Blog Entry

BCS eligibility rules

Posted on: November 27, 2011 10:50 pm
Edited on: November 28, 2011 10:03 am
  •  
 
There is some confusion out there about how teams become eligible for the BCS, so to clear it up, here are the rules.

1. The champions of the ACC, Big East, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-12 and SEC (the AQ conferences) will play in BCS games, regardless of rankings.  There is no exception.  That accounts for six of the ten bowl spots.

2. The top two teams in the BCS standings play for the BCS title.  There are no restrictions.  The teams do not have to be conference champions.  They do not have to be from different conferences.  The top two, whoever they are, play.

3. No more than two teams from any conference can appear in the BCS games.  Exception: if No. 1 and No. 2 in the BCS standings are from the same AQ conference and neither is the conference champion, the conference champion also plays in the BCS (rule #1), thus giving that conference three teams.  Many think this exception would come into play if Georgia beats LSU this week.  Under normal circumstances though, the four at-large teams must come from different conferences.

4. The highest rated non-AQ conference champion automatically qualifies for an at-large spot if it is in the top 12 of the BCS standings, or in the top 16 and ranked ahead of one of the AQ conference champions.  That's why Houston did not have to pass Boise State in the rankings to automatically qualify.  Boise will not be a conference champion.  If Houston loses, it could open the door for TCU, which is 18th this week and would have to get up to the top 16 to qualify.

5. Notre Dame automatically qualifies if it is in the top eight.  lol.

6. If a team from an AQ conference that did not win its league is ranked third or fourth, it automatically qualifies for an at-large spot.  This rule cannot be used to supersede the two-team limit per conference, and only one team (the higher rated) can qualify under this rule.  Stanford qualified under this rule last year, and is positioned to possibly do so again.

7. If there are any spots left after all that, any team with nine wins and a top 14 ranking can be selected at the discretion of the bowls.

There was some erraneous reporting tonight that indicated that the BCS could go down to the top 18 to grab a team from an AQ conference if its league only had its champion in the top 14.  That is NOT true.  Michigan fans - this means you.  Michigan has to be in the top 14 to be eligible, period.

There is a provision to go outside the top 14 for at-large teams, but it only comes into play if it is not possible to fill the at-large spots with teams in the top 14.  That will not be a problem this year.  It almost happened in 2007, which is the year that rule was introduced.

Hope this clears things up!

  •  
Comments

Since: Sep 30, 2008
Posted on: December 4, 2011 3:21 pm
 

BCS eligibility rules

First - I never stated that the conferences would stay the way they are. Quiet honestly, they cannot, mainly because of the reasons that you list. I do love the traditions of the different conferences. However, in order for my plan to work evenly, the conferences, all of them, would have to be redone.


what you cannot do is say one conference is inferior to another. that is discrimination. All conference should be equal and thus conference realignment to make up the ten 12 school conferences. eventually, i will make  a chart with a proposed 10 conferences.


So yes i agree, this plan does need more thinking. i agree that as the conferences are made up right now, some tweaking will need to happen.


But to call it the dumbest playoff system ever proposed? well that is you opinion. as it is an opinion, i do appreicate that.


As far as the 32 team playoff taking too long? it will run no longer than the current bowl system. 5 weeks of playoff system     
;   



Since: Nov 29, 2011
Posted on: December 3, 2011 10:32 pm
 

BCS eligibility rules

This is the dumbest playoff system ever proposed. First of all 32 teams is ridiculous and would make the season way too long. Don't get me wrong, I love football, but this is just too much.

And by your proposal, you would have 2 teams from the Sun Belt, 2 from the MAC, and 2 from all the other inferior conferences make it. That is flat out stuipid. You could have 4 teams from the SEC (or any other conference, BIG 12, BIG 10, etc.) be ranked in the Top 10 or Top 15, yet only 3 would make it? So you would tell a team that played a very hard schedule, most likely had 10 wins, and were ranked in let's say the Top 12, that they can't make it into the playoffs, yet the #2 ranked team from the Sun Belt, which has 5 losses (this is just an assumption on the losses here) and is ranked probably #75th in the country that they deserve a spot over a Top 12 team?

