# BCS Bowls-I think Boise is in along w/ TCU!!!!



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

Ok, so I am a little bored and simultaneously very disappointed that Boise may not be getting into a BCS bowl while they are ranked ahead of about half of the teams that will. So, here is the way it may go (I used the BCS summation from here http://www.bcsfootball.org/bcsfb/eligibility)
All games are assuming that the BCS rankings stay the same (as today) except for the SEC championship game, which will clearly affect the final rankings-for FB's benefit, we will assume Bama wins it) I don't think the Big 12 championship will change anything as long as Texas wins. 
Championship game at the Rose Bowl-Bama vs. Texas
Rose Bowl (#1 PAC 10 vs #1 Big10)-Oregon vs Ohio State
Orange Bowl (#1 ACC vs at large)-Georgia Tech vs Cinci
Fiesta Bowl (#1 Big12 vs at large)-TCU vs Boise
Sugar Bowl (#1SEC vs at large)-Florida vs Iowa
The first rule to be used is


> If two bowls lose host teams to the NCG, each bowl will get a replacement pick before any other selections are made. In such case, the bowl losing the No. 1 team gets the first replacement pick, and the bowl losing the No. 2 team gets the second replacement pick.


From this, I would assume that Florida would be chosen by the Sugar then Fiesta presumably chooses TCU, since TCU would be the highest qualifying team available.
Then the replacement picks are done and the order of picks begin, which is Orange, Fiesta, Sugar. The Orange Bowl has only one remaining automatic bid-Cinci. 
Fiesta would have next pick between only at large bids-the only conference winner would be Boise since everyone else was 2nd or 3rd in their conference, not to mention that Boise is by far the highest ranking (#6), 2nd highest to them would be Pitt at #9 (we all know how well they do in the Fiesta Bowl)-*I would think Boise would be in!!!* How ironic, that it could possibly be a rematch of last year's bowl games and also two non BCS teams. That would be kind of a stretch and I would personally like to see a BCS team get throttled by TCU. 
And last would be the Sugar Bowl selecting among all crappy choices being Pitt (they would likely drop quite a ways after they presumably lose to Cinci), Iowa, OSU, Penn, VT and LSU... I guess they would go with the highest ranked team available in Pitt, right?
My only point in doing this was to see just what would have to happen for Boise to be in or out with the big assumption that everything stays just the way it is with the exception of the SEC title game. Let me know if I made an actual logical error, of course I had to speculate on what choices would be made; I used the assumption that the highest ranked team would be chosen (assuming Florida would come in at like 5 after losing to Bama).


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

I don't see both Pitt and Cincy getting BCS bids. They play next week, the winner is in, the loser is out IMHO. If the BCS puts BSU vs TCU I will be disappointed, but not surprised. EVERY BCS team is scared of playing either team. After watching Texas play tonight, I like TCU's chances against them everyday of the week.


----------



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> I don't see both Pitt and Cincy getting BCS bids. They play next week, the winner is in, the loser is out IMHO. If the BCS puts BSU vs TCU I will be disappointed, but not surprised. EVERY BCS team is scared of playing either team. After watching Texas play tonight, I like TCU's chances against them everyday of the week.


Good point! There may be other errors in the assumptions too, however the fact of Cinci or Pitt having to lose would only increase the chances of Boise getting in fortunately!
I edited it now above.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

That looks better. 8) I think any Bowl getting 'stuck' with Iowa will be holding their nose when doing so. I think they are the most bland one loss team I ever ever watched. I say that as a long time Iowa (wrestling) fan.


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

the X factor left out is really the only one that matters after the NC game. Butts in seats. I would personally find TCU or BSU in the Sugar Bowl a very compelling match-up - but TCU doesn't travel well at all, and neither does BSU compared to other conferences. 

As I see it, the BEST thing for the BCS this year would be for TCU to play in the NC game, AND BSU play in some other game. Then any claims or accusations about keeping the little guys out would be disproven and allow the BCS to keep with what they've got going on.


