The Lakers Beat the Supersonics: College Football Playoff Payoff, BlogPoll Ballot, Football Parlay and Classic Music Video of the Week

Posted: November 9, 2012 in Big East, Big Ten, College Basketball, College Football, Illinois Fighting Illini, Sports
Tags: , , ,

It’s the home stretch for the college football regular season.  Let’s get to it.

(1) College Football Playoff News Leads to More College Football Playoff Questions – Every few weeks, a flurry of news about the college football playoff comes out and it ends up being more head-spinning than clarifying.  Last month, it appeared that a 7th BCS bowl (or whatever we will call the system going forward) would be a lock in order to provide more top tier bowl access to the new class of “non-contract” conferences (Big East, Mountain West, Conference USA, Sun Belt and MAC) known as the “Gang of Five” (hereinafter referred to by me as the “G5″*) along with an additional contract spot for the Pac-12 and Big 12 (to match the Orange Bowl contract spot that the Big Ten, SEC and Notre Dame are occupying opposite of the ACC).   It now looks like that idea lasted about as long as Mike Brown’s coaching tenure with the Lakers, complete with the BFFs of the Big Ten and Pac-12 getting into a tiff over the bowl’s viability.

(* Whenever I hear a reference to a G5, I always think of this moment.)

As a result, the FBS commissioners are going to recommend the original plan of a 4-team playoff incorporated into 6 bowls, with the Rose, Sugar (which has finally been named as the home of the SEC-Big 12 matchup and allows all of us to stop calling it the pompous Champions Bowl) and Orange Bowls as “Contract Bowls” and 3 other “Access Bowls” that will likely consist of the Cotton, Fiesta and the I Really Love Chick Fil-A Breakfast Biscuit Sandwiches So Please Have Your CFO Not Talk About Politics So I Can Eat Them Without Guilt Bowls*.

(* In full disclosure for those that don’t already know from some of my past blog posts, I have long considered myself to be a libertarian Republican, so I have a constant tension in my head between my belief that there needs to be significantly lower government spending with fewer regulatory restraints on the free market and social viewpoints that I completely disagree with.  This election year certainly didn’t ease that tension at all.  At least we can all depend upon Nate Silver.)

That leaves a multitude of questions that need to be answered ASAP:

  • How often will the Rose Bowl and Sugar Bowl host semifinals compared to the other top bowls?
  • How will the conferences split the playoff money?
  • Will the G5 conferences receive a dedicated bid to the access bowls, a provisional bid based on a top 15/20 ranking threshold similar to the current BCS system, or no guaranteed access at all?
  • Will ESPN win the TV rights or do the conference commissioners want to take the playoff package to the open market?  (Currently, it looks like Disney is going to buy up everything once again just as it swallowed up Star Wars.)
  • Who will be on the playoff selection committee?
  • Are playoff games really going to be played on New Year’s Eve or will TV interests nix that prospect?
  • What happens when the first Monday after the NFL Wild Card weekend, which TV partners have said is the optimal date for the national championship game, comes on a date that is less than a week after New Year’s Day?
  • Where is the first national championship game going to be played?
  • Since ESPN is ready to pay over $600 million per year for the college football postseason, when will a further expansion of the playoff become too irresistible for the powers that be?*

(* Unlike a lot of people, I personally don’t believe that an 8-team playoff is going to be inevitable by any means.  If there’s an expansion of the postseason, I think a “plus three” system of a 4-team playoff with the participants chosen after the bowls are played would be more likely, but that’s another discussion for another day.)

With the new playoff starting for the 2014 season, there honestly isn’t that much time to hammer all of these details out.  We’ll see what comes out on Monday after the Presidential Oversight Committee hears from the FBS commissioners.

(2) BlogPoll Ballot

I had been holding out on elevating Oregon to #2 since I believed that Notre Dame had a much better resume, but the Ducks continuing its thrashings against USC combined with a game that the Irish should have completely lost versus Pitt has finally gotten me to go with the conventional wisdom among the human pollsters (if not the computers that still like Kansas State much better).

(3) College Football Parlay Picks (odds from Yahoo! and home teams in CAPS)

Minnesota (-3) over ILLINOIS

SYRACUSE (+2) over Louisville

Northwestern (+9.5) over MICHIGAN

(4) NFL Parlay Picks (odds from Yahoo! and home teams in CAPS)

BEARS (PK) over Texans

EAGLES (+1) over Cowboys

Lions (-1) over VIKINGS

(5) Classic Music Video of the Week – “It Was a Good Day” by Ice Cube

While it is now impossible for the Lakers to beat the Supersonics (particularly for Mike Brown), any list of the top Internet achievements of 2012 needs to include the pinpointing of November 30, 1988 as Ice Cube’s “good day” (after an original argument that it was January 20, 1992).

Enjoy another great weekend of football!

(Follow Frank the Tank’s Slant on Twitter @frankthetank111 and Facebook)

About these ads
  1. cfn_ms says:

    Umm… Toledo just lost to a .500 team. Just saying. Plus the MAC is AWFUL this year, see . A couple half-way decent teams, and a bunch of flat-out atrocious teams. Definitely not 3 top 25… heck, not even one top 25 team.

    Relating to the “New BCS”, I’d agree with your list, though I think auto/non-auto contracts and revenue splits are the biggest highlight issues.

  2. largeR says:

    Thankyou to all the veterans who have given so much for this country! And thankyou to your families who also have endured hardships and perservered in your absence. God bless you, and may God bless these UNITED States of America.

  3. frug says:

    Just out of curiosity why do you have Oregon and ND above KSU? You talked about resume and thrashings, but Kansas St. has a played a stronger schedule than Oregon and has a better MOV than ND.

  4. Jake says:

    7: you make a couple of teams play on less than a week’s rest. It’s never been about the players.

  5. Brian says:


    I really think they’ll play on NYE. Everyone used to decry Saturday night as a dead zone for TV until ABC tried some CFB games there. Now it draws huge numbers.

    Possible schedule:

    1:00 – Access bowl
    4:30 – Contract bowl replacement
    8:00 – Semi

    1:00 – Orange
    4:30 – Rose
    8:00 – Sugar

    The NYE semi should finish before midnight and would probably draw high ratings even if it isn’t watched all that closely (on in the background at parties). The earlier bowls will suffer from people working, but maybe they aren’t that worried about it. Ideally on NYD the games would shift so the semi is always at 8:00. Any bowl after the semi will lose interest, and the game isn’t the same anyway since the semi replaces the contracted match-up. Unfortunately, I think they really want to lock those 3 games in place.

    As for the first NCG site, I think they should use these criteria:
    1. Has hosted a Super Bowl
    2. Not one of the 6 bowl sites
    3. Warm weather

    Options – San Diego, Houston, Tampa

    In future years, I’d add some northern domes (Indy, Detroit, St. Louis) mixed in with the 6 bowl sites and the other two options from the above list. And voila, 12 cities for the first 12 NCGs.

    • ccrider55 says:

      LA not an option? If Rosé Bowl eliminated the colliseum is historic and available, or the forever rumored new NFL stadium in the future.

      • Brian says:


        LA gets 1 of the 12 as is. The options are extra cities that don’t host a major bowl. But that was just the first 12. Beyond that, I’d give LA a chance. The new NFL stadium, yes. The Coliseum, no. I know USC is supposed to upgrade it, but it’s a hole last I knew.

  6. greg says:

    Go Hawks.

  7. Denogginizer says:


  8. bullet says:

    Indiana/Wisconsin is for a division championship.

    Should Duke beat Georgia Tech, Duke/Miami will be for a division championship. For the 1st time, VT or GT will not win their division, although GT still has a mathematical chance and VT has a mathematical chance of a multiple team tie at 4-4 (not sure how the tiebreaks would work out). Actually, had VT held on against FSU, that division could have had a 6 way tie at 4-4 with the only notable upsets being UVA winning its last 3.

  9. bullet says:

    One particularly complex piece is how the $80 million Rose and Sugar and $55 million Orange fit in the with playoffs and money distribution. The reported $608 million offer is $393 million + those 3. But 1 of those 3 will probably be a playoff game each year and the money from those will not be shared when they aren’t a playoff.

  10. Alan from Baton Rouge says:

    GEAUX LSU Fightin’ Tigers!

    The scuttlebutt down here is that Arlington Texas is a near lock for the first NCG. In part because they lost out on the Champions Bowl, and because it can seat 100k, and has a ga-zillion club seats and suites.

    i would also guess that the commissioners keep it simple with every site hosting 4 semis.

    Chick-Fil-A would be the best destination for the designated G5-spot. All planes fly to the ATL.

    • bullet says:

      I didn’t realize how big Air Trans was in Atlanta until I heard that Atlanta would become the biggest hub for Southwest Airlines after they bought Air Trans. SW is very big in Houston, Phoenix and Las Vegas and wasn’t in Atlanta.

    • Brian says:

      Alan from Baton Rouge,

      “The scuttlebutt down here is that Arlington Texas is a near lock for the first NCG. In part because they lost out on the Champions Bowl, and because it can seat 100k, and has a ga-zillion club seats and suites.”

      I’m not saying you’re wrong, because I certainly don’t know where it’ll be. However, nobody outside the B12 feels like Dallas is owed anything. The Cotton wasn’t a BCS bowl, so just being in the 6 bowls is sufficient. The Fiesta got downgraded by not being a contract bowl, so they seem to be owed something more than anybody. Jerryworld is a great site to host the game on its own merits, of course. I just don’t see why most people would feel like they owe them anything.

      “i would also guess that the commissioners keep it simple with every site hosting 4 semis.”

      I think so too. Tell the Rose and Sugar that only hosting 2 or 3 isn’t an option.

      “Chick-Fil-A would be the best destination for the designated G5-spot. All planes fly to the ATL.”

      Of the 6 bowls, the Peach is probably the best option since it’s close to the SB, CUSA, MAC and the BE. It sucks for the MWC, though. I’d let it rotate between the Peach, Cotton and Fiesta so none of them always get the game nobody wants.

      • bullet says:

        In the mid-90s, 60 years of history was dumped because the Fiesta outbid the Cotton. The Fiesta is a newcomer and isn’t owned anything. This time, they didn’t even try to compete with the Cotton and Sugar.

        • Brian says:

          I don’t really think either of them is owed anything. But it wasn’t just the bid, it was also the condition of the stadium that hurt the Cotton Bowl. There was no point in the Fiesta trying to compete for the Champs game. It made no geographical sense for a B12/SEC game.

  11. Pablo says:

    Some form of preferential treatment for the best G5 champion within the available access bowl openings makes some sense. At the end of the day, the larger conferences will lose the PR battle if their champions are guaranteed to play in the new structure and G5 champions get shut out. The B1G, PAC and ACC have already made pitches for special consideration to be given to conference champions in the 4 team playoff.

    Regardless of the accommodation towards the G5, trying to partner the G5 request with additional slots for the PAC or B12 is a bad idea. Financially, a second/third/fourth place team from the PAC or B12 does not help when TV ratings depend on brand recognition and bowls need fans. The non-playoff bowls depend on some beauty contest attractions for revenue. Giving favorable status to the PAC and B12, as compared to the ACC, would create another problem. Over the long-term, the second/third/fourth place ACC team should be able to hold its own against a comparable team from the PAC or B12.

    A compromise: So long as the best G5 champion meets qualifying criteria, then they would rotate amongst each of the three access bowls. Their opponent would always be the the automatic qualifier from the bowl’s geography. If the Orange is a semi-final game, then the G5 would be matched against the ACC qualifier in Atlanta. If the Sugar is a semi, then the G5 would play the B12 qualifier in the Cotton Bowl. If the Rose is a semi, the G5 would play the PAC qualifier in the Fiesta Bowl. The preferential opportunity being given to the SEC and B1G due to their Orange Bowl tie-in would be resolved (although Orange Bowl revenue would actually increase). The only awkward outcome is that Notre Dame’s access to the Orange Bowl would be lost.

  12. Brian says:

    Some important results today so far:

    #9 UL got whipped by Syracuse

    UVA beat Miami so now Duke controls their own destiny in the Coastal (play Miami and GT in the last 2 games)

    WI crushed IN to officially lock their spot in Indy

    MI nipped NW to stay tied with NE in the loss column

    PU beat IA to make both 4-6 and keep PU’s bowl hopes alive (they have IL and IN, IA has MI and NE)

    • Michael in Raleigh says:

      Why does the ACC have to be oh-so-bad? Miami was emerging as a semi-decent third-best team in the conference, and now this. UNC was looking respectable, then theygive up 68 to a bad Georgia Tech team.

      If indeed FSU and Clemson do both make it to BCS bowls, just how bad is the record of the Chick-fil-a Bowl team going to be? That bowl gets the ACC’s best non-BCS bowl team, and they’re going to have to face someone among Georgia, South Carolina, Florida, LSU, and Texas A&M.

      There are zero excuses for the league to be this bad.

