Mountain West Wants Auto Bid to BCS games

And I found it funny how all the comments were trying to compare the MWC to the Big East or the Big 10.

Yes Utah, BYU, and TCU have had the occasional great seasons. But let’s look past the fact that most years the conference struggles to finish three teams with over 7 wins. Hell, overall the conference from 2002-2006 was pretty damn bad except for the occasional good team.

Mountain West Conference – wait your turn until 2012 like you agreed you whiny little bitches. If ’09, ’10, and ’11 are similar to the past two years, then yes you have a great case.

Ask KU how we feel about one-hit wonders……

I don’t think it’s impossible for a non-BCS team to earn a trip to the NC. Like this season with Utah going undefeated, it all boils down to smart scheduling. You’re going to have to leave schools like Utah State and Weber State off your schedule if you want to be considered the nation’s best.

Here’s a hint – schedule a top-5 perennial powerhouse at the end of the season – since we all know how much of an impact when you lose can make.

BYU -——————- 25
TCU -——————- 31
Utah -——————- 43
Wyoming -———- 51
Air Force -———— 57
SDSU -—————- 71
CSU -——————- 75
UNLV -—————- 100
UNM -—————— 104

mean avg. MWC -——- 61.89

mean avg. Big 10 -—- 38.72
mean avg. ACC -——— 38.75
mean avg. SEC -——— 39.67
mean avg. Pac 10 -—- 39.80
mean avg. Big XII -—— 43.33
mean avg. Beast -——- 63.75

They do have an edge on the Big East, though there is definitely a prestige gap after the Big XII.

Who cares about those? Seriously…that has nothing to do with the modern game. I’m sure the Ivy League has a higher “Prestige Ranking” to. Besides, anything that places the ACC, as a whole, over the SEC, as a whole, historically, is a crock.

If MWC gets in…it’s at the ground floor…so, look at it this way…is the Big East really all that much better, or even potentially better than the Mountain West? Would you rather have a league in a region of the country that is one of the fastest growing (the West outside of California), or one that has consistently lost population and cares more about MLB, NFL, and College Basketball?

I agree with the masher, why the prestige rankings? Since the BCS has been used who has been a major team from the Pac 10 other than USC, and why aren’t the Big 12 and SEC at the top of this list ahead of the Big 10 and ACC? I know USC has won several and played in a couple other BCS games but so has OU and Texas and Florida has done fairly well also I would say. I wish the BCS rankings would be thrown out completely, never to be used again and for something like a playoff, BracketCat has thought of a good one, to be used instead. If the ADs and Commissioners tried they could come up with a way to make it work, although they are the ones who want to keep the BCS. I’d be okay with Obama forcing it upon them if he’s got to.

isn’t just something to make them feel better. If done correctly, it could force the hand of the NCAA, BCS and major university presidents to seriously consider a playoff/bowl integrated system and totally throw out the BCS all together. I, like Wabasher, think the BCS should be thrown out. It’s insane that media members who’ve never set foot in the state of UTah, let alone watch an entire game, be determining national champions and tiebreakers for major conferences.

Rather than go down the slippery slope of letting in the Mountain West, the powers that be may need to institute the playoff or go back to the old system with a “+1” game after the bowls. Talk about drama….

relies on the perceived aristocracy of schools / conferences. This perception tends to help the more ‘prestigious’ institutions and hinder the others…even within the BCS conferences. The BCS is just an extension of the aristocracy.

For example, 1.) K-State ranked number 1 in 1998 loses its BXII championship game to Texas A&M. 2.) OU, the same thing happened in 2003 to them.

The results for 1 and 2 you think would be the same…however, K-State went to the Alamo Bowl and OU played in the Nat’l Championship game. I feel there is a connection between perceived prestige and the BCS selection as OU is number 1 in prestige; whereas, K-State is number 76.

I don’t understand why there needs to be BCS and non-BCS conferences all within the same Football Bowl Subdivision…why not all equals? Obviously, there is some criteria that separates BCS conferences from non-BCS conferences…is it not perceived prestige?

For the record, I’m not for categorizing schools based on prestige…I just don’t think the powers that be will make comparisons based on anything more objective.

But de facto “prestige rankings” are what the BCS uses to keep others from feeding at it’s trough.

One interesting point from those is that the MWC is higher than the Big East. Now that WVU has levelled off and joined the rest of the league in general mediocrity, what really does it bring to the BCS table? Syracuse? Rutgers? Louisville? The ’natti?

I don’t see how that is clearly better than a league with Utah, BYU, TCU, and even Air Force and Colorado State (one of the only non-BCS schools that gets an annual neutral site game with a BCS conference school).

Furthermore…if the MWC adds Boise, it’s at least on par with The Big East, if not better.

Almost the same with the ACC – until FSU and Miami manage a comeback, that league is really just providing someone to fill a spot in BCS bowl games.