The Bowl Championship Series has modified its rules slightly, and although the changes are small in scope, they're large in their implications for the Big East Football Conference.

The most concise article on the changes appears on the ABC College Football web site at http://abccfb.go.com/road/rules.asp.   The report simply lists the complete text of the BCS rules, with the new changes underlined.

Don't be misled by the first underlined paragraph in the article. That simply says that any team which is not a champion of the BCS conferences (SEC, Big 10, Pac 10, ACC, Big East, and Big 12) can still get into the BCS by winning 9 games and being ranked in the top 12 of the final BCS poll. Call that the Notre Dame rule.

The paragraph you really want to pay attention to is the second underlined paragraph:

Also, beginning with the 1999 regular season, each BCS conference is subject to review and possible loss of automatic selection by the BCS should the conference champion not have an average ranking of 12 or higher over a four-year period.

In other words, the Big East better get cracking and produce some seriously high-ranked champions, or the conference could lose its BCS bid in 2003.

I don't call this the "anti-Big-East" rule, like most people do. I call it the "anti-Virginia-Tech-and-Syracuse" rule. Let's be honest: if the Big East champion the last four years had been a 15th-ranked Miami team instead of a 10^th-15^th ranked Tech or Syracuse team, we wouldn't be here having this discussion. The TV execs would all be fat, dumb, and happy, instead of complaining about how the Hokies and Orangemen don't produce good national ratings.

This all goes back to Rule #57 here at HokieCentral: the Big East Football Conference and its BCS bid exist under the assumption that Miami will be the team winning the conference and going to the big-money bowl. If that's not happening, nobody (except Tech and 'Cuse fans) is happy.

Note that the new rule doesn't mean that a conference will lose its BCS bid. It just means that it will come under review and might lose its BCS slot. My interpretation: if the Canes start making it in as a low-ranked team, don’t worry about it, the Big East will keep its BCS bid. But if Tech and the 'Cuse continue to make it in as low-ranked teams, watch out.

The funny thing is, despite that bit of cynicism, I don't really have a problem with the new rule. It's not like the bar has been set really high or anything like that. A ranking of 12? That's not hard to do, and Tech has spent plenty of time in that area in the last few years, and in fact, has been ranked that high (or darn close to it) each of the last four seasons. In 1995, we finished in the top 10, and in 1996, we cracked the top 10 before finishing somewhere around #12.

In both the 1997 and 1998 regular seasons, we flirted with top 10 rankings before losing to Miami of Ohio and Temple, respectively.

Of course, I'm talking AP and USA Today rankings, not BCS rankings, but in those years, I'm guessing that the BCS rankings would have fallen pretty much in line with the pollsters.

So Top 12 isn't exactly rarified air, and certainly the Big East Conference should be held to that standard. Bring it on.

There are a couple of relevant points to be made here. Number one, if you don't like this rule, just stick around - it'll change next year. The big boys of college football, meaning the power conferences like the SEC and Big 10, plus Notre Dame, bend and shape the rules yearly to accommodate themselves. Heck, a year from now, you may be pining for the days when the Big East representative to the BCS only had to average a BCS ranking of 12, and had a whole four years to do it.

If a 12^th-ranked Hokie team shows up on the Fiesta Bowl this year, you may find yourself looking at new rules that require an average ranking of #10 every two years. Hey, whatever suits the SEC and the Big 10, that's what'll happen.

The best question I saw asked about the new rule came from "HOaKIE" on the message board:

Any chance the new BCS formula will change how the Big East picks its BCS champion each year?

1. Will the tiebreaker change to go with the team in the Top 12 (assuming there is one)?
2. Will the team in the Top 12 (or highest ranked in the Top 12) be the choice even if it isn't the first place team?

I am sure other possibilities exist. My thought here is whether the Big East will change the formula to improve their chances of having the 4-year Top 12 average.

You would think that some sort of change in the Big East champion selection, or at least the tiebreaker system, would have to take place. The Big East has to protect its BCS bid, and will probably go to any length to do so. I think that option #2 is a bit radical, but certainly, some form of option #1 will probably go into effect almost immediately.

I'm thinking that the Big East will immediately institute a simple tiebreaker that takes the team ranked highest in the BCS poll. I'll bet that change is proposed at the next AD's meeting (in July, I believe) and unanimously approved, for the good of the conference. If not, it ought to be.

If you kept reading that ABC article linked above, then you noticed that five new computer rankings have been added to the three used last year, for a total of eight. What you may not know is that one of the new rankings is done by a Virginia Tech graduate student majoring in mathematics.

Kenneth Massey, whose rankings and system appear on his web site, was caught off guard when SEC commissioner and BCS guru Roy Kramer called him and told him that his ratings would be used in the BCS's formula.

There is a lengthy article on Massey and his ratings at hokiesports.com:

Tech student's ratings to be used for BCS standings - hokiesports.com

(Disclaimer for any of Roy Kramer's deputies who may be visiting - I'M JUST KIDDING!!!)

TSL News and Notes Archives