Football Home Game
Sat, August 31, 2024
Sat, August 31, 2024
Basketball Home Game
Fri, November 1, 2024
Fri, November 1, 2024
Denver Post regarding MWC & AQ status
Denver Post regarding MWC & AQ status
copy & paste from the MWC board:
http://www.denverpost.com/colleges/ci_16900712
Mountain West hopes for future BCS automatic qualifying
By Natalie Meisler
The Denver Post
Thompson has every reason to expect an MWC football team will play in a BCS bowl a year from now. Contrary to widespread belief that TCU's membership in the Big East Conference, starting July 1, 2012, kills MWC hopes of gaining automatic Bowl Championship Series qualification, little has changed.
Thompson worked the figures and says they show a net gain, losing BYU's top-25 finishes and replacing Utah's run with Boise State's third-, fourth- and 10th-place finishes in the final BCS standings. "It's not a dramatic changer," Thompson said.
Read more: Mountain West hopes for future BCS automatic qualifying - The Denver Post http://www.denverpost.com/colleges/ci_16900712
Read The Denver Post's Terms of Use of its content: http://www.denverpost.com/termsofuse
http://www.denverpost.com/colleges/ci_16900712
Mountain West hopes for future BCS automatic qualifying
By Natalie Meisler
The Denver Post
Thompson has every reason to expect an MWC football team will play in a BCS bowl a year from now. Contrary to widespread belief that TCU's membership in the Big East Conference, starting July 1, 2012, kills MWC hopes of gaining automatic Bowl Championship Series qualification, little has changed.
Thompson worked the figures and says they show a net gain, losing BYU's top-25 finishes and replacing Utah's run with Boise State's third-, fourth- and 10th-place finishes in the final BCS standings. "It's not a dramatic changer," Thompson said.
Read more: Mountain West hopes for future BCS automatic qualifying - The Denver Post http://www.denverpost.com/colleges/ci_16900712
Read The Denver Post's Terms of Use of its content: http://www.denverpost.com/termsofuse
- ProvoAggie
- Site Admin
- Posts: 14992
- Joined: June 14th, 2010, 1:00 am
- Location: Provo, Utah
- Has thanked: 1483 times
- Been thanked: 2938 times
- Contact:
Re: Denver Post regarding MWC & AQ status
the most interesting thing to me is the part about the BE needing another waiver.
it's been speculated by some on the MWC board that the easiest thing for the BCS to do would be to throw the MWC some sort of bone. the playoff game with conf-usa could be that bone.
it's been speculated by some on the MWC board that the easiest thing for the BCS to do would be to throw the MWC some sort of bone. the playoff game with conf-usa could be that bone.
Re: Denver Post regarding MWC & AQ status
I'm sorry, I meant to include that.ProvoAggie wrote:Do you have a link to the thread where this comes from?
http://www.mwcboard.com/www/forums/inde ... opic=30383
- SoCalAggie
- Posts: 903
- Joined: November 2nd, 2010, 11:10 pm
- Location: Anaheim Hills, California
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Re: Denver Post regarding MWC & AQ status
If the end result is a play off between the MWC Champs and the CUSA champs, then there is no way the MWC takes UTEP, and there is little chance they go to 12.
Drifting through a world that's torn and tattered, every thought I have don't mean a thing...
- WillRogersAggie
- Posts: 1691
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 9:18 pm
- Location: Section 4
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Re: Denver Post regarding MWC & AQ status
We are getting our chain yanked IMO
Good judgment comes from experience, and a lot of that comes from bad judgment.
Will Rogers
Will Rogers
- ustate98
- Pick'em Champ - '13 WTHCG
- Posts: 2027
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 11:14 am
- Has thanked: 212 times
- Been thanked: 127 times
Re: Denver Post regarding MWC & AQ status
If there does turn out to be a play-in AQ game between CUSA and MWC I think that increases the odds of the MWC expanding. I doubt CUSA would agree to that game if they have to play a conference championship game first and the MWC didn't.SoCalAggie wrote:If the end result is a play off between the MWC Champs and the CUSA champs, then there is no way the MWC takes UTEP, and there is little chance they go to 12.
- bigbluebaby
- Posts: 1548
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 2:11 pm
- Location: Logan, Idaho Falls, Rock Springs,
- Has thanked: 7 times
- Been thanked: 34 times
Re: Denver Post regarding MWC & AQ status
I believe this is all wishful thinking and posturing for hopeful discussion by the "HAIR".
