BCS

[horseofcourse]

The biggest travesty in this whole thing is of course TExas Tech not playing in the Big 12 championship game. Oklahoma of course insisted on Texas Tech playing in this game by explaining that head to head means absolutely nothing as they beat Texas Tech and Texas didn't. Their circularity of course meant that Oklahoma and Stoops felt T Tech was the deserving big 12 south champion. Texas Tech beat Texas and Oklahoma didn't...plus Texas Tech beat Oklahoma State prettier than Oklahoma did. Therefore, according to the Oklahoma publicity machine the Texas Tech/Oklahoma matchup really meant nothing. Oklahoma tosses Texas game in favor of the Texas Tech game, therefore Texas Tech can toss the Oklahoma game in favor of the Texas game putting them ahead of Oklahoma obviously according to the Oklahoma argument. Their own logic and argument placed them below Texas Tech.

And of course Texas was also arguing for Texas Tech as they claimed they beat Oklahoma straight up...meaning their straight up loss to Texas Tech was the decider. Their own logic and argument placed them below Texas Tech.

And of course MIke Leach brought up the graduation rates as well. So all 3 big 12 South schools argued for Texas Tech as the champion of the conference to no success. The pollsters have it all wrong.

Texas Tech...the true Big 12 south champion.

Originally Posted by horseofcourse

The biggest travesty in this whole thing is of course TExas Tech not playing in the Big 12 championship game. Oklahoma of course insisted on Texas Tech playing in this game by explaining that head to head means absolutely nothing as they beat Texas Tech and Texas didn't. Their circularity of course meant that Oklahoma and Stoops felt T Tech was the deserving big 12 south champion. Texas Tech beat Texas and Oklahoma didn't...plus Texas Tech beat Oklahoma State prettier than Oklahoma did. Therefore, according to the Oklahoma publicity machine the Texas Tech/Oklahoma matchup really meant nothing. Oklahoma tosses Texas game in favor of the Texas Tech game, therefore Texas Tech can toss the Oklahoma game in favor of the Texas game putting them ahead of Oklahoma obviously according to the Oklahoma argument. Their own logic and argument placed them below Texas Tech.

And of course Texas was also arguing for Texas Tech as they claimed they beat Oklahoma straight up...meaning their straight up loss to Texas Tech was the decider. Their own logic and argument placed them below Texas Tech.

And of course MIke Leach brought up the graduation rates as well. So all 3 big 12 South schools argued for Texas Tech as the champion of the conference to no success. The pollsters have it all wrong.

Texas Tech...the true Big 12 south champion.

Texas logic is that they lost to Tech on Tech's home field on the last play.
(after a freshman dropped a lollypop interception to seal the game) and beat Oklahoma cleanly on a neutral field. Tech barely sneaking by Baylor sealed their coffin. Any team that gets beat as bad as Tech did... They are just not that good. They got Texas on a very bad game and barely won.

Unlike most Texas fans, it does not bother me that Oklahoma went over us. You play your best and live with the results. We know the system has its drawbacks. No use to continually beating your head against a wall.

The one thing I can make sense of is that out of those 3 Big 12 teams, Tech is cearly the NOT the best. Good teams dont get 65 or whatever points put up on them. Tech away from Lubbock can lose to any decent team.

I think the King's scenario seems correct. Except I think Ohio St. has a good chance to replace Boise. Ohio St. has a huge following. And it does matter.

[Mortimer]

Hey..I'm not a bcs fan because it's so phony.



But Ohio State or any other team like them.....check the schedules for whoever that team could be ...and then look at Boise.

[philcski]

Originally Posted by Mortimer

Hey..I'm not a bcs fan because it's so phony.



But Ohio State or any other team like them.....check the schedules for whoever that team could be ...and then look at Boise.

While I very much agree with you on point #1, note that Ohio State beat exactly one good team this year (@ Michigan State) and lost to the two other legitimate teams they played. Normally I'd give credit for a good win @ Camp Randall, but not this year.

Boise's win at Oregon is just as good, if not better, than Ohio State's at Michigan State- and they absolutely manhandled everybody else on their schedule except a decent Nevada team. They deserve to go over a two-loss Ohio State team.

We know they won't, since money matters of course as Phil stated.

[Mortimer]

Originally Posted by philcski

While I very much agree with you on point #1, note that Ohio State beat exactly one good team this year (@ Michigan State) and lost to the two other legitimate teams they played. Normally I'd give credit for a good win @ Camp Randall, but not this year.

Boise's win at Oregon is just as good, if not better, than Ohio State's at Michigan State- and they absolutely manhandled everybody else on their schedule except a decent Nevada team. They deserve to go over a two-loss Ohio State team.

We know they won't, since money matters of course as Phil stated.

Honest..wasn't a plug for us.


