SB Nation User Blog: utesfan100

New Mexico Bowl 2009 - Fresno St. vs. Wyoming

utesfan100 — Sat, 12 Dec 2009 02:12:27 -0000

December 19th 2009, 4:30 ET - ESPN

This year's New Mexico Bowl is one of two MWC vs. WAC games this year. This is a natural conference rivalry both because of the proximity of the teams and because of the sorted history and the wounds caused by the process in which they split. Chief among those with sore feelings were the Fresno St. Bulldogs, whose play anyone anywhere anytime mantra has made famous nationally.

The Wyoming Cowboys are more known for being the insult added to Tennessee's injuries in 2008.

Fresno St. is a perennial candidate to dethrone Boise State if they falter. Wyoming consistently is in the middle to bottom of the MWC. The series is tied at 3-3 with both teams sweeping at home from 1992 through 1997. For a tied series over a short duration the games were remarkably not close. The average winning margin was 15.8 points.

Over a decade has past since these two team squared off on the football field. How do they compare in the 2009 neutral site rubber match?

General

Fresno St.
Bulldogs
Wyoming
Cowboys

Current
Top 25
Faced #3 Cincinnati (20-28)
#6 Boise St. (34-51)
#25 Wisconsin (31-34 OT) #2 Texas (10-41)
#4 TCU (10-45)
#14 BYU (0-52)
#23 Utah (10-22)

Ranking #51 #80

Record 8-4 6-6

Wyoming has played more ranked teams but Fresno St. has played them more competitively. Fresno St. has a solid lead in a broad battery of ranking methodologies.

Fresno State's Ball

	Fresno St. Offense	Wyoming Defense
Points	34.3	27.3
Yards	435.9	395.6
Per Play	6.44	5.60
Rushing	251.6	170.5
Per Play	5.44	4.38
Passing	204.3	225.1
Per Play	8.15	7.10
Turnovers	23	20

One thing that makes this difficult is the disparity among conferences. The WAC particularly has a wide disparity between their offenses and defenses making it hard to distinguish how much their stats reflect strong offenses and how much reflects bad defenses.

Wyoming's defense has been tested better that Fresno St.'s offense. I would expect numbers closer to Wyoming's average in this game.

One factor in Wyoming's favor is that Fresno St. has a history of turning the ball over.

Wyoming's Ball

	Fresno St. Defense	Wyoming Offense
Points	27.8	16.9
Yards	411.6	298.7
Per Play	6.62	4.35
Rushing	212.4	128.0
Per Play	6.17	3.44
Passing	199.3	170.7
Per Play	7.18	5.43
Turnovers	14	13

Both sides have faced stiff tests this year. I would expect numbers near the middle in this game on this side of the ball.

Prediction

Fresno St. should win by roughly 27-21, though a couple of costly turnovers by Fresno St. could make the game closer than this score.

Poll

Who is your New Mexico Bowl pick?

Which is the Better BCS Bowl?

utesfan100 — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 23:03:54 -0000

When I first sketched the idea of this thread the idea was to promote the idea of boycotting the Orange Bowl to make the Fiesta Bowl the more popular bowl in the TV ratings. If a significant number of fans watch all the bowls games except one that would get noticed in the rankings.

Then I came to realize that the Fiesta Bowl just needs to be acknowledged as the better and more marketable game on its own right. I still plan on watching "The Blindside" instead of the Orange Bowl.

If the Fiesta Bowl can out Nelson the Orange Bowl this will mark a turning point when the at large conferences (or at least the MWC and Boise State) demonstrate their marketability to the national audience. This could lead to large scale perception changes among the people who really matter.

And if you really hate the BCS but find the idea of protesting all of their games ridiculous, I ask you to consider just giving up this one Orange Bowl.

