Go Back   Sports Central Message Boards > Collegiate Sports Discussion > College Football

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-28-2003, 12:51 PM   #16
I OWN THIS
The True Titan
 
I OWN THIS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Southaven, Mississippi
Posts: 2,634
I OWN THIS is on a distinguished road
Default

Well, I have pondered over this one, and after TCU went to overtime with one of the worst teams in the country in Arizona, they are simply not worthy of even a thought of a BCS bid.

Joey
__________________
Tennesse Titans Superbowl Champs 2003...Steve Mcnair for NFL MVP...Hopefully the Gators can compete in the SEC
I OWN THIS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2003, 09:25 PM   #17
JBDTD
Sports Enthusiast
 
JBDTD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 37
JBDTD is on a distinguished road
Default

They did play horrible, but you have to consider that they were playing on the road, with thier backup qb and 3rd string running back. If you watched the game it was very one sided, just several mistakes in the red zone. Didn't deserve to drop 4 spots in the polls.
JBDTD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2003, 01:47 PM   #18
I OWN THIS
The True Titan
 
I OWN THIS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Southaven, Mississippi
Posts: 2,634
I OWN THIS is on a distinguished road
Default

JBDTD, I was trying to get that game late Saturday night, but my direct tv was not picking it up on ESPN gameplan. So, if TCU did dominate the stats, time of possession and so forth, I did not get to see it. I knew the TCU QB was out, but Arizona has been completely blasted by LSU, Purdue, and Oregon by around 40 to 50 points. One would think, even with the injuries TCU did have, they should have beaten Arizona in regulation and had a much better performance vs. a team who is outright terrible and just fired their head coach shortly after the game.

Joey
__________________
Tennesse Titans Superbowl Champs 2003...Steve Mcnair for NFL MVP...Hopefully the Gators can compete in the SEC
I OWN THIS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2003, 05:32 PM   #19
JBDTD
Sports Enthusiast
 
JBDTD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 37
JBDTD is on a distinguished road
Default

TCU had over 450 yards of total offense. They made some mistakes in the red zone. Went for it on 4th and one from the Arizona 6 and fumbled. Our All-American kicker had his worst game ever missing two field goals that would normally be chip shots for him. Our tight end dropped a wide open 50 yard pass that would have easily been a touchdown. Anyone who had watched the game would agree that TCU should have won (based on how they played compared to zona) about 35-10.

These are all just excuses, I admit. But looking at the game, the offense executed, the defense executed. The only thing that made it close, was the inexperience of key players inside the red zone. I dont feel it was deserving of dropping 4 spots in the polls. TCU is a very solid team and I honestly dont see them losing more than 1 game, if any this season.

Last edited by JBDTD; 09-29-2003 at 05:50 PM.
JBDTD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2003, 05:47 PM   #20
JBDTD
Sports Enthusiast
 
JBDTD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 37
JBDTD is on a distinguished road
Default

One more point....

You guys think that TCU, NIU, and other quality no-name teams truly dont deserve to be in the BCS bowls and truly would get dominated in a game against a top tier team. My only point is this: If they go undefeated, give them the bid. If they are that much worse, they are gonna get killed in the game, and this will never have to be an issue again. Either way, if they win the game or lose it, the debate will be over. We cant just tell small schools out there that even with a perfect season, they wont even get a 2nd glance. Thats not what college sports are all about.
JBDTD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2003, 07:30 PM   #21
dhav8706
Grizzled Veteran
 
dhav8706's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 137
dhav8706 is on a distinguished road
Default

I think that a few more bowls should be added to the BCS for that very reason. I want to see a undefeated MAC school, or CUSA school, or MWC school get a shot in a big payout and a nationally televised game on the basic channels. Believe me, a small conference school would be pumped up for that game. Would they win, likely they wouldn'y, but i would think about half the games would be close and even more would be in the first half. Add on the Cotton Bowl, and either the Holiday, Gator, or Capital One Bowl, depending on who wants it more.
dhav8706 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2003, 05:16 PM   #22
MountaineerDave
Where am I?
 
