Football.org and read his teleconferences he had the past couple of months.

BTW Tulane has been living off our basketball units for the past 30 years. I for one will be glad when you leaches feed off someone else. Carry your own weight and get some people in the SuperDome. There was probably more Cardinal fans in the SuperDome then Green Wave fans. No wonder you almost drop football last year.

tufinal4 Wrote:The criteria can get developed and proposed until the cows come home, but until they are acceptable to all 11 Div. 1A conferences they aren't worth the paper they're written on. The BCS leadership thought they could unilaterally dictate to the (at the time) non-BCS conferences back in the fall of 2003, too. Look at what happened. If the criteria are obviously slanted to someone's benefit and someone else's detriment, then they can either go back to the drawing board or we can start preparing again for court. The BCS leadership is acutely aware of this.

Also, when are you people going to stop crediting the Big East with Louisville's 2004 performance. I don't know on what basis you are deluding yourselves that this is appropriate or will be accepted, but it certainly doesn't come from reading actual BCS guidance. Louisville will no more get to export their 2004 ranking to the Big East than they will get to export their NCAA basketball tourney units.

This is the actual statement from the BCS Chairman:

Kevin Weiberg: Well I think the way we're talking about it at this point, Kelly, is that we would really plan to not have an evaluation of AQ status until we've gone through an additional four-year period. So the two years of the remaining BCS structure, and the two years of any new structure. And of course that assumes that there is a new structure rolling forward here at some point.

But that is the way we have talked about it. And it would also include a review of teams that are part of the conference at the time of the evaluation. So as conference realignment continues to play out, conferences are going to get credit for the performance of teams that are migrating or moving in to their conference. That's another important element of the consideration as we go forward.

Quote:While I am not happy with the Big East as currently constituted, I am extremely reticent about adding any new members not named Penn State or Notre Dame (yeah, I know, fat chance) until the auto-bid is secured in 2007.

-- Here is a question guys....if we are fortunate enought to secure the automatic bid permantly in 2007... is that bid officially going to be tied to the "Big East Conference" or the "BE football schools"....what would be this situation if the bid is tied to the BE conference and the football schools form their own league?



Jackson

Quote:Also, when are you people going to stop crediting the Big East with Louisville's 2004 performance. I don't know on what basis you are deluding yourselves that this is appropriate or will be accepted, but it certainly doesn't come from reading actual BCS guidance. Louisville will no more get to export their 2004 ranking to the Big East than they will get to export their NCAA basketball tourney units.

Others have already addressed the incorrect information in regard to the BCS you spouted above.

In terms of the NCAA basketball tourney units, all of the C-USA teams leaving could indeed petition the NCAA about receiving those units earned. The NCAA regulation does states that if 50 % or more of the teams decide to leave a conference and this reduces the conference to less than 6 conference members those units go to the individual teams that earned the units.

C-USA believes it is safe from the above regulation because they have 6 teams remaining, Houston, Memphis, Tulane, So. Miss, UAB, and ECU. But there is another NCAA regulation that says in order for a conference to be considered a Division 1 conference for basketball, they must have 6 members who have played a full men's basketball schedule together for at least 5 years.

ECU did not begin playing a men's basketball schedule in C-USA until the 2001-02 season, which means C-USA technically does not meet NCAA requirements as a Division 1 conference beginning 2005-06 since 6 of its 12 schools have only played men's basketball for four years together entering the season, not the mandatory five. Do not be surprised to see some of the departing C-USA schools like Cincinnati and Louisville challenge C-USA's claims to those basketball fund units. And if they were to win their claim, C-USA would lose its auto-bid to the NCAAs for the 2005-06 season, but regain it for the 2006-07 season, the first year in which 6 of its current teams have played men's basketball together for 5 years.

Cheers,
Neil

Quote:-- Here is a question guys....if we are fortunate enought to secure the automatic bid permantly in 2007... is that bid officially going to be tied to the "Big East Conference" or the "BE football schools"....what would be this situation if the bid is tied to the BE conference and the football schools form their own league?

It's my understanding the contract would be signed by the Big East commissioner, Mike Tranghese. So it is with the Big East conference and would need to be renegotiated with any split league not named "The Big East".

Cheers,
Neil

Quote:It's my understanding the contract would be signed by the Big East commissioner, Mike Tranghese. So it is with the Big East conference and would need to be renegotiated with any split league not named "The Big East".

-- I don't like that at all....that as problems written all over it if the football schools form thier own league


Jackson