• New here? Register here now for access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Plus, stay connected and follow BP on Instagram @buckeyeplanet and Facebook.

Big (L)East BCS & No Respect - Wash Post

sandgk

Watson, Crick & A Twist
Man -you know your conference has reached a new low when BBoard epithets find their way into headlines from a major national broadsheet.

Big (L)east Conference looking like a BCS joke

By Jon Siegel
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
October 18, 2005


The Big East staged its unofficial championship football game Saturday when West Virginia rallied for a 46-44 triple-overtime win over Louisville. But this showdown with major Bowl Championship Series implications hardly made a ripple on the national TV scene, which focused on Southern Cal-Notre Dame. Even the Washington area did not get the game as the ABC affiliate (WJLA, Ch. 7) showed Penn State-Michigan instead.
In effect, the Big East has become a big afterthought. The conference might still have BCS status, but that has not saved it from a free fall.
West Virginia's victory was entertaining, but to suggest the Mountaineers are now in line for a top bowl is absurd. West Virginia was ranked 17th in the first BCS poll released yesterday. Each of the other five BCS leagues has at least two teams higher.
The poll provides the latest evidence of how ugly the revamped Big East has become following the losses of Miami, Virginia Tech and Boston College to the ACC. The conference appears likely to have about as much impact on the race for the national title as a squirt gun on a forest fire.
"We are literally in a state of flux," Big East commissioner Mike Tranghese said recently. "[Although] some people will just say I am trying to make excuses, that is just a fact. We lost three programs that are now ranked in the top 20."
The Big East responded to the ACC's raid by enticing Louisville, Cincinnati and South Florida from Conference USA, giving it eight members this season. Indeed, the emasculated league is up and running -- just not very well.
West Virginia, at No. 20, is the only ranked team. The Big East is in jeopardy of falling behind the non-BCS Mountain West Conference as the sixth-highest rated league. The Big East owns a 4-8 record against BCS teams, with the biggest win being West Virginia over Maryland.
Not that the Big East was expected to match the glory days when Miami and Virginia Tech slugged it out and competed for national titles. Instead, Louisville was supposed to become king of the lesser league while giving faltering programs like those at Syracuse and Pitt time to rebuild and young programs like Connecticut and South Florida a few seasons to emerge.
The Cardinals were to give the league at least some legitimacy in the face of mounting criticism that it had been allowed to keep its BCS bid despite its diminished status. The Big East is one of six BCS conferences -- along with the ACC, SEC, Big Ten, Big 12 and Pac 10 -- that earns an automatic bid to one of the top four bowls (Orange, Sugar, Rose and Fiesta). The berth means an excessive payout, millions more than those gained by champions of non-BCS leagues that are forced to settle for lesser bowls.
And the Big East's BCS status appears solid until reassessments are made following the 2009 season.
"They can talk all they want," Tranghese said with a nervous chuckle. "We are going [to a BCS bowl]. It's that simple. We got it. We think we have earned it."
But even with lower expectations, the Big East is not reaching them.