----------



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

GaryFish said:


> the X factor left out is really the only one that matters after the NC game. Butts in seats. I would personally find TCU or BSU in the Sugar Bowl a very compelling match-up - but TCU doesn't travel well at all, and neither does BSU compared to other conferences.
> 
> As I see it, the BEST thing for the BCS this year would be for TCU to play in the NC game, AND BSU play in some other game. Then any claims or accusations about keeping the little guys out would be disproven and allow the BCS to keep with what they've got going on.


I thought of this same thing today, Fiesta Bowl would have the best number of BSU fans as it is the closest one to Boise.


----------



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

fatbass said:


> Time to do some refiguring, Huge. Pitt got beat. Bama squeaked one out over the barners and if they start slowly against Fla next weekend they won't win the SEC CG. There may well be a couple more upsets today.


I see that, I will updated it tomorrow or later today once all of the precincts have reported.


----------



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

At this moment, Georgia Tech losing, Pitt already lost, OSU lost, along with 3 other ranked teams lost to unranked teams (Clemson, NC, Miss) not that those are direct effects, but certainly make the at large choice of an undefeated team much easier than many of these 2 and 3 loss teams out there.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Huge29 said:


> At this moment, Georgia Tech losing, Pitt already lost, OSU lost, along with 3 other ranked teams lost to unranked teams (Clemson, NC, Miss) not that those are direct effects, but certainly make the at large choice of an undefeated team much easier than many of these 2 and 3 loss teams out there.


 It cracks me up listening to 'experts' try and justify putting a 2 loss team in the BCS over ANY undefeated Division One team. What I see is parity, caused mostly by the limit on how many scholarships a school can offer. No longer can a program with deep wallets 'buy' all the top recruits. This is good for the sport of college football, all that is missing is a playoff.

Just yesterday Oklahoma State was telling the world how they 'deserved' a BCS bid over Boise State. Georgia Tech and Clemson lost, yet the winner of their head to head game next week gets a BCS bid while NEITHER looked very good today. Pitt lost to WVU, and if they beat Cincy next week they get a BCS bid. If the Bearcats beat the Panthers they deserve a BCS bid along with the other five teams that are currently undefeated. The rest of the teams in the Top 25 are a notch below, and don't deserve mention when talking about the cream of the crop.


----------



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

A little update based on this week's games:
Pitt lost (could still tie Cinci, but Cinci has the tie breaker)
GT lost (non conference game, still the only ACC team w/ only one conf loss)
OSU lost (now tied for 2nd with Nebraska at 6-2 in conf.)

Championship game at the Rose Bowl-Florida vs. Texas
Rose Bowl (#1 PAC 10 vs #1 Big10)-Oregon vs Ohio State
Orange Bowl (#1 ACC vs at large)-Georgia Tech vs Cinci
Fiesta Bowl (#1 Big12 vs at large)-TCU vs Boise
Sugar Bowl (#1SEC vs at large)-Florida vs Iowa

So, I don't think that really changed anything too much. Main change would be that there are less legitimate at large potential teams.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Huge29 said:


> A little update based on this week's games:
> Pitt lost (could still tie Cinci, but Cinci has the tie breaker) If Pitt wins they have the head to head tie-breaker.
> GT lost (non conference game, still the only ACC team w/ only one conf loss) If Clemson beats GT they get the bid.
> OSU lost (now tied for 2nd with Nebraska at 6-2 in conf.)
> ...


I will be surprised if they put TCU up against BSU. If they want to quiet the playoff crowd at all they will put the SEC runner-up against TCU in the Sugar Bowl.


----------



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> Huge29 said:
> 
> 
> > A little update based on this week's games:
> ...


