T1B

I'd be really interested in seeing how you think the BCS bowls should have been paired....

go ahead, list em out then I'll give you my critique of your pairings........

Tigers eat the Christians

heh heh...maybe Quinn can ride his Steed of a Sister into battle...

It'd be interesting to see how the OU players view their bowl opponent. For all we know, they're happy just to be in a BCS bowl considering how bleak things looked in the beginning.

I know Van thinks that they'll dog it.

USC's drive to their bowl game is much less than 80 miles

PSUFAN wrote:I know Van thinks that they'll dog it.

:-)

Woof!

88 wrote: 9. Nevada - I wonder how kids who live in a desert feel about getting to go to a frozen blue field

Uhm...ever been to Reno in winter?


So, you're saying kids who live in high desert might be shell-shocked travelling a little ways north to high desert?


Looked at a map lately, 88?

88 wrote: 9. Nevada - I wonder how kids who live in a desert feel about getting to go to a frozen blue field

I mean, I'm not sure how those poor kids from Reno will ever be able to adjust to that radically different climate in Boise.


I hope they don't die or anything.

88 wrote:Hey, it was my 9th and last team pairing. I was scratching at the bottom of the barrel for something. Fix it for me.

We cool.

I think you were on the right track with the secondary line...maybe something like --

"Those poor kids from Nevada did just well-enough to have the honor of risking life-and-limb taking the field with a team that's but one bad call away from being permanently incarcerated under the three-time-loser provisions."


Or something...

88 wrote:
MNC - Ohio State vs. Michigan (it is unfair to take Michigan's #2 ranking away after they got done playing their season; it is also unfair to have Ohio State play Michigan twice; that is one of the reasons why the BCS blows goat ass)

Michigan had their shot....

yes, it does blow........

ROSE - USC vs. LSU (LSU fans were promised the tickets, and they bought them in droves - USC gets the Rose due to conference tie-in and LSU gets selected with the first at-large pick (replacing OSU to the MNC game))

Personally, I think SC/Michigan will be a very entertaining match up......

SUGAR - Florida vs. Wisconsin (Florida gets the Sugar due to conference tie-ins, but gets a quality 11-1 team as a reward - yes, I know Wisconsin isn't eligible, but that is another reason why the BCS blows goat ass; and Wisconsin is selected because the Sugar gets first pick)

Wisconsin got the shaft no doubt......

ORANGE - Louisville vs. Boise State (Louisville gets the conference tie-in game, and Boise State gets a good bowl - everyone is happy; and the Orange gets Boise State instead of Wake Forest because it gets first pick)

It's makes no logistical sense to ship a team from the west to Florida insofar as fanbase support goes......coupled with the fact that BSU played Louisville two years ago, and two years prior to that in bowl games.......

FIESTA - Oklahoma vs. Wake Forest (Oklahoma gets the conference tie-in game and the Fiesta gets stuck with Wake Forest because it gets last pick; more goat ass anyone?)

well that's why conference automatics blow monkey cack........(s'up Pittsburgh)

ND exits stage left

no argument here....ND does not belong in a BCS game with worthier teams out there.......

A 16 team playoff is what we really need.

yep.......

Please tell me that there isn't one person left on the "Wisconsin got scewed" bandwagon...please?

Save for two great teams, they played in a shit-conference. Couple that with Bowling Green, Western Illinois, and San Diego State, and what you have is...


A joke.

Don't cry to the BCS or pollsters about Wisky getting screwed...cry to the person who deserves it -- the AD or whoever does their scheduling.

Egads, what were they thinking? Nothing like throwing in the towel 5 years before the season even starts.

That's SECesque.

I don't agree the Big 10 is a shit conference, but i do agree that Wiscy's OOC schedule deserves some scrutiny (add Buffalo to your list above Dins)....*and* they didn't play tOSU this year.

King Crimson wrote:I don't agree the Big 10 is a shit conference

You'll note I qualified my "shit-conference" designation. Take away OSU and UM, and it's worse than the WAC.

Traditionally, always one of the stronger, if not the strongest top-to-bottom...but certainly not this year.

As much as I would love to say Wisconsin got screwed, I know they didn't. They always frustrate me with their weak OOC sceduling. How's about this for next year for UW: Washington State, UNLV and The Citadel with one open date. They'll proabably schedule Toledo or Temple or some team like that for it. OSU and Michigan are on the schedule, though.

Capital One Bowl is fair, IMO.

Why don't more teams beef up their OOC schedules. Do they really need to play div 2 scrubs to experiment safely? They have practice for that and besides, wtf good is experimenting against scrubs? It really doesn't prove a thing. Also, the school would get more nice paydays with more big games.

