Deseret News | MWC, WAC rushed into signing on with the BCS

Reader comments
Dick Harmon: MWC, WAC rushed into signing on with the BCS

Sell Out | 5:06 a.m. July 9, 2009

Pathetic

Scoobie | 5:21 a.m. July 9, 2009

It's a double edged sword...yes it's a diasappointment on one side but it is a matter of progress on another....an oppurtunity to better position themselves to continue what pressure they can apply. The disappointment of compromising to what amounts to sheer blackmail could have been even further overshadowed by total exclusion...total castigation, and total shunning. Even though the current system and the corrupt pwer that it wields is the problem...when you are alone and on the outside it's extremely hard to put up a fight and gain much ground....at least being somewhat within the system gives you some ground and some space to to put up some semblence of resistance that could spawn a revolt later on. The Best Allie the BCS has is time. The NCAA is to blame for this...and they have no one with a spine who will buck up to the BCS. When the giant just laughs at you and won't fight you because in his mind you aren't worthy of his attention, sometimes entering his domain under a smoke screen to kick him in the shins will at least afford you one more shot.

Scoobie | 5:53 a.m. July 9, 2009

Just remember it is a contract....it has an expiration date...but at least it keeps the WAC and the MWC in the lineup...and to be effective to possibly end the giants reign someday...that is the position that has to be maintained. That is the position that has to be strengthened and enlarged. No other position will afford us the time or the resources to continue the bashing of the doors. The MWC and the WAC are the leaders in that catagory. That alone has some power and even to the disdain of some...it forces those who oppose us to internally fear as well. We do still represent a threat to their "Ideal." We still have the ability to force change. But it will take time. And Time can also be an allie to the Non BCS conferences as well. But you can't be in the fight if you are completely locked out. Someone on here has said several times the fans can have an effect....maybe we can. Maybe by turning off our tv's and not buying any of the products of the major BCS sponsors would help. But don't punish the players.

Comments continue below

It makes me feel dirty | 7:51 a.m. July 9, 2009

Somehow I feel like we stood up for our rights and took the money under the table. I know it is all on the up and up (sort of) but for correct principles sake, maybe we should have sacrificed for the better of the whole. Sacrafice defined is giving up what we want today to receive something better in the future. Almost everything tells me it was the right thing to do, but then why do I feel so dirty?

Let's be honest | 8:15 a.m. July 9, 2009

There's no way the WAC and MWC can survive without the possibility of making BCS games. If the MWC didn't sign on the dotted line its teams would lose recruits left and right. This is a contract of coercion and the conferences have no choice but to sign it. If I put a gun to your head and required you to sign a contract or die it would be a pretty pathetic argument to later defend the contract's terms by saying that you agreed to it. Failure to sign this agreement means death to any conference. If all the mid-majors agreed not to sign it together then there might be some clout, but the MWC can go it alone. Although, then the BCS would just say they offered it to us and we rejected it. Either way, they win. The NCAA has no spine at all to just sit back and let this happen.

Friends, | 9:03 a.m. July 9, 2009

When you refer to the MWC as a "Mid-Major" you are perpetuating the myth that MWC schools are not as good as BCS schools.

None of us should fall into the trap of east coast media who flagrantly and disingenuously dismiss the MWC with such a label.

Please don't accept the label, but for sure don't perpetuate it.

The conference is decidedly not a Mid-Major. It is a Major conference that just happens to not be a BCS conference.

Never again should we allow the east coast media to attempt to dimish the MWC with a disrespectful and phony label.

owm | 9:05 a.m. July 9, 2009

Good comments.

Anyone that knows, however, anything about the inside of a 'courtroom' (the generic reference to the legal system) know that if the BCS Conferences were named in a lawsuit, along with the respective Presidents/Chancellors of each University, along with the naming of each individual Conference Commissioner, with charges of Federal Anti-Trust violations; There would be change.

By the time all of the above had spent millions and millions of dollars hiring the best attorneys for a defense, with the knowledge of a potential judgement hanging over their heads; They will acquiesce to the pressure and succumb to the money spent to defend. In other words, they will spend more than they will gain. AG's will bring into the mix tax money, not school money, to bring the action and then force the BCS schools and conferences to spend personal money to defend.

Apparently those most affected have no back bone, no fortitude, and no resolve to end the monopoly.

Sadly, the annual powerhouse schools; BYU, TCU, BSU and every 4 years, UofU and UH, just won't sustain the fight.

If they won't, why would a lesser program do it?

No Choice | 9:13 a.m. July 9, 2009

These conferences had no other choice. They are the only two to bust and probably will be the ones who continue that trend. What do you tell a 13-0/12-1 MWC or WAC team, great season have fun in vegas or boise??? That is not fair to the programs,players and fans included. The NCAA should man up and fix the problem but they are as money hungry as the BCS

wer | 10:07 a.m. July 9, 2009

It is more obvious now than ever before that the lure of money is the driving force behind the leaders of the MWC. All the talk about fairness, etc. was no different than the BCS.

