Can I get a little clarification here? Why is the MWC autobid dead?

[USUC]

To increase our BCS inclusion "score," the bottom of our conference needs to perform better in their OOC games, particularly against BCS teams. I don't see a lot of opportunities for that with our bottom four:

UNLV - Wisconsin, Nevada, @West Virginia, @ Hawaii
SDSU - Nicholls State, @New Mexico State, @Missouri, Utah State
New Mexico - @Oregon, Texas Tech, UTEP, @New Mexico State
Colorado State - Colorado, @Nevada, @Miami (Ohio), Idaho

* I don't include Wyoming in this because they made a bowl game but here is their OOC games:

Wyoming - Southern Utah, @Texas, Boise State, @Toledo.

[SoCalCoug]

Weren't the same people who are saying the MWC will never get an auto-BCS bid without Utah saying just a year ago that the BCS would never allow two non-BCS teams to get BCS bids in the same year?

The MWC with Utah and without Boise State was on the edge of BCS eligibility. The addition of Boise State was supposed to put them over the edge.

One thing I haven't seen anyone consider is that even with the defection of Benedict Arnold U., the addition of Boise State to the MWC has widened the gap between the MWC and the only other non-BCS conference to put teams into to BCS games, the WAC.

The MWC is now clearly the elite of the non-BCS leagues, and is actually much closer to the Big East in football quality than it is to any non-BCS conferences.

With the addition of Boise State, the MWC still has a Big Three, and it appears that for the foreseeable future, the MWC isn't going to go away. The winner of the MWC is, in all likelihood, going to qualify for the BCS under the current rules regarding non-AQ conferences.

With the WAC losing Boise State, they're no longer a real threat to take a BCS bid. No other non-BCS conference has made a real run at taking a BCS bid.

Isn't it the better strategy for the BCS to add another bowl (either the Cotton Bowl or the Jerry Bowl) and bring in the MWC as an AQ conference? Then the questions end. And (hopefully for the BCS) the public outcry and threatened lawsuits and interference by the Singing Senator also go away. Everyone who "deserves" an AQ bid has one. Just bring the MWC into the fold and formalize the bid they're going to keep getting anyway. Plus, the current BCS leagues win, because it's another BCS bid to give to the big boys.

Then, they don't have to worry about this non-AQ conference that keeps beating the chosen ones on the football field. When MWC teams beat Pac-10 teams, it's not news. Of course the MWC teams can do that - they're big boys, too.

I think people are overlooking the value of the loss of Boise State to the WAC as it affects the MWC's auto-bid. The BCS doesn't have to worry about giving the MWC an auto-bid and still have to give one to Boise State for beating a bunch of cupcakes in its conference.

I'm not convinced that the defection of Benedict Arnold U. is the death knell of the MWC's quest for an auto-bid. As I think about it, it may have less of an impact than we initially feared.

[Hot Lunch]

Weren't the same people who are saying the MWC will never get an auto-BCS bid without Utah saying just a year ago that the BCS would never allow two non-BCS teams to get BCS bids in the same year?

The MWC with Utah and without Boise State was on the edge of BCS eligibility. The addition of Boise State was supposed to put them over the edge.

One thing I haven't seen anyone consider is that even with the defection of Benedict Arnold U., the addition of Boise State to the MWC has widened the gap between the MWC and the only other non-BCS conference to put teams into to BCS games, the WAC.

The MWC is now clearly the elite of the non-BCS leagues, and is actually much closer to the Big East in football quality than it is to any non-BCS conferences.

With the addition of Boise State, the MWC still has a Big Three, and it appears that for the foreseeable future, the MWC isn't going to go away. The winner of the MWC is, in all likelihood, going to qualify for the BCS under the current rules regarding non-AQ conferences.

With the WAC losing Boise State, they're no longer a real threat to take a BCS bid. No other non-BCS conference has made a real run at taking a BCS bid.

Isn't it the better strategy for the BCS to add another bowl (either the Cotton Bowl or the Jerry Bowl) and bring in the MWC as an AQ conference? Then the questions end. And (hopefully for the BCS) the public outcry and threatened lawsuits and interference by the Singing Senator also go away. Everyone who "deserves" an AQ bid has one. Just bring the MWC into the fold and formalize the bid they're going to keep getting anyway. Plus, the current BCS leagues win, because it's another BCS bid to give to the big boys.

Then, they don't have to worry about this non-AQ conference that keeps beating the chosen ones on the football field. When MWC teams beat Pac-10 teams, it's not news. Of course the MWC teams can do that - they're big boys, too.

I think people are overlooking the value of the loss of Boise State to the WAC as it affects the MWC's auto-bid. The BCS doesn't have to worry about giving the MWC an auto-bid and still have to give one to Boise State for beating a bunch of cupcakes in its conference.

I'm not convinced that the defection of Benedict Arnold U. is the death knell of the MWC's quest for an auto-bid. As I think about it, it may have less of an impact than we initially feared.

The MWC won't get an auto bid as it is currently. This is a well thought out post. You pointed out some very good things. The thing you failed to point out is how poor the bottom of the conference. We all know what has happened at the top and what will probably happen this next season but the bottom of the conference is what drags it down and will prevent them from getting AQ status. The success at the top has a lot to do with how pathetic the bottom is and, the success at the top can't overcome the short comings of the teams after the big 3. I may be wrong on all of this and I will happily admit if I am.

[Joe Public]

I guess some people are saying the MWC auto-bid for 2012 and 2013 is pretty close to happening:

http://www.lvrj.com/sports/mountain-...3.html?ref=663

I haven't followed this too much after BYU and Utah decided to leave, so I had no idea it was still a realistic possibility.

[USUC]

I guess some people are saying the MWC auto-bid for 2012 and 2013 is pretty close to happening:

http://www.lvrj.com/sports/mountain-...3.html?ref=663

I haven't followed this too much after BYU and Utah decided to leave, so I had no idea it was still a realistic possibility.

This has been the rumor for months now and is almost a certainty if you visit any of the 2012-2013 MWC member school's fan sites. I'm still highly skeptical. I can't imagine the BCS conferences being ok with losing one of the at large bids. The MWC can't put out an undefeated team every year to qualify for one of the at large bids. Why would the other conferences be ok with ensuring a 1 or 2 loss MWC team gets one of those bids? I haven't heard serious talk of the Cotton Bowl being added as another BCS bowl. I have a hard time believing it.