College Football - BCS Bowls

[cubweiser03]

Bowl Appearances. I wonder if this anything has to do with the disparity....

From 1918-1945, the Big Ten did not allow its teams to participate in bowls. From 1946-1974, only the conference champion was allowed to attend a bowl (the Rose Bowl).

Yeah probably.

 

NFL Rosters: SEC has 1 more team.

SEC=263/12=21.9 per school

B10=234/11=21.2 per school

WOW. Enormous, gigantic difference.

 

The attendence...that fact alone says it all! :lol:

That guys is a piece of work.

[wekse]

Bowl Appearances. I wonder if this anything has to do with the disparity....

From 1918-1945, the Big Ten did not allow its teams to participate in bowls. From 1946-1974, only the conference champion was allowed to attend a bowl (the Rose Bowl).

Yeah probably.

 

NFL Rosters: SEC has 1 more team.

SEC=263/12=21.9 per school

B10=234/11=21.2 per school

WOW. Enormous, gigantic difference.

 

The attendence...that fact alone says it all! :lol:

That guys is a piece of work.

 

'bama fan, heh

 

i've responded to his blog with this sort of information....not to mention that the sec had 2-3 more schools for @ 30 years from '32 to '66...granted, tulane and sewanee were two of them, but georgia tech was the other....i think they were pretty good back in the day, heh.

[Andy]

Do those 13 championships count the ones Alabama arbitrarily awards itself whenever it has a decent season?

[wekse]

Do those 13 championships count the ones Alabama arbitrarily awards itself whenever it has a decent season?

 

i have no idea...knowing him, probably.

 

 

I have to say that if your team is not in the big game you need to root for your conference. I HATE Auburn more than anyone hates any other sports program in the world. BUT, if they were playing in the National Championship I would root them on simply because they represent the South East

 

my response

 

we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one....rooting for another school in your conference is like kissing your sister...but i guess southerners know plenty about that, hah ;-)

 

that will thoroughly piss him off, i'm sure.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

While I am usually a fan of the SEC, Weske, I'll have to admit I hate Bama and most Bama fans.

 

Send your friend this pic and see how he responds...

 

http://www.thenewsstar.com/news/blogs/blog2/uploaded_images/Tide-Rolled-billboard-(2)-735180.jpg

[Guest]

Haha Herbie just said the Big Ten is looked upon as being somewhere between Conference USA and the MAC. :lol:

 

So does that mean the ACC is just above the Sun Belt - because they were worse than the Big 10.

[Guest]

IMO..WV would beat LSU or Georgia but would lose to USC due to the matchups but if they did have a plus 1 it would be USC or Georgia going. I really dislike the politics that goes with College football.

 

Politics my ass. If your conference champ didn't play like gutless choking dogs against a horrible Pitt team they woulda gotten the chance to smoke OSU. They didn't.

 

 

They had the same record as LSU and all the other 2 loss teams. Never will a BE team that has the same record as one of the Big 3 (Big 10/12 and SEC plus ND/USC) get a chance to play in the BCS Championship game. Look at the rankings...WV killed OU but yet they are behind Missouri who beat that ever so tough Arkansas team. Again, the politics of this make it suck.

 

If West Virginia lost to a non-horrible team 5 weeks earlier, they'd probably be in the title game. They lost to a horrible team on the last week of the season. You didn't see any Mizzou fans around here thinking they should have been in the title game. They lost in the last week to a much better team than Pitt. Like it or not, teams are rewarded/penalized for how they finish. West Virginia finished about as poor as you could to a regular season, and therefore were knocked out of the title game.

 

I can't imagine how you could possibly be making this argument when heading into the last week of the season West Virginia was one of 5 1 loss or less teams and they were set for the national title game.

 

Mizzou didn't win their conference. The season should be looked at as a whole and not just the last game as they always drop after a loss when it comes to the final poll before the Bowls. These assumptions of who is good by coaches who don't even watch the games is ridicules and that's all this is based on as the computers matter very little.

 

USC got penalized just as much for losing to Stanford as WVU did for losing to Pittsburgh and USC's loss was in their fifth game of the year. I guarantee that USC would have received more of a push for the title game if it had beaten Stanford and lost a 1 point game at Arizona State on November 22. Yes I know that had USC lost to Arizona State they would have finished second in the Pac-10 but that's not the point. WVU got penalized just as much, if not more, for losing to a team that it was a 28 point favorite to beat than it was for losing it's last game of they year. Don't get me wrong, losing it's last game definitely hurt, but the fact that the lost to a crappy team at home hurt more.

