Non Bcs Conferences Need A Plan For Auto Bcs Bid

[MeanGreen61]

http://www.tulsaworld.com/sportsextra/article.aspx?subjectid=203&articleid=20100627_203_B1_LEAGUE369349

[Eastwood Eagle]

No mention of the Sun Belt.

[NThomas]

Because NONE of the Sun Belt Conference teams has a shot at winning against another AQ BCS conference. C-USA, MWC, and the WAC occasionally produce one (or two teams on a good year) that can compete with the big boys. Forget BCS bids. UNT needs to worry about getting out of the Belt ASAP.

[CMJ]

Because NONE of the Sun Belt Conference teams has a shot at winning against another AQ BCS conference. C-USA, MWC, and the WAC occasionally produce one (or two teams on a good year) that can compete with the big boys. Forget BCS bids. UNT needs to worry about getting out of the Belt ASAP.

Teams from the Belt beat teams from the Big 6 every year tho. Maybe not schools near the top of the rankings or anything, but it happens.

[gangrene]

One solution that has been rumored is some sort of alliance between leagues that could deliver a championship team to the BCS bowls.

The BCS has resisted adding any more automatic bids to current conferences.

So, perhaps there could be some sort of championship game or playoff between three or even four non-BCS leagues.

If Conference USA, the Mountain West and the WAC could form some sort of football alliance, then these three leagues could offer a championship team that represents the 30 combined teams from those leagues for an automatic bid.

Hmmm...for some reason, that idea sounds familiar to me. However, I think the MWC gets an auto-BCS bid and either the MAC or the SBC becomes the third conference in the alliance.

[Arkstfan]

MWC wasn't going to qualify WITH Utah and Boise State. Their plan was to appeal arguing that they got close.

I think leagues are fool-hardy if they make plans based on the BCS.

The money doesn't work.

Last year the BCS distributed $142 million (that will rise to around $180 million this year). Five games, ten participants. Logic says $14.2 million per team.

But they skim some for FCS, the non-AQ, Notre Dame and Army. Last year the non-AQ picked up an extra $4.5 million because Boise was selected at-large. Last year non-AQ took $24 million, Notre Dame $1.5 million, Army and Navy $100,000 each, and FCS $1.8 million for a grand total of $27.5 million (would have been $23 million if Boise had been passed over). The BCS leagues split $115.2 million, SEC and Big 10 took $22.2 and the other four took $17.7

The BCS revenue system works by screwing an extra team from a league and screwing the team(s) from the non-AQ. Having second teams only produced $4.5 million each for the SEC and Big 10. The Big XII, ACC, Big East, and Pac-10 all got over-paid.

Now when it comes time to set around the table and light the cigars IF and it's a huge IF, they keep the current five game arrangement starting 2014 the money will likely look different. The minimum dollars to the AQ (as a percentage) will fall.

More likely what will happen is the BCS title game will continue to rotate but that will be the only BCS game. The SEC and Big 10 and the Pac-10 can make more money negotiating to send their top teams to the Sugar, Fiesta, Orange, and Rose with only #1 and #2 made available for the BCS. If the presidents will give in, we will see Plus One. The bowls will play out with everyone negotiating their own bowl deals and the top two on Jan 2. going to the BCS championship game. Using dollars for the next BCS cycle that single game will be worth about $72 million. The two participating schools would probably get about $18 million each and the remaining $32 million would be distributed the FBS leagues, FCS, Notre Dame, and Army.