You don't get hair like that just a sittin around.
Otherwise if they were gonna get A.Q. why take Hawaii? I don't see how they help the #'s.
They aren't getting AQ and they know it.
You don't get hair like that just a sittin around.
Otherwise if they were gonna get A.Q. why take Hawaii? I don't see how they help the #'s.
They aren't getting AQ and they know it.
"So your saying I got a chance ??!!"
- ProvoAggie
- Site Admin
- Posts: 14992
- Joined: June 14th, 2010, 1:00 am
- Location: Provo, Utah
- Has thanked: 1483 times
- Been thanked: 2938 times
- Contact:
Re: Denver Post regarding MWC & AQ status
Hawaii did make a BCS bowl a couple of year's ago...even though they quickly showed that they probably didn't belong there.
Re: Denver Post regarding MWC & AQ status
Anybody who thinks the numbers are the same after trading BYU, Utah and TCU for BSU, Fresno, Nevada and Hawaii is clueless.
Here are there final finishes in the BCS going back to 2006 (current BCS standing is used for this year).
BYU: 14, 19, 19, 20
Utah: 19, 25, 6
TCU: 3, 4, 11
10 Top-25 BCS finishes.
BSU: 10, 6, 9, 24, 8
Nevada: 15
Fresno: 0
Hawaii: 10
6 Top-25 BCS finishes. And 4 of those are BSUs.
Here are there final finishes in the BCS going back to 2006 (current BCS standing is used for this year).
BYU: 14, 19, 19, 20
Utah: 19, 25, 6
TCU: 3, 4, 11
10 Top-25 BCS finishes.
BSU: 10, 6, 9, 24, 8
Nevada: 15
Fresno: 0
Hawaii: 10
6 Top-25 BCS finishes. And 4 of those are BSUs.
Re: Denver Post regarding MWC & AQ status
it might actually cause c-usa to do away with the championship game. as was suggested in that thread on the mwc board, it could pose a problem because a team might be prohibited from playing a conf championship game, followed by a playoff game, followed by a bowl game.ustate98 wrote:If there does turn out to be a play-in AQ game between CUSA and MWC I think that increases the odds of the MWC expanding. I doubt CUSA would agree to that game if they have to play a conference championship game first and the MWC didn't.SoCalAggie wrote:If the end result is a play off between the MWC Champs and the CUSA champs, then there is no way the MWC takes UTEP, and there is little chance they go to 12.
- hipsterdoofus21
- Mr. Buttface
- Posts: 18156
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 9:39 pm
- Has thanked: 3234 times
- Been thanked: 3194 times
Re: Denver Post regarding MWC & AQ status
Hilarious bbb!!!bigbluebaby wrote:I believe this is all wishful thinking and posturing for hopeful discussion by the "HAIR".
You don't get hair like that just a sittin around.
The BCS would encourage any type of play in game for the non-AQs cause it would eliminate the possibility of two non-AQs making it like they had last year. I wouldn't be surprised if the BCS has decided to allow for a 6th BCS game that would pit the MWC champ vs the C-USA champ. You know the big boys don't like having to face these non-AQ giant killers cause it's embarrassing for them and the BCS system. That's why they put Boise and TCU together last year. If a non-AQ is going to make it to a BCS game they're going to come from either the MWC or C-USA anyway, so why not just put them together automatically? Otherwise I'm not sure how both conferences have a championship game, plus a play-in game cause that would be too many games in a season. So if the talks of a merger are true, either that means the two conferences will pit their top teams together, without a conf. championship, or they're headed to playing each other in the Miss Congeniality BCS bowl game after winning their respective conf. championship game.
- SoCalAggie
- Posts: 903
- Joined: November 2nd, 2010, 11:10 pm
- Location: Anaheim Hills, California
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Re: Denver Post regarding MWC & AQ status
Actually this could mean mo' Money. It's like a quasi-play off game between the two biggest non-BSC conference (still in existance after 2012). So you have a MWC Div. Champ game and a CUSA Div. Champ game. Winner of each gets to play each other for a chance at an Auto BCS bowl! The only team I could see negatively impacted by this is Hawaii since they like to schedule late in the season for the 13th game. the winner ends up really only playing two unexpected games, then a bowl game. Is there enough time between the offical season end and the begining of the bowl season? That's the question.
Think of the TV exposure. The Mnt. gets the MWC champ game, and ESPN or who ever is the highest bidder gets the rights to the MWC vs CUSA champ game. $$$$$$$$$$ in da bank!
