I'm waiting....No ridiculous arguments coming? If we are going to bring up what was done in the past, then I will certainly win that argument as well. Why don't you bask in the glory that your teams are having good seasons. I just don't think you can consider an apple to an orange, and that's what the MWC is to the Big 6 conferences.
Yourdad
offline
offline
Originally posted by HSKRCHMPS
I'm waiting....No ridiculous arguments coming? If we are going to bring up what was done in the past, then I will certainly win that argument as well. Why don't you bask in the glory that your teams are having good seasons. I just don't think you can consider an apple to an orange, and that's what the MWC is to the Big 6 conferences.
Well, since the tech guy blocked all the major sports sites I cant show you some things like I wanted. But, the big east teams would get stomped if they played in the SEC and BIG 12... same with the ACC teams. So its not like I am comparing the MWC to the top 2 conferences.
What I am saying, though, is that the MWC is better or comparable to 1/2 of the big 6. The top 4 teams in the MWC could play in the pac10, acc, or big east, and be very competitive. Year in and year out. In fact, if the MWC was a BCS conference they'd send competitive teams to a BCS bowl every year. Especially if you take into account the recruiting jump that would take place because of being in a BCS conference.
If you are wanting to talk about "what have you done for me lately" you will lose that argument. Utah has the nations longest bowl win streak and a BCS Bowl blowout win in '04. What has Nebraska done?
I'm waiting....No ridiculous arguments coming? If we are going to bring up what was done in the past, then I will certainly win that argument as well. Why don't you bask in the glory that your teams are having good seasons. I just don't think you can consider an apple to an orange, and that's what the MWC is to the Big 6 conferences.
Well, since the tech guy blocked all the major sports sites I cant show you some things like I wanted. But, the big east teams would get stomped if they played in the SEC and BIG 12... same with the ACC teams. So its not like I am comparing the MWC to the top 2 conferences.
What I am saying, though, is that the MWC is better or comparable to 1/2 of the big 6. The top 4 teams in the MWC could play in the pac10, acc, or big east, and be very competitive. Year in and year out. In fact, if the MWC was a BCS conference they'd send competitive teams to a BCS bowl every year. Especially if you take into account the recruiting jump that would take place because of being in a BCS conference.
If you are wanting to talk about "what have you done for me lately" you will lose that argument. Utah has the nations longest bowl win streak and a BCS Bowl blowout win in '04. What has Nebraska done?
HSKRCHMPS
offline
offline
Originally posted by Yourdad
Originally posted by HSKRCHMPS
I'm waiting....No ridiculous arguments coming? If we are going to bring up what was done in the past, then I will certainly win that argument as well. Why don't you bask in the glory that your teams are having good seasons. I just don't think you can consider an apple to an orange, and that's what the MWC is to the Big 6 conferences.
Well, since the tech guy blocked all the major sports sites I cant show you some things like I wanted. But, the big east teams would get stomped if they played in the SEC and BIG 12... same with the ACC teams. So its not like I am comparing the MWC to the top 2 conferences.
What I am saying, though, is that the MWC is better or comparable to 1/2 of the big 6. The top 4 teams in the MWC could play in the pac10, acc, or big east, and be very competitive. Year in and year out. In fact, if the MWC was a BCS conference they'd send competitive teams to a BCS bowl every year. Especially if you take into account the recruiting jump that would take place because of being in a BCS conference.
If you are wanting to talk about "what have you done for me lately" you will lose that argument. Utah has the nations longest bowl win streak and a BCS Bowl blowout win in '04. What has Nebraska done?
Nebraska has been pretty irrelevant since '01, although they did have a good season the year before Callahan left. They may have the longest bowl win streak, but it's not taking a whole lot for these teams to become bowl eligible. I mean that is 6 wins to become eligible, which I don't know how many teams are in that conference, nor do I care, honestly, but if those are the only 3 teams, and you're able to beat up on teams like Wyoming (don't know if same conference). I think you get my point. Sure, they would do great in those crap conferences you named. I agree that playoffs need to be here instead of BCS. We wouldn't be having these discussions if that were the case. As far as Utah, that's this decade. What did they do before that? NU will win that argument. Thanks though for trying.
