Is it the highest rated team from the G5? Or the highest rated conference champ?

(11-12-2012 05:21 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  Is it the highest rated team from the G5? Or the highest rated conference champ?

Very explicitly the highest rated champ. Last year, for example, TCU would have won the G5 bid since it was the highest ranked *champ* by winning the MWC title, even though Boise State was higher ranked and in the same league.

(11-12-2012 05:33 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(11-12-2012 05:21 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  Is it the highest rated team from the G5? Or the highest rated conference champ?

Very explicitly the highest rated champ. Last year, for example, TCU would have won the G5 bid since it was the highest ranked *champ* by winning the MWC title, even though Boise State was higher ranked and in the same league.

But with Boise St being ranked 9th in the final BCS rankings last year, they would also have received access thru one of the open slots. (I think)

(11-12-2012 07:25 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(11-12-2012 05:33 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(11-12-2012 05:21 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  Is it the highest rated team from the G5? Or the highest rated conference champ?

Very explicitly the highest rated champ. Last year, for example, TCU would have won the G5 bid since it was the highest ranked *champ* by winning the MWC title, even though Boise State was higher ranked and in the same league.

But with Boise St being ranked 9th in the final BCS rankings last year, they would also have received access thru one of the open slots. (I think)

The committee MIGHT have picked them for one of the at large spots.

(11-12-2012 04:30 PM)3601 Wrote:  If you want to get the 4 team playoffs out of the Big East then you are going to need to play tough OOC opponents and likely finish undefeated.

If your goal is to simply take the one guaranteed spot that goes to the best team from BE, CUSA, SB, MWC and MAC then you might be better off playing a watered down OOC schedule.

It will be interesting to see how this affects scheduling philosophies.

I think most teams will take their chances of going 13-0 (winning conf champ game) vs a team with at least 1 loss (possibly due to a tough non-conf schedule).

Most seasons, there are just 1 or 2 undefeated teams...as ANY loss is a killer.

I don't think most will schedule TOUGH non-conf game anymore than they do now.

Big programs will still schedule 7-8 home games per year...and hope for the best at the end.

Most powers are not going to give up a $3 Million - $6 Million home game vs a nobody to play a tough game non-conf game on the road.

I doubt it has much of an effect. If you are top program, you may only have 3 occ games to begin with. But even with 4, One tough, 2 bcs non AQ schools, and a 1aa cup cake. BE schools either go easy to get access game, or if they are building for top 4, have to have 2 AQ teams, and a couple more non AQ, not much room for 1aa.

Guys, if you've been paying attention teams are toughening up their schedule. A commitee picks the teams. Not coaches anymore. I used this before, Ohio St will play TCU, Cincy and UNC.

(11-12-2012 04:33 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  Unfortunately, human voters always tend to punish losses more than they reward strong victories. I still think you need a signature win to impress the selection committee, though. Boise State's formula of 1 marquee non-conference game and holding serve the rest of the year has done very well for them.

That's road apples, Frank.

2011: #5 ranked Boise State (12-1) beat #19 Georgia in Atlanta but had one loss to #18 TCU by one point. The reward was a trip to the MAACO bowl in Vegas where we defeated Arizona State.

2010: #10 Boise State (12-1) defeated #10 Virginia Tech and #24 Oregon State on their home fields. The one loss was by 3 points to #19 Nevada in Reno. The reward: back to the MAACO Vegas bowl where we defeated #19 Utah.

2009: #6 Boise State (12-0) defeated # 16 Oregon at their house. The reward? Grudgingly, the BCS arranged a sham Fiesta Bowl match up with the WAC vs MWC (TCU yet again).

2008: #9 Boise State (12-0) defeated #17 Oregon at their house. Results was a trip to the Poinsettia Bowl to take on TCU again.

So spare me that condescending line about Boise State being somehow rewarded for after not playing a tougher schedule. There hasn't been a reward.

(11-13-2012 08:01 AM)Road Apple Wrote:  

(11-12-2012 04:33 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  Unfortunately, human voters always tend to punish losses more than they reward strong victories. I still think you need a signature win to impress the selection committee, though. Boise State's formula of 1 marquee non-conference game and holding serve the rest of the year has done very well for them.

That's road apples, Frank.

2011: #5 ranked Boise State (12-1) beat #19 Georgia in Atlanta but had one loss to #18 TCU by one point. The reward was a trip to the MAACO bowl in Vegas where we defeated Arizona State.

2010: #10 Boise State (12-0) defeated #10 Virginia Tech and #24 Oregon State on their home fields. Reward: back to the MAACO Vegas bowl where we defeated #19 Utah.

2009: #6 Boise State (12-0) defeated # 16 Oregon at their house. The reward? Grudgingly, the BCS arranged a sham Fiesta Bowl match up with the WAC vs MWC (TCU).

2008: #9 Boise State (12-0) defeated #17 Oregon at their house. Results was a trip to the Poinsettia Bowl to take on TCU again.

So spare me that condensing crap about Boise State being somehow rewarded for after not playing a tougher schedule. There hasn't been a reward.

Well that had to do with your conferences crappy bowl arrangement.

(11-13-2012 08:00 AM)NJRedMan Wrote:  Guys, if you've been paying attention teams are toughening up their schedule. A commitee picks the teams. Not coaches anymore. I used this before, Ohio St will play TCU, Cincy and UNC.

OSU has played similar teams in the past.

Bottom line....I don't think you will see that many Big 6 teams that play 3-4 tough non-conf games per year.

(11-13-2012 08:07 AM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(11-13-2012 08:01 AM)Road Apple Wrote:  

(11-12-2012 04:33 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  Unfortunately, human voters always tend to punish losses more than they reward strong victories. I still think you need a signature win to impress the selection committee, though. Boise State's formula of 1 marquee non-conference game and holding serve the rest of the year has done very well for them.

That's road apples, Frank.

2011: #5 ranked Boise State (12-1) beat #19 Georgia in Atlanta but had one loss to #18 TCU by one point. The reward was a trip to the MAACO bowl in Vegas where we defeated Arizona State.

2010: #10 Boise State (12-1) defeated #10 Virginia Tech and #24 Oregon State on their home fields. The one loss was by 3 points to #19 Nevada in Reno. Reward: back to the MAACO Vegas bowl where we defeated #19 Utah.

2009: #6 Boise State (12-0) defeated # 16 Oregon at their house. The reward? Grudgingly, the BCS arranged a sham Fiesta Bowl match up with the WAC vs MWC (TCU).

2008: #9 Boise State (12-0) defeated #17 Oregon at their house. Results was a trip to the Poinsettia Bowl to take on TCU again.

So spare me that condescending line about Boise State being somehow rewarded for after not playing a tougher schedule. There hasn't been a reward.

Well that had to do with your conferences crappy bowl arrangement.

Yeah. While Boise State sat on the sidelines watching lesser ranked teams get picked by the BCS for the better bowls. But my point was that Frank is dead wrong about how Boise State's "formula" to take on one marquee team and the rest all being cupcakes, yet we somehow were rewarded. It's BS.