Posted on: December 4, 2011 10:30 am

Schmolik BCS Bowl Projections (Sun. Dec. 4 AM)

Hello, college football fans!

This year's final BCS bowl projections unfortunately is like a close presidential race - too close to call. We pretty much have to wait for the final BCS rankings to determine not only who will get into the BCS title game but who will get into BCS bowls period.

The big question is who will be ranked #2 behind LSU. Will it be Alabama and the title game will be a rematch or will it be Oklahoma State who made a big statement beating Oklahoma badly in Bedlam?

But lesser questions deal with BCS selections which are based on the now unknown BCS rankings:


The highest ranked non-AQ league champion is guaranteed a spot if they are in the top 12 of the BCS or top 16 and higher than the lowest ranked AQ-league champion. Since the Big Least champion is almost certainly going to be below 16, use the top 16 as the cutoff.

Houston would have received the spot but they lost, costing them a bid. Boise State is not a conference champion so they do not qualify under this rule. TCU is currently #18. They would have to jump two places to secure an automatic bid. If not, no one gets it.

To be eligible for a BCS bowl, a team must be ranked in the top 14. Right now, Michigan is 16th. They would have to jump two places as well.

My base projections will be based upon:

1. Alabama being ranked #2.
2. TCU gaining an automatic bid (top 16).
2. Michigan becoming BCS eligible (top 14).

National Championship: LSU (#1. SEC) vs. Alabama (#2)

Rose Bowl: Oregon (Pac-12) vs. Wisconsin (Big Ten)
Sugar Bowl: Michigan (At Large Choice 1) vs. West Virginia (Big East)
Orange Bowl: Clemson (ACC) vs. TCU (Non AQ Automatic)
Fiesta Bowl: Oklahoma State (Big 12) vs. Stanford (At Large Choice 2)

I think the Sugar Bowl will choose West Virginia over TCU since their fans seem to travel well and they have more national appeal than TCU although TCU is closer to New Orleans.

If either TCU or Michigan does not qualify, it will be between Kansas State and Boise State for one bid. If neither TCU nor Michigan qualify, both will make it by default. Virginia Tech should be eligible but an unlikely choice after they got pounded. The Orange Bowl would never take them and the Fiesta Bowl is way too far.

Should Oklahoma State jump Alabama...

Alabama goes to the Sugar Bowl instead of Michigan.

The Fiesta gets a pick to replace Oklahoma State and the next choice out of the BCS pool. I see that being Stanford vs. Michigan, assuming they are eligible. Should Michigan not be eligible, it will be interesting if they take Boise State again (they've been there twice since the Statue of Liberty play) or take Kansas State.

Assuming West Virginia goes to the Sugar Bowl, Michigan gets in and TCU does not, the Orange Bowl will have to choose between Boise State or Kansas State. Both are way too far away. Boise State is probably the more nationally known program and it will appease the people who think the BCS is exclusive towards the BCS conferences.

Remember the pick order this year:

Sugar (to replace LSU)
Fiesta (IF they have to replace Oklahoma State)


Assuming my BCS projections are true, here is possibly how some of the other BCS bowls could shake out:

Cotton: Arkansas vs. Kansas State (Oklahoma's big loss probably means Kansas State will be chosen, assuming KSU doesn't make the BCS. I think Arkansas feels more at home with the Cotton than the Capital One)

Capital One: South Carolina vs. Nebraska (Michigan State was in last year's Capital One Bowl. Nebraska may be too far away from Orlando but the other choices would be the scandal filled Penn State and Ohio State (who is 6-6) teams).

Outback: Georgia vs. Michigan State. Possibly Georgia and South Carolina could flip flop.

Chick Fil A: Virginia Tech vs. Auburn (Maybe Florida State instead of Virginia Tech, maybe Florida instead of Auburn, but of course Florida/Florida State won't happen).

Gator: Florida vs. Ohio State (The future Urban Meyer Bowl has been rumored for the past week. The catch is that the Insight Bowl gets to pick the Big Ten ahead of the Gator even though the Gator is a far better bowl.)

Category: NCAAF
Posted on: November 26, 2011 11:13 pm

Schmolik BCS Bowl Projections Nov. 26 (night)

Hello, college football fans!

I still think there is a chance that Oklahoma State will jump Alabama next week to gain a spot against likely opponent LSU in the BCS championship. But this week, I will play what if and list two scenarios (Oklahoma State in the title game and Alabama in the title game)...

If LSU plays Oklahoma State in the title game:

Rose: Big Ten (Michigan State/Wisconsin winner) vs. Pac-12 (Oregon/UCLA winner)
Orange: ACC (Clemson/Virginia Tech winner)

Sugar: Replaces LSU with Alabama
Fiesta: Replaces Oklahoma State with Stanford

Fiesta: Picks Michigan
Sugar: Picks Houston (pending win in C-USA Championship)
Orange: Is stuck with the Big Least Champ (West Virginia, Louisville, or Cincinnati): Click here for scenarios:

If LSU plays Alabama in the title game:

Fiesta: Big 12 Champ (Oklahoma State/Oklahoma winner)
Rose: Big Ten (Michigan State/Wisconsin winner) vs. Pac-12 (Oregon/UCLA winner)
Orange: ACC (Clemson/Virginia Tech winner)

Sugar: Replaces LSU with Michigan

Fiesta: Picks Stanford
Sugar: Picks Houston (pending win in C-USA Championship)
Orange: Is stuck with the Big Least Champ

West Virginia could be chosen ahead of Houston in the Sugar Bowl if they are the Big East champion.