      • Brian says:

        Michael in Raleigh,

        “Why does the ACC have to be oh-so-bad?”

        You picked the wrong year to want sympathy from B10 fans on that.

        “Miami was emerging as a semi-decent third-best team in the conference, and now this. UNC was looking respectable, then they give up 68 to a bad Georgia Tech team.”

        So you have a weak division. Duke could win it at 8-4 or any of the 3 at 7-5. Regardless, FSU should win the CCG. If they don’t, that’s when the league will really be in trouble.

        “If indeed FSU and Clemson do both make it to BCS bowls, just how bad is the record of the Chick-fil-a Bowl team going to be?”

        FSU only needs to beat MD and then win the CCG to make the Orange Bowl. Losing to UF won’t matter if it happens. Clemson is in a tougher spot as #13 in the BCS now. Can they afford to lose to SC and still be high enough for an at large spot? I’m not saying they will definitely lose that game, but it’s a very real possibility. Obviously Clemson is fine if they win out, but otherwise I think they need to hope the BCS has to expand to the top 18.

        That said, if both go to the BCS, then the Peach would get to choose from the CCG loser at 7-6 (maybe 8-5 for Duke, or 10-3 if FSU gets upset) or 7-5 NCSU.

        “That bowl gets the ACC’s best non-BCS bowl team, and they’re going to have to face someone among Georgia, South Carolina, Florida, LSU, and Texas A&M.”

        You may want to root for Clemson to not make the BCS. The B10 has to face most of those teams that don’t go to the Peach, and they aren’t loaded with top teams either.

        “There are zero excuses for the league to be this bad.”

        On the bright side, hoops season started.

  13. Brian says:

    Sorry bamatab, but in a national sense that’s a huge loss for AL.

    1. For the first time since 2007, no SEC team will be 8-0. In 2008 the champ was 7-1 but they beat an 8-0 team in the CCG.

    2. The BCS top 3 won’t have an SEC team in it for the first time since the first BCS rankings in 2010.

    3. We have a chance at the first SEC-free NCG in a long time. It’ll be a pleasant change if the media has to speak nicely about someone else for a while.

    • bullet says:

      As I’ve said, the odds were just really long that the SEC would keep getting unbeaten champs. It was pretty long odds that Florida would escape ULL today as well. The TD in the final 2 minutes got them tied and the blocked punt in the final seconds saved them from OT.

      Wild weekend so far. Lots of OTs. Lots of crazy finishes to get OTs.

      • Brian says:

        This is the first real upset in the SEC since Ole Miss over UF in 2008. That string of luck couldn’t last forever.

        I have more respect for a conference that can knock of it’s top teams on occasion than one where the powers always slide through just fine.

    • bamatab says:

      Yeah, the SEC has to have 2 of the remaining top 3 teams lose to get back into the BCSCG. But with that said, it isn’t out of the realm of possibility. ND still has USC. Oregon still has Stanford, OSU, and the Pac 12 CG, and KSU still has Texas. Crazier things have happened in the BCS over the years.

      • Brian says:

        It’s definitely a possibility.

        Rough math:

        Say OR has an 80% chance in each game, that’s about a 50% chance to win out.
        ND and KSU both have 1 easier game and 1 hard one, so 70% for them.

        All 3 win out – 25%

        2 win out – 45%
        ND and KSU – 25%
        OR and ND – 10%
        OR and KSU – 10%

        1 wins out – 25%
        OR – 5%
        ND – 10%
        KSU – 10%

        0 win out – 5%

        So, that’s roughly 70% chance at least two of the three win out and keep the SEC out of the NCG.

  14. bullet says:

    34 has been a bad number in the Big 12 today.
    WVU 34 Okie St. 55
    Baylor 34 OU 42
    Kansas 34 Texas Tech 41

    Texas missed an extra point so they escaped the curse of 34 and beat ISU 33-7. The former Penn St. kicker, Fera, had a blocked FG and missed XP in the first half and got replaced in the 2nd half. He’s had a rough year in every sense.

    • duffman says:

      I think the bigger issue is that the 2 worst teams in the conference kept it so close to 2 of the best. Kansas and Baylor have 1 combined conference win in 13 attempts (and the lone win was Baylor beating Kansas) and could finish with 1 win in 18 attempts!

      7-2, 5-1 Oklahoma beats 4-5, 1-5 Baylor by 8 at Norman
      7-3, 4-3 Texas Tech beats 1-9, 0-7 Kansas by 7 at Lubbock in overtime

      I still say most of the B12 is a train wreck

      • Jake says:

        I wouldn’t go that far, Duffman. The Big 12 only has four non-conference losses – OU-ND, OSU@Arizona, and two from KU. By contrast, the ACC has 16 OOC losses, the Pac-12 10. Granted, the Big 12 is a smaller conference with only three OOC games per team. It’s just a league where, aside from KSU, there’s a lot of parity. I guess we’ll find out in bowl season where it stacks up.

        • duffman says:


          They have no losses because they did not play anybody of note OOC. The only Top 25 opponent in the entire B12 was the Notre Dame game with Oklahoma. Compare that with the PAC who also only plays 3 OOC games as well :

          B12 vs Top 25 OOC = 1 game
          Oklahoma vs Notre Dame

          PAC vs Top 25 OOC = 5 games
          Stanford @ Notre Dame
          Washington @ LSU
          Cal @ Ohio State
          UCLA vs Nebraska
          Southern Cal vs Notre Dame

          It gets more apparent when you look at how many near Top 25’s the PAC played OOC this season. Since they are limited to just 3 OOC’s as well they seem to still schedule good teams which of course results in more losses. If the B12 plays parity bowls (were say #2 B12 plays #2 B1G) it will be interesting to see just how good they are and how much has been the padding.

  15. Andy says:

    I seem to recall being told on this forum that Mizzou couldn’t possibly win in Knoxville this year. Final score: Mizzou 51, Tennessee 48, 4OTs. What a game!

    • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

      —I seem to recall being told on this forum that Mizzou couldn’t possibly win in Knoxville this year…

      Are you really talking smack after Missouri squeaked by a Vols team that hadn’t won a single conference game?

      Still, I suppose congratulations are in order for competing with Arkansas & ‘Ole miss for 9-11th place in the SEC.

      • danimation707 says:

        Yes. Andy is an employee of the marketing dept of Missouri…or perhaps an incredibly delusional fan. He does not agree with my contention that Missouri will not win even it’s side of the SEC during their first decade there. I believe they where mathmatically elimated in week six this season.

      • Andy says:

        Hey, a 6-6 season is pretty good when you lose your QB to injury and 5 of your o-linemen and your schedule includes the BCS ranked #s 4, 5, 6, 8, and 9 teams. The only non-top 10 team we lost to was Vandy, and they’re sagarin #38, 6-4, and they barely beat us when our QB went down with a knee injury mid-game and our backup crapped his pants.

    • duffman says:

      That would be me and I say congrats on the win and will have some crow pie for dessert. On the flip side I did not predict the Vols possibly going 0-8 in the SEC. I think VU beats UT and UK is a coin flip after a week off followed by a FCS school. I did predict Mizzou going 0-8 to 3-5 and they are still in that range with the TAMU win looking less likely. To be clear a win is a win but going 4 overtimes to get it means the Tigers are in the bottom 4 this season with Kentucky, Tennessee, and Auburn.

      • Andy says:

        Yes, it was you. Tennessee is the kind of team Mizzou typically beats. A team with a strong offense and a weak defense. I thought we had a pretty good shot at that one. As for the season, when our QB went down with a knee injury early in the Vandy game that pretty much sealed our fate because we don’t have a good backup. We ended up narrowly losing to Vandy and then struggling as James Franklin recovered. His first game back he was still struggling with his knee and threw 4 interceptions, but we still almost beat Florida on the road. Had the ball on the FL 20 with a few seconds left down 14-7, but then Franklin throws his 4th interception. This game against Tennessee is the first game where he’s looked healthy since early in the season. If Franklin doesn’t hurt his knee we almost certainly beat Vandy and probably Florida too and then Mizzou is 7-3, probably ranked in the top 20. Oh well.

    • danimation707 says:

      Andy congrats on the squeeker win against TN who is a bottom dweller this year. 2-5 in conference with your other big conference win coming against Kentucky. Did you buy a commemorative tshirt for that win? I can’t believe the goal posts didn’t come down in your stadium after that win.

      I am putting good odds on you all losing your last two to fall to 5-7 & sit at home where you belong for bowl season. Hey it keeps yout bowl record from getting worse.

      • Andy says:

        As I said above, losing our QB and 5 of our o-linemen to injuries hasn’t helped. If our QB stays healthy we almost certainly don’t have those close losses to Vandy and Florida and we’re sitting at 7-3 or better just like we have for the last 8 seasons.

        As it is, now that Franklin’s back we’ve got a decent shot at closing out the season right. I see us finishing 7-6 or 8-5. We’ll see.

        • duffman says:


          It is the SEC and everybody gets injured. Look at how many QB’s UK lost this season. South Carolina lost Lattimore. I am guessing you still lose to Vandy because they are in the Top 15 in scoring defense in the country and Florida has enough of a defense to win. So far you beat 2 SEC teams with a combined SEC record of 0-13. Vandy is 6-4 and should finish at 8-4. If they do not get the bad call in the South Carolina game and play the second half of the Northwestern game the way they played the first the folks in Nashville are 10-2 for the season. I know you think Franklin hangs the moon but he is not Johnny Football.

          Guess what, that is football! If you get to 6-6 and get to a bowl be happy and get ready for next season. Even if you beat TAMU you will still be in the bottom of the east. You beat Kentucky and Tennessee which is like beating Kansas in the old conference. Not exactly something to get all worked up about. 8 SEC teams are in the Top 30 in scoring defense. Mizzou is #52 and Auburn is #67. Until your defense can score you have not adjusted to your new surroundings. The teams that are winning where you now play are winning the turnover margin battle and Mizzou is not there yet.

          TAMU scored 3 TD’s in the first quarter and only scored 1 TD in the remaining 3 quarters. Where they won the game was the turnover game which is how they beat Alabama. The Tide had 3 costly turnovers and the folks at TAMU did not have a single turnover in the entire game. Sumlin was also able to have his team get fewer penalties than their opponent which is generally how you win and is very uncharacteristic for the team they beat.

          • Andy says:

            Missouri’s offense is completely dependent on QB play. Yes, it’s our fault for not having a good backup QB. But the fact remains that if we hadn’t had injuries to our starting QB we’re very likely 7-3 and ranked arond 18th in the country right now. There’s a wide gap between an honorable mention All-Big 12 QB who had over 3500 yards last year and a freshman backup who’s never played a D-1 game and doesn’t seem to be all that good to begin with. Downplay that all you want but you’re just fooling yourself.

            Missouri’s had a lot of good fortune at the QB position over the last decade. Brad Smith to Chase Daniel to Blain Gabbert to James Franklin. This is the first injury in all of those years. In all of those years we’re averaging about 8.5 wins per season. If Franklin stays healthy we keep that average. This shows Missouri’s main vulnerability: we need a good, healthy QB to win. A lot of teams can say the same. Take away A&M’s Johnny Football and how good are they?

    • Brian says:

      This is what you get with today’s spoiled athletes. Poor baby got his feelings hurt when his coach told him he wasn’t a great player that could slack off during practice.

      The WSU players don’t know what it takes to win and they prefer the easier path which leads to losing.

  16. bullet says:

    GT beats UNC 68-56. What’s the over/under on whether their basketball game results in more points?

  17. danimation707 says:

    Why would the conferences not take the playoff to the open market in order to get the most money possible?

    • Brian says:

      The contract bowls already have ESPN deals. Maybe they’d see value in keeping all the games together rather than splitting them onto different networks. But practically speaking, there isn’t much reason not to hear from the other networks.

    • m (Ag) says:

      ESPN may be telling them they’ll withdraw the offer if they go to the open market, then wait and see what the other networks bid. If the other networks don’t match the offer ESPN has already made, the conferences would lose money.

  18. Brian says:

    Apparently Brad Edwards says look for NE vs ND in the Rose Bowl. He’s crunched a lot more numbers than me, obviously, but I have some doubts. I don’t have his original statement so I don’t know the context.

    1. This assumes OR, KSU and ND win out.

    OR has Stanford, OrSU and the CCG. KSU has Baylor and UT. ND has WF and USC. That’s 4 or 5 losable games between them.

    2. This assumes they finish in that order (he’d know if that’s what’s likely to happen).

    Depending on how close the various games are, I could see the order getting shuffled. If ND is top 2, he’s obviously wrong. If KSU is #1, the Fiesta gets first choice and seems likely to take ND.

    3. This assumes NE wins the B10, obviously.

    They only have MN and IA left while MI has IA and OSU, so winning their division seems pretty safe. They still have to beat WI after that. Combined, that can’t be more than a 50-60% chance considering how close the WI game was.

