(02-17-2012 08:35 PM)Maize Wrote:  In athletics nothing stays the same BUT outside the the games involving schools with the Number 1 & Number 2 schools the other games are just "Exhibition Games" and they become meaningless....only the payout would matter.

We already have a situation in which 1 vs 2 play in a separate game for the title, and yet the major bowls remain the major bowls, even though they no longer impact who wins the national title.

(02-17-2012 08:44 PM)Maize Wrote:  A world without AQ could look like this:

Rose Bowl: B1G Champ vs. Pac 12 Champ
Sugar Bowl: SEC Champ
Cotton Bowl: Big XII Champ
Fiesta Bowl: Pac 12 #2
Orange Bowl: ACC Champ

The BIG EAST would need ND help in begging to get a tie-in with either the Fiesta Bowl/Orange Bowl or Fiesta Bowl....juz say'n.

Also for something to look out for is the ND AD becoming the new Big XII Commish. If he takes that job and they let him do his thing the Big XII long term future is secure.

This is where Fed Ex and a 10 million dollar sponsorship may help the Big East swing a major bowl tie-in they would not have recieved otherwise.

(02-17-2012 08:44 PM)Maize Wrote:  A world without AQ could look like this:

Rose Bowl: B1G Champ vs. Pac 12 Champ
Sugar Bowl: SEC Champ
Cotton Bowl: Big XII Champ
Fiesta Bowl: Pac 12 #2
Orange Bowl: ACC Champ

The BIG EAST would need ND help in begging to get a tie-in with either the Fiesta Bowl/Orange Bowl or Fiesta Bowl....juz say'n.

If any conference is going to have its #2 team guaranteed a slot in a major bowl, it will be the SEC or the B1G, not the PAC.

But beyond that, i agree the Big East will not get an automatic slot unless ND is involved. Of course ND will not choose to be involved.

(02-17-2012 09:54 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-17-2012 09:54 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-17-2012 08:44 PM)Maize Wrote:  A world without AQ could look like this:

Rose Bowl: B1G Champ vs. Pac 12 Champ
Sugar Bowl: SEC Champ
Cotton Bowl: Big XII Champ
Fiesta Bowl: Pac 12 #2
Orange Bowl: ACC Champ

The BIG EAST would need ND help in begging to get a tie-in with either the Fiesta Bowl/Orange Bowl or Fiesta Bowl....juz say'n.

If any conference is going to have its #2 team guaranteed a slot in a major bowl, it will be the SEC or the B1G, not the PAC.

But beyond that, i agree the Big East will not get an automatic slot unless ND is involved. Of course ND will not choose to be involved.

IF the BCS goes away, anyone who doesn't think the PAC-12 will be guaranteed a team in the Rose Bowl (#1) and the Fiesta Bowl (#2) is truly uninformed. Just when you start to win over some fans, you go and post something this stupid just to be negative.

Some good points. There are a few factors that help the Big East:

1) The Cotton is likely going to become what is essentially the fifth BCS bowl, only that title won't exist any longer, so there will be 10 teams in what are, for all practical purposes, BCS bowls.

2) If the plus-one model is implemented, two additional teams will be unavailable for the big 4-5, so you're really talking 14 teams in the big bowls.

3) I don't know how unhelpful or devious Notre Dame is, but it would make a lot of sense for them to partner with the Big East for two bowls, maybe the Orange and the Gator or Holiday or some other top second-tier bowl. Obviously ND would have an advantage and likely be able to get the slot with a lower ranking, but that would be okay. They've got USC, Michigan, OU, Stanford, Michigan State, and others on upcoming schedules. I would think Florida bowls would love the ND tie-in, and if they don't get them, it's not as if a 10-2 or so USF or UCF or Navy or Rutgers or Boise or Louisville would be like getting stuck with Southern Miss or Northern Illinois.

This is probably close to right:

Rose big ten vs. PAC
Sugar sec vs big ten2
Orange sec2 vs acc
Fiesta bigxii vs PAC2

Only I think the Cotton could take the SEC and Big 12 #2s. Someone will want ND, and, again, if the plus-one is in place, you'll be depriving at least two and possibly all four of those bowls their top choice. You know the SEC will be sending two teams to a plus-one as often as not. So they'd actually be sending their #4 to the Cotton or wherever their #2 goes. I think the conference ought to be able to work something out. I doubt it will be as simple as the Big East champion goes to the Orange Bowl, but my hope is that will be one option, with the second being a strong second-tier bowl like the Gator, Capital One, Holiday, or Outback.

(02-18-2012 01:45 AM)UHCougar Wrote:  

(02-17-2012 09:54 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-17-2012 08:44 PM)Maize Wrote:  A world without AQ could look like this:

Rose Bowl: B1G Champ vs. Pac 12 Champ
Sugar Bowl: SEC Champ
Cotton Bowl: Big XII Champ
Fiesta Bowl: Pac 12 #2
Orange Bowl: ACC Champ

The BIG EAST would need ND help in begging to get a tie-in with either the Fiesta Bowl/Orange Bowl or Fiesta Bowl....juz say'n.

