So if UCLA wins

[ImperialOrange]

do they get the Pac12 BCS autobid?

The thought of a UCLA vs Louisville BCS game is awesome.

 

[Frozen]

do they get the Pac12 BCS autobid?

The thought of a UCLA vs Louisville BCS game is awesome.

Yes. That's the double-edged sword of conference championship games. A non-BCS conference like C-USA, for example, has a great shot of having Houston play in the Sugar Bowl. But if UH is upset by Southern Miss in their conference championship game, they lose the BCS bowl spot and the money that comes with it.

 

[Orangemen]

The Big 12 agrees with this whole heartedly.

 

[Orangello]

Yes. I was just about to post this as a contratemp to the "BE should lose its AQ status" thread.

Likewise, LSU and Bama will play for the NC despite both of them (Bama can't) possibly not even winning the SEC title if Georgia beats LSU (unlikely).

 

[Nate44]

do they get the Pac12 BCS autobid?

The thought of a UCLA vs Louisville BCS game is awesome.

I don't think those two could play each other. I;m pretty UCLA gets the rose bowl if they win and they'd play the winner of the B1G champ game. But either way, those teams playing in the BCS games over Arkansas is such a joke.

 

[cuseincincy]

Yes. I was just about to post this as a contratemp to the "BE should lose its AQ status" thread.

Likewise, LSU and Bama will play for the NC despite both of them (Bama can't) possibly not even winning the SEC title if Georgia beats LSU (unlikely).

Personally, I have no interst in watching a LSU - Alabama repeat. None. Last time they combined for 5 field goals. I don't care how good the defense is, you've got to be able to score

 

[IthacaBarrel]

when your conference game has a point spread of 31 points, something has gone wrong. Isn't this a case of USC not being able to play

 

[ImperialOrange]

when your conference game has a point spread is 31 points, something has gone wrong. Isn't this a case of USC not being able to play

Yeah that and the conference split being way too heavy in the North division. PAC12 is set up to have USC in the title game every year.

 

[ImperialOrange]

I don't think those two could play each other. I;m pretty UCLA gets the rose bowl if they win and they'd play the winner of the B1G champ game. But either way, those teams playing in the BCS games over Arkansas is such a joke.

I'm sure you're right if was just for comedy sake.

The fun part will be if Georgia beats LSU. Will there then be 3 SEC teams in the BCS? Other conferences would go nuts.

 

[NovaOrange]

Personally, I have no interst in watching a LSU - Alabama repeat. None. Last time they combined for 5 field goals. I don't care how good the defense is, you've got to be able to score

I would tune in with out question those two teams this year are fun to watch. I could care less about watching a field goal battle it's better then watching LSU tear apart Houston or Oklahoma State IMO

 

[cuseincincy]

I would tune in with out question those two teams this year are fun to watch. I could care less about watching a field goal battle it's better then watching LSU tear apart Houston or Oklahoma State IMO

Personally I think the BCS missed the boat. 2 teams from the same conference should never get to play for the national championship in football. (especially if neither wins their conference championship!) Unless there is a playoff. The fact is for the most part all LSU and ALA have done is play and beat the same teams. I know LSU beat Oregon and ALA beat Penn State but that is not much of a reference sample. It's not like basketball (or any other sport including football at any other level!)where there is a tournament they advance through. It's primarily based on opinion. If you're not the best team in your conference you lose. I want a 7-6 and 7-5 UCLA and Louisville in the BCS. I really do this year.

 

[NovaOrange]

Personally I think the BCS missed the boat. 2 teams from the same conference should never get to play for the national championship in football. (especially if neither wins their conference championship!) Unless there is a playoff. The fact is for the most part all LSU and ALA have done is play and beat the same teams. I know LSU beat Oregon and ALA beat Penn State but that is not much of a reference sample. It's not like basketball (or any other sport including football at any other level!)where there is a tournament they advance through. It's primarily based on opinion. If you're not the best team in your conference you lose. I want a 7-6 and 7-5 UCLA and Louisville in the BCS. I really do this year.

lol dear god I wouldn't tune in for that game (UCLA Louisville) but I get your point. I am just tired of watching blow outs in the BCS bowl games. I think we all can agree that college football needs a playoff system badly. There is nothing wrong with have a 10 team playoff system with the top 2 teams getting a bye. Then you could still have all of the papa john's/tire bowls you please with the teams left out of the top 10.

 

[Orangello]

I'm sure you're right if was just for comedy sake.

The fun part will be if Georgia beats LSU. Will there then be 3 SEC teams in the BCS? Other conferences would go nuts.

Yep, if the Dogs beat LSU they, LSU and Bama will be in the BCS. Delaney's head would explode.

 

[SWC75]

Yep, if the Dogs beat LSU they, LSU and Bama will be in the BCS. Delaney's head would explode.

Imagine leaving Alabama out of the BCS. Think of all the exploded heads then.

 

[SWC75]

Yeah that and the conference split being way too heavy in the North division. PAC12 is set up to have USC in the title game every year.

The logical split was: The Washington teams, the Oregon teams, Colorado and Utah in the North. The California and Arizona teams in the South.

But logic and NCAA football are not bedfellows.

Which does not bode well for a North-South split in the ACC.

 

[bnoro]

I

Yep, if the Dogs beat LSU they, LSU and Bama will be in the BCS. Delaney's head would explode.

