So Long AQ Status for the Big East

[Bearcattitue92]

http://espn.go.com/blog/ncfnation/po...-bye-aq-status

Not sure how I feel about this, but the place it really hurts is recuiting. This was a big card to play on for 3 star recruits.

[BearcatPride]

It's not just for the Big East but all conferences. Yes, there will be issues debating strength of schedule and all; however, this isn't happening until 2014. We've got two more years of AQ and by 2014 college football will look a lot different.

Not really worried about it. UC has put itself in a very competitive situation athletically and academically.

Also, I sure hope we're recruiting higher than just 3 stars.

[Thegreatone]

I think this is good news. If it was just losing the AQ status for the Big East we would be hurting. Now we dont have to worry about being in a AQ conference.

[08bearcat]

Now it gets simple: go undefeated with a win over a top half team from the SEC/big10/p12 and get to the playoff.

(The Big East likely would have been represented in 2007 (WVU) and definitely in 2009 (UC) in the playoff. Limiting it to conference champs would stop the SEC from having half the teams in the thing.)

Really would have preferred an 8 team playoff though with 6 AQ.

[cpawstoney]

Her closing statement is written like it's a done deal:

Remember, all of these changes take effect beginning with the 2014 season. AQ designation is a part of the BCS for 2012 and 2013, so the Big East retains its spot as an automatic qualifier for these next two seasons.

It's not.

While it most likely this will happen, no surprise, at this time recommendations are being presented to the various universities for consideration. More discussion and maybe a decision will be forth coming in June.

With all the people involved having different views an opinions, I would expect it to drag on much longer than June.

[Bearcat Otto]

Forgive me for seeing this as not good for team like UC.

I can see the traditional teams with history dominating the playoff even over undeafeated teams out side of the former BCS.

Money talks and that is what it will boil down to. TX vs. FL will far outdraw UC vs. VT in televison viewers. This will be even more true if the bowls themselves have any say in who plays. They will ALWAYS choose who they think will sell more tickets.

One other aspect will be how they choose they teams. If there is ANY preseason polls in use, you can kiss major bowls goodbye. Even in our 12-0 year we had to overcome the preseason poll that I believe left us out.

[bearcatgary]

Ultimately, this will be good for UC.

The powers that be are only willing to have 4 teams currently. When they find out how much interest the playoff draws and how much money it brings in, they will eventually expand it to 8 or 16 teams.

At 8 or 16 teams, UC will have a decent chance of being included after an outstanding year.

The entities who should be threatened are they BCS, the existing bowls and bowl committees.

--Gary

[DBSUC1982]

Originally Posted by 08bearcat

Now it gets simple: go undefeated with a win over a top half team from the SEC/big10/p12 and get to the playoff.

(The Big East likely would have been represented in 2007 (WVU) and definitely in 2009 (UC) in the playoff. Limiting it to conference champs would stop the SEC from having half the teams in the thing.)

Really would have preferred an 8 team playoff though with 6 AQ.

I hope you're correct, but the voters in the polls from the 5 power conferences (BE is not considered that any more by many) may vote a BE team or other such conference lower to keep them out of the 4 team playoffs. The method of selecting the 4 is, however, yet to be determined so we'll have to wait and see. Generally though we can assume this playoff will be designed to favor and enrichen the Big 5 Conferences.

[True Bearcat]

You're kidding yourself if you truly believe the NCAA and the conferences will stop at only 4 teams. They are fueled by one and one thing only greed. In a few years it will expand to 8 teams. A few years after that maybe 10-12 until we get to 16. College football fans have been begging for a playoff for a million years. Once this gets started March Madness will finally have competition for being the greatest tournament in the world.

[bearcat25]

Here is my opinion.

I don't think losing the "BCS" title to conferences is all that bad. First, what is driving all of this? Money, and specifically TELEVISION MONEY. With the current/future markets of the Big East, money is going to be generated. FAR more than what the conference received for simply participating in a BCS game. Right?

Second, although Big East teams may not make it very often (and neither will ACC teams) the 4-team playoff is designed to put the BEST 4 teams in a playoff. This is good for college football. And like the poster above stated, there is no way it's going to stop at 4. I think the number will get to 8.

So, what does this mean for UC? Well, take the increase in revenue with the new TV deal and grow the program. Become a powerhouse of the Big East and we'll get in that playoff. Does it take another undefeated season, maybe. But why would any of us not believe it's possible?

[richard k.]

Originally Posted by Bearcat Otto

Forgive me for seeing this as not good for team like UC.

I can see the traditional teams with history dominating the playoff even over undeafeated teams out side of the former BCS.

Money talks and that is what it will boil down to. TX vs. FL will far outdraw UC vs. VT in televison viewers. This will be even more true if the bowls themselves have any say in who plays. They will ALWAYS choose who they think will sell more tickets.

One other aspect will be how they choose they teams. If there is ANY preseason polls in use, you can kiss major bowls goodbye. Even in our 12-0 year we had to overcome the preseason poll that I believe left us out.

