Here's something to think about RE: the BCS and mid-majors.

 

If a team goes undefeated, and get into the top 6 of the BCS, they recieve a payment of over $12M, which gets split among the teams in conference.

 

If that team has one loss, they would go to a bowl where the payout is substancially less, less than 10% of the BCS bowl. THe $$$ awarded would be less than the amount each team recieves if they have a BCS school... Plus one extra school probably goes to a bowl game

 

THerefore there is actually a benefit for teams to roll over at the end of the season if there appears to be any opportunity for a team from their conference of making the BCS.

 

/not saying it's happened. Just think about it.

Yeah but you made it seem like they shouldnt be there.. which they should

 

but it doesnt matter now because they lost, looks like Pitt will be in the Fiesta Bowl

I know, but the same argument now applies to Pitt. They deserve to be there, based on the system in place. If not for that system, there is no way in hell they get into such a bowl. The system allows them to play in a bowl, but they are by no means one of the best in the country. That is all I am saying.

Here's something to think about RE: the BCS and mid-majors.

 

If a team goes undefeated, and get into the top 6 of the BCS, they recieve a payment of over $12M, which gets split among the teams in conference. 

 

If that team has one loss, they would go to a bowl where the payout is substancially less, less than 10% of the BCS bowl.  THe $$$ awarded would be less than the amount each team recieves if they have a BCS school... Plus one extra school probably goes to a bowl game

 

THerefore there is actually a benefit for teams to roll over at the end of the season if there appears to be any opportunity for a team from their conference of making the BCS.

 

/not saying it's happened.  Just think about it.

The same could apply to a team in a BCS conference playing a team that is chasing an at large berth. It would be to their advantage financially to roll over. But finances don't get into the way of competitiveness. A guy doesn't get to be a coach at that high of a level if it is not in his nature to win every time he takes the field. Ditto for players at that high of a level. They aren't directly benefitting (especially seniors) so as soon as they take the field, all of that is forgotten.

 

It is a strange system nonetheless, that allows for such twists and turns.

I know, but the same argument now applies to Pitt.  They deserve to be there, based on the system in place.  If not for that system, there is no way in hell they get into such a bowl.  The system allows them to play in a bowl, but they are by no means one of the best in the country.  That is all I am saying.

ok then I agree with you

The reason they will be left out is because they cant beat OU.. Lets say they beat OU and lose to Oklahoma State (The game they made the HUGE comeback) I think that they would be in a BCS bowl

 

but its the fact that OU has year in and out slapped Texas in the face.. And thats why I think they will not get in..

 

I picked Texas to go to the National Title game, but again OU has stopped them once again.. I seriously dont think they will ever get to a BCS game unless they find a way to beat OU.. Or OU somehow just sucks and they win the South

Looking at Utah and UT. Utah would not go undefeated in the Big 12 South. At best they would also have lost to OU. I just do not believe Utah is as strong as UT. Cal and UT should be the at-large this season.

Looking at Utah and UT. Utah would not go undefeated in the Big 12 South.  At best they would also have lost to OU. I just do not believe Utah is as strong as UT. Cal and UT should be the at-large this season.

I don't think it's fair to Utah to look at it that way.

They took that schedule that was given to them and dominated it.

The same could apply to a team in a BCS conference playing a team that is chasing an at large berth.  It would be to their advantage financially to roll over.  But finances don't get into the way of competitiveness.  A guy doesn't get to be a coach at that high of a level if it is not in his nature to win every time he takes the field.  Ditto for players at that high of a level.  They aren't directly benefitting (especially seniors) so as soon as they take the field, all of that is forgotten.

 

It is a strange system nonetheless, that allows for such twists and turns.

There's little chance of it ever happening in a BCS conference for several reasons.

 

The BCS conference is guarenteed a bid (at least $13M)

When a BCS conference gets an at-large bid, they only get about half of the $13M for the second team.

A BCS conference likely has at least 6 bowl teams, sometimes 8 or more. That's $13M for the first, and about $1M for the other 6-7... So about $20M

 

A non BCS conference only has 2-4 bowl bids, most awarding below $1M -- I would say the average non-BCS conferece generates less than $3M year from bowls.

 

1 BCS bowl bid would be worth about 4 years of bowls for the conference... It's just too lucrative to think that it's not a possibility. Although when a non-BCS school makes a BCS bowl, they make less money than the BCS schools... And when Notre Dame makes a BCS bowl, they get more than the BCS schools(even though they get stomped)

I don't think it's fair to Utah to look at it that way.

They took that schedule that was given to them and dominated it.

Including thumping Texas A&M...... more so than Texas did.

 

My only problem with Utah is that they are going to get stuck playing Pittsburgh and not one of the top teams. I wish they would play Cal or UT or Michigan so that they can truly show what they can or cannot do. Instead, they will play Pitt, where they will likely be double-digit favorites. Utah gets stuck with the team that doesn't belong, so they won't truly get the chance to prove themselves.

I don't think it's fair to Utah to look at it that way.

They took that schedule that was given to them and dominated it.

You have to somehow determine which is the better team. Since they did not play head to head, it becomes an intellectual exercise in comparison. Could UT have won Utah's conference? Could Utah have win UT's conference. If I had to take one of those scenarios, I'd take UT over Utah.

You have to somehow determine which is the better team. Since they did not play head to head, it becomes an intellectual exercise in comparison. Could UT have won Utah's conference? Could Utah have win UT's conference. If I had to take one of those scenarios, I'd take UT over Utah.

They have one common opponent, Texas A&M.

Utah beat them by 20.

Texas beat them by 13.

 

That's pretty much the only way you can compare them head to head without thinking hypothetically.

 

As you can see, there isn't really a way to compare them.

 

And you can't really compare them through A & M because there is the rivalry factor against Texas.