Some numbers I found interesting:

Population of Idaho: 1.5M

Population of Iowa: 3.0M

Population of Dallas-Fort Worth Metro Plex: 6.3M

Poputation of Atlanta metropolitan area: 5.6M

Fiesta Bowl fan base population: 8.1M

Orange Bowl fan base population: 8.6M

This is not a vary wide margin of difference. It should be observed that the Fiesta Bowl participants, particularly TCU, have not saturated their markets to the level of the Orange Bowl participants. My question is which game has the broader national interest? One factor to consider is that the Fiesta Bowl will be in the football fan friendly Monday Night with the Orange Bowl deferred to Tuesday night. This alone could even out the differences in fan base levels of the teams.

Not to mention the 25-0 vs. 21-4 combined records and #5 and #9.5 average BCS ranking differences. The Fiesta Bowl also features the only team among the four participants in these bowls to have won a BCS bowl (Boise State).

Basically the Fiesta Bowl is a must see while the Orange Bowl is a see if you are a fan of either of these teams or are feeding a football addiction..

Poll

Which of these two bowl games will you watch?

Final BCS Standings 2009

utesfan100 — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 00:25:46 -0000

Did I really forget to post these on Sunday? Shame on me!

Gaps in the standings indicate standings differences more than 0.06 in the standings.

Notes are made for the highest ranked teams from each conference, independents (ind), and all non-automatic qualifying conference members. (non-AQ)

Team must be in the top 14 to be eligible for a BCS at-large bid.

Rank	Team	BCS Average	Bowl	Notes
1	Alabama Crimson Tide	.9978	BCS Championship	BCS #1, SEC #1
2	Texas Longhorns	.9433	BCS Championship	BCS #2, Big 12 #1
3	Cincinnati Bearcats	.8878	Sugar Bowl	Big East #1
4	TCU Horned Frogs	.8836	Fiesta Bowl	Non-AQ #1 (MWC #1)
5	Florida Gators	.8636	Sugar Bowl	At Large
6	Boise St. Broncos	.8106	Fiesta Bowl	At Large (WAC #1)
7	Oregon Ducks	.7568	Rose Bowl	PAC 10 #1

8	Ohio St. Buckeyes	.6568	Rose Bowl	Big Ten #1
9	Georgia Tech Yellow Jackets	.6471	Orange Bowl	ACC #1
10	Iowa Hawkeyes	.6180	Orange Bowl	At Large
11	Virginia Tech Hokies	.5675	Chick-fil-A Bowl
12	LSU Tigers	.5375	Capital One Bowl
13	Penn St. Nittany Lions	.5319	Capital One Bowl

14	BYU Cougars	.4531	Las Vegas Bowl	non-AQ
--- BCS Eligibility Line ---
15	Miami Hurricanes	.4419	Champs Sports Bowl

16	West Virginia Mountaineers	.3357	Gator Bowl
17	Pittsburgh Panthers	.3141	Car Car Bowl
18	Oregon St. Beavers	.2876	Las Vegas Bowl
19	Oklahoma St. Cowboys	.2628	Cotton Bowl
20	Arizona Wildcats	.2248	Holiday Bowl
21	Stanford Cardinal	.1803	Sun Bowl
22	Nebraska Cornhuskers	.1655	Holiday Bowl
23	Utah Utes	.1245	Poinsettia Bowl	non-AQ
24	USC Trojans	.1207	Emerald Bowl
25	Wisconsin Badgers	.1203	Champs Sports Bowl

Number of top 25 teams per conference:
5: PAC 10
4: Big 10
3: SEC, Big 12, MWC, Big East, ACC
1: WAC
0: C-USA, MAC, Sun Belt

My thoughts on the BCS pairings after the jump.

BCS Championship Game

#1 Alabama (13-0) vs. #2 Texas (13-0)

This game is the undefeated SEC vs. Big 12 champion showdown the media has been pulling for since the fourth week of the season. Alabama has emerged as a team on the verge of greatness while Texas rose to the top of a struggling Big 12.

At the end of the day these two teams are the top two in all major polls and represent the views of the vast majority of the public. Cincinnati, TCU and Boise State can make cases for their undefeated teams and it is a travesty that they won't have their opportunity on the field. They are not in the top 2 of the BCS standings at the end of the season. They are not even within an average of one vote difference of Texas.