The league has suffered humiliating defeats like Ohio shocking Pitt and Miami of Ohio drubbing Cincinnati 44-16. It has merely an 18-12 record in nonconference games, including six victories over Division I-AA opponents like Wofford, Liberty and Youngstown State, and three over I-A laggard Buffalo.
And Louisville won't save the league either.
The Cardinals narrowly missed an at-large BCS bid last season when they went 12-1 with the only loss to Miami 41-38. This season the would-be new Big East bullies began the season in the top 10 amid some forecasts of an undefeated year. That was before Big East newcomer South Florida, a 20-point underdog, dropkicked the then-No. 9 Cardinals 45-14.
Asked how that defeat might affect the Big East's prestige, Louisville coach Bobby Petrino replied, "I couldn't tell you right now whether it is good or bad." He might have been the only one feeling that way.
"Short term, it may have been a negative for the league," Tranghese conceded. "Long term, I think and most of our members think that South Florida has a huge upside."
The Bulls, now 3-3 after losing to Pitt, provide some reason for optimism. Another rising program is Connecticut, which has a 4-2 record (2-1 in the Big East) in only its third Division I-A season. The Huskies already have conquered the league's soft middle with blowouts of Syracuse and Rutgers.
West Virginia (6-1, 3-0 Big East) showed it was not ready to join the elite with a 34-17 loss to former Big East member and third-ranked Virginia Tech at Mountaineer Field. Even South Florida (1-1 in the league) might compete for the watered-down crown, although the 8-year-old program is far from being the state's best team.
"Sometimes you wonder if [that challenge is] insurmountable," Bulls coach Jim Leavitt said, and that was before his team lost to No. 6 Miami 27-7.
The Big East was desperate to have a strong presence in the state after Miami's departure and is banking on the Bulls eventually challenging the Big Three of Florida, Florida State and Miami. But Leavitt knows he first must win a few off-field battles before crashing the party.
"We haven't been able to beat Miami in recruiting much," Leavitt said. "If Miami comes in and offers [scholarships], they are usually going to get [players] no matter how hard we try."
The league also hopes founding members with new coaches will rise to prominence. Syracuse (1-5, 0-3) is in its first season under former Texas co-defensive coordinator Greg Robinson. Pitt (3-4, 2-1) is hoping for a resurgence under ex-Miami Dolphins coach Dave Wannstedt.
However, the Panthers reflect how out of whack the Big East has become. Last season Pitt won the league's BCS bid, despite being ranked 21st in the BCS standings, and fired coach Walt Harris. The Panthers played Utah, which became the first non-BCS member by finishing sixth in the BCS standings, in the Fiesta Bowl. The Mountain West's Utes, under current Florida coach Urban Meyer, routed Pitt 35-7.
"Last year was bad for everybody," Tranghese said. "We had a league, but it was a year of limbo. Temple [which was kicked out because of poor play, facilities and attendance] was leaving. Boston College was leaving. We were bringing in new members. Connecticut was rushed in a year early so we would have competition. It was a very, very bizarre football season."
This season the conference can't use the same excuse although results have been similar. The Big East's roster is now set for the foreseeable future, but the embarrassing losses keep coming as it continues to be stuck in a credibility crisis.
"We are going to have to win some quality nonconference games this year and next year," Tranghese said. "That is how we are going to get the message across. We are going to have to win what I call some 'statement' games."
And there's no time to waste.

Earned it have they? That man is delusional.
 
Anyone have the rule handy for what the average rank has to be over time in order to qualify for the BCS?

It might not cost them a BCS spot this year but if they keep putting a "champion" in thats ranked 20 something in the final BCS polls then I am pretty sure there is a rule that will exclude them.
 
Upvote 0
Anyone have the rule handy for what the average rank has to be over time in order to qualify for the BCS?

It might not cost them a BCS spot this year but if they keep putting a "champion" in thats ranked 20 something in the final BCS polls then I am pretty sure there is a rule that will exclude them.

I think that there is a rule that the conference champion needs to be ranked in top 20, or something, to be in a BCS game. Top 20? 25? I forget. Sorry.
 
Upvote 0
I believe the original BCS "Big East rule" was that a conference's champs needed to average 12th or better over a 4-year span, or they lose their auto-bid, though that rule may have been modified to include provision for mid-major conferences.
 
Upvote 0
I believe the original BCS "Big East rule" was that a conference's champs needed to average 12th or better over a 4-year span, or they lose their auto-bid, though that rule may have been modified to include provision for mid-major conferences.

Has not changed - yet --

From the BCS web-site

Which Teams Are Eligible?

The pool of eligible teams includes:
(snip)
4. All other Division I-A teams that have won at least nine regular season games (not including wins in exempt games) and are ranked among the top 12 in the final BCS Standings are eligible for selection as an at-large team. The final BCS Standings will be released on Sunday, December 4. The conferences whose champions have a guaranteed annual berth in one of the BCS bowls are subject to review and possible loss of that guaranteed annual berth should the conference champion not have an average ranking of 12 or higher over a four-year period.

