T1B

Posted: **Mon Dec 05, 2011 3:52 am**

'Spray, the Big 10 has done nicely in the Rose Bowl of late? Besides Ohio State's one win against Oregon a couple of years ago, the Big 10 lost year in the Rose Bowl to TCU, meaning the Big 10 has gone 1-7 in their last eight trips to The Granddaddy...and most of them were blowouts.

I'm liking Bama in the rematch. LSU may now have too much cocky swagger for their own good. They have guys who are starting to refer to themselves as the "best ever" should they beat Bama. They're beginning to believe their own press, which is never a good sign. I get the feeling they already think this one's in the bag, particularly since it'll be in New Orleans.

Also, it seems that often times the loser during the regular season wins the rematch.

Besides, Bama looked to be the stronger team in the first game. Picking the more business-like team with the more focused approach—not to mention a severe chip on their shoulders—seems like the stronger play. I won't be surprised if LSU wins, but I'll take Bama and the points, and to win straight up.

Posted: **Mon Dec 05, 2011 4:03 am**

Papa Willie wrote:
S.D. County Credit Union Poinsettia
TCU vs. Louisiana Tech San Diego
Fuck - talk about a team that got SCREWED. Probably the worst of them all. TCU by 40.

this pretty much demonstrates why the BCS sucks monkey cack....last week TCU was ranked 18th...5 teams that were ahead of them lost, and TCU went to 18th in the polls....the biggest pile of horseshit I've ever seen...I fucking hate TCU and even I think they got jobbed...

MAACO Las Vegas
Arizona State vs. Boise State Las Vegas
You laugh

uh no, actually I cry...the 7th ranked team in the country is relegated to playing in a bowl nobody cares about against a 6-6 team of scrubs who's coach just got shown the door.....Boise State is going to take their frustration out on ASU....this won't even be close....

Virginia Tech in the sugar bowl are you fucking shitting me????

Posted: **Mon Dec 05, 2011 4:08 am**

Nobody but nobody got screwed as badly as Boise St. 6-6 Arizona fucking State in the MAACO Bowl? Hell, UCLA got a better bowl game than that, and they shouldn't even be playing anymore.

Yep, ol' Chris Petersen better truly love that whole 'living in Boise' experience, 'cause this shit would drive any sane man off the rails.

Posted: **Mon Dec 05, 2011 4:51 am**

The Cotton Bowl has a better match-up than the Sugar or the Orange. The Outback and the Capital One are probably better as well.

The Big 12 was the toughest conference in the nation and got one BCS entrant, while the ACC got two? Of course, it's all about the money - that is, the teams that historically travel well.

Posted: **Mon Dec 05, 2011 4:59 am**

Goober McTuber wrote:Of course, it's all about the money - that is, the teams that historically travel well.

what the fuck does that mean.....how many tickets do they think Virginia Tech is going to sell? How many can they sell.....

Posted: **Mon Dec 05, 2011 5:05 am**

Mizzou was #25 in the BCS last week and now this week, not in the top 25.

But guess who is? Yep, Texas, at 7-5. Same record as Mizzou. We beat them, but who cares, right?

After Mizzou beat #16 or #17 Texas, Texas was still ranked in the Top 25. Then the next week, Texas lost again, yet, they were still in the Top 25. Amazing.

Then, Texas loses against Baylor, yet STILL in the Top 25. Usually, if a team is down toward the bottom of the Top 25 and that team loses, it's out of the Top 25 the next week. But that doesn't apply to Texas.

College football has been political for many years. But now, it's getting much worse and the teams that don't have a great history like Mizzou football, suffer. And the teams that do have a great history, yet are mediocre, still get the best or better bowls. Look at Texas, Florida, and Ohio State this year. Very average, but very good bowls and they leapfrogged many well-deserving teams.

Posted: **Mon Dec 05, 2011 5:09 am**

All things considered, I'm surprised they let us go to Shreveport, Bace...

Posted: **Mon Dec 05, 2011 5:38 am**

Check your math. Since 1991 (the last twenty years) the Pac 12 and Big 10 have split in the Rose Bowl, 8-8.