That's flat out ridiculous. I give you props for coming up with a playoff scenario, but this system needs a ton of work, not just tweaking. It needs to be revamped, and basically could never happen. Sorry bud.



Since: Sep 30, 2008
Posted on: December 3, 2011 2:53 pm
 

BCS eligibility rules

The last statement - the BCS Championship game is Jan 9 - THATS THIS YEAR GAME



Since: Sep 30, 2008
Posted on: December 3, 2011 2:43 pm
 

BCS eligibility rules

I personally hate the BCS. It is not fair at all. The 6 "Automatic Qualifier" Conferences account 6 of 11 conferences. How come all conference champions are not part of this mix. I will admit that the Sun Belt is not as good as the SEC but yet they are both overall part of the same FBS rules. The BCS is just a terrible way to do this.


WHY is Norte Dame by itself. Norte Dame IS NOT THAT GOOD ANYMORE to stand alone. I feel all 120 schools should be in a conference.


Personally I would like to have a 32 team playoff system. I would divide all 120 schools into ten 12 team conferences. Each conference would have 2 divisions. Both division winners automatically qualify for the playoffs. The 12 Conference Champions would be the top 12 Seeds. The conference championship losers will be seeds 13-24. 8 At-large teams would also get a playoff spot. (Maximum number of teams from a single conference is 3, Conference Champ, Conference Runner-up, 1 At-large team). 

With this system, the bowl games go away. This playoff system would produce more TV ratings than the bowl games. Bowl games mean nothing these days except for the championship game. This year there are 35 bowl games. Honestly, I may watch 2 games and thats it. In the playoff system i stated above, there are 31 games. I would watch all 31 games.


Conference championships in football mean nothing except a bowl games. WHO CARES. The two teams from the BCS game do not have to win their conference to get there. They just have to be ranked 1 and 2.


The other division in college football has a playoff system. With the playoff system listed above, the regular season ends the last weekend of November. Conference championship games, 1st weekend in December. Playoffs starts the 2nd weekend in December. The cha
mpionship game of the playoffs would be the first full weekend in January (Jan 7th). BCS Championship game is Jan 9



Since: Nov 14, 2006
Posted on: December 3, 2011 3:07 am
 

BCS eligibility rules

I still believe that a system which will allow a 7-5 team (Louisville, if Cincy loses to the Huskies on Saturday) to automatically earn a top 6 is flawed!  But, since I am a BCS buster, I am cheering for the Huskies to beat the lame B-Cats, only to hopefully again show to all how the system OVERALL needs to be converted to a playoff system.  A system that can actually get only ONE game right (LSU vs Bama) is not working properly, and needs to be changed.



Since: Nov 9, 2008
Posted on: December 2, 2011 9:42 pm
 

BCS eligibility rules

If college football instituted a playoff system, it would need a few things (among others) to work.

1. Automatic qualifiers. I know a lot of people hate this, but without automatic qualifiers, there is no playoff (or BCS or any other championship format). That doesn't necessarily mean that any of the mid-major conferences or the Big East must get an automatic bid, the way they do in basketball. But if you do not guarantee a spot to the champions of the SEC, Big Ten, Pac-12, Big 12 and ACC, those conferences will probably choose not to participate in a tournament, the same way the SWAC and Ivy League don't participate in the FCS tournament (though they do it for different reasons).

2. Byes. Specifically, byes given to conference champions. This keeps emphasis on late season games and conference championship games. In a 16-team tournament with no byes, teams like LSU have little incentive to win their conference championship games, which make games like this week's LSU/Georgia match-up mostly meaningless (not that they still wouldn't play their hearts out). But if you have a 12-team tournament and give byes to the top 4 conference champions (or independent teams, if ranked high enough) that makes every game, especially conference games, a little more important, all-be-it not as cutthroat as the current one-and-probably-done college football season. If there were a playoff, this would help college football more than it would hurt it. I can imagine fans of Alabama this year or Stanford this year or last not liking this. But admit it: if your team were in the conference championship game, you'd rather it be for a bye than to have very little meaning.

