This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
Okay, so six different times so far, non-AQ teams have made it into BCS games. However, only 4 different teams have done so. I think the list should be a bit more clear. Hillshum| Talk 16:50, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
http://www.bcsfootball.org/news/story?id=4819597
The BCS itself notes that "non-BCS" is a misnomer, though "non-AQ" and "non-BCS" are common in describing the 5 conferences and member teams whose champion do not get an automatic bid without an additional ranking requirement.
Note that the so-called "non-AQ" teams do in fact have access to a automatic bid--the teams from the 5 conferences share access to just 1. The team must be a conference champion and must be ranked highly enough (rule 3). Of the so-called non-AQ teams that have gone to a BCS bowl, all have gone via AQ bid except for BSU in the 2010 Fiesta Reamon ( talk) 18:20, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
The article implies that bowls select participants from the BCS "pool" due to historic ties. The reality is that current contracts tie the conference champions to particular bowls. The SEC champ is going to the Sugar, unless that champ is ranked 1 or 2. Then, by contract, the Sugar will release that team and select another--but it can't select the "host" of one of the other bowls--e.g. the Sugar cannot take the ACC champ as that team is the "host" for the Orange. The BCS is primarily "governed" by contracts. http://www.bcsfootball.org/news/story?id=4819597 "Team selection procedures" Reamon ( talk) 22:34, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
Since the article is about "popular usage" of the terms I can understand the description about "BCS" being used outside the context of the college football post-season. But I wonder if the article should also note that such usage is utterly inaccurate. The BCS has nothing whatsoever to do with any other sport. It is solely about 5 bowl games. Reamon ( talk) 22:42, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
From the article: "The official term for this is Automatic Qualifying (AQ) Conference."
What is the reference for this? The BCS does not define such a term, at least not that I've seen on the BCS web site. Reamon ( talk) 22:53, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
Found a mention of "AQ conference" on the BCS web site. "The five non-AQ conferences are just as much BCS conferences as the six AQ conferences. Conferences earn AQ status by on-field competition." http://www.bcsfootball.org/news/story?id=4809755 The FAQ also mentions the term. http://www.bcsfootball.org/news/story?id=4809793 Alas, there is no explicit definition that I've found. It seems that rule 2 of the "Automatic qualification" section infers what is defined as an "AQ conference." If someone sees something else on the BCS web site that is more explicit please post it. Reamon ( talk) 17:34, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
The map showing all the Power 5 Schools is outdated. Both Maryland and Rutgers should be changed to be listed under the Big 10. 108.48.23.27 ( talk) 20:02, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
I added a "dubious" tag here. The Group of Five schools are ranked in the CFP. They are eligible for the playoff. If the champions aren't eligible, then why would non-champions be eligible? I think this change was a joke or a protest. Holy ( talk) 00:53, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
With the current changes I am wondering what others thing we should do with this article.
The way I see it, we can 1) make this article a historic article/history and detail the history of the Power 5. or 2) we can update the article to focus only on the upcoming Power 4.
DesertVulture ( talk) 00:55, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
Is it really necessary to add that V-Tech and K-State have never won a National Championship? I get this enough from KU fans not Wikipedia too. |1Falco3| ( talk) 16:21, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
Okay, so six different times so far, non-AQ teams have made it into BCS games. However, only 4 different teams have done so. I think the list should be a bit more clear. Hillshum| Talk 16:50, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
http://www.bcsfootball.org/news/story?id=4819597
The BCS itself notes that "non-BCS" is a misnomer, though "non-AQ" and "non-BCS" are common in describing the 5 conferences and member teams whose champion do not get an automatic bid without an additional ranking requirement.
Note that the so-called "non-AQ" teams do in fact have access to a automatic bid--the teams from the 5 conferences share access to just 1. The team must be a conference champion and must be ranked highly enough (rule 3). Of the so-called non-AQ teams that have gone to a BCS bowl, all have gone via AQ bid except for BSU in the 2010 Fiesta Reamon ( talk) 18:20, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
The article implies that bowls select participants from the BCS "pool" due to historic ties. The reality is that current contracts tie the conference champions to particular bowls. The SEC champ is going to the Sugar, unless that champ is ranked 1 or 2. Then, by contract, the Sugar will release that team and select another--but it can't select the "host" of one of the other bowls--e.g. the Sugar cannot take the ACC champ as that team is the "host" for the Orange. The BCS is primarily "governed" by contracts. http://www.bcsfootball.org/news/story?id=4819597 "Team selection procedures" Reamon ( talk) 22:34, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
Since the article is about "popular usage" of the terms I can understand the description about "BCS" being used outside the context of the college football post-season. But I wonder if the article should also note that such usage is utterly inaccurate. The BCS has nothing whatsoever to do with any other sport. It is solely about 5 bowl games. Reamon ( talk) 22:42, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
From the article: "The official term for this is Automatic Qualifying (AQ) Conference."
What is the reference for this? The BCS does not define such a term, at least not that I've seen on the BCS web site. Reamon ( talk) 22:53, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
Found a mention of "AQ conference" on the BCS web site. "The five non-AQ conferences are just as much BCS conferences as the six AQ conferences. Conferences earn AQ status by on-field competition." http://www.bcsfootball.org/news/story?id=4809755 The FAQ also mentions the term. http://www.bcsfootball.org/news/story?id=4809793 Alas, there is no explicit definition that I've found. It seems that rule 2 of the "Automatic qualification" section infers what is defined as an "AQ conference." If someone sees something else on the BCS web site that is more explicit please post it. Reamon ( talk) 17:34, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
The map showing all the Power 5 Schools is outdated. Both Maryland and Rutgers should be changed to be listed under the Big 10. 108.48.23.27 ( talk) 20:02, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
I added a "dubious" tag here. The Group of Five schools are ranked in the CFP. They are eligible for the playoff. If the champions aren't eligible, then why would non-champions be eligible? I think this change was a joke or a protest. Holy ( talk) 00:53, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
With the current changes I am wondering what others thing we should do with this article.
The way I see it, we can 1) make this article a historic article/history and detail the history of the Power 5. or 2) we can update the article to focus only on the upcoming Power 4.
DesertVulture ( talk) 00:55, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
Is it really necessary to add that V-Tech and K-State have never won a National Championship? I get this enough from KU fans not Wikipedia too. |1Falco3| ( talk) 16:21, 8 August 2023 (UTC)