January 1, 1991 Washington 46 Iowa 34
January 1, 1992 Washington 34 Michigan 14
January 1, 1993 Michigan 38 Washington 31
January 1, 1994 Wisconsin 21 UCLA 16
January 2, 1995 Penn State 38 Oregon 20
January 1, 1996 Southern California 41 Northwestern 32
January 1, 1997 Ohio State 20 Arizona State 17
January 1, 1998 Michigan 21 Washington State 16
January 1, 1999 Wisconsin 38 UCLA 31
January 1, 2000 Wisconsin 17 Stanford 9
January 1, 2001 Washington 34 Purdue 24
January 3, 2002* Miami (FL) 37 Nebraska 14
January 1, 2003 Oklahoma 34 Washington State 14
January 1, 2004 Southern California 28 Michigan 14
January 1, 2005 Texas 38 Michigan 37
January 4, 2006* Texas 41 Southern California 38
January 1, 2007 Southern California 32 Michigan 18
January 1, 2008 Southern California 49 Illinois 17
January 1, 2009 Southern California 38 Penn State 24
January 1, 2010 Ohio State 26 Oregon 17
January 1, 2011 TCU 21 Wisconsin 19

Posted: **Mon Dec 05, 2011 1:28 pm**

Felix wrote:
Goober McTuber wrote:Of course, it's all about the money - that is, the teams that historically travel well.
what the fuck does that mean.....how many tickets do they think Virginia Tech is going to sell? How many can they sell.....

Virginia Tech has a reputation for travelling well to bowl games. Reece Davis thought that was the reason they got the bid rather than Boise or K-State. Just another example of how totally fucked up the BCS really is.

Posted: **Mon Dec 05, 2011 1:35 pm**

Looks to me like the Sugar could have just as easily had Stanford and Boise State, #4 vs #7. Or BSU vs KSU.

After bypassing four higher-ranked eligible teams, Allstate Sugar Bowl Chief Executive Officer Paul Hoolahan was prepared to be criticized for selecting No. 11 Virginia Tech to meet No. 13 Michigan in the 78th edition of the game Jan. 3 at the Mercedes-Benz Superdome.

Picking teams for a bowl game, he explained, doesn’t necessarily depend on rankings, despite the Sugar Bowl winding up as only the second BCS bowl without at least one top-10 team in the BCS’ 14-year, 62-game history. The 2009 Orange Bowl between the Hokies and Cincinnati was the other.

“We had to put together what we think makes the most sense for our bowl,” Hoolahan said Sunday after the BCS bowl selections were announced. “There are reasons we do things that are way beyond the obvious.

“You can’t please everyone. We feel like we’ve got a heck of a nice matchup.”

Nonetheless, even ESPN analyst Kirk Herbstreit questioned the pairing despite the fact that his network will air the game.

“You look at Michigan and Virginia Tech both bringing a lot of fans,” he said. “But is that what it’s come down to?

“Kellen Moore and Boise State, Baylor and Robert Griffin, Kansas State and Bill Snyder is the coach of the year. But the BCS at-large selection is all about how teams come into cities and fill up hotel rooms.”

That had been the reason Michigan (10-2) had been widely anticipated to be invited. The Wolverines have not been in a BCS bowl since the 2007 their fans are known for traveling well. Plus, Michigan had not been to the Sugar Bowl since 1984.

But Virginia Tech (11-2) was a surprise. Not only were the Hokies upset by Clemson, 38-10, in Saturday’s ACC championship game, but they’ve had trouble selling tickets to the Orange Bowl three of the past four years in which they played.

But veteran Hokies Coach Frank Beamer said that Virginia Tech fans would travel well to New Orleans.

“I don’t think there’s any question about it,” he said. “Our fans are going to be tremendously excited to be playing a program that’s so well respected as Michigan is.

“And we’ve had great experiences in New Orleans before.”

This will be Virginia Tech’s fourth Sugar Bowl. The Hokies lost to unbeaten Auburn, 16-13, in 2005 and more memorably fell to Florida State, 46-29, in 2000 for the national championship. Virginia Tech also defeated Texas, 28-10, in 1995.

Beamer, whose 251 career victories make him the active career leader since the dismissal of Penn State’s Joe Paterno, also said he had no doubts about his team’s worthiness for the game despite a weak non-conference schedule and Saturday’s decisive loss. Clemson also handed Virginia Tech its only other loss, 27-3, on Oct. 1.

“I’m proud of our football team and what we’ve been able to beat didn’t seem weak to me,” he said. “And until last night, we were ranked fifth.

“We only lost to one team; we just happened to lose to them twice.”

First-year Michigan Coach Brady Hoke said the Sugar Bowl selection was a tribute to his seniors, some of whom were recruited by former Coach Lloyd Carr before playing for three seasons under Rich Rodriguez.

