College Football - Week of Nov. 28th

[Tracer Bullet]

Go Oklahoma. Wouldn't be against West Virginia, Nevada and Illinois winning either.

 

i really don't think oklahoma st matters. they have 2 losses in a mediocre conference and don't even sell out their own 60,000 seat stadium. iowa and penn st are clearly better options.

Deserving or not, I think Penn State gets selected over Iowa for an at-large bid.

 

on what basis? Iowa is ahead of them in the BCS standings (and isn't likely to be jumped since they're both done), won the H2H matchup, has more quality wins (both AZ and Wisconsin are better than any non-Iowa, non-OSU team PSU played, which is to say, Iowa has at least 3 quality wins to PSU's 0), and has fans that travel in droves (as does PSU, but this is a neutral factor, at best, for PSU).

 

So again, on what possible basis?

 

He said "deserving or not".

 

Head to head, quality wins, etc. is pretty irrelevant in this discussion. Good news is that PSU won't travel more than Iowa. However there's the perception that PSU would deliver higher tv ratings than Iowa. You can debate how true that is or even how important that is, but it's not outlandish.

 

I don't know. Iowa got a lot of pub this year and played OSU down to the wire. I'm not sure what PSU has that's such a tv draw this year. No big names, no Heisman candidates. Seems the choice is even on tv eyes and ticket sales, so I have a hard time seeing a BCS game picking the lower-ranked team that lost to the other team. It's pretty ridiculous if you ask me.

[SouthSideRyan]

Penn State is a name program and Iowa isn't.

[Tracer Bullet]

Penn State is a name program and Iowa isn't.

 

I suppose. I guess if a bowl thinks more people would tune if for PSU than Iowa. Seems unlikely. Was it just this weekend I read some guy from the Orange Bowl saying no team travels like Hawkeye nation? I don't that's true, but I thought it was interesting.

 

I'm not sure Penn State is enough of a name program any more to overcome the other factors. Maybe I underestimate the great deal of national media attention Penn State garners these days. But I don't think I am.

[TheVolCub08]

CFN is full of crap if they think a 6-6 UGA with 2 losses in its final 2 games gets into a Bowl above a 6-6 UT with a better finish and a head to head win.

[Guest]

Penn State is a name program and Iowa isn't.

 

I suppose. I guess if a bowl thinks more people would tune if for PSU than Iowa. Seems unlikely. Was it just this weekend I read some guy from the Orange Bowl saying no team travels like Hawkeye nation? I don't that's true, but I thought it was interesting.

 

I'm not sure Penn State is enough of a name program any more to overcome the other factors. Maybe I underestimate the great deal of national media attention Penn State garners these days. But I don't think I am.

 

Said this in another thread (not in response to you) but it didn't make sense for Kansas to get picked over Missouri for a BCS game in 2007 but they did.

[Derwood]

Iowa winning head-to-head and "deserving" it more means nothing to the bowl committees. They want butts in seats and viewers watching the advertisers. Penn State has a great history of doing both

[SouthSideRyan]

CFN is full of crap if they think a 6-6 UGA with 2 losses in its final 2 games gets into a Bowl above a 6-6 UT with a better finish and a head to head win.

 

Or they think the Atlanta based bowl would pick the team based in that state?

[inari]

Iowa winning head-to-head and "deserving" it more means nothing to the bowl committees. They want butts in seats and viewers watching the advertisers. Penn State has a great history of doing both

 

Iowa travels just as well if not better than PSU. The only debatable aspect is the TV ratings.

[OleMissCub]

The only debatable aspect is the TV ratings.

 

is that even really a debate? To the lay fan, PSU is leaps and bounds more well known of a program than Iowa.

[hawkeyecub]

The only debatable aspect is the TV ratings.

 

is that even really a debate? To the lay fan, PSU is leaps and bounds more well known of a program than Iowa.

 

Yes it is debatable. There was an article last week debunking some of that. Basically Penn State's bowl games recently haven't been any higher than that bowl has averaged. Iowa has had some games with really high tv ratings this year. The IU game was the 2nd highest rated 11 a.m. start ever on ESPN. Iowa/OSU was rated higher than PSU/OSU.

 

The Iowa/Texas Alamo Bowl in '06 was the highest rated bowl game ever on ESPN.

[Tracer Bullet]

The only debatable aspect is the TV ratings.