Think of the TV exposure. The Mnt. gets the MWC champ game, and ESPN or who ever is the highest bidder gets the rights to the MWC vs CUSA champ game. $$$$$$$$$$ in da bank!
Drifting through a world that's torn and tattered, every thought I have don't mean a thing...
- hipsterdoofus21
- Mr. Buttface
- Posts: 18156
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 9:39 pm
- Has thanked: 3234 times
- Been thanked: 3194 times
Re: Denver Post regarding MWC & AQ status
If they could pull it off, the MWC vs CUSA championship game would be the only FBS game on tv that saturday.
- Aggieiester
- Posts: 662
- Joined: November 18th, 2010, 10:11 pm
- Has thanked: 70 times
- Been thanked: 157 times
Re: Denver Post regarding MWC & AQ status
If Thompson and the MWC presidents still have visions of BCS AQ status dancing around their heads then IMO it is doubtful that they expand.
Then again if the MWC is really that close to AQ status, why did TCU bolt for the Big East?
Then again if the MWC is really that close to AQ status, why did TCU bolt for the Big East?
- AGinNEIowa
- Pick'em Champ - '15, '16, '17 WTHCG
- Posts: 8077
- Joined: January 10th, 2003, 12:00 am
- Location: northeast Iowa
- Has thanked: 2403 times
- Been thanked: 1085 times
Re: Denver Post regarding MWC & AQ status
There will be NO qualifier playoff between CUSA and MWC. CUSA's playoff puts them at the maximum allowed games by NCAA. The BCS isn't the NCAA, and I don't see the NCAA allowing that extra game.
MW will go to 12, the MWC champ will usually qualify for the BCS game, just like Boise, TCU, Utah keep doing now.
I'm calling it, 12/20/2010 - Feel free to remember these bolded comments, and I'll eat crow if it doesn't come to pass.
MW will go to 12, the MWC champ will usually qualify for the BCS game, just like Boise, TCU, Utah keep doing now.
I'm calling it, 12/20/2010 - Feel free to remember these bolded comments, and I'll eat crow if it doesn't come to pass.
2023-24 BOWL PICK'EM Deadline is 12/16 1:30pm
WEEK 14 PICK'EM Results
KICKOFF PICKEM Summary & Results
YTD STANDINGS -WEEKLY PICKEM & WTHG
WEEK 14 PICK'EM Results
KICKOFF PICKEM Summary & Results
YTD STANDINGS -WEEKLY PICKEM & WTHG
- WillRogersAggie
- Posts: 1691
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 9:18 pm
- Location: Section 4
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Re: Denver Post regarding MWC & AQ status
AGinNEIowa wrote:There will be NO qualifier playoff between CUSA and MWC. CUSA's playoff puts them at the maximum allowed games by NCAA. The BCS isn't the NCAA, and I don't see the NCAA allowing that extra game.
MW will go to 12, the MWC champ will usually qualify for the BCS game, just like Boise, TCU, Utah keep doing now.
I'm calling it, 12/20/2010 - Feel free to remember these bolded comments, and I'll eat crow if it doesn't come to pass.
2 things. When? is USU included? PM me your scoop.....I am
•Trustworthy,
•Loyal,
•Helpful,
•Friendly,
•Courteous,
•Kind,
•Obedient,
•Cheerful,
•Thrifty,
•Brave,
•Clean,
•and Reverent.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Good judgment comes from experience, and a lot of that comes from bad judgment.
Will Rogers
Will Rogers
- hipsterdoofus21
- Mr. Buttface
- Posts: 18156
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 9:39 pm
- Has thanked: 3234 times
- Been thanked: 3194 times
Re: Denver Post regarding MWC & AQ status
but Will Rogers you're also judgmental of people who pee in public.
- AGinNEIowa
- Pick'em Champ - '15, '16, '17 WTHCG
- Posts: 8077
- Joined: January 10th, 2003, 12:00 am
- Location: northeast Iowa
- Has thanked: 2403 times
- Been thanked: 1085 times
Re: Denver Post regarding MWC & AQ status
I have a feeling- not going to elaborate about who's in.WillRogersAggie wrote:AGinNEIowa wrote:There will be NO qualifier playoff between CUSA and MWC. CUSA's playoff puts them at the maximum allowed games by NCAA. The BCS isn't the NCAA, and I don't see the NCAA allowing that extra game.