If LSU loses to Georgia, they won't play in the NC. This means only one other SEC team can play in the BCS. The SEC's only representatives if they don't have two in the NC would be LSU and Bama

 

[Scooch]

The logical split was: The Washington teams, the Oregon teams, Colorado and Utah in the North. The California and Arizona teams in the South.

But logic and NCAA football are not bedfellows.

Which does not bode well for a North-South split in the ACC.

I think their split makes total sense. Cal and Stanford are as much tied to the Pacific Northwest schools culturally as they are to the southern California schools. And it makes more sense for the mountain/desert schools to be together than it does to have the desert/northern cali schools together.

The problem is that right now you have schools like Stanford and Cal being strong, which isn't the usual case historically. And you have Arizona and Arizona State in a downcycle, which makes the South that much weaker than normal.

Over time this will balance out. There will be years down the road when the South is stronger and the North is weaker. That's how divisions go.

The challenge for the ACC is that the three of the four "biggest" football schools historically are in what would be a "south" division (FSU, Clemson, Miami). That's relatively persistent and a problem. The Pac-12 thing is more cyclical.

 

[Orangemen]

The logical split was: The Washington teams, the Oregon teams, Colorado and Utah in the North. The California and Arizona teams in the South.

But logic and NCAA football are not bedfellows.

Which does not bode well for a North-South split in the ACC.

I think everyone wanted a foothold in California.

The recruiting ground is too fertile to pass up.

 

[Millhouse]

I think their split makes total sense. Cal and Stanford are as much tied to the Pacific Northwest schools culturally as they are to the southern California schools. And it makes more sense for the mountain/desert schools to be together than it does to have the desert/northern cali schools together.

The problem is that right now you have schools like Stanford and Cal being strong, which isn't the usual case historically. And you have Arizona and Arizona State in a downcycle, which makes the South that much weaker than normal.

Over time this will balance out. There will be years down the road when the South is stronger and the North is weaker. That's how divisions go.

The challenge for the ACC is that the three of the four "biggest" football schools historically are in what would be a "south" division (FSU, Clemson, Miami). That's relatively persistent and a problem. The Pac-12 thing is more cyclical.

part of the reason conferences should want to get to 16 is that it makes terrible championship matchups less likely. the smaller the divisions, the more likely you get a stinker matchup

 

[Scooch]

part of the reason conferences should want to get to 16 is that it makes terrible championship matchups less likely. the smaller the divisions, the more likely you get a stinker matchup

True. Although in this case it's just because USC is on probation. Otherwise an Oregon/USC champ game is EXACTLY what Larry Scott has been having wet dreams about for a few years.

 

[Millhouse]

True. Although in this case it's just because USC is on probation. Otherwise an Oregon/USC champ game is EXACTLY what Larry Scott has been having wet dreams about for a few years.

yeah, i was thinking as much about the nfl with 7-9 playoff teams.

 

[cuseincincy]

I
If LSU loses to Georgia, they won't play in the NC. This means only one other SEC team can play in the BCS. The SEC's only representatives if they don't have two in the NC would be LSU and Bama

Not sure what you're saying...If LSU loses to Georgia, Georgia gets the SEC auto bid. If that happens the only way LSU and Bama both make it is if they are in the NC game. If LSU does lose, I would bet major money (where's the deed to the house honey?) that LSU would remain #1. They played a tougher schedule and beat Bama at Bama. The only possibility of change would be is OK St blows out Oklahoma in impressive fashion. IMO that still wouldn't be enough. To highlight the folly of the BCS, 2 of the top 4 are not even in their own conference championship game. I am all in for Georgia, UCLA, Houston, Clemson and Louisville crashing the party this year, add that to a re-match between LSU and Bama and you've got a BCS mess.

 

[Scooch]

Not sure what you're saying...If LSU loses to Georgia, Georgia gets the SEC auto bid. If that happens the only way LSU and Bama both make it is if they are in the NC game. If LSU does lose, I would bet major money (where's the deed to the house honey?) that LSU would remain #1. They played a tougher schedule and beat Bama at Bama. The only possibility of change would be is OK St blows out Oklahoma in impressive fashion. IMO that still wouldn't be enough. To highlight the folly of the BCS, 2 of the top 4 are not even in their own conference championship game. I am all in for Georgia, UCLA, Houston, Clemson and Louisville crashing the party this year, add that to a re-match between LSU and Bama and you've got a BCS mess.

See, people always say stuff like this, but it misses the point of the BCS. The BCS is supposed to "select" the two best teams, over the course of the entire season, to play for the national title. If conferences have wacky rules, or divisional set-ups, that cause one of those 2 teams to not be playing for their championship that's besides the point.

 

[bnoro]

Ok forgot about the Auto-bid. If Georgia wins, the higher ranked team of LSU and Alabama, which would probably be Bama, would be the second SEC rep. LSU wouldn't get in in that scenario.

The BCS rules say unless there are two teams from one conference in the NC, there can only be two bowl representatives. If there is a 1-2 championship between two teams in one conference, a 3rd can get a berth in another game.

I doubt LSU would remain #1 in the BCS standings. I'd put money on that. Okie St. would probably play Bama in the National championship, which would be very interesting.

 

[lvilleorange]

This is just the first weekend of bowl games. Meaningless exhibitions played before mostly empty stadiums.