Originally posted by HSKRCHMPS
I'm waiting....No ridiculous arguments coming? If we are going to bring up what was done in the past, then I will certainly win that argument as well. Why don't you bask in the glory that your teams are having good seasons. I just don't think you can consider an apple to an orange, and that's what the MWC is to the Big 6 conferences.
Well, since the tech guy blocked all the major sports sites I cant show you some things like I wanted. But, the big east teams would get stomped if they played in the SEC and BIG 12... same with the ACC teams. So its not like I am comparing the MWC to the top 2 conferences.
What I am saying, though, is that the MWC is better or comparable to 1/2 of the big 6. The top 4 teams in the MWC could play in the pac10, acc, or big east, and be very competitive. Year in and year out. In fact, if the MWC was a BCS conference they'd send competitive teams to a BCS bowl every year. Especially if you take into account the recruiting jump that would take place because of being in a BCS conference.
If you are wanting to talk about "what have you done for me lately" you will lose that argument. Utah has the nations longest bowl win streak and a BCS Bowl blowout win in '04. What has Nebraska done?
Nebraska has been pretty irrelevant since '01, although they did have a good season the year before Callahan left. They may have the longest bowl win streak, but it's not taking a whole lot for these teams to become bowl eligible. I mean that is 6 wins to become eligible, which I don't know how many teams are in that conference, nor do I care, honestly, but if those are the only 3 teams, and you're able to beat up on teams like Wyoming (don't know if same conference). I think you get my point. Sure, they would do great in those crap conferences you named. I agree that playoffs need to be here instead of BCS. We wouldn't be having these discussions if that were the case. As far as Utah, that's this decade. What did they do before that? NU will win that argument. Thanks though for trying.
Last edited Oct 17, 2008 14:26:22
Yourdad
offline
offline
Originally posted by HSKRCHMPS
Originally posted by Yourdad
Originally posted by HSKRCHMPS
I'm waiting....No ridiculous arguments coming? If we are going to bring up what was done in the past, then I will certainly win that argument as well. Why don't you bask in the glory that your teams are having good seasons. I just don't think you can consider an apple to an orange, and that's what the MWC is to the Big 6 conferences.
Well, since the tech guy blocked all the major sports sites I cant show you some things like I wanted. But, the big east teams would get stomped if they played in the SEC and BIG 12... same with the ACC teams. So its not like I am comparing the MWC to the top 2 conferences.
What I am saying, though, is that the MWC is better or comparable to 1/2 of the big 6. The top 4 teams in the MWC could play in the pac10, acc, or big east, and be very competitive. Year in and year out. In fact, if the MWC was a BCS conference they'd send competitive teams to a BCS bowl every year. Especially if you take into account the recruiting jump that would take place because of being in a BCS conference.
If you are wanting to talk about "what have you done for me lately" you will lose that argument. Utah has the nations longest bowl win streak and a BCS Bowl blowout win in '04. What has Nebraska done?
Nebraska has been pretty irrelevant since '01, although they did have a good season the year before Callahan left. They may have the longest bowl win streak, but it's not taking a whole lot for these teams to become bowl eligible. I mean that is 6 wins to become eligible, which I don't know how many teams are in that conference, nor do I care, honestly, but if those are the only 3 teams, and you're able to beat up on teams like Wyoming (don't know if same conference). I think you get my point. Sure, they would do great in those crap conferences you named. I agree that playoffs need to be here instead of BCS. We wouldn't be having these discussions if that were the case. As far as Utah, that's this decade. What did they do before that? NU will win that argument. Thanks though for trying.
Well you were the one who was telling me not to bring up the past.... so thats why I said this decade.
I guess we will see what the future holds. Utah has TCU and BYU left before they can claim an undefeated season. If they run the table they will be in yet another BCS bowl game. Nebraska will not be, however. If that doesnt say something for the quality of the program I dont know what does.