    4. I think this assumes that no P12 team is available.

    Stanford is #14 now and beat #11 today. #15 TAMU will leap them, but #9 UL also lost so Stanford should be #13 tomorrow. Their remaining games are OR and #18 UCLA. If they split those games and UCLA beats #19 USC, I could see Stanford still being top 14 potentially.

    UCLA is #18 now and still plays #19 USC and #14 Stanford. If they win out, they’d play #3 OR in the CCG. I could see them moving up as other teams lose if they go 2-1 with a reasonably close loss to OR.

    USC couldn’t do it because his scenario requires them to lose to ND and then to OR in the CCG.

    OrSU can’t do it because they play Cal, OR (must lose) and Nicholls St and will drop from #11 after losing today.


    Let’s put this altogether.

    Chances OR, KSU and ND win out ~ 30%
    Chances they finish in that order if they do win out ~ 90%
    Chances NE wins the B10 ~ 50%
    Chances no other P12 team is top 14 ~ 75%

    Chances of all of that happening ~ 10%

    But maybe he was posed a scenario assuming all 3 win out, and was asked what the likely Rose Bowl would be. Then the chances of him being right are more like 70%. Anyway, my point isn’t to mock Brad Edwards or say he’s necessarily wrong.

    Let’s assume no P12 team is available to face NE. Then who would the Rose choose? #3 ND would be very tempting. Who else would be under consideration?

    ACC runner up – NO
    BE champ – NO
    B10 runner up – NO
    P12 runner up – NO by definition
    SEC runner up – the only possible 1 loss team is UF, and no 2 loss team is plausible, so NO
    B12 runner up – the only possible option is a 2 loss OU
    Indy – NO
    Non-AQ – NO

    So the only reasonable choices are #3 12-0 ND and a top 10 10-2 OU.

    Is 11-2 NE vs 10-2 OU a better choice than 11-2 NE vs 12-0 ND? Probably not, but that rivalry is enticing and the teams would be more equal.

    BCS previews
    NCG – OR vs KSU
    Rose – ND vs NE
    Fiesta – OU vs UF
    Sugar – AL vs Clemson
    Orange – FSU vs LT

    NCG – OR vs KSU
    Rose – OU vs NE
    Fiesta – ND vs UF
    Sugar – AL vs Clemson
    Orange – FSU vs LT

    It’s incredibly hard to pick the at larges. The current top 14 has 5 SEC and 3 P12 teams, so only 10 actual candidates. Also, #9 UL lost and no other BE schools will make it. #13 Clemson has to play SC so they could get knocked out. If the top 14 can’t fill the slots, the rules expand it to 18. That would pretty much guarantee a second P12 team being available. Would the Rose take a #17 OrSU over #3 ND, or stick another bowl with them?

    • @Brian – You’re correct that Fiesta Bowl gets first pick of at-larges if Kansas State is #1. However, I think you’ll see them stick with a Big 12 replacement of Oklahoma (assuming that they’re bowl eligible) to keep the long-term goodwill of the conference with the bowl’s future status in the new playoff system still not quite confirmed. That is why a lot of people believe that Notre Dame is headed to the Rose Bowl if there’s a KSU vs. Oregon national championship game.

      • Alan from Baton Rouge says:

        Frank – why would the Fiesta feel any loyalty to the Big XII with only one year left in the current arrangement? The all the BCS busters the Fiesta has been stuck with over the years, if they get the first replacement pick, I doubt the Fiesta passes on Notre Dame. The Rose and the Sugar have historic loyalty. The Orange and the Fiesta have shotgun marriages with the ACC and Big XII, respectively. Neither would pass on the Irish, IMO. If the Rose has no P-12 replacement, and I don’t think they will, the Rose takes the Irish if they are available.

        Brian – I don’t think Florida wins out. The Gators end the season with a game in Tallahassee. If Florida loses, LSU will finish at #5 in the BCS and be the top SEC BCS at-large candidate, assuming my Tigers take care of business against Ole Miss and at Arkansas. FYI, in 2006, when LSU thought it was going to the Rose Bowl, it pre-sold 40,000 tickets.

        Here’s my BCS predictions, assuming K-State, Oregon & Notre Dame win out.

        If K-State is No 1:

        BCS NCG – K-State v. Oregon
        Fiesta – Notre Dame v. Oklahoma or Texas
        Rose – Nebraska v. LSU
        Sugar – Bama/UGA winner v. Clemson or LA Tech
        Orange – Florida State v. Louisville

        If Oregon is No. 1:

        BCS NCG – Oregon v. K-State
        Fiesta – LSU v. Oklahoma or Texas
        Rose – Nebraska v. Notre Dame
        Sugar – Bama/UGA winner v. Clemson or LA Tech
        Orange – Florida State v. Louisville

        • bullet says:

          SEC loses ground in the computers next week. Odd scheduling. Half the schools have FCS opponents
          Alabama-W. Carolina
          Florida-Jacksonville St.
          Georgia-Georgia Southern
          South Carolina-Wofford
          A&M-Sam Houston St.
          Auburn-Alabama A&M (Div II)
          LSU-Ole Miss
          MS St.-Arkansas

        • Michael in Raleigh says:


          I would argue the Orange Bowl-ACC relationship is not COMPLETELY a shotgun marriage, though it’s nothing like the Sugar-SEC or Rose-B1G/Pac-12. Miami, now an ACC member, appeared in numerous Orange Bowls, especially in the 80’s and 90’s. Florida State had been to the OB numerous times as an independent and as an ACC member prior to the official conference-bowl relationship. And while Clemson had been fewer times, they did win a national championship at the OB in 1981. Geographically, the gie-in makes more sense for the ACC than any other major bowl, whereas the Fiesta us a ling way off from the Big 12’s footprint. The Cotton or even the Sugar always made more sense for the Big 12 than the Fiesta did.

        • Brian says:

          Alan from Baton Rouge,

          “Frank – why would the Fiesta feel any loyalty to the Big XII with only one year left in the current arrangement? The all the BCS busters the Fiesta has been stuck with over the years, if they get the first replacement pick, I doubt the Fiesta passes on Notre Dame. The Rose and the Sugar have historic loyalty. The Orange and the Fiesta have shotgun marriages with the ACC and Big XII, respectively. Neither would pass on the Irish, IMO. If the Rose has no P-12 replacement, and I don’t think they will, the Rose takes the Irish if they are available.”

          That was my thought process, too. The Fiesta only has 14 years with the B12 and has already been demoted to access bowl status. Their best bet is to get the B10/P12 pairing when the Rose is a semi. The owe the B12 nothing. They also have a history of picking non-traditionally.

          “Brian – I don’t think Florida wins out. The Gators end the season with a game in Tallahassee. If Florida loses, LSU will finish at #5 in the BCS and be the top SEC BCS at-large candidate, assuming my Tigers take care of business against Ole Miss and at Arkansas. FYI, in 2006, when LSU thought it was going to the Rose Bowl, it pre-sold 40,000 tickets.”

          There are so many SEC teams bunched up, I just took the one highest in the BCS. They are interchangeable for this purpose. Feel free to read that as SEC #2, because that’s really what it was.

          “Here’s my BCS predictions, assuming K-State, Oregon & Notre Dame win out.

          If K-State is No 1:

          BCS NCG – K-State v. Oregon
          Fiesta – Notre Dame v. Oklahoma or Texas
          Rose – Nebraska v. LSU
          Sugar – Bama/UGA winner v. Clemson or LA Tech
          Orange – Florida State v. Louisville”

          I don’t know. Why wouldn’t the Rose take OU over LSU to face NE? Both are big brands, but OU brings the rivalry factor. I also tend to think a P12 team will be available.

          “If Oregon is No. 1:

          BCS NCG – Oregon v. K-State
          Fiesta – LSU v. Oklahoma or Texas
          Rose – Nebraska v. Notre Dame
          Sugar – Bama/UGA winner v. Clemson or LA Tech
          Orange – Florida State v. Louisville”

          Yeah, my thinking the Rose will take OU over ND is going out on a limb a little. I’m sure the Fiesta would be happy to swap OU for ND in that match-up, though.

        • m (Ag) says:

          “why would the Fiesta feel any loyalty to the Big XII with only one year left in the current arrangement”

          The Fiesta Bowl committee also organizes the Copper Bowl (I forget the current sponsor name) that I believe currently matches the 2nd non-BCS Big 12 team with a Big Ten team. They probably want to continue their relationship with one of the top Big 12 teams that don’t make the playoff bowls.

          I wouldn’t be surprised if a bowl in the Dallas area tries and steal a high Big 12 team now that the Cotton Bowl is an ‘Access Bowl’.

          • Brian says:

            Buffalo Wild Wings is the new sponsor.

            The other factor is OU has been to the Fiesta 3 of the last 6 years. They could legitimately be concerned about fans turning out. That and ND is such a huge draw. Also, they may not have any great choices for the other spot. Assuming ND and OU are the two replacement picks, one to the Fiesta and the other to the Rose), who’s left? Most likely an SEC runner up, but they all have some flaws.

            AL/UGA – will be coming off of a CCG loss
            UF – could lose to FSU, offensively challenged, far away
            LSU – lost to both top 10 teams they played, crazy coach
            TAMU – do they want a B12 conference game from last year?
            SC – still has to beat Clemson, far away, lost their best player

            Of those, I think LSU is probably the best choice to face OU. If the Fiesta takes ND, then I’d expect them to take TAMU.

            BTW, congrats on the big win. I assume that TAMU fans have been rubbing it in the faces of UT fans non-stop since it ended. If only you hadn’t blown leads to UF and LSU.

          • m (Ag) says:

            Thanks. After last year, this season has been a lot of fun.

      • Brian says:

        Frank the Tank,

        “@Brian – You’re correct that Fiesta Bowl gets first pick of at-larges if Kansas State is #1. However, I think you’ll see them stick with a Big 12 replacement of Oklahoma (assuming that they’re bowl eligible) to keep the long-term goodwill of the conference with the bowl’s future status in the new playoff system still not quite confirmed.”

        I explained elsewhere why I don’t think that relationship means much to the Fiesta. It’s fairly new and about to expire. What i forgot to mention was that the Fiesta had OU in 2006-7 and 2010. They may worry the fans won’t be thrilled to go yet again.

    • @Brian – I believe you’re correct. Ultimately, I think that the playoff will still end up back with ESPN because it’s a property that they simply aren’t willing to lose and they can outbid anyone, but it definitely behooves the conferences to hear from other networks if only to drive up the price.

    • bullet says:

      If a Pac 12 is available Rose takes them. If not, Notre Dame beats anyone else out and they don’t even think very long about it.

      • Michael in Raleigh says:

        Oklahoma as Nebraska’s opponent would be a compelling alternative, would it not? Any other non-Pac-12 team would not have a chance against Notre Dame as a Rose Bowl participant, and OU’s only shot is for the Big Ten’s entrant to be Nebraska.

    • Alan from Baton Rouge says:

      Brian – doesn’t the Big East still get an automatic bid this year?

  19. frug says:

    In case you needed further evidence that Billy Gillispie really is nuts;

    Former Texas Tech coach Billy Gillispie continued exceeding NCAA practice-time limits even after the school reprimanded him for the same violation earlier this year.

  20. Brian says:

    Bowl eligibility:

    ACC – 4 – 3/1* (Duke only one from Coastal so far)
    B12 – 6
    BE – 3
    B10 – 5 – 4/1* (only WI from the East)
    P12 – 6 – 3/3
    SEC – 7 – 4/3
    Indie – 2

    CUSA – 3 – 2/1
    MAC – 6 – 3/3
    MWC – 4
    SB – 4
    WAC – 3

    Total – 53 (70 needed)

    Ineligible – 33 (54 max)

    1 win away – 17
    1 loss away – 15

    • Brian says:

      Updated for late games

      Bowl eligibility:

      ACC – 4 – 3/1* (Duke only one from Coastal so far)
      B12 – 6
      BE – 3
      B10 – 5 – 4/1* (only WI from the East)
      P12 – 7 – 4/3
      SEC – 8 – 4/4
      Indie – 3

      CUSA – 3 – 2/1
      MAC – 6 – 3/3
      MWC – 4
      SB – 4
      WAC – 4

      Total – 57 (70 needed)

      Ineligible – 33 (54 max)

      1 win away – 14
      1 loss away – 19

      57 + 14 = 71, so all but 1 needs to get their 6th win (or some 4 win teams need to win 2).

      33 + 19 = 52, so only a couple of 5 loss teams can lose 2.