Future changes that soften this requirement -

from the NCAA site

Bowl Championship Series (BCS) administrators voted during their April 25-27 meeting in Phoenix to open automatic qualification to BCS bowl games to all Division I-A conferences beginning with the 2007 season.
The policy will change qualifying procedures that have been in place since the BCS was established in 1998, when the champions of the Atlantic Coast, Big East, Big 12, Big Ten, Pacific-10 and Southeastern Conferences, and the University of Notre Dame could earn automatic-qualifying spots into BCS games. Other criteria recently were adopted to include institutions outside of those six conferences. The University of Utah from the Mountain West Conference earned a berth in the Fiesta Bowl last season.
One of the standards for maintaining an automatic bid to BCS games was the average finish in the BCS standings of a conference's top team over a four-year period. A conference's overall strength now will be added to the criteria. The BCS will take into account the number of teams in a conference that finish in the standings' top 25 over a four-year period.
There will be an appeals process if a conference doesn't meet the criteria but still believes it belongs in the BCS.
The change accompanies an earlier modification in the BCS structure that accommodates a fifth BCS game. Beginning in 2006, the BCS will consist of five games -- the Rose Bowl, the Nokia Sugar Bowl, the Tostitos Fiesta Bowl and the FedEx Orange Bowl, plus the championship game between the two top-ranked teams. The championship game will be played at the site of one of the other four bowls on a rotating basis. The first title game in the new format is tentatively scheduled January 8, 2007, in Tempe, Arizona. The Fiesta Bowl will have been played at the same site January 1.
Current NCAA playing and practice season legislation requires bowl games to be played no later than January 4, so a proposal would have to be submitted in the 2005-06 legislative cycle year for the BCS date formula to work.
The flexibility in qualification and the addition of a bowl may address concerns from some conferences that believed previous policies did not provide equal access to the BCS.
BCS officials also are considering modifications to its selection formula necessitated when the Associated Press told the BCS it could no longer use its top-25 poll as a criterion. There was talk of developing another poll with voters consisting of former coaches, former players, administrators and possibly members of the media, but the idea was shelved for further review.

Specific criteria under these proposed rules - still searching...

Clue 1 - from Weiberg April 27 Press Conference --
What are the provisions for a former coalition team getting an automatic berth? Would it be top 12?

Starting in 2006, yes, or top 16 if one of the automatic qualification conferences has a champion between that 12 and 16. For example, let's say that the Big 12 champion is 14, then the coalition standard slides down to match that.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
What's BS about the 4-year rule is that they're allowing the Big East to take credit for Miami's and VaTech's finishes when they were in the conference, but they're also allowing them to take credit for Louisville last year when they weren't in the conference.

Now that's bullshit. Either count the teams only when they're in your conference, or only count the teams that are in your conference now. But you shouldn't be allowed to have it both ways.

That crock of crap that Tranghese snuck past the BCS powers-that-be will allow the BigLeast to maintain an average of 12 for the next couple of years.

2005 - W. Va (17) - pending the remainder of the season
2004 - Louisville (10) - which should be Pitt's (21), since Louisville wasn't in the Big East
2003 - Miami (9) - no current Big East team was in top-25
2002 - Miami (1) - West Va. was (15)
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
2005 - W. Va (17) - pending the remainder of the season
2004 - Louisville (10) - which should be Pitt's (21), since Louisville wasn't in the Big East
2003 - Miami (9) - no current Big East team was in top-25
2002 - Miami (1) - West Va. was (15)

So, assuming WV wins and stays around 17, the Big Easy (ah so many derogatory puns) , they will have a 3-year average of exactly 12 and need a top-12 champ next year to keep the bid.
 
Upvote 0
Back
Top