But, the future will hold many surprises im sure. I guarantee the MWC is on the rise.
Originally posted by Yourdad
Originally posted by HSKRCHMPS
I'm waiting....No ridiculous arguments coming? If we are going to bring up what was done in the past, then I will certainly win that argument as well. Why don't you bask in the glory that your teams are having good seasons. I just don't think you can consider an apple to an orange, and that's what the MWC is to the Big 6 conferences.
Well, since the tech guy blocked all the major sports sites I cant show you some things like I wanted. But, the big east teams would get stomped if they played in the SEC and BIG 12... same with the ACC teams. So its not like I am comparing the MWC to the top 2 conferences.
What I am saying, though, is that the MWC is better or comparable to 1/2 of the big 6. The top 4 teams in the MWC could play in the pac10, acc, or big east, and be very competitive. Year in and year out. In fact, if the MWC was a BCS conference they'd send competitive teams to a BCS bowl every year. Especially if you take into account the recruiting jump that would take place because of being in a BCS conference.
If you are wanting to talk about "what have you done for me lately" you will lose that argument. Utah has the nations longest bowl win streak and a BCS Bowl blowout win in '04. What has Nebraska done?
Nebraska has been pretty irrelevant since '01, although they did have a good season the year before Callahan left. They may have the longest bowl win streak, but it's not taking a whole lot for these teams to become bowl eligible. I mean that is 6 wins to become eligible, which I don't know how many teams are in that conference, nor do I care, honestly, but if those are the only 3 teams, and you're able to beat up on teams like Wyoming (don't know if same conference). I think you get my point. Sure, they would do great in those crap conferences you named. I agree that playoffs need to be here instead of BCS. We wouldn't be having these discussions if that were the case. As far as Utah, that's this decade. What did they do before that? NU will win that argument. Thanks though for trying.
Well you were the one who was telling me not to bring up the past.... so thats why I said this decade.
I guess we will see what the future holds. Utah has TCU and BYU left before they can claim an undefeated season. If they run the table they will be in yet another BCS bowl game. Nebraska will not be, however. If that doesnt say something for the quality of the program I dont know what does.
But, the future will hold many surprises im sure. I guarantee the MWC is on the rise.
HSKRCHMPS
offline
offline
I'm not going to argue with you about this. Very different teams in very different conferences. Regardless of your argument of their greatness, you say that they could do well in the ACC, Big Least, or Pac 10. That is irrelevant for two reasons. First of all, none of those conferences are even close to Big 12 or SEC. Secondly, strength of schedule is very much in those teams' favor. You stick any one of those teams in the Big 12, SEC, or even Big 10 for that matter, and they will get eaten alive. If one of those teams do make it to a BCS bowl, kudos to those kids. They would deserve it. However, I will feel sorry for them when they get stomped like Hawaii! Saying that doesn't say something for quality b/c one of these teams could get in and NU won't is possibly the worst argument made ever! Everybody knows NU is rebuilding and has a brand new coaching staff. If the tides were turned, and those teams played in areal conference like the big 12, I would be amazed if they did any better than NU
sew3663
offline
offline
Well... I'll put in my $.02... The BCS essentially shuts all non BCS schools from EVER making it into the national championship. However, it does share money with the non BCS conferences pretty well (which makes AD's of those other schools content and makes them reluctant to buck the system).
I'm from a non BCS school with possibly the worst I-A record in NCAA history, so I am a little biased against the 6 "Big" conferences (and ND) being the only ones who WILL EVER have a chance at a national championship. And that is the certain truth. There can never be anotherscenario like the 1984 BYU national championship as long as the BCS exists.
Think of it this way. If Boise State goes undefeated, they will play in "a" BCS game, not "THE" BCS game. Boise state has had a number of successful seasons the last 9-10 years as well as a win over OK in the Fiesta Bowl and they still aren't even considered as good as a mediocre BCS team (like, K-State, for example). If K-State were to go undefeated for only one season, they would be playing for a national championship (partially because they would have won the Big 12 and had a championship game against UT or OK), but Boise State can do it a few times (with some 1 loss seasons as well) and never even sniff the top 10.