  21. Brian says:

    BCS results

    1 Alabama 9-0 – L
    2 Kansas State 9-0 – W
    3 Oregon 9-0 – W
    4 Notre Dame 9-0 – W
    5 Georgia 8-1 – W
    6 Florida 8-1 – W
    7 LSU 7-2 – W
    8 South Carolina 7-2 – W
    9 Louisville 9-0 – L
    10 Florida State 8-1 – W
    11 Oregon State 7-1 – L
    12 Oklahoma 6-2 – W
    13 Clemson 8-1 – W
    14 Stanford 7-2 – W
    15 Texas A&M 7-2 – W
    16 Nebraska 7-2 – W
    17 Texas 7-2 – W
    18 UCLA 7-2 – W
    19 USC 6-3 – W
    20 Louisiana Tech 8-1 – W
    21 Mississippi State 7-2 – L
    22 Texas Tech 6-3 – W
    23 Rutgers 7-1 – W
    24 Northwestern 7-2 – L
    25 Toledo 8-1 – L

    New rough order:

    1 Kansas State 9-0 – W
    2 Oregon 9-0 – W
    3 Notre Dame 9-0 – W
    4 Alabama 9-0 – L
    5 Georgia 8-1 – W
    6 Florida 8-1 – W
    7 LSU 7-2 – W
    8 South Carolina 7-2 – W
    9 Florida State 8-1 – W
    10 Texas A&M 7-2 – W
    11 Stanford 7-2 – W
    12 Oklahoma 6-2 – W
    13 Clemson 8-1 – W
    14 Oregon State 7-1 – L
    15 Nebraska 7-2 – W
    16 Texas 7-2 – W
    17 UCLA 7-2 – W
    18 Louisville 9-0 – L
    19 USC 6-3 – W
    20 Louisiana Tech 8-1 – W
    21 Texas Tech 6-3 – W
    22 Rutgers 7-1 – W
    23 MI
    24 OkSU
    25 ???

    The problem:
    Top 14 only has 9 eligible teams due to the 2 team limit. On the other hand, the B10 and BE champs aren’t in the top 14 so only 8 teams need to be eligible. They could easily need to expand to 18 teams this year.

  22. duffman says:

    Getting pounded by the Badgers was no picnic but it was a good week where The Tan One got a contract extension and IU landed Noah.

  23. vp19 says:

    Of the top three, KSU has the least margin of error because it’s not a brand name (the Okie State syndrome).

    • Michael in Raleigh says:


      I can’t help but wonder if Alabama would have gotten into the NCG last year if nothing else had been different about Oklahoma State’s season had been different, other than OkSU’s name instead being called “Oklahoma.”

      • duffman says:

        I think the OOC schedule was what cost Oklahoma State a shot at the MNC. They might have forgiven the Iowa State loss if their early SoS had not been so pitiful.

      • Brian says:


        Yes, OU would have made it. The voters would have given them the benefit of the doubt while some voters had OkSU outside the top 5.

      • bullet says:

        I’m pretty sure they would have. I guarantee if it was OU vs. Mississippi St., OU would have made it over MS St.

        Alabama is still #4 in the AP Poll which shows how much the writers want to hang onto their previous beliefs. Their normal rule is to knock the loser down below the others with the same record.

        We still aren’t out of the woods of another SEC/SEC BCS title game. If LaLa hadn’t blown it against Florida in the last 2 minutes we would be pretty safe, but now its still a possibility. All it takes is USC to win out (knocking off ND and OR) and UT or Baylor to upset KSU. Assuming Florida and either UGA or Alabama wins out, we would have a Florida vs. SEC champ title game.

  24. Alan from Baton Rouge says:

    Oregon is No. 1 in the new AP poll.
    2. K-State
    3. Notre Dame
    4. Alabama
    5. Georgia
    6. Ohio State
    7. Florida
    8. LSU
    9. Texas A&M
    10. Florida State

  25. duffman says:

    Week 11 :

    ACC : AQ = 5-6 : NAQ = DNP : FCS = DNP : OFF = ONE :: U = NONE
    ACC (5-5) : B1G (DNP) : BE (DNP) : B12 (DNP) : PAC (DNP) : SEC (DNP) : IND (0-1)
    CUSA (DNP) : MAC (DNP) : MWC (DNP) : SB (DNP) : WAC (DNP) : FCS (DNP)

    B 12 : AQ = 5-5 : NAQ = DNP : FCS = DNP : OFF = NONE :: U = Kansas State
    ACC (DNP) : B1G (DNP) : BE (DNP) : B12 (5-5) : PAC (DNP) : SEC (DNP) : IND (DNP)
    CUSA (DNP) : MAC (DNP) : MWC (DNP) : SB (DNP) : WAC (DNP) : FCS (DNP)

    BE : AQ = 4-3 : NAQ = DNP : FCS = DNP : OFF = ONE :: U = NONE
    ACC (DNP) : B1G (DNP) : BE (3-3) : B12 (DNP) : PAC (DNP) : SEC (DNP) : IND (1-0)
    CUSA (DNP) : MAC (DNP) : MWC (DNP) : SB (DNP) : WAC (DNP) : FCS (DNP)

    B1G : AQ = 5-5 : NAQ = DNP : FCS = DNP : OFF = TWO :: U = Ohio State
    ACC (DNP) : B1G (5-5) : BE (DNP) : B12 (DNP) : PAC (DNP) : SEC (DNP) : IND (DNP)
    CUSA (DNP) : MAC (DNP) : MWC (DNP) : SB (DNP) : WAC (DNP) : FCS (DNP)

    IND : AQ = 1-1 : NAQ = 1-1 : FCS = DNP : OFF = NONE :: U = Notre Dame
    ACC (1-0) : B1G (DNP) : BE (0-1) : B12 (DNP) : PAC (DNP) : SEC (DNP) : IND (DNP)
    CUSA (DNP) : MAC (DNP) : MWC (DNP) : SB (0-1) : WAC (1-0) : FCS (DNP)

    PAC : AQ = 6-6 : NAQ = DNP : FCS = DNP : OFF = NONE :: U = Oregon
    ACC (DNP) : B1G (DNP) : BE (DNP) : B12 (DNP) : PAC (6-6) : SEC (DNP) : IND (DNP)
    CUSA (DNP) : MAC (DNP) : MWC (DNP) : SB (DNP) : WAC (DNP) : FCS (DNP)

    SEC : AQ = 6-6 : NAQ = 1-0 : FCS = DNP : OFF = ONE :: U = NONE
    ACC (DNP) : B1G (DNP) : BE (DNP) : B12 (DNP) : PAC (DNP) : SEC (6-6) : IND (DNP)
    CUSA (DNP) : MAC (DNP) : MWC (DNP) : SB (1-0) : WAC (DNP) : FCS (DNP)


    Best scheduler = everybody played about equal
    Worst scheduler = SEC played 1 non AQ and the IND played 2 non AQ


    Observations :
    Ohio State is still undefeated which keeps a B1G in the top – the good
    Not sure how many others will make the polls this week – the bad
    Purdue scored a conference win but Illinois did not – the ugly


    My weekly B 12 is over rated observations :

    Sagarin still ranks the B 12 as the toughest conference as updated 11.04.2012 @ 2 am

    I included the ELO numbers this week for Brian (70% of conference has Top 30 ELO)
    **** Bowl eligible OOC schools in BOLD ****

    # 2 Kansas State (10-0) : #29 SoS : #2 ELO :::: W 5-5 ACC, W 4-6 SB, W 3-7 FCS
    # 7 Oklahoma (7-2) : #15 SoS : #7 ELO :::: L 10-0 IND, W 2-8 CUSA, W 4-6 FCS
    #14 Texas (8-2) : #23 SoS : #14 ELO :::: W 5-5 SEC, W 4-7 MWC, W 3-7 MWC
    #15 Oklahoma State (6-3) : #26 SoS : #20 ELO :::: L 6-4 PAC, W 5-4 SB, W 1-9 FCS
    #17 Texas Tech (7-3) : #36 SoS : #16 ELO :::: W 4-7 MWC, W 3-6 WAC, W 4-6 FCS
    #27 TCU (6-4) : #25 SoS : #28 ELO :::: W 4-6 ACC, W 5-5 CUSA, W 1-9 FCS
    #29 Baylor (4-5) : #17 SoS : #47 ELO :::: W 5-5 CUSA, W 6-4 SB, W 8-2 FCS
    #37 Iowa State (5-5) : #4 SoS : #26 ELO :::: W 4-6 B1G, L 8-2 CUSA, W 3-7 FCS
    #47 West Virginia (5-4) : #19 SoS : #27 ELO :::: W 4-6 ACC, W 4-6 CUSA, W 7-3 FCS
    #80 Kansas (1-9) : #1 SoS : #113 ELO :::: L 4-6 CUSA, L 9-1 MAC, W 7-3 FCS

    The B12 is 1-4 against bowl eligible teams with the sole win against a Sun Belt team!

    B12 is skewed with only 1 school with an ELO over 47! dropped 3 from 50.


    According to Sagarin this is the 4th toughest schedule in the USA so far!
    (they played 2 Top 25, several Top 50, and the rest is junk)
    Game # 1 = 7-3 FCS school
    Game # 2 = 9-1 MAC school who lost to Iowa in neutral site game (N Illinois)
    Game # 3 = 4-6 CUSA school (Rice)
    Game # 4 = 4-5, 1-5 conference team with no big wins
    Game # 5 = 6-4, 3-4 conference team with no big wins
    Game # 6 = 7-3, 4-3 conference team with no big wins
    Game # 7 = 6-3, 4-2 conference team with no big wins
    Game # 8 = 8-2, 5-2 conference team with no big wins
    Game # 9 = 7-2, 5-1 conference team with no big wins
    Game # 10 = 10-0, 6-0 conference team

    Left on schedule
    5-4, 2-4 conference team with no big wins
    5-5, 2-5 conference team with no big wins



    Sagarin states his numbers are connected yet the following schools are below 80% of the B12 schools (4-5 Baylor is number 7 at #29 and 5-5 Iowa State is number 8 at #37) NOTE, teams with winning records in BOLD :

    ACC (9) or 83.3% : #46 6-4 North Carolina, #56 5-5 Georgia Tech, #57 4-6 Virginia Tech, #59 5-5 Miami, #67 6-4 NC State, #79 6-4 Duke, 89 4-6 Virginia, 99 2-8 Boston College, #106 4-6 Maryland, #122 5-5 Wake Forest

    Big East (8) or 100% : #44 7-2 Cincinnati, #45 8-1 Rutgers, #53 9-1 Louisville, 55 5-5 Syracuse, #70 4-6 Pittsburgh, #75 3-6 South Florida, # 102 4-6 Connecticut, #111 3-6 Temple

    B1G (6) or 50.0% : #43 5-5 Michigan State, #66 6-4 Minnesota, #68 4-6 Purdue, #69 4-6 Iowa, #73 4-6 Indiana, #134 2-8 Illinois

    B 12 (2) or 20.0% : #47 West Virginia 5-4, #88 Kansas 1-9

    IND (2) or 50.0% : #83 Navy 6-4, #150 Army 2-8

    PAC (4) or 33.3% : #38 4-6 Utah, #64 3-8 California, #94 2-8 Washington State, #152 1-9 Colorado

    SEC (7) or 50.0% : #39 6-4 Vanderbilt, #40 5-5 Mississippi, #41 5-5 Missouri, #52 4-6 Tennessee, #61 4-6 Arkansas, #84 2-8 Auburn, #105 1-9 Kentucky

    Look at all the teams above in BOLD that fall below Baylor who has a non winning record!



    The teams with the better defense went 4-1
    #17 Oklahoma vs #114 Baylor : won as projected in close game
    #21 Kansas State @ #47 Texas Christian : won as projected
    #29 Iowa State @ #90 Texas : lost
    #56 Oklahoma State vs #116 West Virginia : won as projected
    #59 Texas Tech vs #88 Kansas : won as projected in close game

    B12 games this week with better defense in BOLD :
    #14 Kansas State @ #115 Baylor
    #24 Oklahoma @ #117 West Virginia
    #34 Iowa State @ #92 Kansas
    #60 Oklahoma State vs #62 Texas Tech

    #43 TCU = OFF
    #72 Texas = OFF

    • frug says:

      The teams with the better defense went 4-1

      Wait… teams with better defenses win more games? I am SHOCKED. I mean just wait until coaches start realizing this. If could truly revolutionize the way teams are constructed.

      The fact is the team with the better defense usually wins because they are usually the better team.

      (Which is why the team with the better offense (based on points) also went 4-1 this weekend)

  26. Alan from Baton Rouge says:

    Next week’s slate of games looks like a stinker, in part due to my SEC brothers. Only three games featuring teams ranked in either the AP or coaches’ poll.

    #1 Oregon v. #14 Stanford
    #17 UCLA v. #21 USC
    #23 Texas Tech @ #24(coaches) OK State

    Other games of interest:

    #6 Ohio State @ Wisconsin
    #8 LSU v. Ole Miss
    #13 Oklahoma @ West Virginia
    #22 Rutgers @ Cincy
    #23 Michigan v. Iowa

    • Alan from Baton Rouge says:

      ESPN College Gameday will broadcast from Eugene, Oregon next weekend.

    • Brian says:

      The P12 games are really big for the at large BCS picture. An OSU win locks up the division title for OSU. Duke @ GT is big for the Coastal race. Otherwise, not much to get excited about.