I would be surprised too, although from my reading of the process, each bowl is on its own decision officially (who knows how the good ole boys operated behind closed doors though??) 
I don't know that Saban would be too excited about facing another MWC BCS buster though! :mrgreen: I would be disappointed to see the two non BCS teams play, but it all depends on several other choices made. I did change it above, that would be a much better match up especially to potentially see an SEC powerhouse (no offense FB, I just like to see the high and mighty get humbled).


----------



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

fatbass said:


> Bama will do its best to send Tebow to New Orleans. If not then even I would like to see Bama play TCU. 8)


You must not be living right, because magic only happened in half of your wish today :mrgreen:


----------



## Yonni (Sep 7, 2007)

ESPN's BCS predictions

Brad Edwards' BCS Bowl Projections
Bowl Matchup

BCS Title Alabama versus Texas
Rose Bowl Ohio St. versus Oregon
Fiesta Bowl TCU versus Boise State
Orange Bowl Ga. Tech versus Iowa
Sugar Bowl Florida versus Cincinnati


Huge just may be right afterall with TCU vs Boise St


----------



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

Yonni said:


> Huge just may be right after all with TCU vs Boise St


I sure like being right, but I will take one for the team, sum beech that would blow!!!!!!!! NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! It would almost be better for Boise to not make it than to have them matched up together! The BCS boys would love that because there would be no chance of the big boys being upset and shown up, they would like that a lot!


----------



## plottrunner (Apr 3, 2008)

In a perfect world......Nebraska would have beat Texas last night then the BCS would of had a real nightmare on there hands.....But after watching some of the calls made in that game I'm sure the BCS controlled the outcome of the game.....Adding the once second back to the clock was legit as the replay proved but the one pass interference call that moved Texas into field goal range in the 2nd quarter was a bad call......Of course Nebraska's offense looked like **** last night so who knows...............


----------



## The Janitor (Jan 23, 2009)

plottrunner said:


> But after watching some of the calls made in that game I'm sure the BCS controlled the outcome of the game.....


+1

The reffing in games that Texas is involved in is always quite a spectacle as it is (Texas vs USC in 05-06 NC game) but I think last night was questionable too.


----------



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

fatbass said:


> Why wouldn't you want TCU to play BSU? OH, CRAP! If Boise beats TCU, it will look like the WAC is JUST AS GOOD AS THE MWC! :shock:


I could not care any less about that, my beef is:
1-Same matchup as last year
2-No chance to really measure up as to just how dominant these dominant BCS teams are (of course, I believe the BCS busters are 3-1!!) :wink:


----------



## Guest (Dec 9, 2009)

The whole thing reeks of cowardice. The BCS conferences do not want to put their reputations on the line again because 3 of the last 4 times they did they got beat by these supposedly inferior teams, not to mention what BYU did to OU at the beginning of the season. Look for teams like TCU, Boise, Utah and BYU to have an even harder time scheduling BCS opponents in the future. There should be a rule that limits the number of FCS cupcakes an FBS team can play in a season to 1.


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

WeakenedWarrior said:


> The whole thing reeks of cowardice. The BCS conferences do not want to put their reputations on the line again because 3 of the last 4 times they did they got beat by these supposedly inferior teams, not to mention what BYU did to OU at the beginning of the season. Look for teams like TCU, Boise, Utah and BYU to have an even harder time scheduling BCS opponents in the future. There should be a rule that limits the number of FCS cupcakes an FBS team can play in a season to 1.


+10000000


----------



## Riverrat77 (Sep 7, 2007)

LOL Jahan.... can hear you clankin when you walk down the hallway!!


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

So undefeated Alabama and Texas play each other. 
TCU and BSU play each other. 
Other BCS bowl games include Florida, Cincinatti, Georgia Tech, Iowa, Oregon and Ohio State. 

I believe that head to head, TCU and BSU would be favored against every remaining team except maybe Florida. And I think TCU would be favored in that game - BSU not. Though BSU did beat Oregon already this season. 

