Dirty
#BanBiddy
Re: College Football 2009: Bowl College Stupidity Rankings
In that case Northeastern should just drop their athletic program.
In that case Northeastern should just drop their athletic program.
USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
College Football 2009: Bowl College Stupidity Rankings
- Thread starter GreatLakerMohawk
- Start date
- Status
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: College Football 2009: Bowl College Stupidity Rankings
You aren't off base, but I wonder if there isn't an unspoken agreement between bowl officials not to snipe their traditional conferences. So the Fiesta Bowl would skip on the SEC loser and leave them for the Sugar Bowl - plus they have the added benefit of the Penn State fan base which equals ticket sales and hotel reservations. And I think the Sugar Bowl would see BCS-eligible Virginia Tech as more attractive than either Oklahoma State or Pitt.
That means:
National Title: SEC vs Texas
Rose: Ohio State vs Oregon
Fiesta: Penn State vs TCU
Sugar: SEC #2 vs Virginia Tech
Orange: Georgia Tech vs Cincinnati
The exception might be if Alabama is SEC #2, the Sugar Bowl might want to avoid a 'Bama/Tech rematch, but the dollars are there...
I'd like to see Boise get a shot, but the BC$ passed on Cal when they were #4...I don't see any bowl official taking a chance on #6 Boise...
You aren't off base, but I wonder if there isn't an unspoken agreement between bowl officials not to snipe their traditional conferences. So the Fiesta Bowl would skip on the SEC loser and leave them for the Sugar Bowl - plus they have the added benefit of the Penn State fan base which equals ticket sales and hotel reservations. And I think the Sugar Bowl would see BCS-eligible Virginia Tech as more attractive than either Oklahoma State or Pitt.
That means:
National Title: SEC vs Texas
Rose: Ohio State vs Oregon
Fiesta: Penn State vs TCU
Sugar: SEC #2 vs Virginia Tech
Orange: Georgia Tech vs Cincinnati
The exception might be if Alabama is SEC #2, the Sugar Bowl might want to avoid a 'Bama/Tech rematch, but the dollars are there...
I'd like to see Boise get a shot, but the BC$ passed on Cal when they were #4...I don't see any bowl official taking a chance on #6 Boise...
Last edited:
Re: College Football 2009: Bowl College Stupidity Rankings
Priceless/Derek: you know way more about this than I do, so what about the nightmare scenario where Nebraska thrashes Texas in the B12 championship and Florida/Bama go to 5 overtimes?
Any chance both SEC BCS reps would go to Pasedena or did OSU/Michigan 2006 really settle that question once and for all? If not those two, would TCU or BSU get their dream shot, or would the committee screw them and give the other national title slot to the BCS team, Cincinnati?
Priceless/Derek: you know way more about this than I do, so what about the nightmare scenario where Nebraska thrashes Texas in the B12 championship and Florida/Bama go to 5 overtimes?
Any chance both SEC BCS reps would go to Pasedena or did OSU/Michigan 2006 really settle that question once and for all? If not those two, would TCU or BSU get their dream shot, or would the committee screw them and give the other national title slot to the BCS team, Cincinnati?
Re: College Football 2009: Bowl College Stupidity Rankings
No they don't. NU just gets put on the hook with them.
No they don't. NU just gets put on the hook with them.
GreatLakerMohawk
Mushroom Cloud-Laying Mofo
Re: College Football 2009: Bowl College Stupidity Rankings
Out with the old, in with the new.
Out with the old, in with the new.
Patman
Rodent of Unusual Size
Re: College Football 2009: Bowl College Stupidity Rankings
There are two other factors... 1) UConn profits off of football so they don't need to play such deals for money. 2) UConn for a long time eschewed 1-2 arrangements because they wanted to build their own perception and not get locked into lopsided agreements. The Notre Dame deal went against both of those items. It was a deal of "perception is reality" to get a TV game. I'm of the opinion that UConn doesn't need to make these deals and so far it hasn't done so with other teams. The issue became so big that the govenor stepped in to scuttle the deal (something to do with home games in state and stuff)... the state demanded that any contract include one game at home. The problem is that most of these upper level guys want their seat at the table to look important... Notre Dame is that one part that really defies reason... we don't need Notre Dame to be important but for some reason a **** lot of people think we do.
Most of you guys still see UConn as a glorified MAC team. You haven't seen what the school has done with the program in the last decade.