Sugar Bowl

#3 Cincinnati (12-0) vs. # 5 Florida (12-1)

Florida will represent the SEC in this historic conference tie-in. Cincinnati will get to face a team that was somewhat exposed in the SEC championship game and might have Alabama sized motivation issues this year.

While an opportunity to play one of the remaining unbeaten teams in a bowl game might have been attractive, a trip to Tempe would have been difficult for their still building fan base.

Fiesta Bowl

#4 TCU (12-0) vs. #6 Boise St (13-0)

This bowl features a TCU team making their first trip to a BCS bowl to face a team that put themselves on the BCS map with an iconic win in the 2006 Fiesta Bowl.

This game is a rematch of the 2008 Poinsettia Bowl, which was a rematch of the 2003 Fort Worth Bowl. The series is split with the biggest win being three points. Perhaps this is a message from the football gods that these teams need to play more often, say ... by being in the same conference.

While an opportunity to beat a big name BCS team like Florida or an undefeated automatic qualifying conference champion like Cincinnati would have been a match up these teams (especially the ones with a blue field) covet, both teams will face a better opponent to prove their metal than what they would have had in any of the remaining team in BCS bowls.

Rose Bowl

#7 Oregon (10-2) vs. #8 Ohio St. (10-2)

This ancient bowl game with deep conference ties has both partners as champions ranked in the top 10 for the first time in years. From a traditional stand point and a competitive stand point this should be one of the best Rose Bowl's since the formation of the BCS Championship Game.

Orange Bowl

#9 Georgia Tech vs. #10 Iowa

Georgia Tech won the ACC and Iowa beat their primary competitor (Penn St.) head to head.

Other Notes

For the second time in the BCS' 12 year history all participants have been in the top 10. The other time was 2003 when only eight teams were selected.

Even more remarkable is the furthest any two teams are in the rankings are two spots. This is a remarkable job of pairing evenly matched teams that is unlikely to be repeated any time soon.

In short, this year might have been the BCS' best year of selecting and arranging teams yet.

The only way they could have done better would be to somehow allow all undefeated teams to play for the title.

Road to a Split Title?

utesfan100 — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 23:48:31 -0000

Ok. TCU did not bust into the National Championship Game. We do have two teams from at large conferences in BCS bowls for the first time in the history of college football. This certainly cut down one of the most glaring glass ceilings in the BCS design.

But this is not one of the true BCS busting scenarios, as I discussed previously.

No, the real threat is a split title, 2003 USC style.

An outline for how this might be able to happen next ...

With 5 undefeated teams playing in three bowls this year's championship will be disputed. If Alabama rolls Texas and Florida beats down Cincinnati, the season long notions will be vindicated and the Fiesta Bowl winner will only carry an objection of a slim minority.

If Texas beats Alabama and Cincinnati beats Florida the season long poll bias will be turned upside down. The SEC will have been exposed as the biggest fraud since the Big 10 in 2006. If the championship game is close in this scenario Cincinnati or the Fiesta Bowl winner could gain room on Texas with a commanding win and have a significant share of the public opinion.

TCU is the closest in the human polls so they would have a slight edge over Cincinnati in the AP race. Both teams would benefit from a loss by the other. Texas wins a three horse race, hands down. A two horse race will spur rigorous debate. Boise State could generate a buzz with a big win and a Cincinnati loss.

All in all the following bowl results would maximize the controversy of the 2009-2010 college football champion:

Texas beats Alabama in a close game, preferably on a controversial play

One of the following:

Cincinnati routs Florida and a close Fiesta Bowl, preferably with Boise State winning
Florida beats Cincinnati and a Fiesta Bowl rout, preferably with TCU winning

The second option is the most likely to induce more protest votes from activist AP voters, due to public opinions on the disparity of the conferences in the BCS system.

If either of these happen the #2 team would likely be closer to #1 team than Utah was last year, representing a lower consensus in the national championship. A Cincinnati win guarantees three undefeated teams which would raise controversy on its own.

