Subtitle: Should the Fiesta Bowl or Cotton Bowl be a BCS bowl?

What is happening:

I was busy earlier this week and was about to post this thread when the news of the Department of Justice's interest in the BCS broke. That is the second hit in the 1-2 punch the BCS legal team took this week.

The first is a story that has been on my back burner since it broke ion December 18th (mid bowl season!) when the Fiesta Bowl was accused of reimbursing employees for campaign contributions.

As a tax exempt non-profit organization the Fiesta Bowl is not permitted to make campaign contributions. Just because the amount is a mere $38,000 and most of the funds went to defeated presidential candidate John McCain does not make this any less of a criminal offense with the possibility of misdemeanor and felony charges. This pales behind the $4 Million the spent legally since 2000 on lobbyists and pampering BCS officials to secure thier spot as a BCS bowl.

A week later the Fiesta Bowl had appeared to put these claims to bed.

This past week Arizona election officials stated they would begin an independent investigation into the Fiesta Bowl's behaviors. The Fiesta Bowl is accused of not providing state officials with all records that they were asked to provide. Playoff PAC is credited as tenaciously pursuing state officials to launch an investigation. I am inclined to agree with Dr. Saturday that this is not half bad for an upstart PAC less than 3 months old.

So what gives?

Why does the Fiesta Bowl feel the need to spent so much time and money to secure their spot? Aren't they one of the big BCS bowls?

As much murkiness as there is about the criteria used for automatic qualifications for conferences, this is nothing compared to the blatant opaqueness used to determine which bowls are BCS bowls. The Fiesta Bowl is the youngest of the BCS bowls and owes much of its fame from the choice of the Penn St. Nittany Lions and Miami Hurricanes use of that bowl as a defacto national championship game for the 1986 season in the 1997 Sunkist Fiesta Bowl (also the first bowl to pimp out their name that year.) Both teams were independent at the time.

The financial success of this game, and the 1989 Fiesta Bowl between the #1 Notre Dame Fighting Irish and the #3 West Virginia Mountaineers, lead to the formation of the Bowl coalition and the inclusion of the Fiesta Bowl as a major component. This evolved into the BCS.

The Fiesta Bowl began life as a guarantee for WAC champions to have a bowl invite. Before 1987 they were considered a minor bowl, behind the Cotton Bowl who has a long and rich bowl history due to its historical tie in with the once great Southwestern Conference.

Wouldn't it be nice if a process were in place that clearly identified which bowls deserve to be called BCS bowls? Would you believe I have a plan for that?

On Pages 24-26 of my postseason plan I outline a process of using the conference automatic qualification data and bowl tie-ins to determine which of three tiers each bowl belongs.

The Plan

The basic idea is that the top tie-ins for the automatic qualifying conferences become the BCS bowls. If the automatic qualification status of the conferences each bowl is tied to change, so does the status of the bowl. (My estimate for automatic qualification criteria are given on pages 23-24 of the above plan.)

The double hosting model makes it very difficult for each conference and bowl to be evaluated every year. This is mitigated by suspending evaluation of conferences having an automatic qualification until their tie-in hosts the national championship game. I also included contract restrictions that bind conferences to BCS bowls until this evaluation time comes up.

If a conference falls below the standards for automatic qualification before this time they are classified as a provisional automatic qualifying conference in the interim. If  the champion of a conference with a BCS Bowl tie-in fails to be in the top 14 their payout is reduced by $4.5 Million.

Simulation for 2010

The details are linked to above, what might be better is a simulation of how this process would have worked this year.

The Rose Bowl hosted the National Championship Game so it would be their turn to be evaluated.

• The PAC 10 and Big 10 would be evaluated and found to satisfy the requirements.
• The PAC 10 and Big 10 would be given an opportunity to negotiate with another bowl and decline.
• The Rose Bowl would be given an opportunity to negotiate with another conference and decline.
• The Rose Bowl would be certified as a BCS bowl through 2014 and scheduled to host the National Championship Game in 2014.

After this the conferences without a BCS bowl tie-in would be evaluated. The Big East would be found to be acceptable.

• The BCS bowls with an at-large berth would be open to invite the Big East as a tie-in
• If no BCS bowl is interested in a tie-in with the Big East, they would be free to create a tie-in with a bowl of their choice. this bowl would become a BCS bowl through 2015 and be schedule to host the National Championship Game in 2015.

It is likely this process would restore the Big East - Orenge Bowl tie-in that was lost when the ACC pillaged their alleged top teams. This is also a natural conference rivalry the Orange Bowl tradition can build upon.

Simulation for 2011

Ok, 2010 was boring. Let's look at what 2011 could have in store under this process. Next year will be the Fiesta Bowl's turn to host the National Championship Game and be evaluated.

• The Big 12 would be evaluated and found to satisfy the requirements
• The Big 12 would have the opportunity to negotiate with other bowls and could move in with the Cotton Bowl at their new pad.
• The Fiesta Bowl would be free to negotiate with other conferences. Only the Rose Bowl and Orange Bowl participants would be eligible for release (as they have tie-ins with two qualifying conferences), but would not likely move. The only hope would be to secure a tie-in with the MWC and pray they meet the criteria for automatic qualification.
• If the Big 12 is retained or a tie-in with an automatic qualifying MWC is made, the Fiesta Bowl would be certified as a BCS bowl through 2015 and scheduled to host the National Championship Game in 2015.

Then the at large conferences would be evaluated. If the MWC performs at the level it has the past two years (three teams in the top 15) I'd give it a coin flip of them making the grade.

• The BCS bowls with at-large berths would be open to offer the MWC a tie-in.
• If no offers are granted, the MWC would be free to negotiate with a bowl of their choice. This bowl would become a BCS bowl through 2016 and scheduled to host the National Championship Game in 2016.

Closing

This now allows the Big 12 to seamlessly move to the Cotton Bowl, with their SWC ties, and let the MWC move in to the Fiesta Bowl, with their WAC ties. The Fiesta Bowl could double their odds of gaining BCS status by creating a tie-in with the WAC. A MWC Champion vs. WAC Champion could be good for the Fiesta Bowl and a solid tribute to their historical roots.

That is, before the Fiesta Bowl pimped out their history for Sunkist and started the ruination of traditional bowl names nationally.