Thrilled I got the chance to be in Miami to see UC in the Orange Bowl, and the experience in New Orleans for the Sugar Bowl was even better. Once the BCS "auto" goes away, unless a BEast team is undefeated, the likelihood of being in any 4 team playoff, or a "major" bowl, becomes very unlikely.

[#41]

Somebody explain to me how this is good for UC and the Big East -- an undefeated BE team will still have a tough (read: nearly impossible) time landing a Top-4 spot over 1 loss teams from the other power conferences (especially the SEC and the Big 10+), and the new system will allegedly revert back to the old bowl tie-ins for the higher-dollar bowls.

How does this NOT result in the Big East champion (even with no losses or 1 loss) playing in a low-prestige bowl on a regular basis?

[Binturong05]

Originally Posted by #41

Somebody explain to me how this is good for UC and the Big East -- an undefeated BE team will still have a tough (read: nearly impossible) time landing a Top-4 spot over 1 loss teams from the other power conferences (especially the SEC and the Big 10+), and the new system will allegedly revert back to the old bowl tie-ins for the higher-dollar bowls.

How does this NOT result in the Big East champion (even with no losses or 1 loss) playing in a low-prestige bowl on a regular basis?

I talk about what is required in addition to dropping the BCS AQ status for this to be good for every program including UC in the following thread:

http://forums.bearcatnews.com/showthread.php?t=11867

[richard k.]

Originally Posted by #41

Somebody explain to me how this is good for UC and the Big East -- an undefeated BE team will still have a tough (read: nearly impossible) time landing a Top-4 spot over 1 loss teams from the other power conferences (especially the SEC and the Big 10+), and the new system will allegedly revert back to the old bowl tie-ins for the higher-dollar bowls.

How does this NOT result in the Big East champion (even with no losses or 1 loss) playing in a low-prestige bowl on a regular basis?

I'm with him. You can talk all you want about revenue, etc., but there is no way the Sugar, Orange, or Fiesta Bowls voluntarily pick a BEast team, unless they are undefeated, and there is no 1 loss team from one of the other conferences, and I'm not sure that they wouldn't even take a 2 loss Oklahoma, Auburn, etc., over an undefeated UC. If the Orange/Sugar get the semi-finalists I am thrilled that I got to Miami and New Orleans, 'cause UC "ain't" never going back as a member of the BEast.

[GoCats1994]

Originally Posted by #41

Somebody explain to me how this is good for UC and the Big East -- an undefeated BE team will still have a tough (read: nearly impossible) time landing a Top-4 spot over 1 loss teams from the other power conferences (especially the SEC and the Big 10+), and the new system will allegedly revert back to the old bowl tie-ins for the higher-dollar bowls.

How does this NOT result in the Big East champion (even with no losses or 1 loss) playing in a low-prestige bowl on a regular basis?

Very seldom are teams recognized for being good at the national level. Rather, programs are recognized for being good.

If UC continues its upward trend, and is able to continue to win BE titles, good things will come. Be patient...

[1977 BearCat]

Originally Posted by richard k.

I'm with him. You can talk all you want about revenue, etc., but there is no way the Sugar, Orange, or Fiesta Bowls voluntarily pick a BEast team, unless they are undefeated, and there is no 1 loss team from one of the other conferences, and I'm not sure that they wouldn't even take a 2 loss Oklahoma, Auburn, etc., over an undefeated UC. If the Orange/Sugar get the semi-finalists I am thrilled that I got to Miami and New Orleans, 'cause UC "ain't" never going back as a member of the BEast.

I NEVER thought I would attend either one of the games to watch UC play. Yet, I did. I think it is way too early to say it will never happen again if UC is a member of the Big East.

This program has done great things on a shoe string budget and I think under any circumstances the TV money will at least double in 2013. There are also rumblings that the Fox Sports Cable channels are going to get serious about challenging ESPN. If so, they will need more content which means another bidder for Big East sports.

[BearCatMarcher]

Ok, keep going to those lower tier bowls a couple years. Pack the house each time. $$$. The wallet will speak, the higher bowls will listen.

[bobestes]

Anyone who thinks the new world order "playoff" cabal will be good for us is wearing some pretty rose-colored glasses.

There is nothing in the history of "power conference" behavior which suggests otherwise.

[#41]

Originally Posted by GoCats1994

Very seldom are teams recognized for being good at the national level. Rather, programs are recognized for being good.

If UC continues its upward trend, and is able to continue to win BE titles, good things will come. Be patient...

It's not a matter of being patient, really.

If the new system reverts to the old method of negotiated bowl tie-ins, the major bowl games are going to sign contracts with conferences to provide matchups. Does anyone honestly see ANY major bowl signing a contract to lock themselves in to the Big East champion every year?

You can have the patience of a stone, and it isn't going to make the Sugar Bowl or the Orange Bowl excited to sign on to a conference that could potentially send San Diego State or SMU as it's representative.