3. A way for non-AQ teams to qualify automatically. Without it, they'll just take their gripes to Congress again. I propose giving the best non-AQ conference champion or independent team a bid if they finish in the top 16. Give the 2nd and 3rd best team a spot if they finish in the top 12. In a 12 team tournament, those teams deserve a bid, since they can't earn one by simply winning their conference. Most years, this would give a spot to one or two teams.

4. Bowl involvement. A tournament shouldn't usurp the bowls, it should supplement them. No bowls=less corporate support=less money=less support by university and conference presidents. To have support for a postseason change, you need to include the bowls one way or another. Make the first round games four non-BCS bowls and schedule them the week before Christmas. Make the four BCS bowls the second round games and play them two weeks later on or around New Year's (giving the student-athletes a short break for the holidays). And give the bowls the freedom to choose who they want in their games, but construct the selection process so that the match-ups are generally "tournament-like" (i.e., higher seeds generally play lower seeds).Play the semifinals on neutral sites the following week, and the Championship Game a week after that. This only extends the season by a week and gives two weeks of build-up for both the first and second round bowl games, which ought to keep the bowl organizers happy.

Given the current BCS Standings and by projecting conference champions, this year's tournament would look something like this (I chose the first round bowl sites out of preference. A lot of other bowls would be suitable. Take your pick).

FIRST ROUND
Chick-fil-A Bowl - #8 Arkansas vs. #13 Michigan State
Capital One Bowl - #2 Alabama vs. #11 Kansas State
Cotton Bowl - #10 Oklahoma vs. #4 Stanford
Holiday Bowl - #9 Oregon vs. #7 Boise State

SECOND ROUND
Orange Bowl - #5 Virginia Tech vs. TBD
Sugar Bowl - #1 LSU vs. TBD
Fiesta Bowl - #3 Oklahoma State vs. TBD
Rose Bowl - TBD vs. TBD
*#6 Houston would receive the 4th bye, but wouldn't be assigned to a particular bowl.

Last year might have been:

FIRST ROUND
Chick-fil-A Bowl - #13 Virginia Tech vs. #9 Michigan State
Capital One Bowl - #6 Ohio State vs. #11 LSU
Cotton Bowl - #7 Oklahoma vs. #8 Arkansas
Holiday Bowl - #4 Stanford vs. #10 Boise State

SECOND ROUND
Orange Bowl - TBD vs. TBD
Sugar Bowl - #1 Auburn vs. TBD
Fiesta Bowl - TBD vs. TBD
Rose Bowl - #2 Oregon vs. #5 Wisconsin
*#3 TCU would receive the 4th bye, but wouldn't be assigned to a particular bowl.






Since: Dec 2, 2011
Posted on: December 2, 2011 12:46 pm
 

BCS eligibility rules

because the #12, #13, and #15 (or #11) teams are all expected to lose, and probably drop below #17. also, if iowa state pulls another upset and knocks off k state, that would pretty much guarantee michigan is top 14



Since: Jan 9, 2007
Posted on: December 1, 2011 2:45 pm
 

BCS eligibility rules

So if Rule 7 is in effect why are you still picking Michigan to be in the Sugar Bowl when they are only ranked 16th in the BCS. Come on Palm - give us a rational explanation.



Since: Aug 2, 2008
Posted on: November 30, 2011 12:09 pm
 

BCS eligibility rules

That's all good, Alabama could win 50-0 for all I care. Just don't knock Michigan's schedule and say why they shouldn't be in a BCS bowl when Alabama beat up on nothing all year long and pretty much is getting a free pass to the championship.



Since: Jun 11, 2010
Posted on: November 29, 2011 7:38 pm
 

BCS eligibility rules

Gators704, Alabama would crush Michigan, much like they beat MSU last year!


The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com