MW will go to 12, the MWC champ will usually qualify for the BCS game, just like Boise, TCU, Utah keep doing now.
I'm calling it, 12/20/2010 - Feel free to remember these bolded comments, and I'll eat crow if it doesn't come to pass.
2 things. When? is USU included? PM me your scoop.....I am
•Trustworthy,
•Loyal,
•Helpful,
•Friendly,
•Courteous,
•Kind,
•Obedient,
•Cheerful,
•Thrifty,
•Brave,
•Clean,
•and Reverent.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Remember I'm in northeast Iowa. My links to Logan, or anything else out west are weak at best -
it's just in my gut, maybe it's my butt
2023-24 BOWL PICK'EM Deadline is 12/16 1:30pm
WEEK 14 PICK'EM Results
KICKOFF PICKEM Summary & Results
YTD STANDINGS -WEEKLY PICKEM & WTHG
WEEK 14 PICK'EM Results
KICKOFF PICKEM Summary & Results
YTD STANDINGS -WEEKLY PICKEM & WTHG
- hipsterdoofus21
- Mr. Buttface
- Posts: 18156
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 9:39 pm
- Has thanked: 3234 times
- Been thanked: 3194 times
Re: Denver Post regarding MWC & AQ status
May I ask why you think Hawaii hurts their chances? We've had a few bad years looming at about 500, but other than that, we've done very well this last decade. Without looking at the numbers I'd would say easily better than Nevada and Fresno. How is it that Hawaii hurts AQ status, and the other additions help?bigbluebaby wrote:I believe this is all wishful thinking and posturing for hopeful discussion by the "HAIR".
You don't get hair like that just a sittin around.
Otherwise if they were gonna get A.Q. why take Hawaii? I don't see how they help the #'s.
They aren't getting AQ and they know it.
Re: Denver Post regarding MWC & AQ status
Crusaders wrote:May I ask why you think Hawaii hurts their chances? We've had a few bad years looming at about 500, but other than that, we've done very well this last decade. Without looking at the numbers I'd would say easily better than Nevada and Fresno. How is it that Hawaii hurts AQ status, and the other additions help?bigbluebaby wrote:I believe this is all wishful thinking and posturing for hopeful discussion by the "HAIR".
You don't get hair like that just a sittin around.
Otherwise if they were gonna get A.Q. why take Hawaii? I don't see how they help the #'s.
They aren't getting AQ and they know it.
Hawaii is a non factor. It is based on membership as of December 2011. Hawaii, Nevada, Fresno will not count . The next membership period will be December 2015. Alot will change between now and then.
- AggiesForever
- Pick'em Champ - '15 Kickoff
- Posts: 2331
- Joined: January 1st, 1997, 12:00 am
- Has thanked: 1313 times
- Been thanked: 678 times
Re: Denver Post regarding MWC & AQ status
The Mountain West wasn't going to get AQ had Utah, BYU, and TCU stayed, for the very reason the the Big Six Conferences feel no need to let anyone else into the AQ club. They might add a little more money to the non-AQ payouts or something like that. But they will never, repeat NEVER let anybody else into the AQ club. And the MWC, WAC, and anybody else who is left out there just needs to get that through their thick neanderthal-like skulls. Boise State, as great a program as they are, does not have the academic gravitas to get into the PAC Whatever-it-is-today Conference. For that matter very few schools in the Mountain West, except maybe Colorado State, meet that criteria, and believe me, ladies and gentlemen, when President's are making the call, that factors into it.
So you can read this hud if you want to, but it's never going to change because, when push comes to shove, nobody has the balls to force the BCS to change.
So you can read this hud if you want to, but it's never going to change because, when push comes to shove, nobody has the balls to force the BCS to change.
- UtahStizzle
- Posts: 4969
- Joined: November 15th, 2010, 4:16 am
- Location: Northern Utah
- Has thanked: 34 times
- Been thanked: 48 times
- Contact:
Re: Denver Post regarding MWC & AQ status
Well as it is now...the highest rank non-aq team gets an AQ. So allowing this MWC / CUSA thing. Would that basically take that spot, or would there still be the highest rated non-AQ after the MWC / CUSA thing? Meaning MAC or Sunbelt would get someone in if qualified.
it's hard to see them giving an AQ to a join conference like that, but perhaps they would just to relieve pressure. Either way, I think this slows down USU's attempt at getting in, as the MWC is going to wait for the results of this first.
it's hard to see them giving an AQ to a join conference like that, but perhaps they would just to relieve pressure. Either way, I think this slows down USU's attempt at getting in, as the MWC is going to wait for the results of this first.