 

is that even really a debate? To the lay fan, PSU is leaps and bounds more well known of a program than Iowa.

 

being well known and being something people want to watch aren't necessarily the same thing. PSU isn't Florida right now (winning 3 in the last 4 years), not USC (contending every year for 10 years - until this year), not Bama (historical program back in contention), Texas (huge school in the biggest football state in the country). PSU is a name program but they don't have anything to draw lay fans right now. Iowa may not either, but again, this is a neutral factor at best. Iowa isn't dazzling to watch, but they play great defense and got a lot of national media pub when they were charging out to 9-0.

[Tracer Bullet]

Iowa winning head-to-head and "deserving" it more means nothing to the bowl committees. They want butts in seats and viewers watching the advertisers. Penn State has a great history of doing both

 

If one team clearly had more viewers and fans buying tickets, you could argue that H2H, ranking, schedule don't matter. But that's just not the case here.

[Derwood]

Iowa winning head-to-head and "deserving" it more means nothing to the bowl committees. They want butts in seats and viewers watching the advertisers. Penn State has a great history of doing both

 

If one team clearly had more viewers and fans buying tickets, you could argue that H2H, ranking, schedule don't matter. But that's just not the case here.

 

I'm arguing that the perception of the bowl selection folks is all that matters, not any actual facts

[Tracer Bullet]

Iowa winning head-to-head and "deserving" it more means nothing to the bowl committees. They want butts in seats and viewers watching the advertisers. Penn State has a great history of doing both

 

If one team clearly had more viewers and fans buying tickets, you could argue that H2H, ranking, schedule don't matter. But that's just not the case here.

 

I'm arguing that the perception of the bowl selection folks is all that matters, not any actual facts

 

I know. And I'm arguing that your idea of what the selection committee perceives to be true isn't all that accurate.

[Derwood]

Iowa winning head-to-head and "deserving" it more means nothing to the bowl committees. They want butts in seats and viewers watching the advertisers. Penn State has a great history of doing both

 

If one team clearly had more viewers and fans buying tickets, you could argue that H2H, ranking, schedule don't matter. But that's just not the case here.

 

I'm arguing that the perception of the bowl selection folks is all that matters, not any actual facts

 

I know. And I'm arguing that your idea of what the selection committee perceives to be true isn't all that accurate.

 

Sure, but as long as you have highly subjective (and cash driven) committees picking these games, some facts and logic go out the window.

 

At the end of the day, a BCS bowl could take either PSU or Iowa as an at-large and I wouldn't be surprised by either choice

[Tracer Bullet]

Iowa winning head-to-head and "deserving" it more means nothing to the bowl committees. They want butts in seats and viewers watching the advertisers. Penn State has a great history of doing both

 

If one team clearly had more viewers and fans buying tickets, you could argue that H2H, ranking, schedule don't matter. But that's just not the case here.

 

I'm arguing that the perception of the bowl selection folks is all that matters, not any actual facts

 

I know. And I'm arguing that your idea of what the selection committee perceives to be true isn't all that accurate.

 

Sure, but as long as you have highly subjective (and cash driven) committees picking these games, some facts and logic go out the window.

 

At the end of the day, a BCS bowl could take either PSU or Iowa as an at-large and I wouldn't be surprised by either choice

 

of course b/c you're a PSU fan. But I'd be very disappointed if a BCS bowl passed on Iowa for PSU. Just as I was disappointed when KU got picked over Missouri a couple years ago (and I don't like either of those schools). These are the kinds of situations where the BCS really doesn't work.

 

let me ask you this: if you had to pick one of PSU and Iowa to be in a BCS game based on which one "deserved" it (not based on tv viewers or ticket sales), which would you pick?

[dew1679666265]

CFN is full of crap if they think a 6-6 UGA with 2 losses in its final 2 games gets into a Bowl above a 6-6 UT with a better finish and a head to head win.

 

Or they think the Atlanta based bowl would pick the team based in that state?

 

Don't they want the fans to travel and spend money in their town and stay in their hotels, etc? If so, they'd likely take Tennessee - which is just far enough away for some people to choose to at least spend the night before and after - over Georgia, whose fans can drive to the game on gameday.

