Bowls That Matter: #7 Fiesta Bowl
by utesfan100 on Dec 21, 2010 1:14 AM EST
in BCS Analysis
Based on my criteria for which bowls matter, those that are at a level that rivals what playoff level football would be in most designs, only eight bowl qualified. The next in line is the Fiesta Bowl.
Two bowls from outside the BCS have ranked higher this year than this, the youngest of the BCS bowls. One of those is not even on the radar of bowls that might be on the fringe of becoming a BCS bowl one day.
This year's pairing features the #7 Oklahoma Sooners and unranked Connecticut Huskies. Oklahoma sits at 11-2, with Connecticut down to 8-4. This story line for this game is more about whether teams like Connecticut deserve a BCS berth over teams like those in the Las Vegas or Capitol One Bowl.
Let's look a bit closer at these two teams, rather than just dismissing Connecticut outright.
0 commentsFirst Bowl Open Thread
by utesfan100 on Dec 18, 2010 2:18 PM EST
Will BYU Vanquish the Foes or will UTEP experience a Miner Rush?
Will the Northern Illinois Red and Black Attack overcome the Fresno St. Bulldogs?
Will donning the Hustle Belt be enough to speed the Ohio Bobcats past Troy Trojans?
We find out tonight.
Opening Week Bowl Kickoff
by utesfan100 on Dec 17, 2010 9:27 PM EST
in BCS Analysis
I really wish we were going to see Oregon vs. TCU and Auburn vs. Stanford this weekend, and four games with the winners advancing to the BCS.
That is what I would have done. Lets look at what we have on tap instead.
| Bowl | Team | Team |
| New Mexico Bowl ESPN 12/18 2:00ET |
BYU Cougars 6-6 (5-3 MWC) |
UTEP Miners 6-6 (3-5 C-USA) |
| Humanitarian Bowl ESPN 12/18 5:30ET |
Northern Illinois Huskies 10-3 (8-0 MAC) |
Fresno St. Bulldogs 8-4 (5-3 WAC) |
| New Orleans ESPN 12/18 9:00ET |
Ohio Bobcats 8-4 (6-2 MAC) |
Troy Trojans 7-5 (6-2 Sun Belt) |
Only Northern Illinois really deserves mention, as the lone team on tap with nine wins over FBS opponents. Make that 9 wins PERIOD. For this they travel to a lovely outdoor Idaho stadium so cold even the grass is blue.
Oh yeah... that is so much better than a first round playoff spot. I bet the Husky players are thrilled.
Bowls That Matter: #8 Cotton Bowl
by utesfan100 on Dec 15, 2010 11:01 PM EST
in BCS Analysis
Based on my criteria for which bowls matter, those that are at a level that rivals what playoff level football would be in most designs, only eight bowl qualified. The lowest ranked of those is the Cotton Bowl.
I would be less surprised if the BCS chooses to expand to include the Cotton Bowl (an their Dallas Cowboy's Stadium), a MWC automatic qualification and allowing conference to qualify a third team than I would be if they formed an expanded format in 2014.
This year's pairing features the #11 LSU Tigers and #17 Texas A&M Aggies. LSU sits at 10-2, with Texas A&M down to 9-3. One thing is certain ... LSU can not hold more than a 10 point lead over anyone, and can take a lead on anyone.
Let's look a bit closer at these two teams.
College Football Playoff Formats
by utesfan100 on Dec 9, 2010 8:29 PM EST
in BCS Examination
What could a playoff have looked like, if the BCS were not implemented? First, let us consider Plus One scenarios.
True Plus One
In a true plus one the bowls are played and then the teams are selected. Oregon would have gone to the Rose Bowl and Auburn to the Sugar Bowl. TCU would have had a good chance to play Auburn in the Sugar Bowl as a semi-final.
In general the #3 team could be guaranteed any available at large spots against the top 2, and likewise for the #4 team. (For the #4 team to be available in this method the Rose Bowl must have two of the top 3 or none of the top 4).
This year the Sugar Bowl Winner would then likely play the Rose Bowl winner, as Wisconsin could pass Oregon (and Stanford) with a win head to head.
Semi-Final Plus One
Another option would be to implement a semi-final. This can either be done to open the bowl season (December 18th this year) with the losers falling to BCS bowls, or by selecting the two BCS bowls with the highest ranked tie ins as semifinals and playing on New Year's Day in the traditional time slots.
