05 Dec 11
Originally posted by no1marauderIts not last year.
You mean the "semi-joke" of a conference who's champion defeated the champion of the Big Ten in the Rose Bowl last year?
The Sugar Bowl is correct to take the second best team in the Big 10 (and its schedule) over the second best team in the Mountain West (and its ridiculously schedule).
05 Dec 11
2 edits
Originally posted by quackquackHow come the "second best team" in the Big Ten didn't make it to the Big Ten conference championship? And how come they are rated behind Boise State in the BCS and every poll?
Its not last year.
The Sugar Bowl is correct to take the second best team in the Big 10 (and its schedule) over the second best team in the Mountain West (and its ridiculously schedule).
And what about Virginia Tech a team that got crushed twice this year and plays in a weak ACC? Unlike Boise State, the Hokies don't have a single win against a Top 20 team.
Oh, so LAST YEAR the Mountain West wasn't a "semi joke" but this year it is?
05 Dec 11
Originally posted by no1marauderProbably for the same reason that the second best team in the SEC and in the nation,
How come the "second best team" in the Big Ten didn't make it to the Big Ten conference championship? And how come they are rated behind Boise State in the BCS and every poll?
And what about Virginia Tech a team that got crushed twice this year and plays in a weak ACC? Unlike Boise State, the Hokies don't have a single win against a Top ...[text shortened]... Oh, so LAST YEAR the Mountain West wasn't a "semi joke" but this year it is?
didn't make it to the SEC championship game.
Typically it is because the top rated team beat them and precluded them from appearing.
That still does not mean that Boise State is as good as several teams ranked below them.
No, they only get the respect they deserve, not the respect you want to bestow on them.
05 Dec 11
Originally posted by shortcircuit"Respect" from whom? Some bowl organizers?
Probably for the same reason that the second best team in the SEC and in the nation,
didn't make it to the SEC championship game.
Typically it is because the top rated team beat them and precluded them from appearing.
That still does not mean that Boise State is as good as several teams ranked below them.
No, they only get the respect they deserve, not the respect you want to bestow on them.
They were #6 in the Coaches and the Harris Poll. VT was #11 in both and Michigan #12. The system is a travesty.
05 Dec 11
1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauderIt has been a travesty for years.
"Respect" from whom? Some bowl organizers?
They were #6 in the Coaches and the Harris Poll. VT was #11 in both and Michigan #12. The system is a travesty.
The AP and UPI polls were popularity driven for years.
USA Today is much the same.
The computer polls favor strength of schedule, but that is skewed based on when a team plays another.
The bowls are all about money...truckloads of money.
That is how they generate the enormous payouts to the participants, at least for the
larger bowls. The smaller bowls may allow schools to break even for travel expenses.
Heck, you are biased as am I. You root for the underdogs or the little sisters.
Rooting for them doesn't make them better though.
You can scream about how this team or that team could possibly beat another team.
Unless they are played, it is speculation. You enjoy stirring the pot up and going against
the grain. That is your prerogative. However, your playoff scenario would no more
prove who the best team in the country was, than the current system.
Why? Because the best team in the land can have a bad week, a bad play, a bad call against them.
Any of those things destroys the perfection that is almost required to rise to the top.
You will never satisfy everyone with your system either, because there will always
be the bubble team that felt they were slighted and not invited to the dance.
It is an imperfect system to be sure, but so is yours. Until every team can play every
team during the regular season, it is impossible to know with
any certainty about who could beat who. David slew Goliath, so anything is possible.
If Boise wants the public recognition, get them into a tough conference and schedule
tough out of conference games as well. Then win them all. If they do that, they will
get their due.
05 Dec 11
1 edit
Originally posted by shortcircuitWhat "bubble teams" exist when all you take are conference champions? You win, you're in, you don't your out. I suppose there might be some complaint if the Conference USA champ got passed over for the WAC champion, but how often is that going to be an issue? This year and most years there's been two mid-major conferences clearly better than the rest. In fact, the MWC and CONF-USA both have two teams rated better than the Big East champions.