Here is Boise State's regular season record since 1999:
1999 9-3
2000 9-2
2001 8-4
2002 11-1
2003 12-1
2004 11-0
2005 9-3
2006 12-0 Won Fiesta Bowl vs. Oklahoma (13-0 if you include this game)
2007 10-2
I understand many of those wins are against very easy teams because of the conference they play in, but what choice do they have? What BCS conference would kick one of their members out to allow Boise State in? They hardly get a chance to play top ten teams in the regular season because everyone is afraid of them (I seem to remember hearing that BYU or Utah got paid off by a BCS school to not complete a home-and-home contract after the BCS school lost the first of the games).
If I am a player and I want to play for a national championship contender, I'd be better off selecting a .500 BCS school than a Boise State, Utah, or other non-BCS school with a tradition of winning. That, in and of itself, makes it THAT much harder for those non BCS schools to compete and draw talent to them. The self fulfilling prophecy of non-BCS schools not being able to compete with BCS schools is realized, and by design, only BCS schools remain "worthy", and only they ever have a chance at a national championship.
The BCS alone makes it IMPOSSIBLE for any school to build a program starting from the outside. You can do it in basketball, like Gonzaga, because there is an NCAA tournament and almost every conference has an automatic bid. Many of the early games are blowouts, but every season also has a Cinderella. However, even with a football playoff, there would only be 8 or 12 teams competing, and rankings would be the only way to get in. Who gets the rankings? You guessed it. BCS schools (and ND).
/rant
I'm from a non BCS school with possibly the worst I-A record in NCAA history, so I am a little biased against the 6 "Big" conferences (and ND) being the only ones who WILL EVER have a chance at a national championship. And that is the certain truth. There can never be anotherscenario like the 1984 BYU national championship as long as the BCS exists.
Think of it this way. If Boise State goes undefeated, they will play in "a" BCS game, not "THE" BCS game. Boise state has had a number of successful seasons the last 9-10 years as well as a win over OK in the Fiesta Bowl and they still aren't even considered as good as a mediocre BCS team (like, K-State, for example). If K-State were to go undefeated for only one season, they would be playing for a national championship (partially because they would have won the Big 12 and had a championship game against UT or OK), but Boise State can do it a few times (with some 1 loss seasons as well) and never even sniff the top 10.
Here is Boise State's regular season record since 1999:
1999 9-3
2000 9-2
2001 8-4
2002 11-1
2003 12-1
2004 11-0
2005 9-3
2006 12-0 Won Fiesta Bowl vs. Oklahoma (13-0 if you include this game)
2007 10-2
I understand many of those wins are against very easy teams because of the conference they play in, but what choice do they have? What BCS conference would kick one of their members out to allow Boise State in? They hardly get a chance to play top ten teams in the regular season because everyone is afraid of them (I seem to remember hearing that BYU or Utah got paid off by a BCS school to not complete a home-and-home contract after the BCS school lost the first of the games).
If I am a player and I want to play for a national championship contender, I'd be better off selecting a .500 BCS school than a Boise State, Utah, or other non-BCS school with a tradition of winning. That, in and of itself, makes it THAT much harder for those non BCS schools to compete and draw talent to them. The self fulfilling prophecy of non-BCS schools not being able to compete with BCS schools is realized, and by design, only BCS schools remain "worthy", and only they ever have a chance at a national championship.
The BCS alone makes it IMPOSSIBLE for any school to build a program starting from the outside. You can do it in basketball, like Gonzaga, because there is an NCAA tournament and almost every conference has an automatic bid. Many of the early games are blowouts, but every season also has a Cinderella. However, even with a football playoff, there would only be 8 or 12 teams competing, and rankings would be the only way to get in. Who gets the rankings? You guessed it. BCS schools (and ND).