Prior to the current hearings in DC, the BCS finally admitted in a public forum that "market share", etc. was their highest priority. Yesterday, when the MWC signed onto the ESPN contract, they admitted the same thing.

So, for all the hand wringers, columnists, and fans, no matter how the signing is "spun" or explained, or justified, the "bottom line" is, in fact, the bottom line.

Let's don't pretend it isn't, and we can wave goodbye to any credibility the conference tried to establish.

You can just see the SEC, BCS and other leaders smiling smugly and saying to themselves, "Well, we got rid of that aggravation."

Anonymous | 10:40 a.m. July 9, 2009

Too many of you are demonizing the BCS for no other reason than that you don't understand the history and what they are trying to do.

First off, the BCS has nothing to do with the NCAA. The NCAA does not sponsor a Championship game or identify a "National Champion" for college football. They never have, and their statements are that they don't intend to in the future.

Into this gap a large number of polling organizations have stepped, each with their own way of ranking teams and identifying a "National Champion".

The BCS is just one of many different polling organizations that uses statistics and the opinions of people-in-the-know (i.e., sportswriters, coaches, etc.) to rank college football teams.

To that polling function the BSC adds a set of bowl-game contracts that will try to place the top-ranked teams against one another in a "Championship Game."

This is reasonable. It was an intelligent solution to a problem.

Now, after all the whining by MWC, WAC, and Utah politicians (who invited them into this?), the BCS has graciously offered to sign agreements. The MWC and WAC get what they want!

Whiners!

RE: OWM | 10:50 a.m. July 9, 2009

Great comments. Well, thought out and eduacated.
However, you missed a little on your assertion of the MWC. It is UofU, TCU and BSU who are the MWC powerhouses. BYU is the one who only shows up every fourth year, over the past 8 to 10 years.(Never in the BCS)

Scoobie | 10:51 a.m. July 9, 2009

REF: Friends
Very good comments and advice...will no longer use the term Mid Level...you are right the MWC and the WAC are

REF: OWM
I agree with your assessment...Bobby Bowden is one of the adament supporters of a playoff system and there are plenty of others. Right now for some odd reason The NCAA is trying to guarantee that he doesn't surpass Joe Paterno's Total Career wins record by administratively forfeiting 16-twenty some odd of Bobby's wins as a Coach. This is all over a cheating scandel that Bowden had nothing to do with nor any prior knowledge of. When he found out that he had 27 players involved he never even hesitated to suspend the players nor report the issue to the University and to the NCAA The cheating scandel was perpetuated by Student teaching assistants in the Universitys Music Department. But that is the mentality of what we have in the spineless officials of the NCAA rules committee....They protect who they want and will go after someone braking ranks. I'm sure if we look deep enough we will find the NCAA in bed with the BCS

1byufan | 10:57 a.m. July 9, 2009

all you half to say to the bcs scholls is come to provo ,Saltlake ,Dallas Fortworth ,Boise and Hawai
and we will be just as good as any one frome your confrence !!!

Do you see any bcs team that think's they can absalutttly whin in any of thes places.

just ask ucla about BYU or Alabma about Utah

Commissioner Craig Thompson | 11:07 a.m. July 9, 2009

The man that gave you the mtn, the Las Vegas bowl vs the #5 pac-10 team. What else would you expect from this Bozo?

That #5 Pac 10 team | 11:31 a.m. July 9, 2009

Beat the MWC's representative in the Las Vegas bowl!. Be careful what you wish for.

We are in tough times | 11:33 a.m. July 9, 2009

Take the money, BYU or Utah are not going to be near consideration for a BCS birth anyway. BYU gets beat early vs Okalhoma and they get beat bad..BYU will then beat Utah.

Scoobie | 11:34 a.m. July 9, 2009

Anonymous

Yes maybe there are many out there who don't know that because NCAA DIV one football is the only NCAA sport that does not have a playoff or a tournament system. Therefore not having a playoff or a tournament the NCAA does not officially recognize a National Champion...yadda yadda yadda.

The NCAA was a latecomer... what the middle to late 30's... or even after WWII...who cares...it's certainly not uncommon knowledge. BUT New Years Day, The New Years Bowls and most certainly Big Time College Football with it's long standing fraternal order were here long before the NCAA. So were the two polls..the old UPI and the AP which by the way are mistaken in your assessment that they filled a gap. There was no Gap they were the pioneers for the selection of a Mythical National Champion. All of these were / are entities steeped long and fast in a National alliance based soley on Tradition. Radio and TV entered and zoom BIG MONEY.