If any conference is going to have its #2 team guaranteed a slot in a major bowl, it will be the SEC or the B1G, not the PAC.

But beyond that, i agree the Big East will not get an automatic slot unless ND is involved. Of course ND will not choose to be involved.

IF the BCS goes away, anyone who doesn't think the PAC-12 will be guaranteed a team in the Rose Bowl (#1) and the Fiesta Bowl (#2) is truly uninformed. Just when you start to win over some fans, you go and post something this stupid just to be negative.

Are you really so dumb as to think the PAC-freaking-12 is more likely than the B1G and SEC to get a guaranteed #2 in BCS bowls?

You do realize that the B1G and SEC get 2 teams into the current BCS far more regularly then does the PAC? If the major bowls choose to take SEC and B1G #2s more regularly than PAC #2, what on earth makes you think those bowls will want to permanently tie themselves to PAC #2 ahead of B1G or SEC #2?

None of the major bowls would align themselves for the #2 of any conference even if it's sec or BigTen they would much rather keep it at large and have a bigger pool to choose from

(02-18-2012 06:24 AM)Shasta77 Wrote:  I don't know how unhelpful or devious Notre Dame is, but it would make a lot of sense for them to partner with the Big East for two bowls, maybe the Orange and the Gator or Holiday or some other top second-tier bowl.

I don't see what incentive ND has to partner with the Big East on access to a BCS bowl. They can get that access on their own so why share it?

(02-18-2012 10:57 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  I don't see what incentive ND has to partner with the Big East on access to a BCS bowl. They can get that access on their own so why share it?

(1) To help insure the health, prestige and stability of the conference they belong to for all other sports

(2) For the sweetheart package non-BCS bowl deal with the Big East which provides more and better choices. ND isn't qualifying for all that many BCS bowls these days, anyway.

(02-18-2012 10:57 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-18-2012 06:24 AM)Shasta77 Wrote:  I don't know how unhelpful or devious Notre Dame is, but it would make a lot of sense for them to partner with the Big East for two bowls, maybe the Orange and the Gator or Holiday or some other top second-tier bowl.

I don't see what incentive ND has to partner with the Big East on access to a BCS bowl. They can get that access on their own so why share it?

They have plenty of incentive, as has been discussed on here ad nauseum.

Notre Dame can get the football access on its own - no doubt. But, it cannot play its other sports in a major conference, with the exception of the Big East, without joining for football. So, partnering with the Big East is clearly in Notre Dame's best interests, and the Big East's, whether or not most of us particularly like it.

(02-18-2012 10:57 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-18-2012 06:24 AM)Shasta77 Wrote:  I don't know how unhelpful or devious Notre Dame is, but it would make a lot of sense for them to partner with the Big East for two bowls, maybe the Orange and the Gator or Holiday or some other top second-tier bowl.

I don't see what incentive ND has to partner with the Big East on access to a BCS bowl. They can get that access on their own so why share it?

Actually the incentive would be that a somewhat strong BIG EAST Conference would help them maintain their football independence and they would not be forced to join the ACC or Big XII for all sports.

Plus they would have access to some of the BIG EAST Bowls like the Champs Sports.

See that guys. If you don't like what Quo Vadis posts, argue with it, like GA, myself and Maize just did.

Don't whine about it and throw personal barbs at him.

(02-18-2012 10:56 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  None of the major bowls would align themselves for the #2 of any conference even if it's sec or BigTen they would much rather keep it at large and have a bigger pool to choose from

That's my belief as well. But if a major bowl chooses to align with a conference #2, it will almost surely be with the B1G or SEC.

(02-18-2012 12:33 PM)BJUnklFkr Wrote:  

(02-18-2012 10:57 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-18-2012 06:24 AM)Shasta77 Wrote:  I don't know how unhelpful or devious Notre Dame is, but it would make a lot of sense for them to partner with the Big East for two bowls, maybe the Orange and the Gator or Holiday or some other top second-tier bowl.

I don't see what incentive ND has to partner with the Big East on access to a BCS bowl. They can get that access on their own so why share it?

They have plenty of incentive, as has been discussed on here ad nauseum.

Notre Dame can get the football access on its own - no doubt. But, it cannot play its other sports in a major conference, with the exception of the Big East, without joining for football. So, partnering with the Big East is clearly in Notre Dame's best interests, and the Big East's, whether or not most of us particularly like it.

