Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Bob Sapp Denies Throwing Fights

Mountain West trying to force a football playoff

Any college football fan in the country will tell you that the BCS in its present form doesn't work and does little to determine a true champion. If you are from Utah you can make the argument that even though the Ute's were last years only undefeated team and knocked off Alabama to end the season in the Sugar Bowl they had no chance to be crowned national champion.

The powers that be who run the BCS won't tell you that is is very successful because they make record amounts of money, exclude the smaller conferences, avoid antitrust up to now, and preserve the existing cartel of traditional bowls. Those same powers will tell you that they don't want a playoff for academic reasons because extending the season a week or two for a couple of teams would be too tough on the players academics.

A week from now 64 college basketball teams will be play in the NCAA tournament and plenty of others will be playing in the NIT, CBI, and some other new tournament I can't remember the name of. The college basketball season stretches from November to the end of March and for some reason the profits reaped from those tournaments override the academic concerns that come with playing a season that lasts for five months.

The Mountain West is one of those conferences on the outside looking in as far as the BCS is concerned. The MWC has a legitimate beef because they have proved they can play the game at a high level. Perhaps a lot higher than the remains of the fractured Big East Conference which is still part of the cartel despite losing the membership of Boston College, Virginia Tech, and Miami.

The limitation of 85 scholarships has created a lot more parity in college football. It means that the traditional have-nots now have a much better chance of competing against the haves. An example was played out West this past season when a rebuilding Pac 10 was dominated by MWC and WAC foes in regular season play.

A Florida newspaper columnist Gene Frenette had this to say about the MWC's latest move at lobbying congress to force a change.

All the lobbying on Capitol Hill by Mountain West Conference commissioner Craig Thompson to change the football cartel that is the Bowl Championship Series might not bring us any closer to a true playoff system. Any saber-rattling about Utah not having equal access with Florida or Oklahoma to a No. 1 ranking might do nothing more than create a few headlines.

But if nobody speaks up or forces the college football dictators to confront the blatant discrimination they sign off on every fall, how can a broken system get fixed?

We'll just continue the present haves-vs.-have-nots existence and act like it's perfectly fine to rig the process in favor of six BCS conferences and Notre Dame, while leaving 51 other schools from five non-BCS leagues to fight for the crumbs.

ACC commissioner John Swofford, the present BCS coordinator, and his brethren don't like being called out by anybody. They want the status quo, at least until they can figure out a playoff system that will funnel a bigger pile of money into their league coffers.

The Mountain West Conference posted a four page release on their website this week which outlines their proposal to create an eight team playoff which would supposedly balance the inequitable system.

Under the proposal there will be five BCS bowl games and they will consist of the Rose, Orange, Fiesta, Sugar and a bowl to be named later such at the Cotton.

The top eight teams in the country would play in the Rose, Sugar, Fiesta, and Orange Bowls on New Years Day. The winners would advance over the following two weekends to determine a true champion. The fifth bowl featuring the ninth and tenth ranked teams would just conclude their season on January 1st but would share in the big BCS pot of money generated by the playoff. 

Computers would no longer determine the BCS rankings.  An impartial twelve member board would determine the final rankings of who gets in and who stays at home. By the way, have you ever seen an impartial twelve man board?

Traditional conference tie-ins such as the Pac Ten/Big Ten relationship with the Rose Bowl would be preserved under the plan. However the bids would not be automatic since the teams would be forced to finish in the top eight to qualify. If they don't they would be bounced into the proposed fifth bowl.

The proposal makes sense but why would the Pac Ten and Big Ten agree to it when they already have an automatic bid to the Granddaddy of them all? It is conceivable that the two conferences could even withdraw from the BCS scuttling the entire plan if anyone even suggests taking away the automatic bids for the Rose Bowl.

Amateur sports, especially when represented by educational institutions, should be about a sense of fair play. But here we have six conferences and Notre Dame conspiring to horde $18 million apiece for each BCS entrant among four major bowls ($144 million in most years), to divide among themselves. Meanwhile, the five non-BCS leagues are guaranteed only $9 million total.

Cartels such as this eventually get struck down by the Supreme Court. It is only a matter of time till the challenge is mounted and the BCS has to capitulate to the smaller conferences and even out the playing field. That doesn't mean that they will cave in right away because a successful challenge can take a decade to get to fruition.

Supposedly we don't have an equitable playoff format because of concerns about the social welfare and academic standing of the players participating. What it is really about is hoarding all the money and preserving the good old boy relationship the NCCA  and BCS has had with the people who run the bowl games.