[fiver]

Do those 13 championships count the ones Alabama arbitrarily awards itself whenever it has a decent season?

 

i have no idea...knowing him, probably.

 

 

I have to say that if your team is not in the big game you need to root for your conference. I HATE Auburn more than anyone hates any other sports program in the world. BUT, if they were playing in the National Championship I would root them on simply because they represent the South East

 

my response

 

we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one....rooting for another school in your conference is like kissing your sister...but i guess southerners know plenty about that, hah ;-)

 

that will thoroughly piss him off, i'm sure.

 

 

yeah, I struggled with rooting for LSU, but what's good for the conference is good for my team as well I suppose....and wait..aren't you in fact a southerner by definition?

[wekse]

Do those 13 championships count the ones Alabama arbitrarily awards itself whenever it has a decent season?

 

i have no idea...knowing him, probably.

 

 

I have to say that if your team is not in the big game you need to root for your conference. I HATE Auburn more than anyone hates any other sports program in the world. BUT, if they were playing in the National Championship I would root them on simply because they represent the South East

 

my response

 

we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one....rooting for another school in your conference is like kissing your sister...but i guess southerners know plenty about that, hah ;-)

 

that will thoroughly piss him off, i'm sure.

 

 

yeah, I struggled with rooting for LSU, but what's good for the conference is good for my team as well I suppose....and wait..aren't you in fact a southerner by definition?

 

 

if by definition, you mean that i live here...yes....but i was born and raised in illinois...plus, the little joke was just to get under his skin..in which i succeeded.

[CuseCubFan69]

IMO..WV would beat LSU or Georgia but would lose to USC due to the matchups but if they did have a plus 1 it would be USC or Georgia going. I really dislike the politics that goes with College football.

 

Politics my ass. If your conference champ didn't play like gutless choking dogs against a horrible Pitt team they woulda gotten the chance to smoke OSU. They didn't.

 

 

They had the same record as LSU and all the other 2 loss teams. Never will a BE team that has the same record as one of the Big 3 (Big 10/12 and SEC plus ND/USC) get a chance to play in the BCS Championship game. Look at the rankings...WV killed OU but yet they are behind Missouri who beat that ever so tough Arkansas team. Again, the politics of this make it suck.

 

If West Virginia lost to a non-horrible team 5 weeks earlier, they'd probably be in the title game. They lost to a horrible team on the last week of the season. You didn't see any Mizzou fans around here thinking they should have been in the title game. They lost in the last week to a much better team than Pitt. Like it or not, teams are rewarded/penalized for how they finish. West Virginia finished about as poor as you could to a regular season, and therefore were knocked out of the title game.

 

I can't imagine how you could possibly be making this argument when heading into the last week of the season West Virginia was one of 5 1 loss or less teams and they were set for the national title game.

 

Mizzou didn't win their conference. The season should be looked at as a whole and not just the last game as they always drop after a loss when it comes to the final poll before the Bowls. These assumptions of who is good by coaches who don't even watch the games is ridicules and that's all this is based on as the computers matter very little.

 

USC got penalized just as much for losing to Stanford as WVU did for losing to Pittsburgh and USC's loss was in their fifth game of the year. I guarantee that USC would have received more of a push for the title game if it had beaten Stanford and lost a 1 point game at Arizona State on November 22. Yes I know that had USC lost to Arizona State they would have finished second in the Pac-10 but that's not the point. WVU got penalized just as much, if not more, for losing to a team that it was a 28 point favorite to beat than it was for losing it's last game of they year. Don't get me wrong, losing it's last game definitely hurt, but the fact that the lost to a crappy team at home hurt more.

 

So along with those lines they should be rewarded for winning against OU while Mizzou lost twice to them while beating Arkansas. Also, Georgia beat Hawaii? They are rewarded with that by being ranked so high? Please tell me who they beat for this recognition? They got crushed by Tennessee and finished second in their division.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

http://cmsimg.thenewsstar.com/apps/pbcsi.dll/bilde?NewTbl=1&Avis=DI&Dato=20080108&Kategori=NEWS01&Lopenr=801080801&Ref=PH&Item=1&MaxW=350&MaxH=350

[fiver]

IMO..WV would beat LSU or Georgia but would lose to USC due to the matchups but if they did have a plus 1 it would be USC or Georgia going. I really dislike the politics that goes with College football.

 

Politics my ass. If your conference champ didn't play like gutless choking dogs against a horrible Pitt team they woulda gotten the chance to smoke OSU. They didn't.