BJ, I don't see how the Big East can leverage the Olympic sports issue against Notre Dame because ND is already a member for those Olympic sports, and has been in good standing since 1995. Yes, if ND were not currently a member of the Big East in those sports, we could perhaps use that as a bargaining chip for BCS help. But since they already are, i don't see how we could (and i doubt ND would respond to that kind of pressure anyway - they always seem to make football decisions independent of its effect on other sports).

Also, i think this need to have Notre Dame's help gives lie to the claim around here that the Big East is as strong as it ever has been. Recall that when the Bowl Coalition (1992-1994), Bowl Alliance (1995-1997) and BCS (1998 - ) were formed, the Big East champ was always given an AQ spot in a major bowl, and we didn't need Notre Dame's help to get it. That's because, thanks mostly to Miami, the Big East was regarded as a major conference that merited AQ status.

The fact that almost everyone here agrees that if the BCS system collapses the Big East will likely need ND's help to maintain an AQ tie-in to the major bowls means that, pro-NBE rhetoric to the contrary notwithstanding, we all know our status as a major conference has clearly sank as a result of the ACC raids over the past years.

PS - thanks for the admonition for all of us to argue stuff like this out sans the barbs and name-calling. I've been guilty of that myself and will rectify that.

(02-18-2012 12:34 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(02-18-2012 10:57 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-18-2012 06:24 AM)Shasta77 Wrote:  I don't know how unhelpful or devious Notre Dame is, but it would make a lot of sense for them to partner with the Big East for two bowls, maybe the Orange and the Gator or Holiday or some other top second-tier bowl.

I don't see what incentive ND has to partner with the Big East on access to a BCS bowl. They can get that access on their own so why share it?

Actually the incentive would be that a somewhat strong BIG EAST Conference would help them maintain their football independence and they would not be forced to join the ACC or Big XII for all sports.

Plus they would have access to some of the BIG EAST Bowls like the Champs Sports.

Maize, ND already has access to the Big East bowl lineup, so that does not strike me as a bargaining chip we can use to leverage them into an alliance with us for BCS bowl access.

True, the point is Notre Dame in a world without AQ would want the strongest BIG EAST Bowl lineup possible.

You can see a conference like the ACC & Big XII doing whatever possible to limit ND options into Bowls like the Orange Bowl/Fiesta Bowl etc...etc, that is what the ND AD was likely talking about the event that could force ND to join a conference in all sports which is something they really really really don't want to do.

With the BCS Contract ending in 2014 and the Bowl Contracts ending for the various conferences at the same time as the BCS Contract, this along with ND much preferred indy status a strong BIG EAST Bowl lineup helps them maintain the current status.

If they refuse or don't help and with the attractiveness of the B1G #2, the SEC #2 & 3, THE big XII #2 and the Pac 12 #2 to the Fiesta Bowl-(remember the Fiesta Bowl leaped all over Stanford) ND would want to protect themselves.

(02-18-2012 01:38 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Also, i think this need to have Notre Dame's help gives lie to the claim around here that the Big East is as strong as it ever has been.

Yes, but the BE would have needed ND's help whether there had been changes or not. No way a major takes what the BE the past few years has been selling. Until WVU this year, UConn and Cincinnati have been embarrassing the conference the past few years. The Big East's weakness at the top and taking away its AQ status was almost as much on the lips of commentators as the Penn State scandal. I don't think the new Big East is substantially better, and you may have a point about branding. But Boise has been a dominant team for a decade, finishing numerous times in the BCS Top 10. No one in the Big East (hardly anyone anywhere) approaches what they have done. Houston has won 10 or more games three times in the past six years, and along with UCF finished in the BCS Top 25 within the past two years. I believe the only two Big East schools to do that since Miami and VPI left are WVU and Pitt, which isn't as good a program as Houston. Navy has a strong brand and until this season was averaging 9 wins per year.

So
Boise > WVU
Houston > Pitt
SDSU, Navy, UCF > Syracuse

And Memphis has a brand similar to Louisville's in basketball, plus they'll being a nice 2nd-tier bowl with an increased payout against the SEC for the BE's 3rd or so team.

USF and UCF and Navy aren't huge in Florida, but I think that combined with ND they would be good for two good bowls there. We'll see.

If all these new schools were on the East Coast, people wouldn't think twice about their additions. It's the far-flung nature of the new league that causes the double-takes and makes people think it's "desperation." But Marinatto couldn't have gotten better teams in better markets. I think things will work out fine.

Shasta, you forget Cincinnati, who went to consecutive BCS bowl games. They finished in the top 10 in the final BCS poll in 2009, the year they went unbeaten during the regular season...

(02-18-2012 04:54 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  Shasta, you forget Cincinnati, who went to consecutive BCS bowl games. They finished in the top 10 in the final BCS poll in 2009, the year they went unbeaten during the regular season...

Also, if not for the "shady clock" in the Big XII Title Game between Texas-Nebraska the BCS Title Game that year very well could have been Alabama vs. Cincinnati instead of Alabama vs. Texas.