Yep, money has nothing to do with that (if I'm reading your post right). Notre Dame may not be as good as year's past, but if you're implying that schools like UConn wouldn't make more money by traveling to South Bend, then they would at home...you, sir, are off your rocker. If I'm not reading your post right...ignore what I just said as a response.
There are two other factors... 1) UConn profits off of football so they don't need to play such deals for money. 2) UConn for a long time eschewed 1-2 arrangements because they wanted to build their own perception and not get locked into lopsided agreements. The Notre Dame deal went against both of those items. It was a deal of "perception is reality" to get a TV game. I'm of the opinion that UConn doesn't need to make these deals and so far it hasn't done so with other teams. The issue became so big that the govenor stepped in to scuttle the deal (something to do with home games in state and stuff)... the state demanded that any contract include one game at home. The problem is that most of these upper level guys want their seat at the table to look important... Notre Dame is that one part that really defies reason... we don't need Notre Dame to be important but for some reason a **** lot of people think we do.
Most of you guys still see UConn as a glorified MAC team. You haven't seen what the school has done with the program in the last decade.
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: College Football 2009: Bowl College Stupidity Rankings
The BC$ already did a rematch with Florida/Florida State, so an SEC rematch wouldn't be out of the question. There might have been an OSU/Michigan rematch but Lloyd Carr didn't lobby and Florida did.
There would be a lot of talk from the outside for TCU or Cincinnati, but the BC$ will do what the BC$ wants. A rematch and all-SEC title game would be a decent possibility...as would a split national championship. The odds increase if Cincinnati loses because there is no way in hell TCU is going to be let in the club. Florida could lose to FSU, Alabama could lose to Auburn and Texas could lose to Nebraska and they'd still find a way to keep TCU out of the title game.
The BC$ already did a rematch with Florida/Florida State, so an SEC rematch wouldn't be out of the question. There might have been an OSU/Michigan rematch but Lloyd Carr didn't lobby and Florida did.
There would be a lot of talk from the outside for TCU or Cincinnati, but the BC$ will do what the BC$ wants. A rematch and all-SEC title game would be a decent possibility...as would a split national championship. The odds increase if Cincinnati loses because there is no way in hell TCU is going to be let in the club. Florida could lose to FSU, Alabama could lose to Auburn and Texas could lose to Nebraska and they'd still find a way to keep TCU out of the title game.
BoomGoestheDynamite
Registered User
Re: College Football 2009: Bowl College Stupidity Rankings
This is incorrect. The Florida-Florida State matchup was not a BCS national championship game. This was played following the 1996 season and the BCS was created in 1998. It may have been a product of the Bowl Alliance, which did not include the Pac 10 and Big 10 and never purported to match the two best teams in the country against each other. There would be no precedent for an SEC rematch in a title game.
To that point, neither Florida nor even Alabama really stand out this year based on schedule alone. If Florida came out the loser in this hypothetical overtime thriller, they would've beaten a grand total of one (and that one is a highly suspect LSU that will likely clock in somewhere around 15 in the rankings) ranked team that year. Thats not exactly a team that has a great argument for a rematch. Alabama has played a better schedule, but even with them, their best wins don't necessarily prove they deserve a shot. LSU, Ole Miss, and Virginia Tech are all decent, but none signal they deserve a second bite at the apple.
Not to mention this SEC Loser isn't just competing with hypothetical undefeated mid majors and Cinci, but could also have a one loss Georgia Tech to contend with.
This is incorrect. The Florida-Florida State matchup was not a BCS national championship game. This was played following the 1996 season and the BCS was created in 1998. It may have been a product of the Bowl Alliance, which did not include the Pac 10 and Big 10 and never purported to match the two best teams in the country against each other. There would be no precedent for an SEC rematch in a title game.
To that point, neither Florida nor even Alabama really stand out this year based on schedule alone. If Florida came out the loser in this hypothetical overtime thriller, they would've beaten a grand total of one (and that one is a highly suspect LSU that will likely clock in somewhere around 15 in the rankings) ranked team that year. Thats not exactly a team that has a great argument for a rematch. Alabama has played a better schedule, but even with them, their best wins don't necessarily prove they deserve a shot. LSU, Ole Miss, and Virginia Tech are all decent, but none signal they deserve a second bite at the apple.
Not to mention this SEC Loser isn't just competing with hypothetical undefeated mid majors and Cinci, but could also have a one loss Georgia Tech to contend with.