It has been a travesty for years.
The AP and UPI polls were popularity driven for years.
USA Today is much the same.
The computer polls favor strength of schedule, but that is skewed based on when a team plays another.
The bowls are all about money...truckloads of money.
That is how they generate the enormous payouts to the participants, at lea out of conference games as well. Then win them all. If they do that, they will
get their due.
Look everybody and their mothers know that Boise State got slighted for the Sugar Bowl because the bowl organizers thought they'd make more money with Michigan and Virginia Tech even though both are inferior teams to the Broncos.To make it even worse, virtually all the non-BCS bowls have conference tie-ins which means even legitimately good teams like Boise State and TCU don't get a shot against the BCS conference elite. And then people like QQ complain they don't play anybody (of course when they do and win "that was last year"😉.
Surely you aren't being as ignorant as QQ and claiming that teams can get into whatever conference they want whenever they want?
05 Dec 11
Originally posted by no1marauderEver seen a scenario where in a conference championship, the weaker team wins a game?
What "bubble teams" exist when all you take are conference champions? You win, you're in, you don't your out. I suppose there might be some complaint if the Conference USA champ got passed over for the WAC champion, but how often is that going to be an issue? This year and most years there's been two mid-major conferences clearly better than the rest. In ...[text shortened]... nd claiming that teams can get into whatever conference they want whenever they want?
That team could be the 4th or 5th best record in the conference, but you let them in
because they win a one game playoff over a team with a better record who beat them
during the regular season??
06 Dec 11
1 edit
Originally posted by shortcircuitIt's up to the leagues how they decide their champion; it would be illogical and ridiculous to pass over a league champion for another team in the league because somebody thinks the other team is better. No league is required to have a Championship game.
Ever seen a scenario where in a conference championship, the weaker team wins a game?
That team could be the 4th or 5th best record in the conference, but you let them in
because they win a one game playoff over a team with a better record who beat them
during the regular season??
The NCAA basketball tournament didn't allow second place or lower finishers in a conference in the tournament until 1975.
06 Dec 11
Originally posted by no1marauderCollege football has major conference and minor conferences. Teams in major conference play tougher games week in and week out. There is a reward for playing that. Being in second place in the Big 10 will give you a better game then being the secong best team in the Mountain West. Boise actually has a solution they can win their crapy conference -- they did not. They could join a better conference. They see how Utah struggled in its first year in the Pac 10 seem to be afraid that they might really not be gooog enough. But, your position that Boise does not have to win their junky conference, they do not have to join a better conference but should be rewarded anyway is simply a joke.
How come the "second best team" in the Big Ten didn't make it to the Big Ten conference championship? And how come they are rated behind Boise State in the BCS and every poll?
And what about Virginia Tech a team that got crushed twice this year and plays in a weak ACC? Unlike Boise State, the Hokies don't have a single win against a Top ...[text shortened]... Oh, so LAST YEAR the Mountain West wasn't a "semi joke" but this year it is?
I think conference championships are mornic (although last week did show that Houston isn't really that great).
06 Dec 11
Originally posted by quackquackAccording to the same system that anointed Alabama to play in the BCS Championship Game, Boise State is better than either Michigan or Virginia Tech. The "minor conference" they play in champion beat the Big Ten champion last year and Alabama the last time they were allowed in a BCS Bowl. It also has two teams in the top 20 while "major conference" the Big East barely has one in the top 25.
College football has major conference and minor conferences. Teams in major conference play tougher games week in and week out. There is a reward for playing that. Being in second place in the Big 10 will give you a better game then being the secong best team in the Mountain West. Boise actually has a solution they can win their crapy conference -- ...[text shortened]... ce championships are mornic (although last week did show that Houston isn't really that great).
Your crap continues to be just that: crap.
06 Dec 11
Originally posted by no1marauderYou can completely ignore reality but it matters who you play. Bowl tie in recognize that and being the second best team in the Big 10 is better than being the second best team in the Mountain West. The Sugar Bowl which could have either team rewards Michigan (the team who played the better schedule in the better conference) not Boise (the team that ducks joining a real conference and then whines when people don't clamor for it after it can't even win the Mountain West.