      This is the downside of early conference games. Now a bunch of teams are playing OOC cupcakes.

      • m (Ag) says:

        The SEC could schedule better games there even with early conference games, but teams traditionally have wanted a mini-bye before playing their rivals Thanksgiving week.

        The SEC partially addressed the issue in next year’s schedule, no doubt to make CBS happy. Texas A&M-LSU will be played on this weekend next year.

  27. Brian says:

    BCS standings:

    1. KSU
    2. OR
    3. ND
    4. AL
    5. UGA
    6. UF
    7. LSU
    8. TAMU
    9. SC
    10. FSU
    11. Clemson
    12. OU
    13. Stanford (as predicted)
    14. NE
    15. UT
    16. OrSU
    17. UCLA
    18. USC
    19. UL
    20. LT
    21. MI
    22. RU
    23. TT
    24. OkSU
    25. UW

    No non-AQ is in position to get in with the BE and B10 leaders ahead of LT.

    The top 14 provides 10 candidates (2 – ACC, B12, P12, SEC, 1 – B10, Ind) with 4 excess SEC teams. Based on this, the BCS would be:

    NCG – KSU vs OR
    Rose – NE vs ND
    Fiesta – OU vs UF
    Sugar – AL vs Clemson
    Orange – FSU vs UL

    Brad Edwards says he’s being told the Fiesta would take OU. It makes no sense to me, but I went with his “sources” over my opinion. I also went with his feeling that Stanford won’t regain the top 14 status needed to fill the Rose. I’m not sure he’s right about that, either, especially since some of the teams above them also have to lose (SC/Clemson, FSU/UF, AL/UGA).

    • Brian says:

      For what it’s worth, OSU projects to be about 6th in the BCS if they were eligible.

      AP – 6, 0.808

      Andersen/Hester – 4
      Billingsley – 8
      Colley – 5
      Massey – 8
      Sagarin – 11
      Wolfe – 5

      Average – 7, 0.780

      6th (just above UF)

    • bullet says:

      Barring a huge rash of upsets, the BCS title possibilities are down to 8 teams-KSU, Oregon, ND, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, FSU and Clemson.

      With wins over Florida and South Carolina, FSU and Clemson would move up enough in the polls to have a shot if there were no unbeatens. But it would still be a longshot.

      • frug says:

        In order to make the title game FSU would need there to be no more than 1 other 1 loss team. The computers hate them.

        • m (Ag) says:

          The computers love Florida almost as much as they hate FSU.

          If FSU beats Florida and Clemson beats South Carolina, it would raise FSU’s standing in the computers and damage the SEC. GT winning over Georgia would also be a huge boost, but significantly less likely.

          I don’t think if it would be enough to propel FSU over other 1 loss teams; if Florida had beaten Georgia to win the SEC East it would be much more likely.

          • frug says:

            Florida will take a hit in the computers next week for playing FCS Jacksonville St.

            But yeah, even if FSU, G-Tech and Clemson all win I still don’t see FSU jumping 3 of KSU, Oregon, ND and Alabama (and that is assuming the first three each lose a game).

          • bullet says:

            Florida has played 4 of the top 10 teams, losing to UGA and beating LSU, South Carolina and A&M. And they will end up with 5 of 12 games against top 10 unless there are some upsets.

  28. duffman says:

    The ranks of the undefeated after week 11 :

    AQ schools 4 of 72 = 5.6% of population : 4 of 124 = 3.2% of total
    IND (1) of 4 => 25.0% : 10 – 0 = Notre Dame
    Big 12 (1) of 10 => 10.0% : 10 – 0 = Kansas State
    B1G (1) of 12 => 8.3% : 10 – 0 = Ohio State
    PAC (1) of 12 => 8.3% : 10 – 0 = Oregon

    ACC (12) = NONE
    Big East (8) = NONE
    SEC (14) = NONE


    Non AQ schools 0 of 52 = 0.0% of population : 0 of 124 = 0.0% of total
    CUSA (12) = NONE
    MAC (13) = NONE
    MWC (10) = NONE
    Sun Belt (10) = NONE
    WAC (7) = NONE


    Undefeated teams OFF for week #12

    Undefeated games for week #12
    10-0 Notre Dame vs 5-5 Wake Forest : 3:30 pm NBC : game 12 @ Southern Cal on 11/24
    10-0 Ohio State @ 7-3 Wisconsin : 3:30 on ABC : game 12 vs Michigan on 11/24
    10-0 Kansas State @ 4-5 Baylor : 8:00 pm on ESPN : game 12 vs Texas on 12/01
    10-0 Oregon vs 8-2 Stanford : 8:00 pm on ABC : game 12 @ Oregon State on 11/24


    AP Top 25
    SEC (6) = #4 Alabama, #5 Georgia, #7 Florida, #8 LSU, #9 TAMU, #12 USC
    PAC (5) = #1 Oregon, #14 Stanford, #15 Oregon State, #17 UCLA, #21 Southern Cal
    B 12 (4) = #2 Kansas State, #13 Oklahoma, #18 Texas, #23 Texas Tech
    B1G (3) = #6 Ohio State, #16 Nebraska, #23 Michigan
    ACC (2) = #10 Florida State, #11 Clemson
    BigE (2) = #20 Louisville, #22 Rutgers
    I ND (1) = #3 Notre Dame
    WAC (1) = #19 La Tech
    MWC (1) = #25 Kent State

    Dropped : Mississippi State /Toledo


    USA Top 25
    SEC (6) = #4 Georgia, #5 Alabama, #7 Florida, #8 LSU, #10 TAMU, #11 South Carolina
    PAC (5) = #1 Oregon, #13 Stanford, #16 UCLA, #17 Oregon State, #21 Southern Cal
    B 12 (5) = #2 Kansas State, #12 Oklahoma, #15 Texas, #24 OK State, #25 Texas Tech
    ACC (2) = #6 Florida State, #9 Clemson
    B1G (2) = #14 Nebraska, #23 Michigan
    BigE (2) = #18 Louisville, #20 Rutgers
    I ND (1) = #3 Notre Dame
    WAC (1) = #19 La Tech
    MWC (1) = #22 Boise State

    Dropped : Northwestern / Mississippi State / Toledo


    Harris Interactive Top 25
    SEC (7) = #4 Alabama, #5 UGA, #7 Florida, #8 LSU, #10 TAMU, #11 S Carolina, #25 MSU
    PAC (5) = #1 Oregon, #13 Stanford, #16 Oregon State, #18 Southern Cal, #19 UCLA
    B12 (4) = #2 Kansas State, #12 Oklahoma, #15 Texas, #22 Texas Tech
    ACC (2) = #6 Florida State, #9 Clemson
    B1G (2) = #14 Nebraska, #24 Michigan
    BigE (2) = #17 Louisville, #21 Rutgers
    I ND (1) = #3 Notre Dame
    WAC (1) = #20 La Tech
    MWC (1) = #23 Boise State

    Dropped : Northwestern



    The B12 rankings (60% still getting votes)
    – Kansas State beat 6-4 TCU @ TCU : #2 / #2 / #2 – up 1
    – Oklahoma beat 4-5 Baylor @ home : #13 / #12 / #12 – up 1
    – Texas beat 5-5 Iowa State @ home : #18 / #15 / #15 – bumped up 7 spots!
    – Texas Tech beat 1-9 Kansas @ home : #23 / #25 / #22 – bumped up 2 spots
    – Oklahoma State beat 5-4 WVU @ home : #26 / #24 / #26 – bumped up 7 spots!
    – TCU lost to 10-0 KSU @ home : #35 / #NR / #33 – down 6 spots

    – West Virginia (5-4, 2-4) lost to Oklahoma State @ OSU
    – Iowa State (5-5, 2-5) lost to Texas @ Texas
    – Baylor (4-5, 1-5) lost to Oklahoma @ OU by 8 points
    – Kansas (1-9, 0-7) lost to Texas Tech @ TT in overtime

    60% of a conference playing such a padded schedule is bad but at least that was down from 70% last week. The AP (4 B12 teams) held with 4 teams in. The USA (5 B12 teams) added 2 to the Top 25. The Harris (4 B12 teams) stayed at 4 as well. Here are the 3 loss teams in the Top 25 for this week :

    ACC (0) = NONE
    B 12 (2) = 7-3 Texas Tech in AP / USA / Harris + 6-3 Oklahoma State in USA
    BigE (0) = NONE
    B1G (1) = 7-3 Michigan in AP / USA / Harris
    I ND (0) = NONE
    PAC (1) = 7-3 Southern Cal in AP / USA / Harris
    SEC (1) = 7-3 Mississippi State in Harris



    Here is the fifth BCS – 14 BCS slots in BOLD

    SEC (6) = #4 Alabama, #5 Georgia, #6 Florida, #7 LSU, #8 TAMU, #9 South Carolina
    PAC (6) = #2 Oregon, #13 Stanford, #16 Oregon St, #17 UCLA, #18 USC, #25 Washington
    B 12 (5) = #1 Kansas St, #12 Oklahoma, #15 Texas, #23 Texas Tech, #24 Oklahoma St
    ACC (2) = #10 Florida State, #11 Clemson
    B1G (2) = #14 Nebraska, #21 Michigan
    BigE (2) = #19 Louisville, #22 Rutgers
    I ND (1) = #3 Notre Dame
    WAC (1) = #20 La Tech
    MAC (0) = NONE
    MWC (0) = NONE
    MAC (0) NONE
    CUSA (0) NONE
    SunB (0) NONE

    5 B 12 teams = 50% of conference
    6 PAC teams = 50% of conference
    6 SEC teams = 43% of conference

    With the compaction of the SEC it is putting Texas in the path of a BCS bowl if they beat Kansas State even tho it would be the only quality win on their entire schedule. With all the early padding of the B12 schedule it means 9 of the 10 teams are still in the hunt for a bowl bid!

    Teams with 5 or less wins in the major conferences :
    ACC (7) = Wake Forest, Miami, Ga Tech, Maryland, Virginia, Va Tech, 2-8 Boston College
    B 12 (4) = West Virginia, Iowa State, Baylor, 1-9 Kansas
    BigE (5) = Syracuse, Connecticut, Pittsburgh, South Florida, Temple
    B1G (5) = Michigan State, Iowa, Indiana, Purdue, 2-8 Illinois
    I ND (1) = 2-8 Army
    PAC (5) = Arizona State, Utah, 3-8 Cal, 2-8 Washington State, 1-9 Colorado
    SEC (6) = Missouri, Mississippi, Arkansas, Tennessee, 2-8 Auburn, 1-9 Kentucky

    • bullet says:

      As of today:
      Unbeatens 4
      1 Loss 10 (5 from the Big 5 conferences)
      2 Loss 17 (9 from Big 5)
      3 Loss 13 (7 from Big 5)

      There seems to be a high number of 2 loss, but a low number of 3 loss teams for this point in the season. BCS Ranked 3 loss teams-USC, Michigan, Texas Tech, Oklahoma State. NW, WI, MS St. + 6 from the other 5–Bowling Green, Ball ST., SDSU, Fresno St., Ark. St. and Middle Tennessee are the unranked 3 loss teams.

      • bullet says:

        Record of BCS top 25 vs. top 25 + 1 (Ohio St.). *-loss to unranked team
        KSU 3-0
        OR 2-0
        ND 3-0
        AL 2-1
        UGA 1-1
        FL 3-1
        LSU 3-2
        A&M 2-2
        SC 1-2
        FSU 1-0 *NCSU
        CL 0-1
        OU 2-2
        ST 2-2
        NE 1-2
        UT 2-1 *WVU
        OR St 1-2
        UCLA 1-1 *Cal
        USC 1-1 *AZ
        UL 0-0 *Syracuse
        LT 0-1
        MI 0-3
        RU 0-0 *Kent St.
        TT 0-3
        OK St.0-2 *AZ
        UW 2-3 *AZ

        Ohio St. 1-0
        Note: Arizona is 3-4 vs. top 25 and they also beat Toledo who was top 25 last week.

    • bullet says:

      You probably didn’t notice, but in the AP Poll Texas is 18th of the 18 teams from the Big 5 conferences with 2 losses or less. OU is 13th, which is 4th of the 9 2 loss teams.

  29. Brian says:

    The BE will announce their new divisions next week. They’ll be split geographically, but that still leaves some uncertainty with only 5 clearly western schools. Apparently they won’t use East and West for the division names, though.

    • frug says:

      It’ll be interesting to see which of UL and UC gets stuck in the West. My guess is Cincinnati since Louisville probably wields more clout in conference politics.

      • @frug – I’ve heard some scuttlebutt that Temple might get sent out there for 2013 and 2014. Assuming that Air Force becomes football member #14, Temple would switch to the East and Navy would go to the “West” when it joins the league in 2015. Supposedly, Navy would have fewer objections since they play more of a national schedule and would be paired up with rival Air Force.