 

 

They had the same record as LSU and all the other 2 loss teams. Never will a BE team that has the same record as one of the Big 3 (Big 10/12 and SEC plus ND/USC) get a chance to play in the BCS Championship game. Look at the rankings...WV killed OU but yet they are behind Missouri who beat that ever so tough Arkansas team. Again, the politics of this make it suck.

 

If West Virginia lost to a non-horrible team 5 weeks earlier, they'd probably be in the title game. They lost to a horrible team on the last week of the season. You didn't see any Mizzou fans around here thinking they should have been in the title game. They lost in the last week to a much better team than Pitt. Like it or not, teams are rewarded/penalized for how they finish. West Virginia finished about as poor as you could to a regular season, and therefore were knocked out of the title game.

 

I can't imagine how you could possibly be making this argument when heading into the last week of the season West Virginia was one of 5 1 loss or less teams and they were set for the national title game.

 

Mizzou didn't win their conference. The season should be looked at as a whole and not just the last game as they always drop after a loss when it comes to the final poll before the Bowls. These assumptions of who is good by coaches who don't even watch the games is ridicules and that's all this is based on as the computers matter very little.

 

USC got penalized just as much for losing to Stanford as WVU did for losing to Pittsburgh and USC's loss was in their fifth game of the year. I guarantee that USC would have received more of a push for the title game if it had beaten Stanford and lost a 1 point game at Arizona State on November 22. Yes I know that had USC lost to Arizona State they would have finished second in the Pac-10 but that's not the point. WVU got penalized just as much, if not more, for losing to a team that it was a 28 point favorite to beat than it was for losing it's last game of they year. Don't get me wrong, losing it's last game definitely hurt, but the fact that the lost to a crappy team at home hurt more.

 

So along with those lines they should be rewarded for winning against OU while Mizzou lost twice to them while beating Arkansas. Also, Georgia beat Hawaii? They are rewarded with that by being ranked so high? Please tell me who they beat for this recognition? They got crushed by Tennessee and finished second in their division.

 

Georgia won the last seven games of the season beating Florida, Auburn, Kentucky, Georgia Tech, and Hawaii all by more than 10 points each. Does that not deserve a fair amount of recognition?

[CuseCubFan69]

So along with those lines they should be rewarded for winning against OU while Mizzou lost twice to them while beating Arkansas. Also, Georgia beat Hawaii? They are rewarded with that by being ranked so high? Please tell me who they beat for this recognition? They got crushed by Tennessee and finished second in their division.

 

Georgia won the last seven games of the season beating Florida, Auburn, Kentucky, Georgia Tech, and Hawaii all by more than 10 points each. Does that not deserve a fair amount of recognition?

 

Fair, yes. To say they are the hottest team and one of the two best, no. If they won their division and played/beat LSU I'd be fine with them being recognized but they never even played them. They lost to an average SC at home and were crushed 35-14 by Tennessee and their best win was over a 4 loss Florida. At least Missouri won their division so that gives them an edge over them. WV out right won theirs, won their last 3 BCS games and yet they are 6th? OSU gets embarrassed by LSU after getting killed by Florida the year before but yet somehow command the respect to be ranked ahead of WV who beat OU by 20?

[fiver]

So along with those lines they should be rewarded for winning against OU while Mizzou lost twice to them while beating Arkansas. Also, Georgia beat Hawaii? They are rewarded with that by being ranked so high? Please tell me who they beat for this recognition? They got crushed by Tennessee and finished second in their division.

 

Georgia won the last seven games of the season beating Florida, Auburn, Kentucky, Georgia Tech, and Hawaii all by more than 10 points each. Does that not deserve a fair amount of recognition?

 

Fair, yes. To say they are the hottest team and one of the two best, no. If they won their division and played/beat LSU I'd be fine with them being recognized but they never even played them. They lost to an average SC at home and were crushed 35-14 by Tennessee and their best win was over a 4 loss Florida. At least Missouri won their division so that gives them an edge over them. WV out right won theirs, won their last 3 BCS games and yet they are 6th? OSU gets embarrassed by LSU after getting killed by Florida the year before but yet somehow command the respect to be ranked ahead of WV who beat OU by 20?

 

We probably both agree that final rankings other than #1 really have little significance. I wouldn't have any problems with West Virginia being ranked #2. They dismantled OU, but I still think it would be tough to say that WV should have without a doubt been ranked ahead of Georgia or USC given all of their resumes. However, WV should have certainly received the nod over Missouri and OSU in the final rankings in my opinion.

[Exile on Waveland]

So along with those lines they should be rewarded for winning against OU while Mizzou lost twice to them while beating Arkansas. Also, Georgia beat Hawaii? They are rewarded with that by being ranked so high? Please tell me who they beat for this recognition? They got crushed by Tennessee and finished second in their division.