Jon
Say, this is nice.
Re: College Football 2009: Bowl College Stupidity Rankings
BU football, Wayne State hockey, and PC baseball eagerly await their appearance at a foozeball tournament. Unless Title IX gets that cut too...
BU football, Wayne State hockey, and PC baseball eagerly await their appearance at a foozeball tournament. Unless Title IX gets that cut too...
BoomGoestheDynamite
Registered User
Re: College Football 2009: Bowl College Stupidity Rankings
I'm always reluctant to blame situations like this entirely on Title IX. It has its problems, but its also an easy scapegoat for administrators to avoid responsibility.
And as Pirate said, football teams in particular cost a lot of money relative to almost all other sports. In most lower division programs (and even a lot of FBS ones) they do not pay for themselves. I would argue that football teams disproportionatley benefit (vis a vis all other male sports save basketball) at lower division schools because they're precieved as being important to a university, regardless of the actual cost or interest from the student body.
I'm always reluctant to blame situations like this entirely on Title IX. It has its problems, but its also an easy scapegoat for administrators to avoid responsibility.
And as Pirate said, football teams in particular cost a lot of money relative to almost all other sports. In most lower division programs (and even a lot of FBS ones) they do not pay for themselves. I would argue that football teams disproportionatley benefit (vis a vis all other male sports save basketball) at lower division schools because they're precieved as being important to a university, regardless of the actual cost or interest from the student body.
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: College Football 2009: Bowl College Stupidity Rankings
If the nightmare scenario happens (Texas and Cincy lose, the SEC title game is close/goes to OT) then we will be subjected to a million stories about how tough the SEC is and why the football world (read: SEC people) is clamoring for an SEC rematch. And don't you think the coaches involved might do a little lobbying?
If either Texas or Cincy get through unscathed, they'll be in the title game. Otherwise, the odds are very good we get a rematch. They'll never take TCU or Boise, and Georgia Tech is nice, but they play in the wimpy ACC, not the rough and tumble SEC!
If the nightmare scenario happens (Texas and Cincy lose, the SEC title game is close/goes to OT) then we will be subjected to a million stories about how tough the SEC is and why the football world (read: SEC people) is clamoring for an SEC rematch. And don't you think the coaches involved might do a little lobbying?
If either Texas or Cincy get through unscathed, they'll be in the title game. Otherwise, the odds are very good we get a rematch. They'll never take TCU or Boise, and Georgia Tech is nice, but they play in the wimpy ACC, not the rough and tumble SEC!
bronconick
Yep, still here
Re: College Football 2009: Bowl College Stupidity Rankings
the 97 Sugar Bowl had #1 FSU and #3 Florida. Ohio State was #7 or so and "upset" #2 Arizona State earlier that day, making it a de facto #1/2 matchup. Stupid Buckeyes, giving Florida two of their titles.
the 97 Sugar Bowl had #1 FSU and #3 Florida. Ohio State was #7 or so and "upset" #2 Arizona State earlier that day, making it a de facto #1/2 matchup. Stupid Buckeyes, giving Florida two of their titles.
Re: College Football 2009: Bowl College Stupidity Rankings
Sarcasm fail?
I get a really good look at it every year. And the ACC *is* wimpy.
That aside, I think I'm on board with you here...
Sarcasm fail?
I get a really good look at it every year. And the ACC *is* wimpy.
That aside, I think I'm on board with you here...
Re: College Football 2009: Bowl College Stupidity Rankings
One correction: when bowls lose the #1 and #2 teams to the championship game, the bowl that loses the #1 team gets to pick a replacement before the bowl that loses the #2 team. So if #1 is SEC Champ and #2 is Texas, the Sugar bowl would get the first pick (and undoubtedly pick the SEC loser). The Fiesta bowl would get the second pick...but I don't know what they would do with it. Cincinnati? TCU? Iowa? Oklahoma State? None of these teams is going to attract a big-time TV audience. There's a good chance that there isn't a second eligible team from the Pac 10 to select. Maybe USC could play their way back into the top 16, and I guess the Fiesta Bowl would happily take them, amid much controversy.