I guess it all comes down to faggotass ADs/coaches who don't wanna risk any more losses than necessary, since, with the existing BCS debacle, 2 losses and you haven't a chance to play for anything on new years. I guess this is reason #9274 that a playoff system would have 'bode over the bullshit coalition scam.

Great thread, 88.

Why do I get the idea I've typed that before...?

Anyway, my thoughts...

LSU: Considering how friendly those Tigers were to some land thieves a few years ago, if they never leave their home state again, I'd be cool with it.

Michigan: Shut up. It's the USC argument from 2003. If you win out, you're in. Florida plays in a conference with a championship game. Note to Big 10/11: Get a real name. Second note to Big 10/11: When you get with the times, you won't get "screwed." Also, considering a non-conference slate of Vandy, Central Michigan, and Ball State, your argument is weakened even further. Your quality wins are Wisconsin and Notre Dame, if you're calling them "quality." You lost your championship game.

OU: Until Jan 2nd, we're going to hear dozens of times how this is a "no-win" for the Sooners. I think OU has a shot to play in a BCS bowl, which, considering everything that's happened to us this season, is a big deal. But, unless we SPANK Boise State, I won't be happy. To me, beating them isn't enough. I want us to send a message. Losing the game is shower rod material. I don't care if they're undefeated. We're OU.

Florida: Congrats. You're the beneficiary of Michigan having already played tOSU and of being in what is widely considered a strong conference. You earned your right to be there, however, so please, make the most of it.

Gym time. More later.

the_ouskull

smackaholic wrote:Why don't more teams beef up their OOC schedules. Do they really need to play div 2 scrubs to experiment safely? They have practice for that and besides, wtf good is experimenting against scrubs? It really doesn't prove a thing. Also, the school would get more nice paydays with more big games.

I guess it all comes down to faggotass ADs/coaches who don't wanna risk any more losses than necessary, since, with the existing BCS debacle, 2 losses and you haven't a chance to play for anything on new years. I guess this is reason #9274 that a playoff system would have 'bode over the bullshit coalition scam.

Well, since $$$ is the engine that drives everything in this country, AD's see it fit to have as many home games as possible. You know, those ticket sale thingies and all. Tougher OC scheduling means playing tougher, big-time teams that want a one for one (that ticket sale thingy again) whereas weaker schools agree to a two for one or even a non-reciprocal agreement.

the_ouskull wrote:Great thread, 88.

Why do I get the idea I've typed that before...?

Anyway, my thoughts...

LSU: Considering how friendly those Tigers were to some land thieves a few years ago, if they never leave their home state again, I'd be cool with it.

Michigan: Shut up. It's the USC argument from 2003. If you win out, you're in. Florida plays in a conference with a championship game. Note to Big 10/11: Get a real name. Second note to Big 10/11: When you get with the times, you won't get "screwed." Also, considering a non-conference slate of Vandy, Central Michigan, and Ball State, your argument is weakened even further. Your quality wins are Wisconsin and Notre Dame, if you're calling them "quality." You lost your championship game.

OU: Until Jan 2nd, we're going to hear dozens of times how this is a "no-win" for the Sooners. I think OU has a shot to play in a BCS bowl, which, considering everything that's happened to us this season, is a big deal. But, unless we SPANK Boise State, I won't be happy. To me, beating them isn't enough. I want us to send a message. Losing the game is shower rod material. I don't care if they're undefeated. We're OU.

Florida: Congrats. You're the beneficiary of Michigan having already played tOSU and of being in what is widely considered a strong conference. You earned your right to be there, however, so please, make the most of it.

Gym time. More later.

the_ouskull

How about if Boise joins the 10/11? Then they could play in a real conference and the Big13-1? could have a conference championship.

88 wrote:1. LSU - After letting LSU sell 40,000+ tickets to its fans for the Rose Bowl, the BCS awarded the fans with an 80 mile road trip to a bowl game to watch the Tigers eat the Christians. I thought that sort of thing was outlawed during the Holy Roman Empire. What a disappointment. Do the LSU fans get a bowl of gumbo with their ticket?

Fwiw, I could make an argument that ND got screwed. Not by their BCS bid, but by their opponent.

Florida was pretty much signed, sealed and delivered for us until USC lost. As a result, we lost an opposing coach who could have provided bulletin board material for our team, a true neutral field (ND always represents very well at bowl games, but playing LSU in New Orleans means that LSUfan will probably get 80-90% of the tickets), and gives us an opponent which creates more matchup problems for us, certainly when we have the ball at any rate.

