The REAL way to use expansion to crack the BCS

[gmj81]

The TV money these teams are receiving, while insignificant compared to most BCS teams' but certainly more than any other non-BCS team, may be the only thing is keeping some of these teams afloat right now. Splitting it another way may put them in a hole financially . They may not want to vote for that without the guarantee that it will produce more revenue in the future.

[Sammich]

You see, at the end of the day, I'm a BYU fan, NOT a MWC fan (and not a recently-out-of-the-closet-Donkey-Lover like those who shall remain nameless)! I want what's best for the Cougs.

And what's best for the Coug's isn't to get another super-tough in-conference game. What's best for the Cougs is addressing the conference strength issues from the mid-tier teams.

I tend to feel the same way and that's why I'm nervous about the idea of adding BSU. If adding strong middle-tier teams improves the strength and rankings of the conference, I'd prefer that to having to play another game like TCU or Utah each year.

[BerliNY]

Interesting point, and a good one at that. So do we raid the WAC for Nevada and/or Fresno and leave Boise where they are? It might just be crazy enough to work.

[Mars]

I understand, a lot of BYU fans would rather finish first in a non-BCS MWC than 2nd in a BCS MWC. There's a tradeoff there. But I, for one, don't like sacrificing money and competition for security, being the big fish in the smaller pond.

[Y 4 Ever]

I understand, a lot of BYU fans would rather finish first in a non-BCS MWC than 2nd in a BCS MWC. There's a tradeoff there. But I, for one, don't like sacrificing money and competition for security, being the big fish in the smaller pond.

A. How much of that money will hit your pockets?

B. if the numbers that were shown are accurate, adding teams like Houston and Fresno vs. Boise will have equal effects, but will leave less competition at the top of the league. The ONLY way Boise should get an invite is if the BCS says "add Boise and you're in". Otherwise, add GOOD teams that would fill in next to AFA. Again, if it bolsters that one requirement that we are lacking on - the LOWER HALF of the league (and NOT the top!)

[Mars]

A. How much of that money will hit your pockets?

B. if the numbers that were shown are accurate, adding teams like Houston and Fresno vs. Boise will have equal effects, but will leave less competition at the top of the league. The ONLY way Boise should get an invite is if the BCS says "add Boise and you're in". Otherwise, add GOOD teams that would fill in next to AFA. Again, if it bolsters that one requirement that we are lacking on - the LOWER HALF of the league (and NOT the top!)

A. It will hit the pockets of: The basketball teams, volleyball, soccer, baseball, etc. It would have a great affect on all of our sports programs.

B. Adding Houston or Fresno is equal to adding Boise? Really? You still are looking at this emotionally and not mathematically. That comment makes no sense. That's like saying playing Portland State adds as much beef to an OOC schedule as playing Oregon. It's nonsensical. And it's still ignoring the fact that in-conference playing is worth zero.

C. The BCS isn't a godfather figure that delivers messages, like "do this and you're in". You don't seem to understand the concept at all. It's an equation that you have to fit, and there's guesswork involved in expansion, at least for 2 of the 4 year period. What isn't unknown, is how high BSU's numbers have been each of the past 2 years, and how low Houston and Fresno have been by comparison.

[cscoug]

You see, at the end of the day, I'm a BYU fan, NOT a MWC fan (and not a recently-out-of-the-closet-Donkey-Lover like those who shall remain nameless)! I want what's best for the Cougs.

And what's best for the Coug's isn't to get another super-tough in-conference game.

This seems very contradictory to me. At the end of the day, being in a BCS conference is what is best for BYU--for the the money, for the exposure, for the opportunities. Whether that is a tougher, expanded MWC that qualifies for inclusion or being added to another conference that is qualified, BYU will face tougher competition in their conference, and nobody will care because winning those games will get us more recognition, more high-profile games, and better postseason opportunities. So being a fan of BYU means being a fan of the MWC or holding out hope that some conference will overlook our Sunday-play policy, our perceived lowered academics, or our lack of national clout to invite us to their conference. Making it in the MWC seems more plausible, and because of that I am a huge MWC fan--for BYU's sake!

[Mars]

This seems very contradictory to me. At the end of the day, being in a BCS conference is what is best for BYU--for the the money, for the exposure, for the opportunities. Whether that is a tougher, expanded MWC that qualifies for inclusion or being added to another conference that is qualified, BYU will face tougher competition in their conference, and nobody will care because winning those games will get us more recognition, more high-profile games, and better postseason opportunities. So being a fan of BYU means being a fan of the MWC or holding out hope that some conference will overlook our Sunday-play policy, our perceived lowered academics, or our lack of national clout to invite us to their conference. Making it in the MWC seems more plausible, and because of that I am a huge MWC fan--for BYU's sake!

Thank you! The reason found in your post is refreshing.

The same people who wouldn't want to see Boise State added to the MWC in order to gain BCS status for the conference because it would become to tough to win, would jump in an instant if there was a chance that BYU could join the PAC-10 or Big XII, which would be incredibly more difficult. Which is pretty funny.

[Y 4 Ever]

The same people who wouldn't want to see Boise State added to the MWC in order to gain BCS status for the conference because it would become to tough to win, would jump in an instant if there was a chance that BYU could join the PAC-10 or Big XII, which would be incredibly more difficult. Which is pretty funny. [/color]

Once again, Mars, you see only what you want to see, and you hear only what you want to hear. The nature of your posts suggests that you still haven't caught on to the main premise of my original post:

If the BCS formula for inclusion doesn't mandate bringing in a team like Boise in order to become an AQ conference, then DON'T DO IT.

Your words "The same people who wouldn't want to see Boise State added to the MWC in order to gain BCS status for the conference because it would become to tough to win blah blah blah" demonstrate your lack of comprehension of the matter at hand.

I'll speak slowly and plainly this time. if the BCS committee specifically says "add Boise and you're in", then by all means, ADD YOUR BELOVED DONKEY'S!

But if the matter at hand is truly the MIDDLE and LOWER tiers of the conference, then adding Boise doesn't do ANY more good than adding Houston, or Fresno. In fact, these other two schools would be BETTER, because they are in larger markets.

Sure adding Boise to the conference would have this same effect - by pushing one of BSU, BYU, , or TCU down to the "middle" every year. But why do that?

Again, the whole premise of my post is about the MWC BECOMING a BCS auto qualifying conference, but doing so WITHOUT adding Boise.

And yet, for some reason, you seem to think this post is about A) this was an "I don't want BYU to be in a BCS conference", and/or B) "I'm afraid of Mar's Donkey's".

You see, it seems we both have the same goal - make the MWC a BCS AQ conference. But I believe this can be accomplished by adding strong teams to the MIDDLE of the conference, while for some reason you seem to believe the ONLY way the MWC will ever achieve AQ status is by adding the Dirty Donkeys.

So quit pretending like myself and the other posters on this topic who agree with me DON'T want to see the MWC become a BCS level league. By doing so, you are ignoring the entire basis of the original post.

[scott715]

Mathematically, BSU has more wins than any other team and would do more to raise the overall team ranking. It might play out that the MWC needs to move to 12 teams (Houston and someone else) to raise the overall ranking high enough to get into the BCS.