Wish someone else was battling them. I just think strength of sched should matter. Look at their whole sched.....it sucks.They wouldn't finish in the top 5 or 6 in the BT..in my noodle.



Think of BYU being the only undefeated team in the country several years ago. They won the polls nc.........didn't deserve it. I do think 2 and 3 loss teams can be better than unbeaten teams.

[philcski]

Originally Posted by Mortimer

Honest..wasn't a plug for us.


Wish someone else was battling them. I just think strength of sched should matter. Look at their whole sched.....it sucks.They wouldn't finish in the top 5 or 6 in the BT..in my noodle.



Think of BYU being the only undefeated team in the country several years ago. They won the polls nc.........didn't deserve it. I do think 2 and 3 loss teams can be better than unbeaten teams.

I know it wasn't a plug. Just playing the other side of the argument.

I think they'd finish 3rd in the Big Ten this year, or 2nd in the Pac-10. Their wide open style would play better in that league. I love the blue field, by the way- best homefield advantage in the country with the all-blue unis!

Is a 2 loss Ohio State team better than Ball State? Without a DOUBT. Hell, a 5 loss Oregon State team is better than them...

[Mortimer]

You do know Purdue and NW have run a wide open spread here for years?


I don't know what they run...a spread I guess?

I hate that gooofy gimmick offense.


I just can't see them finishing in front of SP,OSU,Iowa,MSU....and even maybe NW,MINN and Illinois.

[ddthetide]

Humanitarian Bowl wants Boise and Ball St. Ball wants no parts of Boise on the blue rug. Ball has no objections to Boise as long as it's a neutral site.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by pgardn

Texas logic is that they lost to Tech on Tech's home field on the last play.
(after a freshman dropped a lollypop interception to seal the game) and beat Oklahoma cleanly on a neutral field. Tech barely sneaking by Baylor sealed their coffin. Any team that gets beat as bad as Tech did... They are just not that good. They got Texas on a very bad game and barely won.

Unlike most Texas fans, it does not bother me that Oklahoma went over us. You play your best and live with the results. We know the system has its drawbacks. No use to continually beating your head against a wall.

The one thing I can make sense of is that out of those 3 Big 12 teams, Tech is cearly the NOT the best. Good teams dont get 65 or whatever points put up on them. Tech away from Lubbock can lose to any decent team.

I think the King's scenario seems correct. Except I think Ohio St. has a good chance to replace Boise. Ohio St. has a huge following. And it does matter.

I think any bowl besides the Fiesta would chose Ohio St. The Fiesta might too but they would probably consider Boise for two reasons:

1) Idaho's close proximity to Arizona. I think in this economy, the fact that they are so close and travel expenses would be a lot lower for not only the team but the fans, that could play a role.

2) Boise's very successful visit the last time they played in the game, against Oklahoma.

[31lengths]

8 teams
Jan 1
Outback or Capital One 1-8
Cotton 2-7
Rose 3-6
Sugar 4-5

Jan 8
Orange 1-4
Fiesta 2-3

Jan 15
BCS Bowl 1-2

or 4 teams

Jan 1 (Rotating the 4 BCS bowls every year)
Orange 1-4
Fiesta 2-3

Jan 8
BCS Bowl 1-2

[ddthetide]

Originally Posted by 31lengths

8 teams
Jan 1
Outback or Capital One 1-8
Cotton 2-7
Rose 3-6
Sugar 4-5

Jan 8
Orange 1-4
Fiesta 2-3

Jan 15
BCS Bowl 1-2

or 4 teams

Jan 1 (Rotating the 4 BCS bowls every year)
Orange 1-4
Fiesta 2-3

Jan 8
BCS Bowl 1-2

pretty good idea just bump back your dates: 8 teams, start the second weekedend in Dec and finish the first weekend in Jan.
4 teams play third weekend in Dec. and the first weekend in Jan. that would be a week off between conference championships and a week off before the NCG.

Originally Posted by King Glorious

I think any bowl besides the Fiesta would chose Ohio St. The Fiesta might too but they would probably consider Boise for two reasons:

1) Idaho's close proximity to Arizona. I think in this economy, the fact that they are so close and travel expenses would be a lot lower for not only the team but the fans, that could play a role.

2) Boise's very successful visit the last time they played in the game, against Oklahoma.

I think it also depends on who is the other representative. If Texas gets the Fiesta, you are going to get many more requests for tickets from Texas fans if Ohio St. is the pick. It may not be fair... but this is how I see it. Texas and Ohio St. fans will travel in very large numbers. You are talking about the two top schools in the nation for revenue from sports. Huge Alumni numbers.

Should be interesting.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

I think any bowl besides the Fiesta would chose Ohio St. The Fiesta might too but they would probably consider Boise for two reasons:

1) Idaho's close proximity to Arizona. I think in this economy, the fact that they are so close and travel expenses would be a lot lower for not only the team but the fans, that could play a role.