In the end it will be interesting to see how this all works out for the football playing schools. Don't count on the big guys to roll over with this idle threat. It will take an act of Congress or a ruling in the US Supreme Court to balance the situation.

As we eagerly anticipate another exciting month of March Madness we can only wonder how exciting it would be if the same equity that allowed schools such as Gonzaga, Davidson, Tulane, and Memphis to compete with the big boys existed in the college football arena.

Comment 23 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Pac 10 should worry about MWC Expansion

If the Mountain West Conference wants to become a legit contender as a BCS league then surely recruiting Boise State and Fresno State would foster tougher league competition. Not sure how many teams are in the MWC but Hawaii could be added to make it a twelve member league. If the MWC ever got to a twelve member league they could hold a MWC conference championship. This league could just go wild putting the Pac 10 in the rear view mirror. If the MWC expands it would hurt the Pac 10 in regards to expansion. After all where would the Pac 10 recruit to become a 12 member league?

If the MWC ever expanded to twelve members, the Pac 10 better move FAST! They’d better take Utah and BYU before that ever happens. Getting Utah and BYU would be perfect for expansion. We’d still have our in-state rivalry games, which our league is best known for plus we’d have total control of major college football west of the Rocky Mountains. Now don’t roll your eyes about that. Utah is a state growing fast in population. Utah and BYU have stadiums of 60,000 plus seat capacity, bigger then Martin, Autzen, and Reser. BYU would be a great get because they have one of the nations largest national fanbases. The mormon religion is the second largest religion in the nation.

If the Pac 10 sits on this, the MWC could possibly catch us. We’ve got a new league commissioner coming in and he’d better consideer expansion before the Mountain West does.

All I saw was purple

by crazidawg on Mar 7, 2009 11:26 AM PST reply actions  

Why?

Why would an expansion of the MWC threaten the Pac-10? Neither one of those two teams are from big markets. I mean the Pac-10 could get San Diego State and Hawaii or Fresno or ? I think any of those teams would jump at the chance to join. I don’t know that it would be a big deal either way though.

Washington Husky Football-1991 National Champions

by dawgfan22 on Mar 7, 2009 1:17 PM PST up reply actions  

MWC Expansion

I don’t think anything the MWC does threatens the Pac 10.

by John Berkowitz on Mar 7, 2009 1:19 PM PST up reply actions  

Hypothetical

If the MWC were to expand and nab Boise State, Fresno State, and Hawaii they could become a 12 member league- only one out west w/ a conference championship. If this thing is marketed well they could become a BCS affiliated league. If that happens would we be able to ever expand? Why would a 12 member BCS MWC team leave for the Pac 10? It would be an easier route to a championship then the Pac 10. And with that said whose to say we don’t lose lower member team(s) in the Pac 10 to the MWC?

It is highly unlikely that this would ever play out. But just when you thought it was safe to go back in the water …

What I have not been happy with in terms of our league is the fact that we are stuck in our out-dated ways. Everybody is expanding except the Pac 10. I’m here to tell you that eventually the BCS will require BCS leagues to have 12 members and a conference championship. Their argument will be based on an “even playing field”. I’m telling you if the MWC makes a move in expansion before the Pac 10 does, then we’ve got a problem. Who the hell are we going to get then? Idaho? Montana? With a 12 member BCS affiliated MWC league- nobody in the MWC would leave for the Pac 10 when the road to the championship is an easier route to the championship in the MWC.

What we lack here in our league is an eye for the future. I sincerely hope our new commish has vision for the future. I don’t want to share a BCS allotment with the MWC.

All I saw was purple

by crazidawg on Mar 7, 2009 7:40 PM PST up reply actions  

They used to be a 16 team league

That road has been traveled before. They didn’t stick with it because there wasn’t enough revenue to split up to make it work.

The MWC can expand or not expand….whenever and if the Pac 10 invites one of their members they won’t hesitate to say yes…its all about money and the Pac 10 has it and the MWC never will.

by John Berkowitz on Mar 7, 2009 7:54 PM PST up reply actions  

Hawaii

The MWC doesn’t want Hawaii because of their low budget and travel costs.

Hawaii is a shoe string operation.

by John Berkowitz on Mar 7, 2009 7:55 PM PST up reply actions  

Not unless...

The BCS allows a 12 member MWC into the BCS. Why would MWC teams leave for the Pac 10, which would be a harder route to a championship?

The reason I am bringing this up and endlessly pursuing my arguement is becaus of your artical. What does the MWC want? They want the tag of BCS. And if they get BCS status then surely it can affect our league in many ways.