Twitter: UtahStizzle
-
- Posts: 767
- Joined: November 13th, 2010, 7:37 pm
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 33 times
Re: Denver Post regarding MWC & AQ status
The entire concept of AQ status is the aspect of the BCS that provides the biggest open door for congressional or legal (or Cubanic) action. If the cartel simply did away with the concept of AQ status (no Big Least team qualifies this year), and simply took the top 10 teams in the rankings, there would be far fewer avenues for attack. For that reason, I could see them adding a sixth "BCS" bowl specifically for the interlopers, if for no other reason than to take off the pressure. Remember, the BCS is all about power and holding onto it. It's the same as Third World dictators who rig elections despite international pressure to step down, sanctions, and all the other negativity. Power is the only thing that matters, and when you have it, you'll do whatever you have to do to keep it. If anybody thinks that Darth Delany cares about ANYTHING other than keeping the power with the Blue-Bloods, you're wrong. He's even admitted that there is a fortune to be made in a playoff. If adding a sixth BCS game keeps the dogs at bay, he'll do it. Why do you think the fifth game was added? Why were provisions made for non-AQ's to qualify at all? It was because of the pressure brought by the actions of the ex-Tulane president with Congress.
C-USA has to hate the fact that if those rules had been in place earlier, the first two non-AQ's to qualify for the BCS would have been from their conference (and they still have no qualifiers since then). The fact that one of their presidents was the driving force for a change that hasn't benefitted them yet has to hurt as well.
C-USA has to hate the fact that if those rules had been in place earlier, the first two non-AQ's to qualify for the BCS would have been from their conference (and they still have no qualifiers since then). The fact that one of their presidents was the driving force for a change that hasn't benefitted them yet has to hurt as well.
- AgTime
- Posts: 1567
- Joined: November 4th, 2010, 10:27 pm
- Has thanked: 66 times
- Been thanked: 137 times
Re: Denver Post regarding MWC & AQ status
Might someone please explain to me the love for CUSA? IIRC, they've never had a BCS qualifier. Secondly, the new MWC is really not a lot (if any) better than the old (i.e. this year's) WAC. To my knowledge, there has never been talk of the WAC gaining AQ status. How do Hair's numbers possibly show a net gain without Utah, TCU and BYU. That just doesn't make any sense to me. May we see these mystical numbers please?
-
- Posts: 767
- Joined: November 13th, 2010, 7:37 pm
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 33 times
Re: Denver Post regarding MWC & AQ status
AgTime, C-USA, as I said above, had a bad break.
They had the bad fortune to have two teams that WOULD HAVE qualified for the BCS under the current rules. It was these two teams, and the bravery of Tulane's then-president, that forced the BCS to make changes allowing non-AQ's to qualify. But this was too late for C-USA, the conference that essentially made it happen. Those Tulane and Marshall teams ultimately got screwed. The would have and should have been the first non-AQ teams to make it to the BCS. But they did allow the access that we now have to happen. So to say that "they've never had a BCS qualifier" is technically correct, but not the whole story.
They had the bad fortune to have two teams that WOULD HAVE qualified for the BCS under the current rules. It was these two teams, and the bravery of Tulane's then-president, that forced the BCS to make changes allowing non-AQ's to qualify. But this was too late for C-USA, the conference that essentially made it happen. Those Tulane and Marshall teams ultimately got screwed. The would have and should have been the first non-AQ teams to make it to the BCS. But they did allow the access that we now have to happen. So to say that "they've never had a BCS qualifier" is technically correct, but not the whole story.
- AGinNEIowa
- Pick'em Champ - '15, '16, '17 WTHCG
- Posts: 8077
- Joined: January 10th, 2003, 12:00 am
- Location: northeast Iowa
- Has thanked: 2403 times
- Been thanked: 1085 times
Re: Denver Post regarding MWC & AQ status
The measurement period for the next round of decision making doesn't include those two teams, in only includes the last 4-5 years, when Utah, BSU and TCU are the only non-AQ's to qualify. USA has only had one team close in that time frame, which was TCU - which didn't qualify the last year they were in the USA.MahlerFan1 wrote:AgTime, C-USA, as I said above, had a bad break.
