Talking AQ Evaluation With BCS Executive Director, Bill Hancock
Everyone knows that the Mountain West is looking to become a BCS conference. They tried lobbying for it last summer, but was rejected. The only way that they can guarantee automatic qualification BCS status would be to gain it through the "BCS Evaluation Period."
The given criteria for evaluating BCS Conferences is very vague. According to the BCS website, the following is how they determine AQ status:
The evaluation data includes the following for each conference
(1) The ranking of the highest-ranked team in the final BCS standings each year
(2) The final regular-season rankings of all conference teams in the computer rankings used by the BCS each year and
(3) The number of teams in the top 25 of the final BCS standings each year.
Obviously the given information is very vague. Fortunately the new BCS Executive Director, Bill Hancock was kind enough to answer a few of my questions regarding the process of determining automatic qualifier status.
Note: This was an e-mail and not exactly an interview. Bill Hancock gave me permission to quote him on his answers.
If a conference is to expand and add a team during the evaluation period, would the conference be able to use that teams statistics in their evaluation, even if the team gained some of their "points" in another conference?
Yes.
This is big news for Boise State fans. The Mountain West Conference will very likely need to expand and add a team like Boise State since it is a top-heavy conference, with little competition aside from TCU, Utah and BYU. This explains the reason that the MWC has not invited anyone in yet. This is a strategic move, which would allow that team to gain points without beating up on MWC teams. If the MWC does expand they will need to invite a team before July 1, 2010 to use that team in their evaluation data.
There are three rules listed for determining AQ status. Is each rule given an equal weight? If not, which categories are "worth more?"
All are the same weight.
This is good news for the Mountain West. Two of the three criteria the MWC is very strong in. The amount of teams in the final Top-25 and ranking of the highest team are things that the Mountain West is very competitive in. The MWC struggles in the ranking of the entire conference in the computers since it is a top heavy conference. It is definitely a plus that that category will not out-weigh the rest.
Does the number of teams in each conference affect how the statistics are calculated for certain criteria such as, number of teams in Top 25?
No, the data is averaged so that the number of teams in the conference does not affect the rankings.
Another positive for the conference. The Mountain West in 2008 and 2009 finished with three ranked teams in the final BCS standings. The Mountain West is a smaller conference with only nine teams. Having three teams ranked for the Mountain West would be greater in the evaluations than three teams from a larger conference like the Big-12.
Does a current non-Automatic Qualifier conference have to "beat out" a single BCS conference four of the four years of the evaluation period? Or, does that conference just have to finish ranked ahead of a certain conference in the final statistics?
Basically a conference must finish in the top half of each category.
Does this mean that a current non-AQ conference must finish ranked at least third in each of the three evaluation criteria? They must finish ahead of at least three current BCS conferences in each of the three categories?
Actually, no, it wouldn't have to finish at least third. Basically it would have to finish in the top 50 percent in each of the three categories.
This is a confusing topic to me. I'm guessing that they would have to finish in the top 50 percent among the 11 conferences in averaged data at the end of the evaluation. It sounds like the Mountain West would have to finish at least fifth in each category. This is a problem for the "final regular-season rankings of all conference teams in the computer rankings used by the BCS each year" criteria. They may need to expand to finish at least fifth in this category. In the other two categories the MWC seems to be among the top 50 percent.
If a non Automatic Qualifying conference gains Automatic Qualifier status, would the BCS expand to 7 conferences, or would that conference replace a current BCS conference?
There would be seven automatic-qualifying conferences.
This is what everyone expected, but I just wanted to clarify it. This is good news for current BCS conference. If the Mountain West becomes a BCS Conference, no one will get replaced.
A big thanks to Bill Hancock for taking the time answering my questions. He is very involved in the public and seems to be the guy that the BCS is using to boost their public relations.
Follow Michael Rueckert on Twitter @MichaelRueckert
23 comments
|
Add comment
|
4 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
They better
Invite Boise State. Just look how close TCU is for the number two spot without being in a BCS league. I have been saying the invite will come this summer for a while. It better happen.
by Jeremy Mauss on Nov 30, 2009 8:34 AM PST up reply actions
Great work, great article.
Way to land the big-time “interview”!
Mountain West Connection ::Above the Rest::
Bolts From The Blue "There’s a gleam men. Let’s go get the gleam! Focus and Finish!!! One play at a time!!! Let's Go!!!"
Representing the San Diego State University Aztecs, home of the 2009 College Cheerleading National Champions in the all women's division.
by Sam (sdsuaztec4) on Nov 30, 2009 8:02 AM PST reply actions
Your experience with Bill Hancock matches what I found this past off season
He is direct, promt and succinct. And pleasant to talk to on the phone (judging by my experience last March).
Your first question is my favorite. Having this in public, rather than as a precident, is a significant move in the Bosie State discussion.
I assumed the number of top 25 teams was a set question. Using a % of ranked teams is a significant plus for the MWC.
A look at the AQ status over 2006-2009 (as of the first BCS standings) can be found here.
BCS Evolution -- Punctuating the Equilibrium - twitter
This data will be updated next week.
My biggest beef is that bowl reslts do not play any part of the determination of future automatic qualifications.