I really believe Alabama is the real deal and Texas has some serious holes, but the dream is not dead. Not yet.

Bill Hancock, You Are Wrong.

utesfan100 — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 14:36:41 -0000

More photos » by Pat Little - AP

Joe Paterno knows what it is like having a team go undefeated and not having the opportunity to play for a championship - He has lead more teams to undefeated season without a championship than any other active coach.

Browse more photos »

[This is a rebuttal to Bill Hancock's USA Today Op-Ed Playoffs hurt the regular season - It can also be found here]

I certainly agree that the BCS does pair top teams in exciting must see games. The National Championship Game, Sugar and Fiesta Bowls certainly fit this billing this year. Some could argue that each of these three bowls still holds some claim to determining the true national champion.

Do you really want to encourage every person under a rock with a playoff design to attempt to contact and persuade the presidents, athletic directores, coaches and faculty that their plan is the best? Shouldn't it be the task of the BCS to determine their ideals and find and implement designs that improve upon these ideals?

I disagree with your assertions and here are several reasons why:

First, playoffs only diminish the regular season if teams with more than two losses become a significant part of it. Allowing higher seeded teams to have byes or host the first rounds both reduces travel costs and adds incentive to the top ranked teams to finish strong.

Second, for three weeks college fans travel for basketball to watch their team advance through March Maddness. While many fans will find this task unaffordable plenty will be able to manage and fill the venues. The rest of us will watch at home on TV, like most of us do now.

Third, shoehorning teams into a pre-constructed one size fits all seasons tournament will generate selection controversy that grows with the size of the tournament. What is needed is a new paradigm that defines qualified teams to be selected and then apply one of a battery of designs that best fits that year's situation.

Fourth, college football (thanks in large part to the Saturday game tradition) interferes with classes and finals less than any other collegiate sport. Even playing through December, as FCS Division II and Division III do would not alter this fact.

While congress has better issues to address than the management of the college football postseason, they would not need to if the BCS would follow due diligence in hearing issues and researching solutions without outside pressure.

The national champion of this sport will not be determiened until all teams can earn the title by winning the games they are allowed to play.

That said, the games are good, so we will be watching.

Future BCS Automatic Qualification Evaluation Preview.

utesfan100 — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 00:14:27 -0000

The BCS uses three criteria averaged over a four year window to evaluate future BCS automatic qualifications.

(1) the ranking of the highest-ranked team in the final BCS standings each year
(2) the final regular-season rankings of all conference teams in the computer rankings used by the BCS each year
(3) the number of teams in the top 25 of the final BCS standings each year.

MWC Connection recently asked some interesting questions clarifying these procedures. Bill Hancock point blank answered that statistics for conference members in 2011 over the 2008-2011 window will be used. This means that if Boise State joins the MWC in 2011 their numbers from 2008-2010 will count for the MWC to evaluate their automatic qualification status for 2012 and 2013.

Estimates of these numbers over 2006-2009 are hosted at BCS Guru's site. These have been updated to include all 2009 data. They are broken down by criteria and for each year to see how and when each conference earned their marks.

None of these three criteria depend on the bowls in any manner whatsoever. Perhaps this is a subtle way for the BCS to communicate that the bowls are essentially meaningless.

If I were to attempt to design a system to undermine the bowls and raise a public outcry to implement a playoff I think it would be hard to achieve the success the BCS has attained.

A summary of these numbers looking at this year's and the 4 year running average is presented below. The last entry represents what the MWC would look like if they added Boise State. These numbers were desigend so that 0.5000 represents the BCS cutoff.

Conference	2009	4 Year
SEC	0.9321	0.9421
Big 12	0.6326	0.7316
PAC 10	0.9039	0.7098
Big East	0.7756	0.7085
Big 10	0.5983	0.6844
ACC	0.6487	0.5849
MWC	0.4945	0.3329
WAC	0.3369	0.3221
MAC	0.0139	0.0321
C-USA	0.0164	0.0069
Sun Belt	0.0004	0.0001

MWC+BS	0.6127	0.4719

The first note is that the Big East is not as bad as people tend to project. They have managed to survive what many thought was a decapitating blow, but the teams that were cut off have not performed recently. This year's data moved them over the Big 10 who appear to be in a steady decline.