They had the bad fortune to have two teams that WOULD HAVE qualified for the BCS under the current rules. It was these two teams, and the bravery of Tulane's then-president, that forced the BCS to make changes allowing non-AQ's to qualify. But this was too late for C-USA, the conference that essentially made it happen. Those Tulane and Marshall teams ultimately got screwed. The would have and should have been the first non-AQ teams to make it to the BCS. But they did allow the access that we now have to happen. So to say that "they've never had a BCS qualifier" is technically correct, but not the whole story.
On the other hand, only BSU will remain as a non-AQ to have qualified, since (IIRC) the team's qualification belongs to the team, not the conf, and now that UU and TCU are in AQ conf's, their credits are going to PAC and BEast.
MW won't have AQ status, MW/USA playoff game won't happen either. IMNSHO
2023-24 BOWL PICK'EM Deadline is 12/16 1:30pm
WEEK 14 PICK'EM Results
KICKOFF PICKEM Summary & Results
YTD STANDINGS -WEEKLY PICKEM & WTHG
WEEK 14 PICK'EM Results
KICKOFF PICKEM Summary & Results
YTD STANDINGS -WEEKLY PICKEM & WTHG
-
- Posts: 767
- Joined: November 13th, 2010, 7:37 pm
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 33 times
Re: Denver Post regarding MWC & AQ status
Like I said, though, the very existence of "AQ status" is the primary, and most vulnerable, attack point against the BCS. I think a lot is going to happen before 2014 on that front. The cartel, led by Delany, is more intransigent than ever, but the opposition is more determined than ever, with powerful friends in the government and the private sector.
-
- SJSU Ultimate Loser Award Winner - Given to someone that should probably give up but won't.
- Posts: 23455
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 8:09 am
- Location: Where the sagebrush grows!
- Has thanked: 1417 times
- Been thanked: 3212 times
Re: Denver Post regarding MWC & AQ status
Old Orrin hasn't put up much fight now that the State's precious Utes are in the PAC 12. Typical politician. Once they get theirs, they don't care about the rest of us.
-
- Posts: 767
- Joined: November 13th, 2010, 7:37 pm
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 33 times
Re: Denver Post regarding MWC & AQ status
Well, BYU is still not AQ, are they? As long as they're not, Orrin still has a dog in the fight.
Re: Denver Post regarding MWC & AQ status
Supposedly, Hawaii's Gov & new Atty General have mentioned they may enter the fight, should it become necessary. The BCS will create problems for themselves if they grant and excemption/waiver to the BE and not the MWC. I would guess they will try to avoid political and media pressure. Just how far they will go to avoid that pressure, remains to be seen.
It's been mentioned, the best thing for them would be to talk the MWC out of seeking an excemption. They have to give them something for that to happen.
They may also just do whatever they want and roll with the fallout.
It's been mentioned, the best thing for them would be to talk the MWC out of seeking an excemption. They have to give them something for that to happen.
They may also just do whatever they want and roll with the fallout.
- jackmormon
- RIP
- Posts: 10564
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 4:53 pm
- Has thanked: 8 times
- Been thanked: 3 times
Re: Denver Post regarding MWC & AQ status
Hatch doesn't give a rat's (_!_) about the Utes. If BYU ever gets in an AQ conference you won't hear a peep from him.NVAggie wrote:Old Orrin hasn't put up much fight now that the State's precious Utes are in the PAC 12. Typical politician. Once they get theirs, they don't care about the rest of us.
-
- Posts: 654
- Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 10:45 am
- Location: West Point, Utah
- Has thanked: 150 times
- Been thanked: 43 times
Re: Denver Post regarding MWC & AQ status
I have heard this statement come up quite a few times and it conflicts with the reports I remember reading. The reports and formulas came out a while ago so finding concrete references is harder now but this from Andy Staples from SI states that the AQs need no exemption.Steve509 wrote:...The BCS will create problems for themselves if they grant and excemption/waiver to the BE and not the MWC...
Can't find where he got the info but it matches what I remember reading. So the long and short is BE - ' You'se guys got nothing to worry about. '. MWC - ' Well played but better luck next time (evil laugh and money grubbing) 'Can one of the big six get deep-sixed for poor performance? Alas, that cannot happen. This isn't the English Premier League. No one will get relegated, because the big six conferences observed the Golden Rule when they drew up the BCS contracts: He who has the gold makes the rules."
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/w ... z18mFVmmUC
I just can't see it any other way without huge, enormous, monumental pressure from someone or something that can't be ignored.
"Due to budget cutbacks the light at the end of the tunnel has been turned off...."