 

Georgia won the last seven games of the season beating Florida, Auburn, Kentucky, Georgia Tech, and Hawaii all by more than 10 points each. Does that not deserve a fair amount of recognition?

 

Fair, yes. To say they are the hottest team and one of the two best, no. If they won their division and played/beat LSU I'd be fine with them being recognized but they never even played them. They lost to an average SC at home and were crushed 35-14 by Tennessee and their best win was over a 4 loss Florida. At least Missouri won their division so that gives them an edge over them. WV out right won theirs, won their last 3 BCS games and yet they are 6th? OSU gets embarrassed by LSU after getting killed by Florida the year before but yet somehow command the respect to be ranked ahead of WV who beat OU by 20?

 

We probably both agree that final rankings other than #1 really have little significance. I wouldn't have any problems with West Virginia being ranked #2. They dismantled OU, but I still think it would be tough to say that WV should have without a doubt been ranked ahead of Georgia or USC given all of their resumes. However, WV should have certainly received the nod over Missouri and OSU in the final rankings in my opinion.

 

Even as a Big Ten fan, Ohio State should be ranked behind LSU, USC, Georgia, West Virginia, Missouri, Kansas, and, despite their three losses and bowl loss, probably Oklahoma.

[jaydee]

So Ohio State gets rewarded for playing no one out of conference, please...someone in the Big 10 stop them from going to this game again.

 

You know they played Texas last year. And play I wanna say USC next year.

 

And that effected 2007, how?

 

Sure sounds like you're implying OSU never plays anyone out of conference.

 

They didn't in 2007 and will play 1 BCS team in 2008 out of conference. After USC kills them they will still win the Big 10 and get a chance to play in the BCS big game and prove they don't belong.

 

i see, so when you realized the fact they do schedule premier programs in the OOC schedule, you simply say they will get blown out and that will further prove how much big ten sucks. just like they got blown out by texas, right? and man miami took them to town in that NC game.

[Guest]

So along with those lines they should be rewarded for winning against OU while Mizzou lost twice to them while beating Arkansas. Also, Georgia beat Hawaii? They are rewarded with that by being ranked so high? Please tell me who they beat for this recognition? They got crushed by Tennessee and finished second in their division.

 

I have no problems with USC and Georgia getting ranked ahead of WVU but if WVU would have been ranked No. 2, I wouldn't have had a problem with that either.

 

However, I do completely agree with you that WVU should be ranked ahead of OSU and Missouri and I wouldn't put WVU any lower than fourth.

[CuseCubFan69]

So Ohio State gets rewarded for playing no one out of conference, please...someone in the Big 10 stop them from going to this game again.

 

You know they played Texas last year. And play I wanna say USC next year.

 

And that effected 2007, how?

 

Sure sounds like you're implying OSU never plays anyone out of conference.

 

They didn't in 2007 and will play 1 BCS team in 2008 out of conference. After USC kills them they will still win the Big 10 and get a chance to play in the BCS big game and prove they don't belong.

 

i see, so when you realized the fact they do schedule premier programs in the OOC schedule, you simply say they will get blown out and that will further prove how much big ten sucks. just like they got blown out by texas, right? and man miami took them to town in that NC game.

 

They just keep winning the Big 10 and by playing 1 good team OOC every other year it keeps them in the hunt for the Champ game. They are a solid team but somethings wrong with the system if OSU keeps getting chance after chance of going to this game.

[CuseCubFan69]

So along with those lines they should be rewarded for winning against OU while Mizzou lost twice to them while beating Arkansas. Also, Georgia beat Hawaii? They are rewarded with that by being ranked so high? Please tell me who they beat for this recognition? They got crushed by Tennessee and finished second in their division.

 

Georgia won the last seven games of the season beating Florida, Auburn, Kentucky, Georgia Tech, and Hawaii all by more than 10 points each. Does that not deserve a fair amount of recognition?

 

Fair, yes. To say they are the hottest team and one of the two best, no. If they won their division and played/beat LSU I'd be fine with them being recognized but they never even played them. They lost to an average SC at home and were crushed 35-14 by Tennessee and their best win was over a 4 loss Florida. At least Missouri won their division so that gives them an edge over them. WV out right won theirs, won their last 3 BCS games and yet they are 6th? OSU gets embarrassed by LSU after getting killed by Florida the year before but yet somehow command the respect to be ranked ahead of WV who beat OU by 20?