The MWC also passed the WAC here this year. Utah's 2004 Fiesta bowl appearance was not in these windows giving the WAC a 2-1 lead in BCS appearances that contributed greatly to their previous lead.

The MWC has performed at a level that should earn them an automatic qualification for 2012 and 2013 if they continue to perform at their current level. If they expand to include Boise State their 4 year window should cross the BCS threshold after next year. While the MWC might not strictly need Boise State to qualify the addition of Boise State would significantly increase the chances of meeting the criteria.

These numbers are estimates of the actual values used, as the actual values are not made public.

House Sub-Committee Passes Anti-BCS Bill (HR 390)

utesfan100 — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 23:00:39 -0000

More photos » by Evan Vucci - AP

2 days ago: House Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection subcommittee member Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas gestures on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, Dec. 9, 2009, during the subcommittee's hearing to markup legislation on a BCS college football playoff system. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

Browse more photos »

Joe Barton's bill l has passed the House Energy and Commerce subcommittee. The next the bill will go before the full committee where it would be examined to determine if it is worth taking to the House floor. If passed by the house it would go to the Senate for passage or amendment and then any differences would have to be ironed out. One both houses pass the final bill it would go to President Obama for his signature.

Only the last step does not present formidable obstacles. The main obstacle is the concept that congress has more pressing issues to address.

I would argue what could possible be more important than the Evolution of the BCS. There is not a single more important issue on my plate, why should congress be any different?

This marks the first time that any bill has passed in any sub-committee of either the house of the senate. This is a huge advance in the legislative pressure on the BCS.

Amendments to the original bill were passed that would prohibit the BCS from renaming the game as an enhanced bowl game and to require the revenue from the tournament to be distributed evenly to all conferences.

The original bill and my thoughts next.

Here is the original version of the bill, first drafted last year after Joe Barton's team (Texas) was left out of the BCS NCG due to Big 12 Tiebreaker procedures.

HR 390 IH

111th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. R. 390

To prohibit, as an unfair and deceptive act or practice, the promotion, marketing, and advertising of any post-season NCAA Division I football game as a national championship game unless such game is the culmination of a fair and equitable playoff system.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

January 9, 2009

Mr. BARTON of Texas (for himself, Mr. RUSH, and Mr. MCCAUL) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce

A BILL

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ‘College Football Playoff Act of 2009'.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

Congress finds that--

(1) college football games, including post-season football games, depend upon competition between college and university teams traveling in interstate commerce;

(2) the competitions involve and affect interstate commerce and are therefore within Congress's constitutional authority to regulate;

(3) the total economic impact in the host cities from the 5 Bowl Championship Series (BCS) games in January 2008 was estimated at more than $1.2 billion;

(4) collegiate athletic conferences whose teams participate in each BCS bowl game share $17.5 million in revenue;

(5) the BCS system recognizes the important economic impact to a city hosting the BCS championship game and therefore rotates it among cities; and

(6) the colleges and universities whose teams participate in the post-season football bowls experience significant financial windfall including increased applications for enrollment, recruiting advantages, increased alumni donations, and increased corporate sponsorship that provides a competitive advantage over universities whose teams are ineligible or statistically at a disadvantage from the BCS bowl competitions because of their conference affiliation.

SEC. 3. PROHIBITED ACT.

(a) Promotion of Game- It shall be unlawful for any person to promote, market, or advertise a post-season National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) Division I Football Bowl Subdivision (FBS) football game as a championship or national championship game, unless the game is the final game of a single elimination post-season playoff system for which all NCAA Division I FBS conferences and unaffiliated Division I FBS teams are eligible.