/rant
Last edited Oct 17, 2008 15:58:19
HSKRCHMPS
offline
offline
I would say that if playoffs do become a possibility, out of the 118 teams, take the top 60 (just throwing out a number). The thing is that you have to have at least a .500 record. I agree with what both of you are saying, but to say that Utah is better than NU b/c they could go to a BCS bowl is a horrible argument. That's all I'm saying. I don't really mind those teams, but I think the big 6 needs to be expanded and/or some restructuring to make it fair for all. If that were the case, this wouldn't be an argument.
sew3663
offline
offline
Someone I know suggested promotion/relegation. The top 2 non-BCS conferences switch places with the bottom 2 BCS conferences... That would be pretty entertaining to see the Big East fall by the wayside. Also, it would make USC want to move into the Mountain West and let the PAC-10 follow the Big East into oblivion...lol.
Yourdad
offline
offline
Originally posted by sew3663
Someone I know suggested promotion/relegation. The top 2 non-BCS conferences switch places with the bottom 2 BCS conferences... That would be pretty entertaining to see the Big East fall by the wayside. Also, it would make USC want to move into the Mountain West and let the PAC-10 follow the Big East into oblivion...lol.
That would be way interesting, lol. Also, there have been rumblings for a few years now about trying to incorporate Utah and BYU into the Pac-10 (pac-12)
What makes me giggle is that here we are talking about mid-major programs from non BCS conferences who are actually pretty strong schools, but all that anyone in the college football world can throw back is "SEC so good big 12 so good" every time. Yes, we know because the athletes go there. You know, the ones who want to play in the NFL! Miami (the U) always has players go into the NFL, but they have been very mediocre lately. Why? Because parody in college football has been growing. The average schools are getting better and lessening the gap between the big dogs. What this means is that the smaller programs are sending a ton of players into the NFL also. Utah had the number 1 pick in the NFL AND NBA in the same year... which was the first time ever. Jamall Anderson was from Utah. Steve Smith. Jordan Gross. The Dyson boys. I am not saying that Alex Smith has been good, but he was a phenominal college QB. Utah gets its recruits.
I think that the gap is being lessened year by year, and the BCS will be forced to change the system or there will be a BCS buster EVERY year (there has been lately) and they will have to start considering non-BCS schools in the national championsihp game.
Utah played at the Big House this year and dominated a rebuilding Michigan program. Urban Meyer turned down a 2 for 1 against Texas (2 at UT and 1 at Salt lake) when he was a coach here. But its hard for the TOP mid Major schools to schedule tougher BCS opponents because they are scared. Utah THROTTLED a 11th ranked UCLA team last year 44-6 at Salt Lake City. The top TOP schools dont want to schedule us. Only the schools who are looking to boost their out of conference schedule (UCLA is a prime example of that...)
Also, as far as basketball goes; Utah played in the National Championship game against Kentucky. In the final 4 Utah beat a STACKED NC team. The one with Antwan Jamison and Vince Carter (anyone know of these guys) on it. So the BBall system with the NCAA Tournament is a far better system than the BCS is.
Someone I know suggested promotion/relegation. The top 2 non-BCS conferences switch places with the bottom 2 BCS conferences... That would be pretty entertaining to see the Big East fall by the wayside. Also, it would make USC want to move into the Mountain West and let the PAC-10 follow the Big East into oblivion...lol.
That would be way interesting, lol. Also, there have been rumblings for a few years now about trying to incorporate Utah and BYU into the Pac-10 (pac-12)
What makes me giggle is that here we are talking about mid-major programs from non BCS conferences who are actually pretty strong schools, but all that anyone in the college football world can throw back is "SEC so good big 12 so good" every time. Yes, we know because the athletes go there. You know, the ones who want to play in the NFL! Miami (the U) always has players go into the NFL, but they have been very mediocre lately. Why? Because parody in college football has been growing. The average schools are getting better and lessening the gap between the big dogs. What this means is that the smaller programs are sending a ton of players into the NFL also. Utah had the number 1 pick in the NFL AND NBA in the same year... which was the first time ever. Jamall Anderson was from Utah. Steve Smith. Jordan Gross. The Dyson boys. I am not saying that Alex Smith has been good, but he was a phenominal college QB. Utah gets its recruits.