I have almost no confidence that we'll win the Sugar Bowl against LSU. I gave us at least a shot against Florida.

Gotta say, it must be damn difficult these days to be a Notre Dame fan. Thin skinned types need not apply, not with ND rightfully being the second most loathed program in CF (right behind Goldtoof U) ever since they got their NBC deal and their BCS deal...

Add to that, the continued media hype despite they haven't won a bowl game in years. And didn't even compete in 'em in years between.

After two wins in a row, nobody rises faster than ND.

Well, yeah, I definitely should've included the incessant and so often undeserved media hype.

The bowl game losses? People love 'em for those. They're almost becoming the beloved Chicago Cubs of CF's modern era...

Notre Dame's actually becoming cute and cuddly.

Yup, ND's fans are awesome. Being an ND fan these days...not so much.

Notre Dame's actually becoming cute and cuddly.

Especially now that Charlie Weis-tershiresauce is on the sidelines.

Charlie Weis-tershiresauce

HOOOOOOlllllly crap!! Bwaaahahaaaaaa!!!!!!!

His costarring role alongside Hamburgler in those commercials made him a household word. Unfortunetly, he took his paycheck in the form of Big Macs.

Dinsdale wrote:His costarring role alongside Hamburgler in those commercials made him a household word. Unfortunetly, he took his paycheck in the form of Big Macs.

Speaking of which...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obzXpGGi ... ed&search=

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:

Notre Dame's actually becoming cute and cuddly.

Especially now that Charlie Weis-tershiresauce is on the sidelines.

Quality gloss...

Texas didn't get screwed, they got extremely lucky. No matter what bowl game they would have been invited to it would not have been a BCS and thus Texas fans probably would not have traveled too well. The Alamo is just as good as any other crap bowl not named Fiesta, Rose, Sugar or Orange. The benefit is we get to go to San Antonio and then drive home after the game. To most Texas fans we just want to cheer on our team and get the damn season over with, with as little inconvience as possible.

Van wrote:Speaking of which...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obzXpGGi ... ed&search=

Glass dick.

But hey, if it makes you feel any better, it got TROTSed when JTR posted it.

88 wrote:Terry, if ND had defeated USC, you'd be talking about how ND deserved a shot at OSU in the MNC because Michigan already had its chance and the ND loss to Michigan was a lot of NBC telecasts ago.

Puh-leeze. ND has two losses. There's no way I'd argue that they deserve a shot at the title.

Instead, you are whining about having to play LSU in a BCS game because of "matchup problems". Give me a break. If Wisconsin had the same bullshit deal that only Notre Dame has with the BCS, they would be guaranteed a shot to play in the BCS, "matchup problems" notwithstanding.

Not whining, it's still the BCS, and there are lots of teams that would love to be in ND's position right now. I would have rather played Florida, because I think we match up better vs. Florida. But either way, it's an opportunity for the program to silence a lot of its critics on the most common criticism, i.e., the bowl game losing streak. I don't like our chances much of winning this game, but it's not impossible either.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:Add to that, the continued media hype despite they haven't won a bowl game in years. And didn't even compete in 'em in years between.

Actually, Houston has a longer bowl-game losing streak. Not in terms of consecutive losses, but definitely in terms of the time covered by those losses. Hell, it isn't even close. http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/di ... istory.php

I hate to admit it, but it was friggin' ESPN that tipped me off on that fact. I just did the research to confirm.

Terry in Crapchester wrote:

88 wrote:1. LSU - After letting LSU sell 40,000+ tickets to its fans for the Rose Bowl, the BCS awarded the fans with an 80 mile road trip to a bowl game to watch the Tigers eat the Christians. I thought that sort of thing was outlawed during the Holy Roman Empire. What a disappointment. Do the LSU fans get a bowl of gumbo with their ticket?

Fwiw, I could make an argument that ND got screwed. Not by their BCS bid, but by their opponent.

Florida was pretty much signed, sealed and delivered for us until USC lost. As a result, we lost an opposing coach who could have provided bulletin board material for our team, a true neutral field (ND always represents very well at bowl games, but playing LSU in New Orleans means that LSUfan will probably get 80-90% of the tickets), and gives us an opponent which creates more matchup problems for us, certainly when we have the ball at any rate.

I have almost no confidence that we'll win the Sugar Bowl against LSU. I gave us at least a shot against Florida.

Sorry, Terry, but I don't think you'd have a prayer against either one. They're both quality football teams.