(b) Merchandising- It shall be unlawful for any person to sell, market, or advertise any merchandise related to a post-season NCAA Division I FBS football game that refers to the game as a championship or national championship game, unless the game is the final game of a single elimination post-season playoff system for which all NCAA Division I FBS conferences and unaffiliated Division I FBS teams are eligible.

SEC. 4. ENFORCEMENT BY THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION.

(a) Enforcement Authority- A violation of section 3 shall be treated as a violation of a rule defining an unfair or deceptive act or practice prescribed under section 18(a)(1)(B) of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 57a(a)(1)(B)). The Federal Trade Commission shall enforce this Act in the same manner, by the same means, and with the same jurisdiction as though all applicable terms and provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act were incorporated into and made a part of this Act.

(b) Regulations- The Federal Trade Commission may promulgate regulations or issue interpretative guidelines as necessary to implement and carry out this Act.

SEC. 5. EFFECTIVE DATE.

The prohibition in section 3 shall apply to any post-season NCAA Division I FBS football game that occurs after January 31, 2011.

What I Think

Isn't the BCS a single game elimination tournament of two teams which any team is equally eligible for if they get into the top two of the BCS standings? Nothing in this bill undercuts this argument that I am sure the BCS' lawyers can see (BCS officials have even used rhetoric to this effect in the past year.)

Also, I have serious reservations about the amendment today that would require the revenue to be distributed equally. I also don't know that the FTC is the proper agency to handle this. If this were coming from the education subcommittee it would make much more sense to me.

College football is a $2.3 billion dollar revenue source to 120 institution that receive large amounts of federal and state funds. The BCS represents $140, soon to be $200+, million of this revenue. This is certainly large enough to warrant some amount of federal attention.

If congress is going to get involved, however, I want it to be with the right bill, not this bill.

Let's define a playoff better. Let's define eligible better. At the very least define eligible to be guaranteed access to all undefeated teams, if not all conference champions.

This would also restrict any bowl from calling itself a championship. As a Utah fan we would not have been able to be called the Sugar Bowl Champions last year if this bill were in effect.

This bill will not alter anything about next year's season. It might even become costly to the MWC if they end up meeting the guidelines for an automatic qualification after the 2011 season.

Why Can't We Have a Playoff? - Real World Constraints on the College Football Postseason

utesfan100 — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 22:44:09 -0000

The BCS has informed us of the playoff problem. One issue with this site is that is is as biased as Playoff PAC's What's Wrong with the BCS. The fact is that their are real world constraints on any postseason design and those should be examined as fully as possible.

The real shame is that the BCS is currently trowing a smoke screen in front of the real issues to prevent them from being examined rather than fostering actual innovation. What is needed is concise descriptions of the actual isssues involved.

I am not the first to undertake this task. Much of the format of this presentation is derived from that of the Enhanced Bowl System. In addition to the issues listed at all three sites linked above I have also included other issues my own research has uncovered.

With this collection of issues it became apparent that some form of ordering is necessary. Pragmatic considerations tempered with mild idealism left me with the following order of the importance of each principle party in the discussion:

the student athletes
the NCAA
the universities and conferences
the bowls
TV networks
the fans

The constraints are then listed in the order of the most significant party that has a differing view on the significance of that constraint.

Possible values for the view of a given ideal:

&: Strongly hold this ideal
: Indifferent towards this ideal
X: Opposed to this ideal