I think that the gap is being lessened year by year, and the BCS will be forced to change the system or there will be a BCS buster EVERY year (there has been lately) and they will have to start considering non-BCS schools in the national championsihp game.
Utah played at the Big House this year and dominated a rebuilding Michigan program. Urban Meyer turned down a 2 for 1 against Texas (2 at UT and 1 at Salt lake) when he was a coach here. But its hard for the TOP mid Major schools to schedule tougher BCS opponents because they are scared. Utah THROTTLED a 11th ranked UCLA team last year 44-6 at Salt Lake City. The top TOP schools dont want to schedule us. Only the schools who are looking to boost their out of conference schedule (UCLA is a prime example of that...)
Also, as far as basketball goes; Utah played in the National Championship game against Kentucky. In the final 4 Utah beat a STACKED NC team. The one with Antwan Jamison and Vince Carter (anyone know of these guys) on it. So the BBall system with the NCAA Tournament is a far better system than the BCS is.
sew3663
offline
offline
Originally posted by Yourdad
Originally posted by sew3663
Someone I know suggested promotion/relegation. The top 2 non-BCS conferences switch places with the bottom 2 BCS conferences... That would be pretty entertaining to see the Big East fall by the wayside. Also, it would make USC want to move into the Mountain West and let the PAC-10 follow the Big East into oblivion...lol.
That would be way interesting, lol. Also, there have been rumblings for a few years now about trying to incorporate Utah and BYU into the Pac-10 (pac-12)
What makes me giggle is that here we are talking about mid-major programs from non BCS conferences who are actually pretty strong schools, but all that anyone in the college football world can throw back is "SEC so good big 12 so good" every time. Yes, we know because the athletes go there. You know, the ones who want to play in the NFL! Miami (the U) always has players go into the NFL, but they have been very mediocre lately. Why? Because parody in college football has been growing. The average schools are getting better and lessening the gap between the big dogs. What this means is that the smaller programs are sending a ton of players into the NFL also. Utah had the number 1 pick in the NFL AND NBA in the same year... which was the first time ever. Jamall Anderson was from Utah. Steve Smith. Jordan Gross. The Dyson boys. I am not saying that Alex Smith has been good, but he was a phenominal college QB. Utah gets its recruits.
I think that the gap is being lessened year by year, and the BCS will be forced to change the system or there will be a BCS buster EVERY year (there has been lately) and they will have to start considering non-BCS schools in the national championsihp game.
Utah played at the Big House this year and dominated a rebuilding Michigan program. Urban Meyer turned down a 2 for 1 against Texas (2 at UT and 1 at Salt lake) when he was a coach here. But its hard for the TOP mid Major schools to schedule tougher BCS opponents because they are scared. Utah THROTTLED a 11th ranked UCLA team last year 44-6 at Salt Lake City. The top TOP schools dont want to schedule us. Only the schools who are looking to boost their out of conference schedule (UCLA is a prime example of that...)
Also, as far as basketball goes; Utah played in the National Championship game against Kentucky. In the final 4 Utah beat a STACKED NC team. The one with Antwan Jamison and Vince Carter (anyone know of these guys) on it. So the BBall system with the NCAA Tournament is a far better system than the BCS is.
+1
Originally posted by sew3663
Someone I know suggested promotion/relegation. The top 2 non-BCS conferences switch places with the bottom 2 BCS conferences... That would be pretty entertaining to see the Big East fall by the wayside. Also, it would make USC want to move into the Mountain West and let the PAC-10 follow the Big East into oblivion...lol.
