The MWC did all the leg work this year to prep the BCS for the next period. They got the word out in the press. They pushed in Congress. They are asking for a DOJ investigation. Basically, they're letting the BCS and the country know that they want in and we're willing to do anything to accomplish that. They also let the BCS know that there's a lawsuit waiting for them if they violate anti-trust issues. The BCS will be forced to honor the Louisville loophole and they know it.
If you look at the MWC first year evaluation criteria, we're ahead of a couple of conferences with the rank of our champion, and one with the number of teams in the top 25. If we added Boise we would have four teams in the top 25 in year one of the evaluation period.
If you invite Boise after this season the first three years of the evaluation period are with Boise in the Wac. That allows Utah, BYU, and TCU to rack up more top 25 finishes while Boise dominates the Wac. All of those results will count for us. It's likely that Boise is going to finish in the top 25 every year they're in the Wac, their champion may even finish ranked higher than ours during those seasons.
It sets up nicely for publicity for the league as well. We've already had our most notable season in the press this past year. If the MWC extends an invitation to Boise st. next year we'll be in the press all summer again. In fact, our commissioner could even make a public appeal to get into the BCS next summer, since we would be a different stronger league then we were this year.
In order for Boise's records to count for the MWC, they have to play one season in our league during the evaluation period. The only way to count that is to invite Boise after the following sports season. It takes one year for them to get out of the Wac, so they would come in during the last year of the evaluation period.
If you look at the evaluation criteria two of them are very clear. The number of teams in the top 25 is clear. The rank of our conference champion is clear. The other criteria is based on voodoo and computer formulas that the BCS designed. No one knows what goes into determining this criteria. Supposedly it's based on the overall strength of the league. The math behind it is vague, and you can bet it's biased towards the BCS. We're always going to finish below every BCS conference in that criteria, because that's what the BCS added it for: to keep us out. Basically, we have to be better than one of the BCS leagues in the other two criteria over a four year period. If we do that, the anti-trust suit is a win for us. If we don't, we won't get in.
The BCS isn't going to come out and tell us how to get into their monopoly. They don't want us in. Craig knows it. If we ask them if adding Boise will get us an AQ they will say no. If we ask them if we can get in just how we are the answer is no. The only way to do that is to beat a current BCS conference in the evaluation criteria. Craig knows that. The only way Boise's record will count for the MWC is to invite them after this season. Craig knows that as well. The BCS isn't going to say "here's your aq". We have to get it on our own. We can beat a BCS league in two of three criteria over a four year period, even with the mysterious third criteria always going to the BCS leagues. However, it's going to be extremely difficult to get that done with the current 9 teams in our league. With Boise playing three years in the WAC, it's not going to be that hard.
The problem with holding the Ace card: the BCS isn't going to tell us when to play it. They're going to try and trump our ace with the three of spades. We have to know when to play the ace. Holding it until the four year evaluation is over turns that Ace into the two of diamonds.
I've got money that says Boise is already invited and it's going to be made public after the following sports year. It gives the MWC the best possible chance of attaining an AQ during our next evaluation. If the BCS doesn't honor the Louisville loophole that's a lawsuit we can win. If we beat one of their leagues in two out of three criteria for the majority of the four year evaluation and we don't gain an AQ, that's an anti-trust suit we will win. I think that's the presidents goal: either get the AQ or bring down the whole system with a lawsuit WE CAN WIN.
Boise definitely gives us our strongest hand of cards. Inviting them next summer makes our hand even stronger. The problem with the Boise card, if we don't play it we're chucking that card in the discard pile.
So Basiclly the MWC Commish is keeping the Boise state card in his hip pocket, waiting for the perfect time to play it.
Here is a recent article pretty much saying its a done deal with Boise in the MWC next year:
Boise State May Force Its Way into Mountain West with BCS Numbers | Bleacher Report
BSU was denied entry to the MWC last season as part of the MWC's plan to become AQ. My only problem with BSU is their facilities are not up to par, the blue turf, and their academics. Also, their fans are some of the dumbest in the west. 9 teams makes a perfect conference IMO and keeps scheduling/rivalries playing every year. Don't even get me started why the WAC-16 never worked.
....
