It seems like a simple question, but with the Big 12 disentigrating around Nebraska and Texas, what happens to the premier bowl game of the Mid-to-South West?Personally, I'm debating whether this is a positive thing or not. If, as suspected (and reported by ESPN), Nebraska has jumped ship on the BIG XII, we've got another BCS bowl without a primary conference tie in anymore. This also raises the larger question of what happens to BCS tie-ins in general. With 16 teams in a conference (as the Pac-16 will seemingly soon be), does the rule on 2 teams per conference still make sense?
As you can imagine, for now, this doesn't affect UGA much. We're still aligned with the Sugar Bowl, and will be for the foreseeable future. I'm fine with that. However, there's a clear issue for the BCS here. If the rules continue unchanged, what happens to USC/Texas/Oklahoma in good years for their conference? We'll see amazingly watered down BCS bowls if this continues. Is the logical move to allow up to 2 teams per division (assuming 8 team divisions in the future Big 10/Pac-16)? Would that be acceptable? Does this then necessitate a scramble by both the ACC and SEC to grab 4 more teams each, in order to maximize the BCS revenue? If you can have up to 4 teams in the BCS with 16, but only 2 with 12, you might be better off larger monetarily. I'm sure some of you could break down the money issues.
So, does the Mountain West, after gobbling up Boise, Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State and Baylor grab the old Fiesta Bowl invite to maintain the status quo?
Or do we finally see the Cotton Bowl make a big push for BCS bowl status at the expense of the Fiesta?