In Response to Nico Savidge of the Daily Cardinal:
"Game Column: Win validates TCU but not every non-AQ team"
----- Forwarded Message ----
From: "Travella, Blaise"
To: savidgewilki@dailycardinal.com
Sent: Tue, January 4, 2011 1:30:29 PM
Subject: Non-AQ Worthiness
From: "Travella, Blaise"
To: savidgewilki@dailycardinal.com
Sent: Tue, January 4, 2011 1:30:29 PM
Subject: Non-AQ Worthiness
Hello Nico,
I believe Gary Patterson and TCU’s point is NOT that all “non-AQ” teams are validated and parity is here for “ALL”. The point is that there are high caliber teams in good Non-AQ conferences that can complete and have/will beat solid BCS teams. Now the proof is in the pudding and if you look at the recent BCS bowl history, it basically boils down to two “mid-major” conferences, the MWC and the WAC, that are most worthy of the parity discussion. And after 2011 it’s really down to the MWC since the WAC will be all but dissolved.
Non-AQs domination in BCS bowls:
You pointed out 2 non-AQ BCS bowl wins without mentioning Utah ’s two wins, who in my opinion were the original “validators” of quality non-BCS conferences. If you look at the history of the BCS, non-AQ schools have gone 5-2 in BCS bowls, or even better, 4-1 in BCS bowls against BCS opponents.
2004 Utah over Pitt MWC over Big East
2006 Boise St over Oklahoma WAC over Big 12
2008 Utah over Alabama MWC over SEC
2009 Boise St over TCU (both Non-AQ) WAC over MWC
2010 TCU over Wisconsin MWC over Big 10
Only non-AQ loss to a BCS team was 2007 Georgia over Hawaii . SEC over WAC
Now it could be said that Utah , TCU, Boise St , (and perhaps BYU) are the only programs worth mentioning out of these conferences. And it could also be said that both TCU and Utah no longer count since they have joined BCS conferences. The fact is that if these teams were not facing a handful of great competition, they wouldn’t be able to match up against the AQ schools. The strong competition in the WAC and MWC only serves to validate Utah ’s, TCU’s, and Boise St’s impressive BCS bowl wins over AQ schools.
For 2011 the MWC loses Utah and BYU, but gains Boise St and keeps TCU for one more year. It’s too bad Utah doesn’t hang around for 2011, to make the MWC a monster conference with 5 of the nation’s top 25 teams returning and would have probably ranked the MWC higher than the ACC, Big East, and Big 12. Even without Utah , TCU and BYU in 2012 there still remains bowl winning programs Air Force, San Diego St and the addition of the top four programs from the WAC ( Boise St, Fresno St, Nevada , Hawaii ). Luckily for the remaining members of the MWC, past member’s performances will be included when the BCS considers MWC membership in 2012.
Perhaps Patterson’s statement of validating the non-AQ schools was really a validation of the MWC with the WAC additions. It should be in the best interest of the BCS to grant AQ status to the strongest “little sisters of the poor” aka MWC. This will silence the most significant non-AQ threat, prop up the BCS bowl system support, and once again let the BCS powers that be rest easy at night.
By the way, take a look at the BCS conference teams by location:
What region is missing? Hint: it’s a tiny region from the Sierras to the Rockies
Footnote: The MWC has won the Bowl Challenge Cup 3 times and probably a 4th this year. The next closest is the ACC with 1.5. Of course the argument here is that the MWC doesn’t play against enough BCS schools in bowl games, but take a look at the impressive record over the last 7 years.
MWC Bowl Record Against BCS Teams Bowl Cup Challenge
2004 2-1 2-0 *Winner
2005 2-2 2-1
2006 3-1 1-0
2007 4-1 1-1 * Winner
2008 3-2 1-1
2009 4-1 2-0 * Winner
2010 4-1 2-0 * Most likely Winner
Total 22-9 10-3 3 wins, 2010 to be decided
No comments:
Post a Comment