We'd still have all of that unchanged but for one thing. All the traditions went out the window with the 83 Holiday Bowl DEC 27,1983. POINTMADE

Jerry | 11:40 a.m. July 9, 2009

Why doesn't the MWC and WAC get the other non BCS conferences together and do what they do in high school. The BCS conferences could continue as 5A schools and do their dog and pony show for a national champion. The non BCS conferences or 4A schools could have a playoff for their national champion. There would be two national championship
divisions instead of just one. Good marketing could
give the 4A schools the opportuntiy for some big games in major markets with good TV contracts which
would in time give the 4A schools a lot more money than they now get from picking up the crums that fall off the BCS table.

RE Jerry | 11:57 a.m. July 9, 2009

Love the Idea. I had a similar thought. I mean didn't the NIT startout as the big show in college basketball then the NCAA decided they wanted in on the action and relegated the NIT to the background. A playoff is what everyone wants why not give it to them?

Scoobie | 11:59 a.m. July 9, 2009

REF: Commissioner Craig Thompson

Despite the Mountain's Non Televised exposure anywhere in the Universe ... and depite the Las Vegas Nut Cracker Bowl Craig Jensen is no BOZO.... He may come a distant second...but that Distinction definately goes to WAC Commissioner Benson. Boy what we could have done without him. The respect was already there...until he came along and made a 16 team 3 ring circus....Now there was a joke. All credibility went out the window.. Utah TCU and BYU are again starting to bring that back. It may take a while but stick around... it's coming.

Scoobie | 12:24 p.m. July 9, 2009

REF: Jerry
naaaaaaahh....it's more fun breaking up a bunch of airheads party and ruining their day... I'd rather laugh at Flutie the Munchkin and his side kick Craig( WE LOST THE STINKIN HOLIDAY BOWL!!!) James and then listening to their vain rationalizations or the maniaclly funny findings in the BCS computer generated disputable undisputable facts. I'd rather keep making them miserable...dispite the marbles or the unfairness.

You have to admit stuffing Nick Saban's own words back down his throat did bring some comic relief...it was pretty cool to watch...Thanks Utah ...I enjoyed that.

RISE AND SHOUT......

Scoobie | 12:34 p.m. July 9, 2009

Craig Jensen????....(LOL)...hahaha.... He's my paper boy....sorry I meant Craig Thompson..... Well I guess there's a little Bozo in all of us.... It's out there too late now !!!

Tourney | 1:30 p.m. July 9, 2009

Someone should just put together a national college footbal tournament. Invite the champion from each conference and have a little tournament. At the end the winner would be declared the national champion. Teams could still go to the silly BCS games if they wanted to. Which team would fans really consider the national champion. The BCS popularity champion or the tournament champion. A college football tournament would be the biggest TV spectacle of the year.

Anonymous | 2:01 p.m. July 9, 2009

BCS has a spot guaranteed to an a non-BCS conference team as long as they are either ranked in the top 12 of the standings or the top ACC or Big East team. Last year Utah, TCU, Boise State and BYU were ranked higher than Pit

Mountain West and the WAC should have a championship games at the end of the season. The Last 3 years (Boise State, Hawaii, and Utah) have all played in a BCS bowl. Then the winning conference gets 75% of the BCS money and the losing team gets 25% of the money.

Advantages:
Give conferences one more quality win in case a Conference USA or other mid-major team is ranked high.
It almost guarantees the conferences gets some BCS money every year.

It guarantees that the best team goes to the BCS-2 seasons ago BYU would have played Hawaii - BYU would may have beat Hawaii or at least prepared Hawaii - They still loose, but respectably

I give top teams one more quality win. Utah beating Boise State would have made it even harder of snubbing them at National Championship.

It really helps both conferences

the only option | 2:58 p.m. July 9, 2009

is for utah to withdraw from the MWC and become apart of the pac-10. I'm sure that would make everybody involved happy. The Pac-10 would be stronger and the utes wouldn't be discriminated against anymore.

that would be silly | 4:29 p.m. July 9, 2009

I hope Utah, TCU and BYU never leave the MWC....why go to the pac-10 and be one of THEM

re: the only option | 8:37 p.m. July 9, 2009

That's a stupid idea. First of all, Utah (nor any OTHER MWC or WAC team) can just break out of our respective conferences and join the PAC 10 or Big XII -- WITHOUT FIRST BEING OFFERED AN INVITATION!!! We've been here all along, and not since the 70s have any of our teams been poached by anyone from the Big 6. Arizona and Arizona St. got out. They've moved on. NOBODY ELSE HAS BEEN INVITED!

It's unlikely any WAC or MWC team would snub an invitation, but until offered, that's entirely out of our control. What IS in our control, and what would be an better solution, is make the MWC better. If that means inviting BSU, Fresno, and Tulsa, so be it. Once we become a BCS conference, there would be no need to join any other.

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.