Constraint	Student Athletes	NCAA	Universities & Conferences	Bowls	TV Networks	Fans
Enhance the value of the regular season	&	&	&	&	&	&
Restore the value of the bowl tradition	&	&	&	&	&	&
Enhance the student athlete's bowl experience	&	&	&	&
Improve the academic success of the students	&	&	&
Allow all conference champions a chance to win the national championship	&	&	&	X	&	&
Allow the best teams to prove their worth on the field	&	&	&	X	&	&
Respect he health of the players due to extra games	&	&	&	X	X	X
Reduce the moral hazard of the selection process	&	&				&
Determine a widely accepted national champion	&	&		X		&
Fair venues	&	&		X		&
Reward champions of the best conferences	&		&	&	&	&
Prevent unworthy teams from having a chance at the national title	&		&	&
Reduce controversy to a manageable level	&					&
Avoid competition with the NFL for veiwership		&	&	&	&	&
Improve the financial success of proven championship contenders		&	&	&	&
Maintain current level of sponsor involvement		&	&	&	&
Improve the financial strength of the bowl system		&	&	&	&
Long term stability		&	&	&
Reduce logistical issues		&	&	&
Be legal		&	&	&
Minimize the number of games in the season		&			X	X
Respect the established postseason time period		&			X	X
Respect the travel costs of the fans			&	X		&

I will be examining each of these issues one at a time each Saturday through the off season, starting this Saturday. This will include a summary of what I mean by each, why I feel the opinions above are accurate and how various alternatives measure up. The alternatives I will examine are:

the bowl system without the BCS
the current system
my tier based plus-one
my full design
the MWC proposal
the Enhanced Bowl System
the Wetzel plan

When these real world constraints are properly arranged three of these alternatives provide more value than the current system does. They are not the old bowl system, MWC proposal or the Wetzel plan.

The Wetzel Plan

utesfan100 — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 04:07:09 -0000

The Wetzel Plan

The best populist tournament design on the web.

This is one of seven deigns I will be examining based on real world constraints on postseason alternatives.

Gut Reaction BCS Bowl Previews

utesfan100 — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 02:49:42 -0000

I will be giving detailed preview for each BCS bowl once every five days. This is simply my initial reaction to the 2009 BCS selections.

Texas Longhorns vs. Alabama Crimson Tide

The much anticipated SEC vs. Big 12 undefeated showdown will become a reality. With the final weeks and growing gap between #1 and #2 this week in the standings the question will be whether this year will be a repeat of 2001 when runaway leader Miami(FL) ran away from every other team or 2006 when Ohio State appeared to be head and shoulders above the crowd only to fall to to Florida in the National Championship Game.

Boise St. Broncos vs. TCU Horned Frogs

For the first time in BCS history two teams from at large conferences will participate in a BCS bowl in the same year. Pairing these teams against each other will raise questions about whether this was a ploy to produce an easily dismissible game.

Some will say that one benefit of a BCS bowl for at large teams is the ability to face off against one of the top teams from one of the top conferences to prove their worth to the nation.

I would argue that TCU and Boise State have already proven to the nation that they each are comparable to any other team they could have played and they each have an opportunity to play one of the top of the class teams from 2009.

Oregon Ducks vs. Ohio St. Buckeyes

Ho hum. The most boring of the BCS selections. This will be a good game featuring the traditional champions in the greatest bowl game in the land, the granddaddy of them all.

Cincinnati Bearcats vs. Florida Gators

Cincinnati, despite a #3 ranking in the BCS standings, fell to the final BCS selection while Florida fell from the National Championship Game in Atlanta.

Can Florida do what Alabama could not in 2008 in keeping focus after a disappointing loss?

Georgia Tech Yellow Jackets vs. Iowa Hawkeyes

The first thing that jumps out at me is that this game has Iowa over Penn St. One of the two eligible Big 10 teams was going to get in and they fell here.

Eligible on the Outside

Penn St. and LSU lost to post conference members selected over them. Virginia Tech's loss to North Carolina sealed the deal. LSU lost to both SEC teams selected over them. BYU's devastating home loss to FSU that made their selection unpalatable.

At the end of the day no teams were left out for a lower ranked team in the BCS at large selections for the fourth time in the BCS's twelve years.

	Fresno St. Bulldogs	Wyoming Cowboys
Current Top 25 Faced	#3 Cincinnati (20-28) #6 Boise St. (34-51) #25 Wisconsin (31-34 OT)	#2 Texas (10-41) #4 TCU (10-45) #14 BYU (0-52) #23 Utah (10-22)
Ranking	#51	#80
Record	8-4	6-6