“Our seniors have done everything they’ve been asked,” he said. “And their leadership and how they’ve worked together as a football team is the reason we’re in the Sugar Bowl.

“It’s a great reward for them.”

The selection of Michigan and Virginia Tech, who have never meet before, capped a weekend for the Sugar Bowl that included both the expected and the unexpected.

The expected was LSU’s maintaining the No.1 spot in the BCS rankings, which gave the Sugar Bowl the first pick among the available at-large teams to fill the bowl’s anchor spot for the SEC champion. It’s the sixth straight year the SEC champion has played in the national championship game instead of the Sugar Bowl.

The unexpected was Houston’s loss to Southern Miss in the Conference USA championship game, knocking the previously unbeaten Cougars out of an almost-certain Sugar Bowl berth.

Then, Texas Christian, the highest ranking champion of a non-BCS conference, remained at No. 18 in the standings and thus failed to reach automatic qualifying status as well.

That left the Sugar Bowl with the first pick among No. 4 Stanford, No. 7 Boise State, No. 8 Kansas State, No. 12 Baylor, No. 14 Oklahoma and Big East champion West Virginia plus the two teams it eventually did take.

Michigan wound up being the first pick, and after the Fiesta Bowl tabbed Stanford, the Sugar took Virginia Tech, leaving the Orange Bowl with automatic-qualifier West Virginia to face Clemson.

Hoolahan said Kansas State was the team most under consideration after Virginia Tech, adding that if No. 6 Arkansas or No. 9 South Carolina had been eligible (BCS rules allow a conference only one at-large team and Alabama filled that spot for the SEC), the selection would have been different.

“We went into Saturday with every contingency planned out,” he said. “We came out with a very nice fit.”

http://www.nola.com/sugarbowl/index.ssf ... iring.html

Posted: **Mon Dec 05, 2011 2:56 pm**

Goober McTuber wrote:Looks to me like the Sugar could have just as easily had Stanford and Boise State, #4 vs #7. Or BSU vs KSU.

After bypassing four higher-ranked eligible teams, Allstate Sugar Bowl Chief Executive Officer Paul Hoolahan was prepared to be criticized for selecting No. 11 Virginia Tech to meet No. 13 Michigan in the 78th edition of the game Jan. 3 at the Mercedes-Benz Superdome.

Picking teams for a bowl game, he explained, doesn’t necessarily depend on rankings, despite the Sugar Bowl winding up as only the second BCS bowl without at least one top-10 team in the BCS’ 14-year, 62-game history. The 2009 Orange Bowl between the Hokies and Cincinnati was the other.

“We had to put together what we think makes the most sense for our bowl,” Hoolahan said Sunday after the BCS bowl selections were announced. “There are reasons we do things that are way beyond the obvious.

“You can’t please everyone. We feel like we’ve got a heck of a nice matchup.”

Nonetheless, even ESPN analyst Kirk Herbstreit questioned the pairing despite the fact that his network will air the game.

“You look at Michigan and Virginia Tech both bringing a lot of fans,” he said. “But is that what it’s come down to?

“Kellen Moore and Boise State, Baylor and Robert Griffin, Kansas State and Bill Snyder is the coach of the year. But the BCS at-large selection is all about how teams come into cities and fill up hotel rooms.”

That had been the reason Michigan (10-2) had been widely anticipated to be invited. The Wolverines have not been in a BCS bowl since the 2007 their fans are known for traveling well. Plus, Michigan had not been to the Sugar Bowl since 1984.

But Virginia Tech (11-2) was a surprise. Not only were the Hokies upset by Clemson, 38-10, in Saturday’s ACC championship game, but they’ve had trouble selling tickets to the Orange Bowl three of the past four years in which they played.

But veteran Hokies Coach Frank Beamer said that Virginia Tech fans would travel well to New Orleans.

“I don’t think there’s any question about it,” he said. “Our fans are going to be tremendously excited to be playing a program that’s so well respected as Michigan is.

“And we’ve had great experiences in New Orleans before.”

This will be Virginia Tech’s fourth Sugar Bowl. The Hokies lost to unbeaten Auburn, 16-13, in 2005 and more memorably fell to Florida State, 46-29, in 2000 for the national championship. Virginia Tech also defeated Texas, 28-10, in 1995.