All I saw was purple

by crazidawg on Mar 7, 2009 7:59 PM PST up reply actions  

Not Big Markets?

WOW! Dawgfan I think you dropped the ball on “neither one of those teams are from big markets”. Utah is right smack dab in the middle of Salt Lake City, a major metro area, capital of the state, and major air terminal. BYU has a HUGE fanbase- currently the mormon church is the second largest religion in the country. We’re talking nation-wide fanbase. Provo is a short jaunt south from SLC. Not a major market? Clearly you have not traveled thru Utah lately.

Now if you want to talk about not being major makets how about Oregon (Eugene, OR), Oregon State (Corvallis, OR), and lowly Washington State (Pullman, WA). Those don’t seem like major markets to me. They would if we were talking about a truck stop or a feedlot but were not- were talking about major college athletics. Both Utah and BYU’s stadiums seat 60,00 plus fans. That’s more then Autzen, Reser, and Martin.

How would USC or Ucla look at expanding to include Utah and BYU? I’m quite confident they like to get off their flight in Seattle w/ a 10 minute bus ride to the UofW. But do they like going to Washington State? Get off their flight and bus it for 100 + miles to Pullman. If the Pac 10 added Utah and BYU the travel expenditure would be the equivelent of flying into Seattle, San Fran, LA, and Pheonix. Makes perfect sense to me.

All I saw was purple

by crazidawg on Mar 7, 2009 7:55 PM PST up reply actions  

Good points crazi

It is all about the number of TV sets in the market…not fans in the seats.

by John Berkowitz on Mar 7, 2009 7:57 PM PST up reply actions  

Then again...

The Pac 10 would have total control of college football west of the Rocky Mountains. That is all of California, Arizona, Oregon, Washington, Utah, and even Montana, Idaho, and Nevada. That’s a lot of television sets!

All I saw was purple

by crazidawg on Mar 7, 2009 8:07 PM PST up reply actions  

Not as many TV sets as you think

It is all about TV sets

California 33,871,648
Arizona 6,338,755
Washington 5,894,121
Colorado 4,301,261
Oregon 3,790,060
Utah 2,736,424
Nevada 2,495,529
Idaho 1,293,953
Hawaii 1,283,388

by John Berkowitz on Mar 7, 2009 8:08 PM PST up reply actions  

I think more people live in Ballard than in Montana

OK…I am exagerating.

Montana 902,195
New Mexico 1,819,046

The Pac 10 would be interested in Texas and all those TV sets.

Texas 23,904,380

by John Berkowitz on Mar 7, 2009 8:11 PM PST up reply actions  

It would work with the right marketing strategy

Such as a rotating conference championsip venues. Our Pac 10 championship games can rotate between

Los Angelas- push LA to build a new state of the art pro football stadium
San Francisco
Portland- no football championship, but host a basketball tournament
Seattle- push Seattle to build a new state of the art pro basketball arena
Pheonix
Salt Lake City- no football championship, but host a basketball tournament

I think what kills our Pac 10 basketball tournament held at the Staples Center is that nobody shows up and the seats are empty. Put it in Seattle, Portland, or Pheonix and you’ll get larger turnouts.

All I saw was purple

by crazidawg on Mar 7, 2009 8:19 PM PST up reply actions  

Hypothetical Pac 10 Expansion Draft

Texas is a huge market, but if the Pac 10 moves forward in expansion- we aren’t getting the Longhorns nor the Aggies. Texas and Oklahoma have ties and Texas A&M have ties to Texas. Texas isn’t going to give up their rival to Oklahoma and A&M isn’t going to give up their rival with Texas. So the Longhorns and Aggies will not be considered.

That leaves us with Texas Tech, Rice, SMU, Houston, Baylor, and UTEP. Seems to me like along way to go just for the efforts of expanding into the LoneStar state. And if we did expand to include say UTEP and Texas Tech how long will it take for them to not feel like the unwanted stepchild or barrowed money? For years Arizona and Arizona State were thought about this way. Penn State doesn’t have a natural rivalry with any of the Big Ten members. Region plays a significant part in order for the league to be viable. The Big Ten has made it work, but I personally feel as if Penn State would be a better fit in the Big East.

To make it work would require marketing. Why didn’t a 16 team MWC work? Because none of the teams they expanded with were viable and it kills all effort if you are not a BCS league. This is what the MWC really wants- they don’t want to expand and they don’t want a playoff. What they want is the tag “BCS” attached to their league. I can guarrentee you if that ever happens (and it could) then surely the MWC would expand to 12. Boise State, Fresno State, along w/ Nevada are viable- especially BSU and Fresno.