Van wrote:Gotta say, it must be damn difficult these days to be a Notre Dame fan. Thin skinned types need not apply, not with ND rightfully being the second most loathed program in CF (right behind Goldtoof U) ever since they got their NBC deal and their BCS deal...

Just based on their fans, I don't think you should sell USC short.

Terry in Crapchester wrote:

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:Add to that, the continued media hype despite they haven't won a bowl game in years. And didn't even compete in 'em in years between.

Actually, Houston has a longer bowl-game losing streak. Not in terms of consecutive losses, but definitely in terms of the time covered by those losses. Hell, it isn't even close. http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/di ... istory.php

Jesus Christ, Terry


Well, I'll give you this...

....at least you didn't bring up William & Mary.

Terry in Crapchester wrote:

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:Add to that, the continued media hype despite they haven't won a bowl game in years. And didn't even compete in 'em in years between.

Actually, Houston has a longer bowl-game losing streak. Not in terms of consecutive losses, but definitely in terms of the time covered by those losses. Hell, it isn't even close. http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/di ... istory.php

I hate to admit it, but it was friggin' ESPN that tipped me off on that fact. I just did the research to confirm.

Actually?

What is this "actually," Terry? Do me a favor? Point out from my post where I said ND has the longest-running bowl game losing streak. I said nothing of the sort, rather, that they pretty much suck at winning bowls.

Terry wrote:

88 wrote: Terry, if ND had defeated USC, you'd be talking about how ND deserved a shot at OSU in the MNC because Michigan already had its chance and the ND loss to Michigan was a lot of NBC telecasts ago.

Puh-leeze. ND has two losses. There's no way I'd argue that they deserve a shot at the title.

Ummm, correct me if I'm wrong here but I'm pretty sure ND would only have one loss and not two if ND had defeated USC...

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:

Terry in Crapchester wrote:

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:Add to that, the continued media hype despite they haven't won a bowl game in years. And didn't even compete in 'em in years between.

Actually, Houston has a longer bowl-game losing streak. Not in terms of consecutive losses, but definitely in terms of the time covered by those losses. Hell, it isn't even close. http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/di ... istory.php

I hate to admit it, but it was friggin' ESPN that tipped me off on that fact. I just did the research to confirm.

Actually?

What is this "actually," Terry? Do me a favor? Point out from my post where I said ND has the longest-running bowl game losing streak. I said nothing of the sort, rather, that they pretty much suck at winning bowls.

I never said you did Mgo. I think ND has the longest current bowl-game losing streak in terms of consecutive losses (maybe not), but not the longest in terms of time elapsed.

88 wrote:

Van wrote:

Terry wrote:

Puh-leeze. ND has two losses. There's no way I'd argue that they deserve a shot at the title.

Ummm, correct me if I'm wrong here but I'm pretty sure ND would only have one loss and not two if ND had defeated USC...

2-1 = 1

Misread your post. I was focused on the USC loss to UCLA. Sorry.

But I think it was pretty well settled that ND had no shot at the BCS championship game once Michigan lost to tOSU. In fact, I think I posted myself that ND was pretty much assured of the Sugar Bowl regardless of the outcome of the USC game.

The difference is, had they beaten USC, you wouldn't be bitching about ND being there. Wait a minute . . . you probably still would. :wink:

420 wrote:

Terry in Crapchester wrote:

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:Add to that, the continued media hype despite they haven't won a bowl game in years. And didn't even compete in 'em in years between.

Actually, Houston has a longer bowl-game losing streak. Not in terms of consecutive losses, but definitely in terms of the time covered by those losses. Hell, it isn't even close. http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/di ... istory.php

Jesus Christ, Terry


Well, I'll give you this...

....at least you didn't bring up William & Mary.

....or Cal.

Considering that Houston won a few SWC titles and played in the Cotton Bowl a few times (including the Ice Bowl/chicken soup game vs. ND and Joe Montana, one of my all-time favorite memories), had a Heisman Trophy-winning QB and another QB who, at the time, broke most NCAA passing records, Houston has been more relevant to discussion of big-time programs during most of the period in question than Cal has. Just sayin'.

88 wrote:I wish I had saved my tongue-in-cheek post from a few years ago about Bob Davie overcoming being stabbed in the back with a sideline marker by an ND fan to lead his 5-loss ND team to a much deserved MNC bid.

For the record, I happen to think that ND fans on this board represent well, including Terry.

Me too. That was the first post I read on the old Jim Rome board. Laughed my ass off.

Not sure where Legacy5.5 went, but I think Terry and I are pretty level headed when it comes to ND. Read any of their public forums and you will see why many people hate ND.