Blog Entry

Mountain West, C-USA Merger not BCS-Worthy

Posted on: October 15, 2011 12:20 pm
Edited on: October 15, 2011 12:33 pm
The Mountan West and Conference USA announced a long-planned, football-only merger yesterday that has as one of its goals acquiring an automatic BCS berth for its champion.

I cannot imagine any chance of that happening.

The Mountain West, on its own, has been hoping to meet the three-part qualification standard for becoming an AQ conference for the 2012 and 2013 seasons.  It looks like that will fall short, although the league should have an opportunity to appeal to the BCS presidential oversight committee.  I can't see any non-political reason for that appeal to be granted.

The qualification standard has three parts and is based on a four-year cycle that ends with the current season.  The parts are the highest ranked team in the league, the average BCS computer rankings of all the teams in the league, and the number of top 25 teams in the league.

If a non-AQ conference finishes the four-year cycle in the top six conferences in the first two categories, it becomes AQ. If it finishes in the top five in one of the two, seventh in the other, and meets a minimum standard in the third category, the league can appeal to the POC.  That's where the MWC stands entering this season.

The Mountain West is in the top five in the highest ranked team category and a distant seventh (yes, well behind the Big East) in the second category.  It is not mathematically possible for the MWC to finish sixth, and it hasn't been a particularly good year for the league anyway.

Conference USA is in a battle for 8th place in this list with the WAC, and both are well behind the MWC in all three categories, and that's the problem for this association's attempt to get an AQ spot in the BCS.  Adding C-USA dilutes the Mountain West.  

That is not even taking into consideration that both leagues are under attack from the Big East, which is looking to grow its membership.

In a semi-related note, the Big East's AQ status is not in doubt for at least two more years, and maybe longer, if it can get its membership numbers up and stabilized.  There is no formal process for removing AQ status from a conference like there is for adding it.  That doesn't mean the BCS poobahs can't create a process or strip a league of its AQ status without one, but it will be at least the 2014 season before that would happen.

In an effort to prevent that, the Big East will invite Air Force, Boise St (MWC), UCF (C-USA) and Navy to join its ranks next week, Brett McMurphy posted yesterday.  Other reports say that SMU and Houston (C-USA) will recieve invites as well.  That doesn't mean those invites will be accepted.

There may be other, perfectly good reasons for these two leagues to work together like this (TV, scheduling, etc), but getting a BCS berth for its champion looks like a pipe dream.


Since: Oct 21, 2011
Posted on: October 21, 2011 9:16 am

Mountain West, C-USA Merger not BCS-Worthy

Which teams are Palm assuming will be in these conferences when BCS AQ status is determined in 2013?  No way a BE without WV and L'ville (and probably Rutgers) would be better than a MWC-CUSA with Boise, Houston, etc.  The BE would be without a consistent top 20 team and have perhaps 4-5 top 50 teams.  MWC-CUSA would have one consistent top 10 team (Boise), and have 5-6 top 50 teams.  If all of the current MWC-CUSA teams stay, it would definitely be better than a BE without WV.  Neither is going to be a great conference, but I think Boise swings the balance with their decision.  Whichever conference they land in will be stronger. 

Plus, with 4 conferences accumulting more teams and more money it becomes more and more unfair to compare conferences like the SEC to the BE or MWC-CUSA.  As much as they'd like it, you can't just give the SEC 6 AQ spots.

Since: Sep 20, 2006
Posted on: October 20, 2011 5:10 pm

Mountain West, C-USA Merger not BCS-Worthy

It would be about a hundred times more worthy than the Big Least champion...UConn pretty much proved that last year...Boise State should have been in that game and the whole world knows it. The Huskies would have finished 4th in the WAC last year.

Since: Aug 17, 2006
Posted on: October 17, 2011 1:04 pm

Mountain West, C-USA Merger not BCS-Worthy

Mount US - I like that conference name

Since: Oct 17, 2011
Posted on: October 17, 2011 12:45 pm
This comment has been removed.

Post Deleted by Administrator

Since: May 8, 2011
Posted on: October 15, 2011 3:56 pm

Mountain West, C-USA Merger not BCS-Worthy

Remember that purple and gray striped football field from 1-AA Central Arkansas? They're playing on it now and you can check it live online, you have to see it to believe it- links to the video at 

Since: Mar 6, 2011
Posted on: October 15, 2011 3:42 pm

Mountain West, C-USA Merger not BCS-Worthy

Rutgers is still a joke, (and yes I am aware they beat the 'Cuse this year), the only reason the Big 10 was considering them was to add exposure to the New York media.

Since: Jan 1, 2007
Posted on: October 15, 2011 2:50 pm

Mountain West, C-USA Merger not BCS-Worthy

Why the mention of Rutgers? They joined the Big East before there was such a thing as the Big East. And they were still a long time joke. You act like they just joined the Big East in the past few years. They were around .500 throughout the 80's before joining the Big East. They went .500 their first couple seasons before they went on a run of 12 straight .500-and-below seasons. The Big East did nothing for them. Only the past few years since 2005 and going 11-2 in 2006 have them been decent. And guess what? It is in the new weak Big East; not the one with Miami, VaTech, and BC.

Since: Sep 26, 2011
Posted on: October 15, 2011 2:36 pm

Mountain West, C-USA Merger not BCS-Worthy

I would rather see AQ status only for the top 4 or 5 conferences, with the additional slots awarded as wild-cards to all of the remaining teams on an individual basis.

Since: Nov 4, 2006
Posted on: October 15, 2011 2:28 pm

Mountain West, C-USA Merger not BCS-Worthy

Keep in mind when comparing non BCS and BCS conferences that the giant advantage (money and recruiting) provided to BCS teams makes current comps invalid.  For example, Va Tech got much better once they were in a "big" conference.  Rutgers was a long time joke before getting BCS money and exposure. Teams like Cincy, Louisville, USF, UConn, etc had much less upside before they got the advantage of a BCS conference. In fact 3 of the 4 WERE CUSA teams recently and the other was new to D-1.  Now, all of sudden they are superior?  No.  They just have new recruiting and revenue advantages by being in the Big East.

So, who is to say an UCF, East Carolina (who already packs out 45-50,000 at home games) or Houston would not make a significant jump in overall program strength if they were granted BCS status with it's added revenues and recruiting power.

Just sayin.

Since: Nov 4, 2006
Posted on: October 15, 2011 2:18 pm

Mountain West, C-USA Merger not BCS-Worthy

The BCS is and always has been a bad joke.
Get rid of it as soon as possible.
The NCAA has never truly had real National Champ...someday they will decdie it like every o ther sport on the planet does. Not by just picking two teams that are deemed worthy, but but settling on the field with a deeper field.  It could be correctly argued that in hindsite, the top two that were selected to play in the title game were not the top 75% of the time.

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