Boise State, Fresno State, and Nevada are small scale universities. The big fish in the MWC are Utah and BYU. Getting both Utah and BYU would completely destroy the MWC and WAC forever competing on the same scale as the Pac 10- FOREVER!

I want a super conference of 12 members, but how do you align the league so it has shelf life? Geographically it would look like this:

North Division
Washington
Oregon
Oregon State
Washington State
California
Stanford

South Division:
USC
Ucla
Arizona State
Arizona
Utah
BYU

This wouldn’t work, because USC and Ucla would be crying about a power struggle. Would it be fair to Arizona and Arizona State to have to go thru both USC and Ucla? Since we have traditional in-state rivalries, I say we use that in terms of aligning our 12 member Pac 12 league as such

UCLA is north of USC
USC is south of Ucla
Washington is north of Washington State
Washington State is south of Washington
Oregon State is north of Oregon
Oregon is south of Oregon State
California is north of Stanford
Stanford is south of California
Arizona State is north of Arizona
Arizona is south of Arizona State
Utah is north of BYU
BYU is south of Utah

So we’d have…

Pac 12 North Division
UCLA
Washington
Oregon State
California
Arizona State
Utah

Pac 12 South Divsion
USC
Washington State
Oregon
Stanford
Arizona
BYU

Notice how the league is not mixed geographically? This is done to so that the league is not seperated geographically from state to state. Rather it is seperated by their own in-state rivalry, and the league has tremendous balance.

Key notes:
1) last game of the regular season would be the in-state rivalry game.
2) Equal balance between the North and South Divisions.
3) Pac 12 league championship games would have rotating venues to keep the league fresh and marketable.

Pac 12 Basketball Tournament Host Sites
year 1: Los Angelas, home of the NBA’s Lakers
year 2: Pheonix, home of the NBA’s Suns
year 3: Salt Lake City, home of the NBA’s Jazz
year 4: Seattle, home of the NBA’s Sonics*
year 5: Portland, home of the NBA’s Blazers
year 6: San Francisco, home of the NBA’s Warriors
year 7: back to LA, PHX, SLC, SEA, PTL, SF…

  • New professional basketball arena is required and if not built, would forfeit their year to host the Pac 12 conference tournament.

Pac 12 Conference Championship (football) Game sites
year 1: Los Angelas*
year 2: Pheonix, home of the NFL’s Cardinals
year 3: Seattle, home of the NFL’s Seahawks
year 4: San Francisco/Oakland, home of the 49ers or Raiders

Salt Lake City and Portland would not be earmarked to host a Pac 12 football championship- no site available.

  • LA could host a Pac 12 championship if a pro football stadium is built, a site in San Diego could be an alternate site until project is complete.

This idea would be HUGE for the Pac 10. Everybody back East is marveling about how the Pac 10 schedules basketball. We could take that approach a step further and blend it in with a 12 member league. A legue formed not by region, but formed by each schools north/south relationship between the rivaling schools. The Pac 12 viewership would grow beyond the traditional Pac 10 borders. Utah would become a Pac 12 state and with Nevada caught right in the middle, we could corner those tv markets as well as Idaho and Montana.

This thing would be a gold mine!

All I saw was purple

by crazidawg on Mar 8, 2009 9:30 AM PST up reply actions  

Yeah I read about this a couple days ago

There was also some criteria that conferences had to schedule at least 20 games against other BCS conferences and win 40% of them to become BCS eligible.

Ultimately, this is just another pipe dream that won’t happen though.

http://www.spartyandfriends.com/

by thecassino on Mar 7, 2009 11:26 AM PST reply actions  

Excellent

 ….article John! I think you nailed it. I also think the comments by crazidawg were on the mark. Progressive thinking is important in this day and age and those are some good points crazi. I hope the Pac 10 is thinking ahead in these matters. I haven’t heard anything myself regarding expansion but I’m sure it would be kept quiet until close to being done anyway. Have you heard anything in this area John? BYU and Utah make alot of sense to me too for the same reasons.

by Dawgs71 on Mar 7, 2009 1:07 PM PST reply actions  

Good!

can’t stand oregon but if they win they help the DAWGS!!