2) Boise's very successful visit the last time they played in the game, against Oklahoma.

Idaho isnt real close to AZ

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Idaho isnt real close to AZ

Boise to Phoenix is under 1000 miles and it's half the distance of Columbus to Phoenix.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

Boise to Phoenix is under 1000 miles and it's half the distance of Columbus to Phoenix.

Boise to Pheonix is farther than Chicago to NY. It is real hard to make a case that proximity is a reason to choose Boise. Maybe they think Boise's fans are more apt to make the trip being that they are new to the big bowl game thing?

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Boise to Pheonix is farther than Chicago to NY. It is real hard to make a case that proximity is a reason to choose Boise. Maybe they think Boise's fans are more apt to make the trip being that they are new to the big bowl game thing?

What does Chicago to NY have to do with anything? Why is it hard to make a case for Boise based on proximity? They are less than 1000 miles away and Ohio St. fans would have to travel twice as far to get to Phoenix as Boise fans. Also, Boise played in the Fiesta Bowl just a couple of years ago and put on a great show when they beat Oklahoma. They'd make the trip to Phoenix. When they played in the 2007 game, the stadium was packed to capacity.

It's probably a moot point though. Ohio St. would be the bigger TV draw even if they wouldn't be a bigger draw attendance wise and as I said earlier, the only chance Boise would have of getting selected is if the selection belongs to the Fiesta. Any other would automatically chose Ohio St.

[horseofcourse]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Idaho isnt real close to AZ

speaking from experience, Idaho is close to absolutely nothing. A 500 mile drive out here is considered pretty much nothing. I think KGs point is pretty valid and the Fiesta has had great success with both Utah and Boise State in recent history. And considering the amount of driving required in the Rocky Mountain States to get somewhere, Phoenix is a pretty easy destination from both Salt Lake and Boise.

[Cajungator26]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

I think any bowl besides the Fiesta would chose Ohio St.

My old high school football team is rumored to be playing Ohio State in the "I'm the most overrated football team in the country" bowl ...













































































Dr. Phillips is the 6 point favorite.

[horseofcourse]

Originally Posted by pgardn

Texas logic is that they lost to Tech on Tech's home field on the last play.
(after a freshman dropped a lollypop interception to seal the game) and beat Oklahoma cleanly on a neutral field. Tech barely sneaking by Baylor sealed their coffin. Any team that gets beat as bad as Tech did... They are just not that good. They got Texas on a very bad game and barely won.

Unlike most Texas fans, it does not bother me that Oklahoma went over us. You play your best and live with the results. We know the system has its drawbacks. No use to continually beating your head against a wall.

The one thing I can make sense of is that out of those 3 Big 12 teams, Tech is cearly the NOT the best. Good teams dont get 65 or whatever points put up on them. Tech away from Lubbock can lose to any decent team.

I think the King's scenario seems correct. Except I think Ohio St. has a good chance to replace Boise. Ohio St. has a huge following. And it does matter.

my quaint attempts at humor again for naught!

with regard to your bolded portion...at what limit do you draw the points allowed to be a good team limit?? Obviously good teams can give up 45 in your opinion...or 41...but not 65?? What is the magic value where a team becomes not good?? 47?? or can you give up 90 as long as you win??

I was attempting to be funny as I clearly don't think Texas Tech is the best team in the big 12 south...but I found great humor in the Texas and Oklahoma people's attempt at justification. In the end they were clearly making circular arguments is all I was saying. When 3 teams all beat each other, that makes any attempt at justification to clearly make one of those teams the best...circular in nature. Just as anyone can make the claim for Texas and Oklahoma, I thought I'd do the same for Tech as noone else did.

In my opinion, of all the one loss teams, Florida is the least deserving of a spot in the title game. They are the only one who lost at home. All the others lost on the road or at neutral fields. I hope they lose to Alabama.

[Mortimer]

Originally Posted by horseofcourse

my quaint attempts at humor again for naught!

with regard to your bolded portion...at what limit do you draw the points allowed to be a good team limit?? Obviously good teams can give up 45 in your opinion...or 41...but not 65?? What is the magic value where a team becomes not good?? 47?? or can you give up 90 as long as you win??

I was attempting to be funny as I clearly don't think Texas Tech is the best team in the big 12 south...but I found great humor in the Texas and Oklahoma people's attempt at justification. In the end they were clearly making circular arguments is all I was saying. When 3 teams all beat each other, that makes any attempt at justification to clearly make one of those teams the best...circular in nature. Just as anyone can make the claim for Texas and Oklahoma, I thought I'd do the same for Tech as noone else did.

In my opinion, of all the one loss teams, Florida is the least deserving of a spot in the title game. They are the only one who lost at home. All the others lost on the road or at neutral fields. I hope they lose to Alabama.

!!!!OOOOOOOOOO!!!!