 

That said, I really don't see Kentucky getting an Outback Bowl bid and Tennessee getting a Music City bowl bid. The only chance of that happening, I think, is for Tennessee to lose (and maybe convincingly) to UK. A Tennessee loss to Kentucky could happen, but even if it did, Tennessee travels better than UK, is a "bigger name" in football circles and has the potential for more fans to show up due to the Monte/Tampa area tie.

 

Kentucky to the Outback is extremely unlikely. UT or Auburn (or even Georgia) would be picked first.

[sweetpeteman]

of course b/c you're a PSU fan. But I'd be very disappointed if a BCS bowl passed on Iowa for PSU. Just as I was disappointed when KU got picked over Missouri a couple years ago (and I don't like either of those schools). These are the kinds of situations where the BCS really doesn't work.

 

let me ask you this: if you had to pick one of PSU and Iowa to be in a BCS game based on which one "deserved" it (not based on tv viewers or ticket sales), which would you pick?

 

That's not his argument. He's arguing that PSU is more likely to be picked for the same reason KU went over Missouri. He's not arguing that PSU deserves it more, but that because of these outside factors, they are more likely to be picked.

 

 

 

Iowa deserves it more, but he isn't arguing who deserves it more.

[Derwood]

Iowa absolutely deserves it more, but that's not how the BCS works

[CubColtPacer]

 

I'm arguing that the perception of the bowl selection folks is all that matters, not any actual facts

 

I know. And I'm arguing that your idea of what the selection committee perceives to be true isn't all that accurate.

 

Sure, but as long as you have highly subjective (and cash driven) committees picking these games, some facts and logic go out the window.

 

At the end of the day, a BCS bowl could take either PSU or Iowa as an at-large and I wouldn't be surprised by either choice

 

of course b/c you're a PSU fan. But I'd be very disappointed if a BCS bowl passed on Iowa for PSU. Just as I was disappointed when KU got picked over Missouri a couple years ago (and I don't like either of those schools). These are the kinds of situations where the BCS really doesn't work.

 

let me ask you this: if you had to pick one of PSU and Iowa to be in a BCS game based on which one "deserved" it (not based on tv viewers or ticket sales), which would you pick?

 

I would pick Iowa. But I really think that Penn State could get in...Iowa had a lot of press being unbeaten, but their frequent close calls meant that it wasn't all good press. And now that they've lost 2 and have lost their starting QB, it sounds very much like the 2002 Notre Dame team who were a very similar type of team, started 8-0 before losing twice, and got passed over. The perception would be that Iowa's lucky streak has run out and now with the injuries that they would get blown out of a bowl game. Nobody knows anything about what Penn State would do.

 

If the bowls did go on who actually deserved it, how would people rank them? I've ranked the teams based partly on how they would land in the at-large pool, as some teams win their conferences if they win out:

 

TCU (if they don't lose they're ranked here..they should get in regardless)

Alabama/Florida loser

Texas (if they lose in the Big 12 Championship)

Boise State (if they don't lose)

Cincy (with a loss against Pittsburgh)

GA Tech (with a loss against Clemson)

Iowa

Penn State

Virginia Tech

Oregon (loss against Oregon State)

Oklahoma State

Pittsburgh (loss against Cincy)

 

There are teams who I think deserve it more than they will be considered (Boise, Cincy, Ga Tech). Then there are teams who will likely be considered higher up on the list than they should (Oklahoma State, Penn State, Iowa).

[Jon]

Iowa fans: What was the experience like last year with the Outback?

 

The Outback certainly has an advantage over the Alamo because it's Florida vs. San Antonio (though a great city if you're only going to spend 1 day exploring), but when it comes down to a possible Outback vs. Champs, I don't see any advantage that the Outback possesses. Yes, it's a January bowl game, but there are now 14 January bowl games and it's played early in the morning, which also makes it a little worse for travel. Champs, on the other hand, has a Tuesday night in primetime all to itself. Last year's Monday night Alamo Bowl drew 50% more viewers than the Outback. From everything I've seen, I'd much prefer Champs to the Outback.

 

Of course, I don't think we're going to jump Wisconsin anyways.

[jersey cubs fan]

The only debatable aspect is the TV ratings.

 

is that even really a debate? To the lay fan, PSU is leaps and bounds more well known of a program than Iowa.

 

Yes it is debatable. There was an article last week debunking some of that. Basically Penn State's bowl games recently haven't been any higher than that bowl has averaged. Iowa has had some games with really high tv ratings this year. The IU game was the 2nd highest rated 11 a.m. start ever on ESPN. Iowa/OSU was rated higher than PSU/OSU.