The TCU-BSU game will be a good game. But it is pure cowardice to put them against each other. But really, the SEC was not about to allow their poster child to get handled in the Sugar Bowl again. And the Orange Bowl NEEDED a Big 10 team to draw TV audiences. And the Rose Bowl was locked to Big 10 and Pac 10. So the overall options were really pretty limited. But hey - the money will come to the MWC and WAC so good for them!

TCU wins the Fiesta by 9.


----------



## Guest (Dec 10, 2009)

GaryFish said:


> TCU wins the Fiesta by 9.


I think they will win by more than 9. Don't get me wrong, I think Boise is a very good team, but I just think that TCU is that much better. I really do think they belong in the NC game with Alabama. They have one of the best defenses in the country, and they can put up a lot of points on offense in a hurry. I just don't think Boise has faced anyone this season as good, on both sides of the ball, as TCU, and that includes Oregon. Not only that but I think TCU will play with a big chip on their shoulders as well. They believe they belong in the NC game, and now they don't even get a BCS opponent. Patterson is saying all the right things to the press about the matchup, but in the locker room I am sure he telling his players that they were wronged and to go out there and take it out on Boise to show the nation they deserved a better opponent. I think Boise will hang with them better than BYU or Utah did, but I still predict TCU wins by at least 3 scores. I am going with TCU by 17.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

GaryFish said:


> The TCU-BSU game will be a good game. But it is pure cowardice to put them against each other. But really, the SEC was not about to allow their poster child to get handled in the Sugar Bowl again. And the Orange Bowl NEEDED a Big 10 team to draw TV audiences. And the Rose Bowl was locked to Big 10 and Pac 10. So the overall options were really pretty limited. But hey - the money will come to the MWC and WAC so good for them!


Did they change it from last year? Last year the utes got $9 million or so, while the BCS schools got over $17 million. That is ONE of many shady things about the BCS.


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> Did they change it from last year? Last year the utes got $9 million or so, while the BCS schools got over $17 million. That is ONE of many shady things about the BCS.


The total amount for the utes was the $17 million. But the arrangement the MWC has with all member schools, is that half of the bowl payout for any bowl goes to the school, and half goes to the conference and is split equally among the other eight schools. So the utes got $9 million, and each of the others got roughly $1 million. That same formula applies to all bowl teams. So the 1 million from the Vegas Bowl ala. BYU will be split - $500,000 to BYU, and the rest split 8 ways.

Most conferences have the same deal going on as well with bowl monies.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

ESPN must be reporting false info then, because they are saying the non-BCS teams get a smaller cut than the BCS teams.


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

Yea, I was reading an article yesterday in USA Today as well. It indicated the share the non-BCS conferences get being smaller. You are correct. 

Still however,each conference does have their own way of splitting bowl proceeds.

As a fairly free-market driven guy - what are your thoughts on conferences that do not have a team that makes it to a BCS game - getting BCS proceeds?

USA Today said:
"Each of the six BCS conferences ... is expected to get a little more than $17.8 million. The Big Ten and SEC each get an additional $4.5 million for landing a second team in the lineup.

"With two teams in the lineup, the five remaining major conferences - the MWC, WAC, C-USA, MAC and Sun Belt - should receive a collective $23.9 million. They are guaranteed a minimum of 9% of the BCS' annual total net revenue, amounting to about $9.6 million this year. That doubles when a team meets automatic qualifying requirements, as TCU did. Placing BSU as at-large entry is worth an additional $4.5 million. 

"Notre Dame is guaranteed a 1/66 share of net BCS revenue, expected to be about $1.3 million. The Irish get $4.5 million if they make a BCS game.

"Army and Navy each receive $100,000.

"Eight lower-echelon Football Championship Subdivision conferences recdeive a total of about $1.8 million - $225,000 apiece - "to support the overall health of college fdootball," according to BCS guidelines.


----------