The former idea keeps the entire BCS process at ten teams and would not impact the bowl system. In fact, if teams with 9 or more FCS teams were allowed two bowl games this design would be a likely outcome. The latter would reduce the BCS draw, adding two more teams to the bowl pool for the remaining bowls.
#1 Auburn Tigers vs. #4 Stanford Cardinal (Sugar)
#2 Oregon Ducks vs. #3 TCU Horned Frogs (Rose)
Tier-Based Plus One
In this design, the BCS system is further expanded by creating four BCS bowl qualifiers, each tied to one of the BCS bowls to represent their selection interests. The BCS bowls are not, however, obligated to take the winner of their respective qualifier. (In particular, if Oregon lost the Rose Bowl would not have an opening, and if Oregon and Auburn won the Rose Bowl would likely take Stanford to replace Oregon.)
The above games would be semi-finals, with the losers falling to their BCS tie-in. Connecticut has an automatic BCS qualification and is not eligible for a second bowl game, so would earn one of two direct BCS berths. Wisconsin is the highest ranked automatic qualifying champion and would get the other (with the option to accept a second early season bowl invite-scrimmage.)
Oklahoma and Virginia Tech would be guaranteed access to the BCS qualifiers. Conferences may qualify up to three teams total, not the two team limit we have now. Here is one of many possible arrangements.
Rose Qualifier: LSU Tigers vs. Boise St. Broncos
Sugar Qualifier: Arkansas Razorbacks vs. Ohio St. Buckeyes
Fiesta Qualifier: Oklahoma Sooners vs. Michigan St. Spartans
Orange Qualifier: Virginia Tech Hokies vs. Nebraska Cornhuskers
Missouri and Oklahoma State would also be eligible. Six other teams would be eligible for a second bowl, but not for the BCS.
The winners of these games would advance to a BCS bowl and the losers would fall to a second round bowl selection. BCS Bowls would have first rights to the winner of their qualifier. Any bowls without a representative of their conference tie-ins would have selections in the ranking order of the champions lost. After that a predetermined ordering would be employed.
On December 5th the bowls after New Year's Day would have had the option to select a team or select one of four bids for the teams losing these first round games in a second selection after the December 18th BCS qualifier games. This would have allowed the remaining bowls to have made selections on the current time line.
More playoffs after the jump...
Which Bowl Games Really Matter?
by utesfan100 on Dec 8, 2010 1:38 AM EST
in BCS Examination
Bowls and conferences have a long twisted list of tie-ins based on various historical and political origins. At least for a handful of bowls. Most bowls are less than a decade old and have all the tradition of a Snuggie.
What happens if we order the bowls based on these tie ins? Let's take a look. Here are the bowls when arranged so that each bowl is in the highest possible rank so that it is in a lower rank than any bowl selecting ahead of it. For fun, let's go ahead and put the team's in their respective bowl games.
The follwing teams are more than 10 ranking spots away from the theoretical range of the tier bowls each team is in, based on the BCS top 25.
Under Placed:
#10 Boise State and #19 Utah are a good match, but not for a bowl with a payout for the #31-34 teams.
#15 Nevada is in a bowl for the #65-68 teams, #24 Hawaii for teams in the 69-70 range and #25 UCF for teams in the 41-46 range.
Over Placed:
Unranked Connecticut has no business in a BCS bowl, based on rankings.
Unranked Florida and Penn State are fairly matched, but neither deserve the prestige of their bowl game based on this year's results. The Outback Bowl should feature teams near #13 to #16.
Personally, I will treat this year's Las Vegas Bowl as this year's Outback Bowl.
I will look at more Bowl comparisons next ...
Future BCS Automatic Qualifications: 2008-2010
by utesfan100 on Dec 7, 2010 8:12 PM EST
in BCS Analysis
That is right. The bowls have yet to be played, yet we can finalize the 2010 Automatic qualification figures. Normally I would look to see which conference would be in based solely on this year. Unfortunately I have already updated my spread sheet to account for the known conference changes and it is tedious to undue that.
The next evaluation will be based on the 2008-2011 seasons to determine if any conferences warrant an automatic qualification for 2012 and 2013. We are in the third quarter in that race. 2010 is also the first year in evaluation of all conferences over 2010-2013 if the current format is extended past 2014.
How do the conferences stand in each? Glad you asked...
BCS AQ Status Coming Soon
I found a bug in my spread sheet, working on ironing it out...
Should be up tomorrow.
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
