Big East - Not so good

[Bull94]

Our champ can upgrade from a regular BCS bowl to a the championship game but that will be determined by how well that team does in their OOC and how tough those opponents were. not whether Pitt beats Utah.

It's more important to schedule tough OOC opponents and do well then it is for your conference to do well in their OOC games.

Actually, that's not true.  Why? Well, look at Alabama last year - they didn't play tough OOC opponents.  Only 1 - VT (they played FIU, North Texas, Chattanooga).  They play in the SEC so they don't have to play tough OOC opponents.

And why is that, pray tell?

I'll tell you why: Because the other teams in their conference are good teams who win their games outside of their conference!

Look at Florida in 2008 ... Miami (in a down year for the Canes), Hawaii, The Citadel, and Florida State (also not at their best)  ... Hmmm... Maybe LSU did it in 2007... VT again, okay not bad.  But Middle Tennesee State, Tulane, and Louisiana Tech?

Okay.. perhaps you have some evidence to back up your assertion that having quality teams in your conference -- which can really only be judged when they play their OOC games - is irrelevant.

Seems to me that, while winning the conference is the ultimate goal, we should want our conference wins to actually MEAN something.

Otherwise, we're nothing more than Boise State or Utah.

who did the other undefeateds left out of the BCS MNC game play last year?

TCU - Virginia, Clemson, Texas State and SMU

Boise State - Oregon, Miami(oh), Bowling Green, Tulsa

Cincy - Southeast Missouri State, Oregon State, Fresno State, Mami(oh), Illinois

not exactly a murderers row.

overall strength of schedule is what matters.

If we played Ohio State, Oklahoma, and Oregon in addition to UF and miami and we were undefeated it wouldn't matter if our conference mates lost every OOC game, we would still play for the BCS MNC.

this whole conference B.S. is drummed up by the networks to get us to watch crappy BE games because they want us to think they matter. In actuality they don't and the only thing they really can effect is the national championship game(which they would still pick a big market Texas over a BE undefeated even if the BE had a better OOC record-see cincy last year).

[Guest]

Our champ can upgrade from a regular BCS bowl to a the championship game but that will be determined by how well that team does in their OOC and how tough those opponents were. not whether Pitt beats Utah.

It's more important to schedule tough OOC opponents and do well then it is for your conference to do well in their OOC games.

Actually, that's not true.  Why? Well, look at Alabama last year - they didn't play tough OOC opponents.  Only 1 - VT (they played FIU, North Texas, Chattanooga).  They play in the SEC so they don't have to play tough OOC opponents.

And why is that, pray tell?

I'll tell you why: Because the other teams in their conference are good teams who win their games outside of their conference!

Look at Florida in 2008 ... Miami (in a down year for the Canes), Hawaii, The Citadel, and Florida State (also not at their best)  ... Hmmm... Maybe LSU did it in 2007... VT again, okay not bad.  But Middle Tennesee State, Tulane, and Louisiana Tech?

Okay.. perhaps you have some evidence to back up your assertion that having quality teams in your conference -- which can really only be judged when they play their OOC games - is irrelevant.

Seems to me that, while winning the conference is the ultimate goal, we should want our conference wins to actually MEAN something.

Otherwise, we're nothing more than Boise State or Utah.

who did the other undefeateds left out of the BCS MNC game play last year?

TCU - Virginia, Clemson, Texas State and SMU

Boise State - Oregon, Miami(oh), Bowling Green, Tulsa

Cincy - Southeast Missouri State, Oregon State, Fresno State, Mami(oh), Illinois

not exactly a murderers row.

overall strength of schedule is what matters.

If we played Ohio State, Oklahoma, and Oregon in addition to UF and miami and we were undefeated it wouldn't matter if our conference mates lost every OOC game, we would still play for the BCS MNC.

this whole conference B.S. is drummed up by the networks to get us to watch crappy BE games because they want us to think they matter. In actuality they don't and the only thing they really can effect is the national championship game(which they would still pick a big market Texas over a BE undefeated even if the BE had a better OOC record-see cincy last year).