 

We probably both agree that final rankings other than #1 really have little significance. I wouldn't have any problems with West Virginia being ranked #2. They dismantled OU, but I still think it would be tough to say that WV should have without a doubt been ranked ahead of Georgia or USC given all of their resumes. However, WV should have certainly received the nod over Missouri and OSU in the final rankings in my opinion.

 

I suppose it's just the frustration of the BE teams always being ranked behind teams from BCS conferences (name teams) with the same record. I agree it doesn't mean a heck of a lot but it does help the recognition of the BE if writers or coaches actually do move them ahead. If OU beat WV 48-28, they would have been 4th at the worst and possibly 2nd. This has happened to eastern teams since I've been a fan. The undefeated Penn State teams that were loaded always got ranked behind the Texas and OSU teams.

 

Georgia beat some solid teams but not an elite one. They didn't play USC which they should have in the bowls but thanks to the Rose bowl they didn't. They never played LSU and the second best team in the SEC killed them. I'm just not impressed with their resume. USC gets a lot of credit for beating a 3 loss Illinois team, solid but not a conference winner. Look at their resume, who did they beat? They lost to Oregon and their best wins were Illinois and Arizona St. I blame the bowls, especially the Rose, for this as we should have had better matchups than we did.

[Guest]

So along with those lines they should be rewarded for winning against OU while Mizzou lost twice to them while beating Arkansas. Also, Georgia beat Hawaii? They are rewarded with that by being ranked so high? Please tell me who they beat for this recognition? They got crushed by Tennessee and finished second in their division.

 

Georgia won the last seven games of the season beating Florida, Auburn, Kentucky, Georgia Tech, and Hawaii all by more than 10 points each. Does that not deserve a fair amount of recognition?

 

Fair, yes. To say they are the hottest team and one of the two best, no. If they won their division and played/beat LSU I'd be fine with them being recognized but they never even played them. They lost to an average SC at home and were crushed 35-14 by Tennessee and their best win was over a 4 loss Florida. At least Missouri won their division so that gives them an edge over them. WV out right won theirs, won their last 3 BCS games and yet they are 6th? OSU gets embarrassed by LSU after getting killed by Florida the year before but yet somehow command the respect to be ranked ahead of WV who beat OU by 20?

 

We probably both agree that final rankings other than #1 really have little significance. I wouldn't have any problems with West Virginia being ranked #2. They dismantled OU, but I still think it would be tough to say that WV should have without a doubt been ranked ahead of Georgia or USC given all of their resumes. However, WV should have certainly received the nod over Missouri and OSU in the final rankings in my opinion.

 

I suppose it's just the frustration of the BE teams always being ranked behind teams from BCS conferences (name teams) with the same record. I agree it doesn't mean a heck of a lot but it does help the recognition of the BE if writers or coaches actually do move them ahead. If OU beat WV 48-28, they would have been 4th at the worst and possibly 2nd. This has happened to eastern teams since I've been a fan. The undefeated Penn State teams that were loaded always got ranked behind the Texas and OSU teams.

 

Georgia beat some solid teams but not an elite one. They didn't play USC which they should have in the bowls but thanks to the Rose bowl they didn't. They never played LSU and the second best team in the SEC killed them. I'm just not impressed with their resume. USC gets a lot of credit for beating a 3 loss Illinois team, solid but not a conference winner. Look at their resume, who did they beat? They lost to Oregon and their best wins were Illinois and Arizona St. I blame the bowls, especially the Rose, for this as we should have had better matchups than we did.

 

Georgia was locked into the Sugar because that bowl lost the SEC champion, LSU, to the National Title game. So the Rose couldn't have picked Georgia because the Sugar did. The Rose could have picked Missouri, though.

[Andy]

Georgia was locked into the Sugar because that bowl lost the SEC champion, LSU, to the National Title game. So the Rose couldn't have picked Georgia because the Sugar did. The Rose could have picked Missouri, though.

I may be wrong, but I don't think Georgia was locked into the Sugar. The Sugar did have second pick because they lost the No. 2 team, and chose Georgia, but I don't think Georgia was predestined to go there.

[Guest]

Georgia was locked into the Sugar because that bowl lost the SEC champion, LSU, to the National Title game. So the Rose couldn't have picked Georgia because the Sugar did. The Rose could have picked Missouri, though.

I may be wrong, but I don't think Georgia was locked into the Sugar. The Sugar did have second pick because they lost the No. 2 team, and chose Georgia, but I don't think Georgia was predestined to go there.

 

They weren't 100% locked in but the bowls don't like stepping on each others toes when it comes to a team playing in it's "home" bowl.