        • Brian says:


          That could make some sense if they have those plans in writing. Navy has plenty of fans in TX and CA, certainly, and they’d still get some games in FL as well. If I’m Temple, though, I’d object to that without having AF’s commitment to join in writing. Otherwise, they may get stuck out there.

          I still think they should consider putting the FL schools out west with the TX and western schools. That groups the 6 distant schools versus the 6 northeasternish schools. Then add AF and Navy to the appropriate geographical divisions with them as locked rivals.

          • Phil says:

            I think Temple was in a position where they had to take what they could get, knowing that there were some idiots in the Big East that still thought the best Philadelphia addition was having Villanova move up and play in a soccer stadium.

    • greg says:

      I have it on good authority that the division names will be BIG EAST and BIG WEST.

    • @Brian – Yes, I saw that piece along with this one from Brett McMurphy that provides more details:

      It states that each of the 5 power conferences will take an equal revenue share and used past BCS rankings performances of their *current* teams since 1998 (e.g. the Big 12 gets to count WVU but the Big East doesn’t) as the justification for taking more than the G5 conferences.

      • Brian says:


        Lots of good info there. Emphasis below is mine.

        “In the new format, which the Sports Business Journal reported could be worth $7.3 billion over 12 years, the power five leagues will each receive an equal share, which will dwarf the compensation of the remaining five leagues (Big East, Conference USA, Mountain West, Sun Belt and Mid-American), called the Group of Five.”

        What happened to all the talk about money based on performance and academics? See below for part of that answer.

        “Using those cumulative rankings, based on 2014 membership, for the top 25 final BCS rankings since 1998, there is a huge disparity between the power five leagues and the Group of Five conferences.

        Awarding 25 points for first place, 24 for second, etc., for those annual rankings, the SEC ranks first with 1,054 points, followed by the Big Ten (860), Big 12 (816), ACC (673) and Pac-12 (671). Then there’s a huge drop to the Group of Five — the Big East (240), C-USA (49), MWC (58), Mid-American (21) and Sun Belt (0).”

        Interesting numbers.

        Apparently the plan is to stick to 6 bowls but guarantee the G5 a spot. That locks 7 of the 12 spots (5 champs, 1 G5 champ, ND/SEC/B10 in Orange).

        One new detail:
        “While a Big Ten or SEC team could be selected to the Orange Bowl, the commissioners have agreed that when the Rose and/or Sugar bowls are hosting the semifinals, that the Big Ten or SEC champion will not be placed in the Orange Bowl. Instead, it would have to be placed in one of the three other access bowls, sources said.”

        That makes sense, and is actually better. I’d like to see the match-ups preserved in the nearest access bowl (shift Rose to Fiesta, Sugar to Cotton) in those years.

        “Another difference between the new format and the current BCS system is revenue distribution will include an academic component rewarding football programs that meet the NCAA’s APR guidelines. Starting in 2014, teams must earn a 930 four-year average APR or a 940 average over the most recent two years or they will be penalized a “significant” amount, a source said.”

        OK, so academics can only be a negative. That’s the expected compromise, I suppose.

        “Conferences also will earn more revenue for each additional team that makes an access bowl.”

        As expected. I’m guessing this amount will be a fraction of the default amount much like the BCS does it.

        • bullet says:

          I read that bit about the Orange Bowl as guaranteeing the SEC or B1G another slot every year. Their champ is guaranteed a spot somewhere other than the Orange and they still get the Orange for their 2nd team.

          Equal splits among the Big 5 would discourage further expansion. The Big 12 would be getting 40% more per school than the SEC and ACC, but would split that pie more ways if they expanded.

          Splitting equally benefits the Pac 12 and ACC and hurts the SEC. If you average the points among the Big 5, the Big 12 is right about the average (albeit with only 10 teams), the B1G 5% above, the SEC 29% above and the ACC and Pac 18% below.

          Justifying it by the top 25 finishes is soft thinking. While there is a “gap” if you are using the gap method of grading, the ACC points per school (48.1) is midway between the SEC (75.3) and Big East (20.0) and closer to the Big East than the Big 12 (81.6).

    • frug says:

      That’s only because when the playoff starts there will be 10 conferences instead of 11 with a former have being demoted…

      • Brian says:

        That’s part of it. Also probably a compromise to keep the little guys happy, especially the BE. Giving up 5% to double the pie is good business.

        • frug says:

          Well, they aren’t really giving up anything either. Since the number of “haves” will be reduced to either 62/63 (depending on what sort of cut ND gets) from 66+ and the “have nots” will be increased from 54 to 65, the Big Boys will still be getting about the same % of revenue per team that they get now.

      • bullet says:

        And the Big 5 have 62 schools + ND out of 126 (127 when Charlotte moves up) while the 6 AQ had 65 + ND out of 119.

        It will be interesting to see how ND and the other Independents get their share. ND gets average of Big 5 while others get average of the other 5? BYU might have more top 25 points than ND over that time period. Do they get big boy $? If not, are they risking waking Hatch up again?

    • bullet says:

      Another article. Surprise! Slive and Delany want to keep their Orange Bowl slot but don’t want to reduce the available open slots by tying in another game with the Big 12 or Pac 12.

  30. OrderRestored83 says:


  31. Penn State Danny says:

    Frank: Fast forward two years. Do you think that there will still be a weekly unveling of rankings in the new BCS (or whatever the upcoming acronymn will be)? Will the committee “committ” to their picks each week? Or will we only go by the computer rankings until the last week?

    The weekly release is one of the most exciting parts of the current format. I can’t imagine it going away.

    • ccrider55 says:

      It should be a year round, weekly show. Off season ranking changes justified by verbal commits, academic problems, legal issues, coaching changes,, astrology, etc. in addition to the automatic bump up that “name” schools annually get because…well, because of their name.

    • @Penn State Danny – I would think that there’s got to be some type of weekly ranking, although that begs the question of whether a selection committee is just really another name for a poll that only happens to have 12 voters. For me personally, I just don’t want to be surprised during the first week of December and we get a “WTF?!” announcement of 4 teams that we didn’t think were in the running. To prevent that with the general public, it would behoove the powers that be to release some type of weekly ranking (or maybe, as I’ve heard suggested before, a listing of “Tier 1″ and “Tier 2″ teams that are in consideration for playoff and access bowl slots).

  32. Penn State Danny says:


    This will be a big deal. If the committee doesn’t agree with the convential wisdom of the weekly rankings, they are going to be accused of being bought off. However, if they do agree with the convential wisdom, they are going to be accused of being inflexible.

    I am anxious for details to emerge from upcoming meetings. Maybe we would be able to simulate what the commitee would do with this year’s teams.

  33. bullet says:

    McMurphy saying there will be an autobid for the best of the other 5 within 6 bowls. Announcement is expected shortly.

    Sounds like they are losing sight of what they were trying to do. They were trying to create the best matchups. Instead, they appear to be guaranteeing 1 bid to a team who may be viewed as inferior and hard to market. They have locked a bid for the 2nd B1G or SEC team or Notre Dame. And the Big 5 all have their autobids. Meanwhile the bottom 5 get less regardless of performance. And the B1G/SEC get more regardless of performance.

    • ccrider55 says:

      I’m becoming almost as fond of BCS 2.0 (the playoff), and all the crap (concessions) going into creating/allowing for it, as I was/am of BCS 1.0. Look how long it’s taken :( .
      I am back to wishing for a return to the bowls, and vote a team #1.

      • bullet says:

        Well we’ve got college presidents deciding it. We are getting a look at how academia works.

      • frug says:

        The big mistake was trying to do the playoffs inside the bowl system. On campus semi-finals would have been the best option, but failing that non-bowl neutral sites would have been superior.

        • ccrider55 says:

          Or use the bowls as the final data points to select the NCG participants. A true plus one. It would be, as with BCS 2.0, a selection and NOT a playoff. Just the number of those selected to participate varies.

        • Eric says:

          I disagree. I think campus sites worked if they were done the first week in December with everyone going to bowls after that (including the losing/winning teams (winning to teams to the championship bowl)). The bowls work better than neutral sites though. If you separate the idea of bowls from the idea of the post-season in college football, the entire bowl system loses relevancy.

          • frug says:

            If you separate the idea of bowls from the idea of the post-season in college football, the entire bowl system loses relevancy.

            Only two bowls a year host playoff games anyways so I can’t see how it would matter. I mean how does the Holiday Bowl become less relevant if the semi-finals are held at a neutral site instead of the Sugar Bowl?

    • m (Ag) says:

      Actually, if we’re ignoring the 4 playoff bids, the Big 12 will get about what the SEC gets per team, because the SEC has 40% more teams.

      They were trying to create a system with more of a free market approach. Once the Orange Bowl deal and the lack of interest in a ‘7th Bowl’ showed everyone in the smaller conferences their worth, they backed away from the free market and got their autobid. Hopefully it will have some sort of minimum ranking requirement.

      • bullet says:

        Minimum ranking not being mentioned. Hard to do that with a committee. The committee would basically have to turn itself into a poll, ranking #1-#25. Maybe they have a minimum number of wins so that you don’t get 8-5 teams in there, without having to rank all the schools to see if they met some criteria.

    • bullet says:

      I’m guessing that $475 excludes the Rose/Sugar/Orange deals.
      So $47.5 allocated is some manner related to academics.
      $427.5 allocated in some other manner. Just using the simplest assumptions, 80% or $380 million goes to the Big 5. That’s $76 million apiece. The $40 million each of the Big 4 gets from their contract bowl (and the $27.5 or more the ACC gets) is pretty significant compared to that. It will be hard to give up those $ 4 out of 12 years. Will be interesting to see more detail.

      • bullet says:

        Little more detail, but a number of things still not clarified (i.e. actual revenue distribution):

      • m (Ag) says:

        My guess is the participants in the Access bowls will get some payout less than the Orange bowl. The ESPN deal will assign some value to those bowls (now reduced thanks to the guaranteed tie-in to the small conferences) that will be divided among the participating teams. So when the Sugar Bowl is a playoff bowl the Big 12 and SEC teams will find their payout reduced from $40 million to (say) $20 million as they get shifted into other bowls. A lot of money lost, but not as much as $40 million to $0.

        I also would guess the actual playoff participants will be making money for their conferences in a similar fashion, but that wasn’t mentioned in the report.

        One thing giving an autobid to the smaller conferences does is provide more certainty to the big conferences’ other bowl deals. That’s one less chance for the playoff system to take another Big Ten or SEC team away from the Capital One Bowl, for example. This might make those agreements a little more profitable, though not as much as getting another guaranteed spot would be.

      • bullet says:

        8 different revenue pools. 1)Rose to B1G/Pac 12 at least 8 out of 12 years. 2)Sugar for SEC/Big 12 at least 8 out of 12 years. 3)Orange to ACC/ND-SEC-B1G at least 8 out of 12 years. Not clear if Orange is 50/50 split or not. 4)Around 10% is distributed to schools who make APR. 5)Fixed amount split approximately 80/20 between Big 5 and G5 with Big 5 splitting theirs equally. 6)G5 fixed pool allocation has not yet been determined. 7)Amount not disclosed & maybe not determined for playoff participants. 8)Amount not disclosed & maybe not determined for “access bowl” participants.

        No indication of how often contract bowls will host semi-finals.

          • Brian says:


            “4)Around 10% is distributed to schools who make APR.”

            Just to clarify, that’s 10% of each conference’s revenue split among the schools that meet the APR.

            EX. Say PU and MN fail to meet the number, and the B10 payout is $100M just for easy math

            PU and MN – $90M/12 = $7.5M
            other 10 – $7.5 + $10M/10 = $8.5M

          • bullet says:

            Selection committee won’t have much to do other than picking the 4 playoff teams. They will pick the best of the gang of 5 champs and the best of ND, SEC, B1G runnerups. Then they will really only have 1 slot to fill. 7 of the 12 slots are identified (B1G vs. Pac 12 in Rose, B12 vs. SEC in Sugar, ACC vs. ND/B1G/SEC in Orange, best of rest champ)and 4 are playoff slots. The only way they have more is if the contracted teams in the bowl that is used for a playoff make the playoff. For example, if the Rose is a playoff bowl and B1G and Pac 12 champs both make the playoff, it doesn’t appear that those conferences get a guaranteed extra slot to replace the Rose. Now if they didn’t make the playoff, you could have:
            Access bowl 1 (say Peach)-team 1 vs. team 4
            Rose Bowl-team 2 vs. team 3
            Sugar-Big 12 vs. SEC
            Orange-ACC vs. Notre Dame or SEC or B1G runnerup
            Access Bowl 2(say Fiesta)-Pac 12 champ vs. at large
            Access Bowl 3(say Cotton)-B1G champ vs. best gang of 5 champ

  34. duffman says:

    A look at shifting AQ’s and the affect on SoS with the Big East becoming the Big Least

    Pittsburgh goes to the ACC
    Syracuse goes to the ACC

    Rutgers (3) = ACC : Pittsburgh and Syracuse + SEC : Arkansas
    Louisville (4) = ACC : North Carolina, Pittsburgh, and Syracuse + SEC : Kentucky
    Cincinnati (3) = ACC : Virginia Tech, Pittsburgh, and Syracuse
    Temple (4) = ACC : Maryland, Pittsburgh, and Syracuse + B1G : Penn State
    Connecticut (4) = ACC : NC State, Maryland, Pittsburgh, and Syracuse
    South Florida (4) = ACC : Florida State, Miami, Pittsburgh, and Syracuse

    If SoS is going to matter going forward the ACC will be jettisoning the Big East and picking up schools from the other 4 power conferences (B1G, B12, PAC, and SEC) unless anybody sees an alternative plan?