MountaineerDave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 5,661
MountaineerDave is on a distinguished road
Default

There has been discussion of a non-BCS conference big payout bowl, possibly on a rotating basis, possibly the CapOne.

I'd like such an idea, but who decides which conferences? I think one of the shoddiest things about the BCS in its current configuration is that the bowl administrators get to pick and choose their attendees, at the expense of more qualified (in this discussion, qualified==ranking). To fix this, the BCS should, if it is expected to exist beyond 2005, do the following three things:

1. Add a bowl. I don't care if it's the Liberty, Capital One, whatever. Just add an existing bowl game, and, if necessary, cut payouts at those games that aren't #1-#2.
2. Assign each season the #1v #2 matchups, as is currently the case. Beyond that, assign, on a rotating basis, the bowl game for #3v #4, #5 v #6, #7 v #8, and #9 v #10.
3. Remove the conference title winners/ND exceptions. (Conference title winners exception can exist if and only if the conference is won outright, either by a game, or by unaminity in conference play. Conference winners who actually tie will not count. If they aren't in the BCS top 10, nobody wants them anyway...)

Dave
__________________
mountaineerdave on twitter
mountaineerdavem on AIM
MountaineerDave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2003, 07:54 PM   #23
buckeyefan78
Happy Land
 
buckeyefan78's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 12,865
buckeyefan78 is a jewel in the roughbuckeyefan78 is a jewel in the roughbuckeyefan78 is a jewel in the rough
Default

You heard Capital One Dave, I heard Cotton. Anyway, it's out there...another BCS bowl. Your amendments make sense, however, they further lessen the chances of a Big Ten-Pac Ten Rose Bowl, so I have to nit pick that. We could always go back to the old days, but that would mean self responsibility for the bowls and the conferences as if they were more then something then pawns in the NCAA-BCS-ABC-DISNEY conglomerates dreams of world domination based on how many BMW's their suits had. It would also mean the Rose would again nearly DOUBLE the Orange Bowls' payout and restore it's prestige and tradition by conducting capitalism in a free market atmosphere, thereby giving power of decision on various levels in matters that actually effect those involved.

But who wants those ideals anyway huh?
buckeyefan78 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2003, 08:27 PM   #24
MountaineerDave
Where am I?
 
MountaineerDave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 5,661
MountaineerDave is on a distinguished road
Default

Let me make an amendment to my amendments, 78. I meant to give better consideration to this, but got wrapped up in pressing the submit post button.

Add two bowls to the BCS, and remove the Rose Bowl from the BCS bowls, allowing it to do whatever it wants. If and only if #1 and #2 are Pac10 and Big10 will the Rose host the national title game. When the Big 10 and Pac 10 each have teams in the top 10, they may choose to forego the BCS bowls if they aren't in title contention, admitting #11 and #12.

Dave
__________________
mountaineerdave on twitter
mountaineerdavem on AIM
MountaineerDave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2003, 10:04 PM   #25
dhav8706
Grizzled Veteran
 
dhav8706's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 137
dhav8706 is on a distinguished road
Default

I like that last idea, but I think they need to keep Conference Champions in there. If there is a tie, screw tie-breakers, just go by higher BCS. And the highest non-BCS conf. school should get an automatic bid. That would give all underdogs a chance.
dhav8706 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2003, 10:46 AM   #26
buckeyefan78
Happy Land
 
buckeyefan78's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 12,865
buckeyefan78 is a jewel in the roughbuckeyefan78 is a jewel in the roughbuckeyefan78 is a jewel in the rough
Default

Sounds good Dave. Sorry about the rant on the Rose Bowl. It upsets me on every level. From a capitalist standpoint, the BCS is such a mockery, I can go head first into it on a political level.