One correction: when bowls lose the #1 and #2 teams to the championship game, the bowl that loses the #1 team gets to pick a replacement before the bowl that loses the #2 team. So if #1 is SEC Champ and #2 is Texas, the Sugar bowl would get the first pick (and undoubtedly pick the SEC loser). The Fiesta bowl would get the second pick...but I don't know what they would do with it. Cincinnati? TCU? Iowa? Oklahoma State? None of these teams is going to attract a big-time TV audience. There's a good chance that there isn't a second eligible team from the Pac 10 to select. Maybe USC could play their way back into the top 16, and I guess the Fiesta Bowl would happily take them, amid much controversy.
Last edited:
Derek Dunning
Women's Division III Correspondent
Re: College Football 2009: Bowl College Stupidity Rankings
Ahh okay yeah that would make more sense that the bowl that loses the #1 team picks first.
The "underdog supporter" in me really would like to see USC out of the top 16 so that other teams get a chance to shine but if USC does get in, I'm sure the Fiesta Bowl would be salvating over the chance to get the Trojans to play there.
I went to the Arizona State/USC game at Tempe Stadium earlier this year and there were a LOT of USC fans there.
Has anyone come up with a prediction or way that Boise State could somehow make the BCS? (barring upsets)
I would think that Oregon winning the Pac-10 would give them the best chance of being picked but it seems like no matter what Boise's schedule just isnt going to be enough to overcome TCU or Cincy.
It's going to look pretty bad having an undefeated team that beat a potential top 5 BCS team in the Holiday Bowl crushing some mid-level major conference team.
On the other hand, if USC misses the BCS, I would like seeing the Trojans play Boise. It would give the Broncos another chance to prove they belong with the big programs.
Ahh okay yeah that would make more sense that the bowl that loses the #1 team picks first.
The "underdog supporter" in me really would like to see USC out of the top 16 so that other teams get a chance to shine but if USC does get in, I'm sure the Fiesta Bowl would be salvating over the chance to get the Trojans to play there.
I went to the Arizona State/USC game at Tempe Stadium earlier this year and there were a LOT of USC fans there.
Has anyone come up with a prediction or way that Boise State could somehow make the BCS? (barring upsets)
I would think that Oregon winning the Pac-10 would give them the best chance of being picked but it seems like no matter what Boise's schedule just isnt going to be enough to overcome TCU or Cincy.
It's going to look pretty bad having an undefeated team that beat a potential top 5 BCS team in the Holiday Bowl crushing some mid-level major conference team.
On the other hand, if USC misses the BCS, I would like seeing the Trojans play Boise. It would give the Broncos another chance to prove they belong with the big programs.
Re: College Football 2009: Bowl College Stupidity Rankings
You can't predict - the polls are weighted so heavily now that it just all comes down to human judgement in the end.
DisplacedCornellian
Let's Go Red!
Re: College Football 2009: Bowl College Stupidity Rankings
Who's the early favorite to be coaching at Notre Dame next year? Pretty clear Charlie Weis is out.
Where will ol' front-butt end up? Another college team or back as a coordinator in the NFL?
Who's the early favorite to be coaching at Notre Dame next year? Pretty clear Charlie Weis is out.
Where will ol' front-butt end up? Another college team or back as a coordinator in the NFL?
Jon
Say, this is nice.
Re: College Football 2009: Bowl College Stupidity Rankings
You need to explain this to 50% of my coworkers who play religiously in the break room. And not a woman among them.
You need to explain this to 50% of my coworkers who play religiously in the break room. And not a woman among them.
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: College Football 2009: Bowl College Stupidity Rankings
Boise will not pass TCU, so they need an at-large berth to the BCS. Oddly, I have ocean front property in Boise to sell, so if you're in the market...
The Fiesta might consider Iowa instead of Penn State, or snatch Virginia Tech before the Sugar. That would leave the Sugar to take Penn State.
ESPN's picks:
Boise will not pass TCU, so they need an at-large berth to the BCS. Oddly, I have ocean front property in Boise to sell, so if you're in the market...
The Fiesta might consider Iowa instead of Penn State, or snatch Virginia Tech before the Sugar. That would leave the Sugar to take Penn State.
ESPN's picks:
Code:
Citi BCS National Championship Game
Alabama vs. Texas Florida vs. Texas
Tostitos Fiesta
Boise State vs. Iowa Boise State vs. Penn State
Allstate Sugar
Florida vs. Cincinnati Alabama vs. Cincinnati
FedEx Orange
Georgia Tech vs. TCU Georgia Tech vs. TCU
Rose Bowl presented by Citi
Oregon vs. Ohio State Oregon vs. Ohio State- Status