    • Brian says:


      SOS only matters for teams that expect to be in the playoffs. Duke isn’t going to change their scheduling because of this. Clemson and FSU already play quality SEC rivals, so they don’t need to worry too much. VT has games with AL, OSU and WI in the next 5 years. Miami has games with UF, NE and ND coming up.

      The ACC also has to have willing partners. I’d expect to see more B10 games as the B10 tries to get tougher schedules. The P12 already plays the ACC some and has tough OOC scheduling already. Most of the B12 and SEC seem largely unconcerned with SOS so far, counting on conference games to keep them in it.

  35. Penn State Danny says:


    As far as we know is there a provision for a bowl (most likely the Fiesta) to match up the winners of the B1G and the Pac 12 in years when the rose has a semI?

    • bullet says:

      I haven’t seen anything. But then they haven’t said a whole lot. Given what they have done with the Orange #2 slot, I don’t think it will happen. In one of these articles, they said that the BIG champ would not play in the Orange in years the Rose was a playoff bowl and gave the reason as wanting to give a better team to one of the non-contract bowls to increase their value. So when the Rose is a playoff bowl, they probably split up the BIG/Pac representatives.

      • ccrider55 says:

        A perfectly good reason to scuttle the whole deal. Not only would the RB get jacked for a selection semi, but the B1G/PAC may be deprived of having champs meet even when neither is selected for a semi. Kiss tradition good bye in order to assist other bowls/conferences.

      • Brian says:


        They could get the same impact by just shifting the contract match-ups to the nearest access bowl. That gets the 5 champs in the other 3 bowls every 3 years. Granted, the Peach gets the short end of that but so does the Orange amongst the contract bowls. They could even keep the pairings but rotate which access bowl gets them (Rose to Fiesta, then to Cotton, then to Peach, then repeat). Splitting up the match-ups dilutes the value built up by tradition in exchange for getting new match-ups which the playoffs should already provide.

  36. Penn State Danny says:

    And also, doesn’t the Chik Fil A Bowl HAVE to be referred to as the Peach Bowl? Won’t the other 5 sponsors go ballistic otherwise?

  37. Alan from Baton Rouge says:

    Here’s an article from the Baton Rouge Morning Advocate regarding the commissioners’ meeting, with some quotes from Sugar Bowl CEO Paul Hoolahan.

    The highlights are as follows:

    “While the nonplayoff Sugar Bowls will be exclusively between SEC and Big 12 teams, much as the Rose Bowl is exclusively between Big Ten and Pac-12 teams, the semifinals can feature teams from any conference, although if an SEC or Big 12 team is seeded first or second, its game will be in the Sugar Bowl.”

    “The rotation for the semifinals is yet to be set. Hoolahan said he did not know which year would be the first for New Orleans to host a playoff game but understood the Sugar Bowl would be paired with the Rose Bowl. “That way, we’ll have an uninterrupted afternoon and evening of playoff games,” he said. “That’s going to be exciting.””

    • Brian says:


      That’s big news about the Rose and Sugar being semis in the same year. I happen to think it’s a bad plan, since it also means 2 access bowls will be semis in some years.

      1. Great 1/1 of afternoon and evening semis every 3 years
      2. Sugar is never overlooked due to the 2nd semi ending right before it’s played
      3. Spreads the 4 champs out to the other bowls (the B10 and SEC champs can’t go to the Orange) to increase their value

      1. 2 semis on 12/31 every 3 years
      2. No tradition in those years (B10, P12 and SEC champs all elsewhere)
      3. Very uneven schedule compared to 1 access bowl and 1 contract bowl each year

      This also means the other pairs will be Orange/Fiesta and Cotton/Peach. Given this setup, I’d prefer to see B10/P12 in the Fiesta and SEC/B12 in the Cotton when the Rose and Sugar are semis. That would bring tons of value to those games, plus it would keep some tradition with the new B12 (more like the SWC) playing in the Cotton and keep the pairings. However, that would mean the Peach would only ever get the ACC champ or ND and I don’t know if that is acceptable to TPTB. They may prefer to mix and match the champs for a change of pace.

    • Alan from Baton Rouge says:

      Here’s another excerpt from the Baton Rouge Morning Advocate article linked above that backs up my earlier assertion that the Cotton Bowl has the inside track on the first NC game.

      “Dallas and the Cotton Bowl is considered the front-runner for the first title game, in part as a consolation prize for losing out to the Sugar Bowl for the Champions Bowl.”

      • Brian says:


        They keep saying that, and it may well be true. But other than the B12 and maybe the SEC, who cares about consoling the Cotton Bowl? They weren’t a BCS bowl before and aren’t a contract bowl now. The Fiesta is the bowl that lost status. Not that I think consolation is the way to determine the site anyway.

        The Fiesta would have been the next site in the BCS, while the Peach and Cotton have never had one. Phoenix and Dallas have nicer stadiums, so I’d pick one of them. If they want to base it on Dallas never having one and being a great site, that’s OK with me. On the other hand, the Phoenix has much better weather.

    • @Alan from Baton Rouge – I’m still completely perplexed as to why the powers that be want the Rose and Sugar to have semifinals during the same years. It’s great for those particular seasons to have back-to-back semifinal games on New Year’s Day, but then also leaves 1 out of 3 years without any semifinals on New Year’s Day at all. It also creates the potential of overloading the access bowls with champs from the Big Ten, SEC, Big 12 and/or Pac-12 that don’t make it to the semifinals in those seasons, which limits the opportunities for other at-large bids to be won. Usually, I can see the reasoning behind these types of moves (even if I don’t agree with them), but I’m at a total loss as to why this has been pushed.

      • Alan from Baton Rouge says:

        Frank – I agree. I would have thought that splitting the semis between 12/31 and 1/1 was the was to go. I guess B1G, P12, B12 and the SEC just want it that way, and they’re in charge.

      • Brian says:


        All I can think of:

        1. The Sugar/SEC/B12 didn’t want to risk being overshadowed by the 2nd semi being in the afternoon so their game becomes a denouement at best.

        2. TPTB want to have champs to spread to the other bowls. They probably want to make unusual pairings like B10/B12 and SEC/P12 to get more diversity.

        3. The Rose didn’t want to risk being overshadowed by the 2nd semi coming up after the game and some pregame show stealing their viewers.

        4. The Rose didn’t want the Sugar to have their tradition in years the Rose couldn’t have it.

        5. TPTB are idiots and/or didn’t think this through very well.

  38. Mike says:

    I guess we can cross of BYU off the Big 12’s list. I expected BYU to be an option (as #12 in a two team expansion) if they gave up on their TV demands.

  39. mushroomgod says:

    Penn State Danny:

    So what’s your take on the goalline call that went against PSU on review?

    Amazing and weird how many high-profile controversal calls have gone against PSU over the years……I’ve seen it in games agianst UM, OSU, and Iowa previously. These are the kind of things. IU fans expect, but PSU fans?….not so much….is there prejudice against PSU? Hard to say…….I don’t see it in other sports (with the exception of the famous call in IU’s favor at the end of the PSU game at PSU in ’95 or so)………

    One thing’s for sure…..the GBI posters think there is…..the hatred toward the BIG is serious. Very similiar to the hatred NEB fans felt toward TX, except that it extends to the whole conference. I think long-term it is extremely likely that PSU goes to the ACC. That’s the natural fit, and there’s now too much water over the damn in the PSU-Big 10 relationship to repair matters, imo. Will be interesting to see what happens.

    • ccrider55 says:

      Sun rising in the west slightly less likely.

    • m (Ag) says:

      The next TV contract negotiations will make the Big Ten much more money than the ACC. The Bowl associations will make the Big Ten much more money than the ACC.

      Unless something changes, it would be foolish for PSU to move.

  40. Penn State Danny says:

    I have never bought that PSU will ever leave the B1G…even though I would personally love it. I would love to play Pitt, BC, Syracuse, Miami, VT and the rest.

    However, I think that the university is happy with the academic set up with the conference.

    Personally, I think that they could have stood more by Penn State than they did. There was a basic ban from the Big Ten Network over the summer where they only showed the bare minimum of games.

    Also, I thought that the call the other day was wrong. The officials who made the call made an excusable error but the lack of overturning it with replay DOES cause the conspiracy theorest inside of me to wonder if there was any way that PSU could have won the game.

    • largeR says:

      From another Nitt: I do not pine for the days of Pitt, Cuse, et al., (as a 60’s grad I should be in that group)but I understand others desire. Being an appendage to the B1G with it’s large MI and OSU personalities, as opposed to more centric in the ACC, is certainly a negative. However the positives of the B1G far outweigh the negatives. Personally, in football, I want the B1G to go to 9 games so that we could play Michigan and Michigan State 6 out of 10 instead of 4 out of ten, which I dislike.

      On the Nebraska fumble review, I don’t see it as anti Penn State. I see it as Penn State taking one for the conference. B1G football this year has been abysmal. How bad would it have looked for out highest rated eligible team to have lost to our two ineligible teams?

      • Brian says:


        I can see the nostalgia factor for playing the eastern schools, but they all suck. It seems like a boring schedule with limited SOS. I suppose it’s be great for winning 10+ games every season, though.

        Lots of fans want the 9th game, but coaches are chickens. I don’t really understand why most ADs oppose it since they schedule OOC home and homes anyway. The 9th game plus a home and home make for a 5-5 split, then you play two paycheck games to get to 7 home games. I understand those with an annual OOC rival (IA, PU, sort of MSU and MI) feeling trapped with limited OOC variety. Do the other ADs oppose it just to help those schools out?

        • m (Ag) says:

          If the Big Ten feels it will be better than most other conferences in the future they should prefer to play more quality home-and-homes with other conferences instead of a 9th game…your conference should rise in the rankings and your conference teams would have more wins.

          If the Big Ten wants to continue to recruit nationally (and it needs to), it should prefer more OOC games over a 9th game. Games against good schools from Texas, California, and the East Coast all help its cause. Those games also get more national media attention. If we’re ‘thinking like a College President’, that also gets the schools’ name out in front of potential college applicants around the country.

          And their could be a few more OOC rivalries spring up. Illinois could schedule Missouri again, while Nebraska could schedule Oklahoma or Missouri (maybe even lowly Colorado).

          • Brian says:

            m (Ag),

            What has changed since last year when they approved the 9th game?

          • m (Ag) says:

            I thought Big Ten commissioner has publicly stated that the new playoff system should encourage his teams to schedule more aggressively. There may also have been something in the current TV negotiations that has lead the Big Ten to believe that quality OOC games would be more valuable to their TV packages than a 9th conference game.

          • Brian says:

            m (Ag),

            Delany has been telling schools to improve scheduling for a while. Besides, adding a 9th B10 game would be improving their SOS. You have to treat it like the 9th game is the average B10 team, so someone like MSU instead of a MAC team. That’s a definite improvement.

        • ccrider55 says:

          The PAC plays 9 and a decent OOC. B1G needs an extra game to do the same? It’s about the money in extra home games regularly, not (currently) about SOS or recruiting grounds (that couldn’t be addressed with 3 games :/ ).

  41. Alan from Baton Rouge says:

    Under the 2014 playoff/bowl format, here’s what the lineup would look like if the season ended today and the selection committee used the BCS rankings to slot teams. I used two access bowls as semi-finals.

    Semi Fiesta – #1 K-State v. #4 Alabama
    Semi Peach – #2 Oregon v. #3 Notre Dame

    Rose – #13 Stanford v. #14 Nebraska (P12 v. B1G)
    Sugar – #5 Georgia v. #12 Oklahoma (SEC v. B12)
    Orange – #10 Florida State v. #6 Florida (ACC v. SEC/B1G/ND)

    Cotton – #7 LSU v. #19 Louisville (At Large v. G5)

    #8 Texas A&M, #9 South Carolina, and #11 Clemson are left out.

    • Brian says:

      Gee, really tough for that AL loss to knock all the way from the 1/4 game to the 1/4 game. I suppose they did have to switch from the Peach to the Fiesta Bowl, and are playing KSU instead of ND, but really. Big punishment.