BCS Evolution -- Punctuating the Equilibrium - twitter
I think bowls should play a part too
Utah’s win over Alabama is a perfect example. They were ranked 6 before that game.
Mountain West Connection
Follow me on Twitter!
by Michael Rueckert on Nov 30, 2009 10:48 AM PST up reply actions
Agreed
Those are non-conference games and are an important measuring stick.
by Jeremy Mauss on Nov 30, 2009 11:03 AM PST up reply actions
I completely agree with what you said about Bill Hancock
I wasn’t expecting a reply. On my twitter page I said
Just e-mailed the BCS with quite a few questions as to determining AQ status. What are my chances that they actually answer them? 1/100?
6 hours later he answered every single question. I was very shocked
Mountain West Connection
Follow me on Twitter!
by Michael Rueckert on Nov 30, 2009 10:44 AM PST up reply actions
I remember that
Mountain West Connection ::Above the Rest::
Bolts From The Blue "There’s a gleam men. Let’s go get the gleam! Focus and Finish!!! One play at a time!!! Let's Go!!!"
Representing the San Diego State University Aztecs, home of the 2009 College Cheerleading National Champions in the all women's division.
by Sam (sdsuaztec4) on Nov 30, 2009 11:06 AM PST up reply actions
Nice job
The college football season is so fragile. It's like a glass ball being pushed around from stadium to stadium by a rhinoceros.
by Winfield Featherston on Nov 30, 2009 11:10 AM PST reply actions
Let them in, Let them in....
Since the MWC went on an early bowl run, and they all believed that TCU was better than Madden All-Stars, what will the Cougs and Ute fans say when (ok if, please, please, please) the Broncos squash them some Horned Frogs and the blood squirting from Horned Frog eyes is because of several big horseshoes planted right in their guts? Like Duck fans, most of them would sooner die than give the Broncos credit. (Thanks BoylenOver for the exception).
Even when you remind Cougar and Ute fans of numbers like 12-1 record against the current MWC, 50-12 against the Cougs on Lavell Edwards field in the snow, 36-3 against the Utes without a blue field in sight, they still harrumph like old ladies at a quilting bee and mutter, yeah…. "but your blue field is stooopid!"
I would love for the Broncs to be in the MWC. I hope they don’t decide to leave BSU out and go it alone, because I think it could be a very fun conference. It will have a ways to go to match the SEC, but I don’t see any reason that if the new and improved MWC had automatic bid money every year, split 10 ways (hehehee) that as the bottom of the conference comes up, that the new MWC couldn’t be contending for a second BCS bid some years instead of the Big 10+1 (or +2, I get so confused). If that starts happening, look out Pac-10 and Big 12 for dominance in the West. Now, it won’t happen overnight, but who would have predicted 2 BCS bowl bids in 4 years for the Broncos, or that in 2004 when Utah went for the 1st time that it become a regular thing for non-AQs to make it in?
Also, if the new MWC with the Broncos had an auto bid, that would leave 3 at large spots. Who is going to be a "BCS buster" if the MWC has absorbed the Broncos and has an auto bid? Western Michigan? East Carolina? Houston? Maybe, but not that likely. The "BCS buster" slot would then be available for a 2nd team from the seven auto bid conferences, in almost all years. Hopefully, a lot of years that would be the new and improved MWC.
Come on MWC, let us into your clubhouse!!!!!!
BCS
Totally agree with Jimb45, the smaller schools need to get qualified into the BCS
by mortgage calculator on Oct 24, 2010 7:50 AM PDT reply actions
Bill Hancock is a good professional. I believe the most important thing is to have a good idea about what the management is. cazare predeal
very nice work. pelt loved it. Thank you very much for this information
robot oyunları oyna | kral oyun | ben 10 oyunları
great work
Nice to learn all the aspects from the post. Please keep updated. mba specializations
nice
Basically its not so easy to deal with this kind of stuffs. online mba salary guide
i am impressed
Hey buddy,this is one of the best posts that I’ve ever seen; you may include some more ideas in the sametheme. I’m still waiting for some interesting thoughts from your side in your next post.
quotes for facebook
amazed me!
Generally I do not learn from posts on blogs, however I wish to say that this write-up very pressured me to check out and I did so! Your writing style has amazed me. Thank you, quite nice article.
john lennon quotes
good post!
Substantially, the article is really the best on this laudable topic. I concur with your conclusions and will eagerly look forward to your future updates.Just saying thank you will not just be enough, for the wonderful lucidity in your writing.
i miss you quotes
The post is written in very a good !
Is there any way you would write a guest post on it? The post is written in very a good manner and it contains much useful information for me.teamwork quotes
its really good post!
Thank you for another essential article. Where else could anyone get that kind of information in such a complete way of writing? I have a presentation incoming week, and I was on the lookout for such information.
best facebook statuses
Thanks a lot for enjoying this beauty article with me. I am apreciating it very much! Looking forward to another great article. Good luck to the author! All the best!faith quotes
So informative things are provided here. I am really happy to read this post.I have got the valuable information and have bookmarked it already for more.best facebook status





