Washington Husky Football-1991 National Champions

by dawgfan22 on Mar 7, 2009 1:18 PM PST up reply actions  

The Pac 10 isn't interested in expansion

The schools that would be logical candidates would siphon off revenue rather than add to it. The Pac 10 will only expand if the members can make more money not less. Another problem is splitting the league into divisions and the elimination of everyone playing each other every single year. Championship games have proven to be big revenue makers in other parts of the country but since the Pac 10 is so spread out geographically they don’t think it would make much sense.

by John Berkowitz on Mar 7, 2009 1:18 PM PST reply actions  

Staples Center

Nice big market arena, but the seats are empty. What makes the game viable is attendence. You hold the Pac 10 Tournament in places like Pheonix, Portland, and Seattle and you’ve got more fans that will attend. LAers just want to see USC and Ucla play- that’s cool. But how many fans outside of LA would pay to see the Bruins or anybody else play?

They need a differnt venue and I like a rotating venue between LA, Pheonix, Seattle, Portland, and the Bay Area.

All I saw was purple

by crazidawg on Mar 8, 2009 11:36 AM PDT up reply actions  

Just like the basketball tournament?

No reasont hat the basketball tournament shouldn’t be rotated but FOX mandates that it stays in LA. The same thing would happen with football. that late in the season you wouldn’t want it in the Northwest anyway.

by John Berkowitz on Mar 7, 2009 8:30 PM PST reply actions  

Disagree!

How cool would it be to see USC vs. Washington or Arizona State vs. Ucla in the Pac 10 Conference championship game played at Quest Field?

See this is what really ticks me off! Football was never invented to be a “perfect” sport. You have fowl weather, bad calls, and an imperfect (oblong) sphere of a ball. This is why the NFL got away from the crappy dome stadiums. Football is good when played in fowl weather- that’s what it’s all about. This line of argument is suited for the Soutern football playing states- USC, Ucla, ASU, Arizona, Texas, LSU, Florida, Florida State, Miami, Alabama, and Georgia. No wonder the Big 10 is struggling to get kids to play or that basically the entire northern hemisphere can’t compete with the southern hemisphere teams.

What it comes down to is football is football and weather (good or bad) is all part of the experience. We’ve got technology now that can keep the playing field free of debris (snow)- so what’s the problem? The fans? Ever hear of seat warmers? Football in the snow is everything that is good about the American sport. One of the most electrifying Apple Cups was the Snow Bowl in Pullman a few years ago. People still talk about that game. Snow is an after thought. The people who complain are the media personel. Because the fan loves it and the players love it.

All I saw was purple

by crazidawg on Mar 8, 2009 11:46 AM PDT up reply actions  

Interesting, very interesting

I agree with John, there is no reason for the Pac10 to worry about the MWC, and no reason to expand. It’s all about money and there isn’t any more money in it for us.

Championship Games – Bad idea, would you want to see UCLA play Oregon State at Qwest Field in December? Not me, and definitely not anybody from Arizona, or probably even Corvallis. How many people in LA would turn out to see WSU and OSU?

I love the idea of a playoff, but I’m not fond of the idea of a 12 person committee. Notre Dame would make it far more often then they deserve. The only way to make it truly fair, 6 spots go to BCS conference champions with the other 2 going as at large bids (and I really don’t care how those are given out, I’m sure somebody can come up with a good system).

Win or go home, it’s how sports are meant to be played.

"Bow Down to Washington"
"Kick the tires and light the fires!"

by Lear Pilot on Mar 8, 2009 5:59 PM PDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the UW Dawg Pound, an unofficial site for Washington Husky fans.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Learjet31a_1_jpg_small
Question of the Day:
T9odawgtest_small
A few Spring Game thoughts.
P1010006_small
Who Said College Basketball Recruiting was Supposed to be Clean?
Dubs_close_small
The Future Of Husky Basketball
Small
Updated: Arizona loses at home, Cal faceplants in style.
Dubs_close_small
PAC 12 Pickem Final Results
Dubs_close_small
UW Dawg Pound Tournament Challenge
Small
PAC 12 Tournament Tickets
Dubs_close_small
PAC 12 Pickem Results/Conference Tournament Schedule
Dubs_close_small
Tournament Challenge

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Managers

1959_huskies_small John Berkowitz

Dubs_small thecassino

Editors

W_logo_small kirkd

New_picture_small Gekko Mojo

Beastquakerwallpaper_small Ben Knibbe

Profpic_small JLee2025

Authors

Learjet31a_1_jpg_small Lear Pilot

Dubs_close_small CODawg

Coda_head_shot_250_small S_o_Smith

2721_small ToddWilliams206

P1010006_small Randall Floyd