For those jumping off the ledge

[Metropolis777]

Everyone seems to forget that the MWC added the only obstacle to the champ going to a BCS game every year to the fray last Friday - Boise St. Are we still missing out on the prestige, TV money, and bowl money but not being an "auto" conference? Of course.

But, a 1 loss or even 2 loss MWC champion will be in the top 12/16 and in front of the rest of the non-AQ champs nearly every year. This will be the case even if Utah leaves. About the only kind of team that would be ranked in front of us would be an undefeated Houston, Fresno, or East Carolina with the kind of OOC scheduling they do. Let's face it. Those teams don't have the firepower to go undefeated with those schedules. Hell, the only 1 loss team to come out of CUSA, MAC, Sun Belt, or the WAC remnants since the first realignment in 2005 was Ball State and they spent their entire undefeated streak BEHIND a 2 loss TCU.

What am I saying? Even if the MWC loses Utah, we're going to be fine and the champion - even with 1 loss - will be going to a BCS game every year.

 

[geefrogs]

+111111111111

 

[tcuball3]

words

 

[Merch Frog]

And when the MWC loses Utah, BYU and Air Force, I'll save a spot for you on the ledge.

 

[Salfrog]

QUOTE(Metropolis777 @ Jun 15 2010, 04:27 AM) [snapback]579282[/snapback]
Everyone seems to forget that the MWC added the only obstacle to the champ going to a BCS game every year to the fray last Friday - Boise St. Are we still missing out on the prestige, TV money, and bowl money but not being an "auto" conference? Of course.

But, a 1 loss or even 2 loss MWC champion will be in the top 12/16 and in front of the rest of the non-AQ champs nearly every year. This will be the case even if Utah leaves. About the only kind of team that would be ranked in front of us would be an undefeated Houston, Fresno, or East Carolina with the kind of OOC scheduling they do. Let's face it. Those teams don't have the firepower to go undefeated with those schedules. Hell, the only 1 loss team to come out of CUSA, MAC, Sun Belt, or the WAC remnants since the first realignment in 2005 was Ball State and they spent their entire undefeated streak BEHIND a 2 loss TCU.

What am I saying? Even if the MWC loses Utah, we're going to be fine and the champion - even with 1 loss - will be going to a BCS game every year.



Did we get this in writing and notarized. I don't trust any verbal agreements from the BCS.

 

[BABYFACE]

The de facto reasoning was one I was preaching 6 months ago, but few bought into then. Maybe the thought process here has changed. You know I am on board with this.

 

[halfwaytoheaven]

But we'll still be sharing the loot with four other conferences.

 

[BABYFACE]

QUOTE(halfwaytoheaven @ Jun 14 2010, 11:43 PM) [snapback]579310[/snapback]
But we'll still be sharing the loot with four other conferences.


Yep, and you know that ain't right.

 

[Dogfrog]

QUOTE(halfwaytoheaven @ Jun 14 2010, 11:43 PM) [snapback]579310[/snapback]
But we'll still be sharing the loot with four other conferences.


it sucks, isn't fair and needs to change, but this is the aspect I spend the least time worrying about. TCU operates efficiently and the applications our football program generate bring in revenue and improve our academic standing. Just give our student athletes an equal opportunity to determine their fate on the field.

 

[Nick Danger]

QUOTE(Metropolis777 @ Jun 14 2010, 11:27 PM) [snapback]579282[/snapback]
Everyone seems to forget that the MWC added the only obstacle to the champ going to a BCS game every year to the fray last Friday - Boise St. Are we still missing out on the prestige, TV money, and bowl money but not being an "auto" conference? Of course.

But, a 1 loss or even 2 loss MWC champion will be in the top 12/16 and in front of the rest of the non-AQ champs nearly every year. This will be the case even if Utah leaves. About the only kind of team that would be ranked in front of us would be an undefeated Houston, Fresno, or East Carolina with the kind of OOC scheduling they do. Let's face it. Those teams don't have the firepower to go undefeated with those schedules. Hell, the only 1 loss team to come out of CUSA, MAC, Sun Belt, or the WAC remnants since the first realignment in 2005 was Ball State and they spent their entire undefeated streak BEHIND a 2 loss TCU.

What am I saying? Even if the MWC loses Utah, we're going to be fine and the champion - even with 1 loss - will be going to a BCS game every year.

Yeah, but will recruits actually buy that! They haven't up to this point and we'll keep getting hit with the rather imprecise "non-BCS" thing over and over again until we officially get that AQ status "Seal of Approval".

 

[gohornedfrogs]

Not sure if this is as great as you project. BOTH TCU and Boise State went to BCS games last year, and there's a good chance of that happening again this year.