According to the same system that anointed Alabama to play in the BCS Championship Game, Boise State is better than either Michigan or Virginia Tech. The "minor conference" they play in champion beat the Big Ten champion last year and Alabama the last time they were allowed in a BCS Bowl. It also has two teams in the top 20 while "major conference" the B ...[text shortened]... East barely has one in the top 25.
Your crap continues to be just that: crap.
The polls do not care who anyone plays. If you lose one game you are basically automatically ahead of a two loss team which is automatically ahead of a three loss team. The crap that comes out your mouth is funny but no one cares about the plight of second place teams in joke conferences.
06 Dec 11
4 edits
Originally posted by quackquackHow come the champion of that "joke" conference keeps beating the big shots of the "major" conferences every time they have the opportunity to do so? Who's "ducking" who? Michigan backed out of a game with Boise State just a few years ago.
You can completely ignore reality but it matters who you play. Bowl tie in recognize that and being the second best team in the Big 10 is better than being the second best team in the Mountain West. The Sugar Bowl which could have either team rewards Michigan (the team who played the better schedule in the better conference) not Boise (the team that ur mouth is funny but no one cares about the plight of second place teams in joke conferences.
EDIT: My mistake; Michigan backed out of a game with Hawaii (with Colt Brennan) in 2007 (and paid Hawaii $250,000 to do so) not Boise State.
EDIT2: Oklahoma State played a much tougher schedule than Alabama; how come they are not playing in the Championship Game if SOS is sooooooooooooooooooo important?
06 Dec 11
Originally posted by no1marauderIf you are looking for a better bowl game for a BCS bowl game because four years ago a game not involving Boise was rescheduled you are even crazier then I thought. If anything it is yet another reason to join a conference, conference games are rarely rescheduled.
How come the champion of that "joke" conference keeps beating the big shots of the "major" conferences every time they have the opportunity to do so? Who's "ducking" who? Michigan backed out of a game with Boise State just a few years ago.
EDIT: My mistake; Michigan backed out of a game with Hawaii (with Colt Brennan) in 2007 (and paid Hawaii $250,000 ...[text shortened]... e they are not playing in the Championship Game if SOS is sooooooooooooooooooo important?
I have no problem with OSU being in the championship game if people feel they played the better schedule but I feel that is very debatable. Alabama had a better out of conference game especially when you figure that winning at Penn State was a much better than win before the Paterno scandal. The SEC is probably the best conference (6 consecutive championships after this season and another strong out of conference season) and although Alabama does not play everyone in the conference they do have a better top in conference win (Arkansas) than OSU and a they did lose to the better team (LSU in overtime) than OSU. When you combine this with the fact that, most experts feel Alabama is the better team, I think there is a lot of logic in the selection for the championship.
06 Dec 11
Originally posted by quackquackAs I stated on page 21:
If you are looking for a better bowl game for a BCS bowl game because four years ago a game not involving Boise was rescheduled you are even crazier then I thought. If anything it is yet another reason to join a conference, conference games are rarely rescheduled.
I have no problem with OSU being in the championship game if people feel they played the ...[text shortened]... abama is the better team, I think there is a lot of logic in the selection for the championship.
Alabama's out of conference schedule included mid-major creampuffs Kent State and North Texas and non-Division I Georgia Southern. Even counting the last, 'Bama only beat 4 teams with a better than .500 record.
If Oklahoma State beats Oklahoma, they'll have 7 wins against teams with a better than .500 record and a much better strength of schedule (which is why they'll be ahead in the computers). If you base it just on SOS and losses, the Cowboys deserve a shot rather than the Tide.
Of course all you keep saying is "SEC this, SEC that". Alabama's win against Penn State is a thin reed to base a claim to a right for a team that didn't even play in its league championship game to play for the National Championship; the Lions lost by 38 last week to Wisconsin.
There really is no reasonable argument that Alabama played a tougher schedule than Oklahoma State.