That would be way interesting, lol. Also, there have been rumblings for a few years now about trying to incorporate Utah and BYU into the Pac-10 (pac-12)
What makes me giggle is that here we are talking about mid-major programs from non BCS conferences who are actually pretty strong schools, but all that anyone in the college football world can throw back is "SEC so good big 12 so good" every time. Yes, we know because the athletes go there. You know, the ones who want to play in the NFL! Miami (the U) always has players go into the NFL, but they have been very mediocre lately. Why? Because parody in college football has been growing. The average schools are getting better and lessening the gap between the big dogs. What this means is that the smaller programs are sending a ton of players into the NFL also. Utah had the number 1 pick in the NFL AND NBA in the same year... which was the first time ever. Jamall Anderson was from Utah. Steve Smith. Jordan Gross. The Dyson boys. I am not saying that Alex Smith has been good, but he was a phenominal college QB. Utah gets its recruits.
I think that the gap is being lessened year by year, and the BCS will be forced to change the system or there will be a BCS buster EVERY year (there has been lately) and they will have to start considering non-BCS schools in the national championsihp game.
Utah played at the Big House this year and dominated a rebuilding Michigan program. Urban Meyer turned down a 2 for 1 against Texas (2 at UT and 1 at Salt lake) when he was a coach here. But its hard for the TOP mid Major schools to schedule tougher BCS opponents because they are scared. Utah THROTTLED a 11th ranked UCLA team last year 44-6 at Salt Lake City. The top TOP schools dont want to schedule us. Only the schools who are looking to boost their out of conference schedule (UCLA is a prime example of that...)
Also, as far as basketball goes; Utah played in the National Championship game against Kentucky. In the final 4 Utah beat a STACKED NC team. The one with Antwan Jamison and Vince Carter (anyone know of these guys) on it. So the BBall system with the NCAA Tournament is a far better system than the BCS is.
+1
HSKRCHMPS
offline
offline
I don't completely disagree with what you are saying by any means! There is a lot of talent in those schools. I, along with the rest of the nation, was completely amazed that Boise beat OU. This is always going to be an argument until the BCS is done away with and a playoff is established. Look at college basketball. You have teams that are not part of a Big 6 Conference, that make a lot of noise. UNC-Charlotte for example a couple of years ago. That is the only way that the gap will be lessened and respect given to the non-BCS schools. If Utah could go into a 64 team playoff, and beat 3 straight BCS schools, then they would get more respect. But until that happens, I'm sorry, it just won't happen. I've been against the BCS since it was formed, even though it was better than the past method. It's too bias. How does a top 5 team who is loved by the media, stay in the top 10 after losing to a nonranked team? USC is the only team that gets that treatment. For arguments sake about LSU, they got extremely lucky, but throttled the 2nd best team in the country. OSU gets the same love, but not on the same level as SC. Just my thoughts. Btw, I love having these CFB talks. Whether you agree with my points or not, college football is my favorite sport, and I love to argue when it comes to things like this.
bknudson
offline
offline
OMG ... i'm not reading all of that....
you guys are college football gods... you win the Internet
you guys are college football gods... you win the Internet
bknudson
offline
offline
I don't get to emotional about college football. I like BYU, but it doesn't compare to pro, it's like watching the special olympics, your fastest all midget relay race is awsome and super duper however they are still midgets.
I'm sure you college football geeks will start to flame away and I know that it will give you erections to do so, so bang (no pun) away and have your self a good time. I'm out for the weekend so you guys behave. Shake smoke a blunt for me. Husker quit spamming as i won't be here to participate, THE LAST WORD IS YOURS TILL MONDAY. Toric cheer up because your a gloomy fucker.
Peace out all.
I'm sure you college football geeks will start to flame away and I know that it will give you erections to do so, so bang (no pun) away and have your self a good time. I'm out for the weekend so you guys behave. Shake smoke a blunt for me. Husker quit spamming as i won't be here to participate, THE LAST WORD IS YOURS TILL MONDAY. Toric cheer up because your a gloomy fucker.
Peace out all.
Last edited Oct 17, 2008 17:44:41
You are not logged in. Please log in if you want to post a reply.