Stanford looks destined for the Fiesta Bowl. The only way Stanford doesn't is if LSU and Alabama make the national championship and the Sugar Bowl decides to choose Stanford ahead of Michigan.

Michigan's BCS fate probably depends on who plays for the championship.

They are rooting for Alabama and LSU to make the title game so they can play in the Sugar Bowl instead of getting stuck with the Fiesta Bowl.

On the other hand, there is a small chance that if Oklahoma State loses to Oklahoma that the Sugar Bowl can use Oklahoma State over Michigan and Michigan can wind up completely out of the BCS.

Posted on: March 13, 2011 8:52 pm

Comments on the Real Bracket (Selection of Teams)

Hello, college basketball fans!

Time for me to compare the NCAA bracket to my last bracket: http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/

The Selection Committee differed on four NCAA teams. I had Harvard, Colorado, Alabama, and Missouri State instead of Georgia, USC, VCU, and Clemson. I have records since 1997 and this is the first time the NCAA differed on four teams (the last two seasons we only differed on one). Now you can say I "did worse", but that assumes the NCAA is "right" and I beg to differ. Actually, I like to compare my bracket to the Bracket Matrix (http://bracketproject.50webs.com/ma
) as to what is right. There are only ten members on the Committtee, the Bracket Matrix has 87 brackets.

Another thing I thought about the differences between my bracket and the NCAA's. Of the four teams I put in that the NCAA left out, three were in the First Four. Harvard was the only team that was not in the First Four that the NCAA chose and Harvard was the last team in before the First Four teams. Of the four teams the NCAA put in that I missed, three were in their First Four (the only team was Georgia). Had this been a 64 team field, we would have differed on just one team (and the team I would have missed would have been the last team I put in). My #65 would have been Colorado. I'm not sure who their #65 was. Clearly those next four created the huge gap between our brackets. If you have to choose more teams (or more at large teams), you are likely to get more differences. That's my story and I'm sticking with it. 

I am very big on "head to head" and I have a problem that Alabama beat Georgia twice (this month, including a victory in the SEC Tournament) but Georgia got in over Alabama (and got in as a 10 seed). Alabama finished three full games (although in a weaker division) than Georgia. I can see Alabama not getting in but then you shouldn't put Georgia in either.

I am not a fan of USC getting in. Their RPI, conference RPI, and non conference RPI were all over 60. The Trojans had five Top 50 wins but so did Colorado. Alabama had four Top 50 wins. I consider a bad loss any home loss to a team with an RPI over 100 and any loss to a team with an RPI over 200. USC had FOUR bad losses, they lost to Oregon at home and lost to TCU, Oregon State, and Bradley, all teams with RPI's worse than 200. No team that I considered a bubble team had more than two. Those three horrible losses should have cancelled out USC's good wins.

This was a down year for the ACC. The Big East had 10 teams in the Top 50 RPI. The Big 10 had six and Michigan at 51. The ACC had only Duke and North Carolina in the Top 50. Clemson had no top 50 wins this season. I can understand an Alabama or a Colorado with a high RPI getting in over a Missouri State that has no top 50 wins. But if Clemson and Missouri State  both have no top 50 wins, how is Clemson a better team than Missouri State (or Harvard, who did beat Princeton)? The ACC is no doubt a stronger conference than the MVC but Missouri State won the MVC outright and Clemson was just 9-7 in the regular season.

The last team I did not have was VCU. They finished third in the Colonial Athletic Association and lost six games in the league. They beat Old Dominion during the regular season and George Mason in the CAA semifinals and that probably got them in. I don't think wins over ODU and GMU are what should put you in the NCAA's. VCU also lost five of their last ten games.

I mentioned Missouri State and Harvard and I realized they were longshots.

I really feel bad for Harvard as they lost on the buzzer yesterday vs. Princeton. I was actually worried with Illinois on the bubble that Princeton's win could have cost someone else a bid. It turned out that was not the case. I'm sure most people were cheering for Old Dominion last week in the CAA final afraid that VCU would steal a bid. It turns out the final was irrelevant and VCU actually did steal a bid. 

As for Missouri State, a lot of people feel for Virginia Tech's Seth Greenberg but to be fair it's hard to justify an NCAA bid with an RPI over 60. If you want to feel bad for someone, consider that Missouri State is the first regular season MVC champion to miss the NCAA Tournament since 1993. Five years ago, these same Missouri State Bears were the highest RPI ever to be left out of the NCAA's (21). If you are going to feel for Virginia Tech, you got to feel for Missouri State who continue to fall short of the NCAA's. Virginia Tech last made the NCAA's in 2007. Missouri State? 1999.

One team that quite a few people on another four letter network that I don't think I'm allowed to mention that I do agree with is UAB. Their RPI was 31 and they were the regular season champion of Conference USA. According to the RPI, Conference USA had eight teams in the top 100 RPI so why not reward their champion? I think Memphis's last second win probably put UAB in. Memphis probably had a better profile if you had to compare the two (Memphis swept UAB). Then again, if the Committee put in Georgia head of Alabama, they probably could have put UAB over Memphis too (although there was less of a difference in RPI). Both the NCAA and I did have UAB in the First Four so we both were skeptical about the Blazers.

I'm not happy about the four teams the NCAA put in that I didn't but then again I'm not too thrilled with the First Four teams I had in either. I think the tournament would have been better with 64 teams. I actually think there would be less disagreement had there been only 64 teams instead of 68.

In Part 2, I will discuss seeding and bracketing disagreements.


Category: NCAAB
The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com