When they join our conference, we'll be looking at one spot at best. There's now a good chance that no one from the MWC will go to a BCS game, especially if Utah stays. It's quite likely that there will be a few years that everyone in the league will have at least two losses.

I've maintained for several years that adding Boise State was only a good thing if we were guaranteed a BCS spot. We may have pulled the trigger a little too early on this one...

 

[weklfrog]

and if we don't make a BCS Bowl, we still end up in the Poinsetta Bowl before Christmas.

 

[fdub]

QUOTE(Metropolis777 @ Jun 14 2010, 11:27 PM) [snapback]579282[/snapback]
a 1 loss or even 2 loss MWC champion will be in the top 12/16 and in front of the rest of the non-AQ champs nearly every year.


maybe. We'll see;
I'll sleep a whole lot easier if that 1-loss champ has an autobid, though.

Besides, autobids are worth twice as much money as at-large bids.

 

[Gunner]

Well, if we go undefeated again this year, by no means a certainty, there will only be one year where all 3 teams, TCU, BYU, and Boise could likely lose a game or two. Then the BCS whores can put the MWC in the automatic, assuming they don't start lying again and change the rules.

 

[Duquesne Frog]

QUOTE(gohornedfrogs @ Jun 15 2010, 08:26 AM) [snapback]579397[/snapback]
Not sure if this is as great as you project. BOTH TCU and Boise State went to BCS games last year, and there's a good chance of that happening again this year.

When they join our conference, we'll be looking at one spot at best. There's now a good chance that no one from the MWC will go to a BCS game, especially if Utah stays. It's quite likely that there will be a few years that everyone in the league will have at least two losses.

I've maintained for several years that adding Boise State was only a good thing if we were guaranteed a BCS spot. We may have pulled the trigger a little too early on this one...

And there is so much faith in some sort of BCS autobid rules permanence as though there isn't a significant possibility that the BCS Gods will use this realignment, even if it stays in the relatively minor fashion that it now appears to be for now, to change those rules. We are not working with the Constitution here ...

 

[Frognosticator]

QUOTE(Duquesne Frog @ Jun 15 2010, 09:54 AM) [snapback]579455[/snapback]
And there is so much faith in some sort of BCS autobid rules permanence as though there isn't a significant possibility that the BCS Gods will use this realignment, even if it stays in the relatively minor fashion that it now appears to be for now, to change those rules. We are not working with the Constitution here ...


Duq, TCU was 1 second from playing in the National championship game last year. We're getting respect. Utah has gained respect. Boise certainly has respect. BYU also has tons of respect. A conference with these 4 members will be more respected than the Big East and ACC by far. With NU and CU gone from the Big XII, they're down to a two team conference again (UT and OU). If Utah can stay, we're talking about SEC, PAC-10, Big 12, Big 10 and MWC as the nations best conferences. Plus, the Fiesta bowl last year had better ratings than the Sugar and Orange bowls. We're sure to get an autobid.

Utah, do the right thing. It will help you.

 

[KillerFrog InD KitchenSink]

Good post and while the last day reminded us of the inequality in terms of TV contracts, the inequality in terms of access to the BCS is not nearly as extreme. Sure we don't have a guaranteed spot, but if we are good (basically undefeated or one loss, maybe 2 losses in rare situations), we are in the BCS, period. And there is still a good shot that the BCS could grant us a waiver with Boise and us set up for big years in year 3 of th ecurrent cycle.

We really aren't in any different shape as a conference than we were 1 month ago. Disappointing we aren't in better shape, but the preexpansion narrative is the same.

 

[Dman890]

Nothing within this thread makes me feel better about our curren situation.

 

[FrogBones]

QUOTE(Merch Frog @ Jun 14 2010, 11:35 PM) [snapback]579298[/snapback]
And when the MWC loses Utah, BYU and Air Force, I'll save a spot for you on the ledge.

At the moment, which is the only way any of us can judge what is going on right now, this seems to have about a 0% chance of happening.

QUOTE(Nick Danger @ Jun 15 2010, 06:51 AM) [snapback]579384[/snapback]
Yeah, but will recruits actually buy that! They haven't up to this point and we'll keep getting hit with the rather imprecise "non-BCS" thing over and over again until we officially get that AQ status "Seal of Approval".


So, our recruits don't believe we can make a BCS game even though we already have? Recruits have bought it so far, and your tone suggests that our recruiting is inferior to BCS teams, which I hate to break it to you but our recruiting is better than most BCS teams, and forget rivals and all that bull our recruiting is doing just fine if you have paid attention to what has happened on the field for about the past, oh I don't know the last decade.