 

The Iowa/Texas Alamo Bowl in '06 was the highest rated bowl game ever on ESPN.

 

Yeah, Iowa is at least the equal to PSU on the butts in seat/tv ratings angle.

[jersey cubs fan]

Iowa fans: What was the experience like last year with the Outback?

 

The Outback certainly has an advantage over the Alamo because it's Florida vs. San Antonio (though a great city if you're only going to spend 1 day exploring), but when it comes down to a possible Outback vs. Champs, I don't see any advantage that the Outback possesses. Yes, it's a January bowl game, but there are now 14 January bowl games and it's played early in the morning, which also makes it a little worse for travel. Champs, on the other hand, has a Tuesday night in primetime all to itself. Last year's Monday night Alamo Bowl drew 50% more viewers than the Outback. From everything I've seen, I'd much prefer Champs to the Outback.

 

Of course, I don't think we're going to jump Wisconsin anyways.

 

What is it about an early game that makes you think it's worse for travelling? I'd take the Outback bowl without question. I much prefer Tampa to Orlando, I'd rather go down there, enjoy new years with the added anticipation of a big game the next morning, plus leaving you the rest of the day after it ends to do as you please. Day football is more enjoyable than night games. As a TV viewer I love waking up and turning on that first game early sitting on the couch.

[UK1679666180]

CFN is full of crap if they think a 6-6 UGA with 2 losses in its final 2 games gets into a Bowl above a 6-6 UT with a better finish and a head to head win.

 

Or they think the Atlanta based bowl would pick the team based in that state?

 

Don't they want the fans to travel and spend money in their town and stay in their hotels, etc? If so, they'd likely take Tennessee - which is just far enough away for some people to choose to at least spend the night before and after - over Georgia, whose fans can drive to the game on gameday.

 

That said, I really don't see Kentucky getting an Outback Bowl bid and Tennessee getting a Music City bowl bid. The only chance of that happening, I think, is for Tennessee to lose (and maybe convincingly) to UK. A Tennessee loss to Kentucky could happen, but even if it did, Tennessee travels better than UK, is a "bigger name" in football circles and has the potential for more fans to show up due to the Monte/Tampa area tie.

 

Kentucky to the Outback is extremely unlikely. UT or Auburn (or even Georgia) would be picked first.

 

If UK finishes 2nd in the SEC East by beating UT on Sat., I can't see any reason how UK doesn't go to the Outback at 8-4 (4-4).

 

If Auburn beats Bama and goes to 8-4 (4-4) they definitely deserve to go ahead of UK b/c they are the better team and would have equal records. While I think Auburn is still a better team than UK at 7-5 (3-5), UK would still deserve to go ahead of them given that UK has the head to head matchup.

 

This is the biggest game in over 10 years for UK football, since the Tim Couch/Air Raid year of '98. There's definitely a huge difference between the Music City/Independence Bowl and the Outback Bowl both exposure and finanically speaking.

Edited November 23, 2009 by UK

[Tracer Bullet]

of course b/c you're a PSU fan. But I'd be very disappointed if a BCS bowl passed on Iowa for PSU. Just as I was disappointed when KU got picked over Missouri a couple years ago (and I don't like either of those schools). These are the kinds of situations where the BCS really doesn't work.

 

let me ask you this: if you had to pick one of PSU and Iowa to be in a BCS game based on which one "deserved" it (not based on tv viewers or ticket sales), which would you pick?

 

That's not his argument. He's arguing that PSU is more likely to be picked for the same reason KU went over Missouri. He's not arguing that PSU deserves it more, but that because of these outside factors, they are more likely to be picked.

 

 

 

Iowa deserves it more, but he isn't arguing who deserves it more.

 

I know his argument. Derwood was arguing that PSU has better ticket sales and tv viewership than Iowa (or that the BCS perceives that to be the case). I'm disagreeing with him. I think those are, at best, neutral factors. If anything, Iowa may travel better than PSU. So if those things are neutral, I think it should go to the team that deserves it more. It may not, but that's why I said I'd be disappointed. If the $ factors were heavily in one team's favor, I could understand why the BCS bowl picked that team. But it's just not the case here and I'm not sure the BCS bowl committees have the perception that Derwood attributed to them.