AND IT WOULD WORK. On paper, it looks as if the Rose would be getting screwed ( thinking back to Stanford playing in the Rose a few years back and barely ranked if memory serves). But the Rose Committee still tends to be a self reliant, defiant bunch, who like to control things ( their way of thinking is in direct contrast to the homogenized BCS, who proably have us living in the Matrix). They would still get the money, it would pose no problems.

dhav brings up conference champions again, which by a quick glance at the standings right now, doesn't seem feasible. If you want conf. champs in, your going to have to set up " super conferences" like the Big 12, SEC, and next year's ACC. This would leave out the Big Ten, Pac Ten and certaintly next year's Big East. This would assure a subpar conf. champ ( FSU last year) didn't get a piece of the pie.
buckeyefan78 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2003, 03:27 PM   #27
MountaineerDave
Where am I?
 
MountaineerDave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 5,661
MountaineerDave is on a distinguished road
Default

78--Just a note: Big Ten and next year's ACC have same number of teams... Just a note.

Conference champs can't have an automatic bid, plain and simple. Do we really believe a 9-4 team should get a BCS bowl bid? I don't.

And 78's point about the '04 Big East is spot on. The champ from that conference is as likely to go 6-5 as they are undefeated. You can't have an automatic bid, in a more permanent system, for such a losery conference.

If we're sticking with the BCS, cut out all the crap, and assign the BCS top ten teams to five bowl games with $10+M payouts. Exempt non-#1 &#2 Pac10/Big10 teams, expanding the BCS participants to #11 and #12 when necessary. Rose Bowl pays what it pays, and if other conferences get jealous... tell them to get their own non-BCS bowl game.

Dave
__________________
mountaineerdave on twitter
mountaineerdavem on AIM
MountaineerDave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2003, 04:43 PM   #28
buckeyefan78
Happy Land
 
buckeyefan78's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 12,865
buckeyefan78 is a jewel in the roughbuckeyefan78 is a jewel in the roughbuckeyefan78 is a jewel in the rough
Default

True on the numbers RIGHT NOW Dave, but I'm looking long term, when the ACC will have12 teams and a conf. title game, which will be 05 at the LATEST IMO. Too much money to be lost if we can't get a billion teams in our conf. and play a billion rematches Dave. This league is like Enron too, ruthless....
buckeyefan78 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2003, 04:50 PM   #29
MountaineerDave
Where am I?
 
MountaineerDave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 5,661
MountaineerDave is on a distinguished road
Default

Oh, they'll have their 12 teams by 2005, 78. I agree there, but I also figure that when it's all said and done, ND might make the same leap, and there's really no way in hell the Big10 says no when the Golden Domers quietly ask entrance. Big 10 makes more sense for ND on so many levels... they have three major rivalry games in conference, and the only recurring rivalry games the Irish have don't have to go away in joining the Big 10. They can easily fit BC, Navy, USC, and Stanford into their non-conference schedule. Makes it more difficult to land the occasional FSU or whatever, but they can always shelve Navy every so often...

Dave
__________________
mountaineerdave on twitter
mountaineerdavem on AIM
MountaineerDave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2003, 06:36 PM   #30
dhav8706
Grizzled Veteran
 
dhav8706's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 137
dhav8706 is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by MountaineerDave
Oh, they'll have their 12 teams by 2005, 78. I agree there, but I also figure that when it's all said and done, ND might make the same leap, and there's really no way in hell the Big10 says no when the Golden Domers quietly ask entrance. Big 10 makes more sense for ND on so many levels... they have three major rivalry games in conference, and the only recurring rivalry games the Irish have don't have to go away in joining the Big 10. They can easily fit BC, Navy, USC, and Stanford into their non-conference schedule. Makes it more difficult to land the occasional FSU or whatever, but they can always shelve Navy every so often...

Dave
1st of all, how can ND play BC Navy USC and Stanford every year. There are usually only 3 non-conference games every year. And lets say that they are in the Big Ten, if they start losing consistently, which they usually do against Big Ten teams, then having Notre Dame in the Big Ten kills their prestige.

2nd of all, chances are that 9-4 confernce champion is going to be in the Top 10 of the BCS. And even if they aren't, what if you've got a conference with a ton of really talented teams that just keep beating up on each other. You're not gonna let any of them in there. If you've got 5 games, then 4 conference champions can be allowed in, and I don't see any reason why not.
dhav8706 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:33 AM.