    • m (Ag) says:

      What’s really interesting is that a top 10 Notre Dame team that loses a game in the next few weeks could be left out entirely. They would be passed over for an SEC team in the Orange Bowl and perhaps for the Cotton Bowl spot. If Louisville and Louisiana Tech also lost a game in the next few weeks you could have an unranked team getting in while ND was on the sidelines.

    • Read The D says:

      This is such a cluster. The new bowl system had the promise of 6 great match-ups on NY Eve and NY Day. But in reality, all that happened is we got a 4 team playoff and shuffled the deck chairs that are the BCS bowl tie-ins.

      I was looking forward to #5 vs. #6 matchups and #7 vs. #8 matchups in the auxiliary bowls.

      I HATE HATE HATE the rules for tie-ins. If a conference champ gets selected to the playoff then that slot should be left open for the next best team, regardless of conference affiliation.

      • greg says:

        ” But in reality, all that happened is we got a 4 team playoff and shuffled the deck chairs that are the BCS bowl tie-ins.”

        You expected the major conferences, which control the system, to give up control?

        • Read The D says:

          Depends on your definition of control, I guess. An 80% cut of revenue seems like a decent amount of control no matter how many schools each conference places in the “BCS” games.

          It wasn’t too long ago we were debating whether anybody would go for the SEC getting 2 auto bids now that they had 14 teams. Now, if your conference gets one team in the semi-finals, that conference is guaranteed at least one more spot in the “BCS” games.

          To answer your question, I fully expected a push for more access from the major conferences, but I also expected a less rigid system with the ability to create more intriguing match-ups each season.

  42. Penn State Danny says:

    Alan from Baton Rouge

    With the committee making the decision, couldn’t they just choose to put Oregon vs K State in the Fiesta and Bama and ND in the Peach? How concerned they will be with matching 1-4 and 2-3 as opposed to selling tickets?

    As usual, I think the members of this board are thinking things through more than the powers that be are.

    • Brian says:

      Penn State Danny,

      They could choose that, but why would they? They are supposed to honestly select 1-4 in order. They might swap teams to avoid rematches or conference games, but neither case applies here. Then it all comes down to location. AL is #4, so they don’t get the benefit of playing in the SE (homefield advantage over #1 is uncool). That means KSU/AL goes out west, where they’ll sell tickets just fine. That means OR/ND comes east where it’ll also sell out. Let’s be honest, AL and ND could sell out these games by themselves.

      • Eric says:

        For me in that case, it would depend on who was #1. If Oregon is #1 (as the closest BCS bowl to them). If Kansas State is, they get the Fiesta due to the history between the Big 12 and Fiesta. If Alabama is #4, they might end up in the southeast, but that’s what we get for putting so many bowls there. I think there should be a little push to get Alabama in the Sugar, even at the #4 spot if it’s one of the bowls due to history, but the Peach does not get the same benefit of the doubt.

    • Eric says:

      I agree Danny and think they should consider history, geography, and rematches in their calculations. For instance, if the Rose and Peach host and you clearly have #1 Oregon, #2 LSU, and then a close Wisconsin and Florida State around #3 and #4, I’d hope they’d give Wisconsin the #4 spot (preserves Rose Bowl tradition) and Florida State the #4 spot (gives you 2 southeastern teams in the Peach Bowl).

      • Alan from Baton Rouge says:

        Danny, Brian & Eric – It looks like the commissioners have already taken your points into consideration. The Baton Rouge Morning Advocate article I linked above stated as much.

        “While the nonplayoff Sugar Bowls will be exclusively between SEC and Big 12 teams, much as the Rose Bowl is exclusively between Big Ten and Pac-12 teams, the semifinals can feature teams from any conference, although if an SEC or Big 12 team is seeded first or second, its game will be in the Sugar Bowl.”

  43. Brian says:

    The new BE divisions are final. For 2013-4, they will be:

    East – UConn, Rutgers, UCF, USF, UC, UL
    West – SDSU, Boise, SMU, UH, Memphis, Temple

    They will change in 2015 when Navy and, presumably, a 14th team join. The plan then is to go to non-geographical divisions with a locked crossover game, and name the divisions Red and Blue.

    “The proposed Red Division in 2015 would consist of Louisville, UConn, Memphis, Navy, San Diego State, USF and SMU, while the Blue Division would consist of Boise State, Cincinnati, UCF, Houston, Rutgers, Temple and the 14th team.

    Each team would play six games within its division and two games against the other division, including one permanent cross-division game. The annual cross-division games would be Cincinnati-Louisville, UConn-Rutgers, Boise State-San Diego State, Houston-SMU, Navy-Temple, UCF-USF and Memphis versus the 14th team.”

    I’d expect that to change to Navy-AF and Memphis-Temple if AF is the 14th team.

    • frug says:

      Big East East and Big East West; silly sounding but still not as bad as Leaders and Legends.

      • Alan from Baton Rouge says:

        I suggest that the Big East split into Geographic divisions named the Big Division and the East Division. That would be much easier to figure out than the Legends/Leaders and the Atlantic/Coastal names.

      • Brian says:


        It’s only for 2 years, too, so they didn’t want to use the real names and then confuse everyone when the alignment totally changes.

    • Richard says:

      Red & Blue would be a clusterf*ck.

      Let’s see, you have a national conference that’s really spread across the entire country.

      Your schools in the west would prefer playing more in Texas than in FL anyway.

      Your schools in the east would prefer playing in FL more than in TX anyway.

      So let’s have SDSU play only 2 of the other 4 teams that are west of the Mississippi!

      • Eric says:

        Since there is so little history between a lot of the teams, I think the way to do it is make sure you get the teams with history together and put the nearby teams that could become rivals together. You might also want to divide up the big recruiting states (having most the California, Texas, and Florida teams together should be avoided). Let’s say, Air Force is the 14th team. Then you’d probably want the following team playing every year:

        South Florida-Central Florida
        Navy-Air Force
        San Diego State-Boise State

        You don’t want to put the first two groups together as that gives you none of the big recruiting states. I’d probably do it like this:

        South Florida
        Central Florida
        SMU (locked rival with Houston)
        Navy (locked crossover with Air Force)

        Houston (locked rival with SMU)
        Boise State
        San Diego State
        Air Force (locked rival with Navy)

        This would leave 4 teams with only 1 non-locked crossover, but for the Big East, I don’t think that’s a big deal. It keeps all teams that are relatively close together. All the western and northeastern teams are together (even Air Force with the western and Navy with the eastern). Both have 3 teams in the biggest recruiting states recruiting states. Most importantly, almost anything resembling a rivalry or something that looks like it would have an easier time getting there is preserved.

        • Read The D says:


          I like your alignment much better. Preserves regional rivalries and lets most teams play more cross-division opponents.

          I’m sure (I hope) something like this was tossed around. I just wonder if Cincinnati and Louisville had a problem with the lack of Florida access.

      • Brian says:


        “Red & Blue would be a clusterf*ck.”

        I agree that the zipper divisions make little sense for the BE on the surface. There’s lots of travel for division games. But if you look deeper, it makes some sense.

        Red – SDSU, SMU, USF, UL, Memphis, Navy, UConn
        Blue – Boise, UH, UCF, UC, Temple, AF, Rutgers

        Every team gets access to all the recruiting grounds and media markets equally. There is no west coast bias built into your league.

        The problem with a geographical alignment for the BE is that it doesn’t cleanly break up that way. There are pairs of TX and FL schools, but 3 western schools, 4 eastern schools and 3 metro conference schools. That would split nicely except for Navy and AF needing to play each other, Navy also wanting to play in TX and CA, the northern schools wanting to play in FL, etc.

        Some options:
        A. Red = SMU, UH, UCF, USF, UC, UL, Memphis
        Blue = SDSU, Boise, AF, Navy, Temple, UConn, Rutgers

        B. Red = AF, Navy, Temple, UConn, Rutgers, UCF, USF
        Blue = SDSU, Boise, SMU, UH, UC, UL, Memphis

  44. Richard says:

    Has anyone mentioned this:
    With 7 of 12 spots accounted for & 4 semis, that leaves 1 more spot for a non-top-4 team.

    Depending on how they split the pot, the B12 could still end up with a higher payout/school than the SEC even if they place a 2nd team on the Orange (if the 2 schools have the same number of playoff teams).

  45. Read The D says:

    Big East should go full Big Country and get to 16 teams. Add #14 Air Force, #15 Hawaii and #16 BYU.

    4 pods. 9 games. Your pod + paired pod, creating 2 divisions every 2 years. 1 game each from the other 2 pods.

    San Diego St.
    Boise St.

    Air Force (locked with Navy)
    Memphis (locked with Louisville)

    USF (locked with Rutgers)
    UCF (locked with UConn)
    Louisville (locked with Memphis)

    Rutgers (locked with USF)
    UConn (locked with UCF)
    Navy (locked with Air Force)

  46. duffman says:


    Sparty on my good man. Izzo was being all Izzo like in locking the Jayhawks down

  47. bullet says:

    Seen a couple of different places claims that a radio station (s) is reporting Maryland is talking to the Big 10. One report claimed a Columbus station 97.1. Any rumours coming out of Big 10 country?

    • Brian says:


      97.1 is the FM side of 1460, the flagship station for the Buckeyes. That said, I haven’t heard anything about it.

    • @bullet – Message board rumors in a bunch of places and Maryland alum Scott Van Pelt even discussed it yesterday, but it seems like all speculation at this point.

    • Brian says:

      Message board on an OSU blog

      Maryland to the BIG?
      Friend who lives in Philly said that a local channel is reporting that there are talks taking place. Maryland has been rumored for awhile, so we’ll see if there is any substance”

      • Brian says:

        I’ll believe it when I see it, but MD would be a nice addition for all but football. It should appease PSU, too. I assume Rutgers would be the 14th team.

        Geographical (in order of locked rivals)
        North – MI, PSU, WI, MSU, MD, MN, RU
        South – OSU, NE, IA, NW, PU, IL, IN

        Podlike (in order of locked rivals)
        Middle – OSU, MI, MSU, PU, NW, IL, IN
        Ends – PSU, NE, WI, IA, MD, MN, RU

        Geographical 2 (in order of locked rivals)
        East – MI, PSU, MSU, PU, MD, RU, IN
        West – OSU, NE, WI, IA, NW, IL, MN

        East – PSU, MD, RU
        North – MI, MSU, NW, IL
        West – NE, WI, IA, MN
        South – OSU, PU, IN

        Pair S & W for 2 years (in order of locked rivals)
        A = S&W – OSU, PU, IN, NE, WI, IA, MN
        B = N&E – MI, MD, IL, PSU, MSU, NW, RU

        Then pair S & N for 2 years (in order of locked rivals)
        A = S&N – OSU, PU, IN, MI, MSU, NW, IL
        B = W&E – PSU, MD, RU, NE, WI, IA, MN

        • @Brian – I really like those North/South divisions. The only change that I’d make there is that I think Iowa-Minnesota would be a protected rivalry, which would leave Wisconsin playing Illinois (which at least has a border war aspect to it).

          • Brian says:

            Frank the Tank,

            “@Brian – I really like those North/South divisions.”

            Thanks. I’m not a big fan of them, but they seem reasonably balanced and keep most rivalries.

            “The only change that I’d make there is that I think Iowa-Minnesota would be a protected rivalry, which would leave Wisconsin playing Illinois (which at least has a border war aspect to it).”

            Realistically, yes, but I paired them by conference W% so they’d be more fair. WI/IL would be an empty rivalry and give WI the same sort of advantage they have now. MN would still have the ax and the jug, so maybe the pig could go on the back burner for a while.

            Total games played:
            MN/WI – 119
            MN/IA – 104
            MN/MI – 98 (missed 1911-1918, or it would be 106)

            WI/IA – 86

            Ideally you’d keep all 3 for MN, but WI/IA is almost as important.

  48. Brian says:

    McMurphyESPN Brett McMurphy
    “In new format each conference w/more teams gets more $ RT @scottcurtis71: Do you know if SEC gets bigger cut because they have more teams?”

    That’s big news. Money split based on number of teams, not equal to each conference. That changes things a lot.

    • m (Ag) says:

      For the money that’s not tied to participation, this makes sense. You don’t want the system to encourage a certain conference structure. If the WAC reconstitutes as a 6 team league, you don’t want them paid twice what a 12 team conference makes on a per-team basis.

      If I was negotiating for one of the power conferences, I’d also add a provision that conferences don’t get a full share for ‘new to FBS’ schools until they’ve been in the subdivision for 5 years, discouraging financially unsound programs from jumping up and using this extra money to keep them afloat.

      • bullet says:

        It seems like there is a Big 5 pot and a Gang of 5 pot. So anyone adding teams from a lower group cuts the funds to everyone within their group (B5 or G5) if it is split by number of teams. That would tend to discourage any expansion except from cannibalizing conferences within your group.

      • Brian says:

        m (Ag),

        I agree it makes sense. It’s the first I’ve heard that they’re actually doing it, though.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s