Okay, that is just downright naive and quite ignorant.  No team out there will ever schedule FIVE games against upper-tier BCS teams.  NO ONE.    Especially when you can play a team like Stony Brook and they count towards bowl eligibility.

Heck, the Big Ten (next year) and Pac 10 only play three games outside their conference.

So strength of the conference matters more than OOC games.  You may not like it... but it is true.  Watch what happens towards the end of the year when they start discussing who should play for the NC... the first thing you hear is they play in the XXX Conference... it's the first consideration.  Not "overall schedule."

[Bull94]

Our champ can upgrade from a regular BCS bowl to a the championship game but that will be determined by how well that team does in their OOC and how tough those opponents were. not whether Pitt beats Utah.

It's more important to schedule tough OOC opponents and do well then it is for your conference to do well in their OOC games.

Actually, that's not true.  Why? Well, look at Alabama last year - they didn't play tough OOC opponents.  Only 1 - VT (they played FIU, North Texas, Chattanooga).  They play in the SEC so they don't have to play tough OOC opponents.

And why is that, pray tell?

I'll tell you why: Because the other teams in their conference are good teams who win their games outside of their conference!

Look at Florida in 2008 ... Miami (in a down year for the Canes), Hawaii, The Citadel, and Florida State (also not at their best)  ... Hmmm... Maybe LSU did it in 2007... VT again, okay not bad.  But Middle Tennesee State, Tulane, and Louisiana Tech?

Okay.. perhaps you have some evidence to back up your assertion that having quality teams in your conference -- which can really only be judged when they play their OOC games - is irrelevant.

Seems to me that, while winning the conference is the ultimate goal, we should want our conference wins to actually MEAN something.

Otherwise, we're nothing more than Boise State or Utah.

who did the other undefeateds left out of the BCS MNC game play last year?

TCU - Virginia, Clemson, Texas State and SMU

Boise State - Oregon, Miami(oh), Bowling Green, Tulsa

Cincy - Southeast Missouri State, Oregon State, Fresno State, Mami(oh), Illinois

not exactly a murderers row.

overall strength of schedule is what matters.

If we played Ohio State, Oklahoma, and Oregon in addition to UF and miami and we were undefeated it wouldn't matter if our conference mates lost every OOC game, we would still play for the BCS MNC.

this whole conference B.S. is drummed up by the networks to get us to watch crappy BE games because they want us to think they matter. In actuality they don't and the only thing they really can effect is the national championship game(which they would still pick a big market Texas over a BE undefeated even if the BE had a better OOC record-see cincy last year).

Okay, that is just downright naive and quite ignorant.  No team out there will ever schedule FIVE games against upper-tier BCS teams.  NO ONE.    Especially when you can play a team like Stony Brook and they count towards bowl eligibility.

Heck, the Big Ten (next year) and Pac 10 only play three games outside their conference.

So strength of the conference matters more than OOC games.  You may not like it... but it is true.  Watch what happens towards the end of the year when they start discussing who should play for the NC... the first thing you hear is they play in the XXX Conference... it's the first consideration.  Not "overall schedule."

an undefeated BE team last year was left out for a big 12 team even though the big 12 had the 5th lowest winning percentage(i.e. worse OOC record) compared to the 2nd highest winning percentage for the BE. A MWC team and possibly a WAC team were also going to go before the BE team even though their conferences ranked 8th and 9th in winning percentage last year.

Having the 2nd best winning percentage did nothing for the BE champ last year.

playing tougher OOC opponents and beating them would have put Cincy in the MNC game.

Obviously I gave a hypothetical. No one will schedule that way but a BE team with 3 top conference OOC opponents will get more consideration for the MNC than if the BE has the 2nd highest winning percentage as evidenced by last year's actual results.