Beamer, whose 251 career victories make him the active career leader since the dismissal of Penn State’s Joe Paterno, also said he had no doubts about his team’s worthiness for the game despite a weak non-conference schedule and Saturday’s decisive loss. Clemson also handed Virginia Tech its only other loss, 27-3, on Oct. 1.

“I’m proud of our football team and what we’ve been able to beat didn’t seem weak to me,” he said. “And until last night, we were ranked fifth.

“We only lost to one team; we just happened to lose to them twice.”

First-year Michigan Coach Brady Hoke said the Sugar Bowl selection was a tribute to his seniors, some of whom were recruited by former Coach Lloyd Carr before playing for three seasons under Rich Rodriguez.

“Our seniors have done everything they’ve been asked,” he said. “And their leadership and how they’ve worked together as a football team is the reason we’re in the Sugar Bowl.

“It’s a great reward for them.”

The selection of Michigan and Virginia Tech, who have never meet before, capped a weekend for the Sugar Bowl that included both the expected and the unexpected.

The expected was LSU’s maintaining the No.1 spot in the BCS rankings, which gave the Sugar Bowl the first pick among the available at-large teams to fill the bowl’s anchor spot for the SEC champion. It’s the sixth straight year the SEC champion has played in the national championship game instead of the Sugar Bowl.

The unexpected was Houston’s loss to Southern Miss in the Conference USA championship game, knocking the previously unbeaten Cougars out of an almost-certain Sugar Bowl berth.

Then, Texas Christian, the highest ranking champion of a non-BCS conference, remained at No. 18 in the standings and thus failed to reach automatic qualifying status as well.

That left the Sugar Bowl with the first pick among No. 4 Stanford, No. 7 Boise State, No. 8 Kansas State, No. 12 Baylor, No. 14 Oklahoma and Big East champion West Virginia plus the two teams it eventually did take.

Michigan wound up being the first pick, and after the Fiesta Bowl tabbed Stanford, the Sugar took Virginia Tech, leaving the Orange Bowl with automatic-qualifier West Virginia to face Clemson.

Hoolahan said Kansas State was the team most under consideration after Virginia Tech, adding that if No. 6 Arkansas or No. 9 South Carolina had been eligible (BCS rules allow a conference only one at-large team and Alabama filled that spot for the SEC), the selection would have been different.

“We went into Saturday with every contingency planned out,” he said. “We came out with a very nice fit.”
http://www.nola.com/sugarbowl/index.ssf ... iring.html

Thanks, Ed Gein42

Posted: **Mon Dec 05, 2011 5:37 pm**

The more I think about it, the more BSU got jobbed.

We can bitch about their schedule, and rightly so, but they beat a good UGA team, their one loss was to a very good TCU team, and they pretty much laid monster-steamrollings on everyone else they stepped to.

And they're headed to... Vegas?

That's pretty messed up.

Posted: **Mon Dec 05, 2011 6:13 pm**

I have mixed feelings. I’d rather see BSU play than Va Tech. On the other hand, for BSU it’s just one more shitty opponent on a schedule filled with shitty opponents. Best case would have them matching up with Houston.

Posted: **Mon Dec 05, 2011 6:53 pm**

Nice to see the Big East had three teams go bowling.

Posted: **Mon Dec 05, 2011 6:55 pm**

Way too much work picking all of those games right now. I’ll focus on the Big 10 which sends a record 10 teams to bowl games. Proves that ~~scheduling weak OOC pays off~~ this is the deepest conference in the country.

Little Caesars
Western Michigan vs. Purdue Detroit
Purdue whips Screwball’s community college alma mater.

Insight
Iowa vs. Oklahoma Tempe, Ariz.
Horrible mis-match. Iowa takes it on the chin.

Meineke Car Care of Texas
Texas A&M vs. Northwestern Houston
I believe Northwestern’s last bowl win was around 1949. They’re due.

Kraft Fight Hunger
Illinois vs. UCLA San Francisco
Ideal match-up in the lame duck coaches bowl. Illini win one for the Zooker.

TicketCity
Houston vs. Penn State Dallas
Houston finally played a ranked team and got spanked. Now they get a ranked team with a very good defense. PSU.

Outback
Michigan State vs. Georgia Tampa, Fla.
I’d like to pick MSU, but they’ll have another letdown from missing out on the BCS again. Don’t worry, Sparty, we’ll send some coin your way.

Capital One
Nebraska vs. South Carolina Orlando, Fla.
Pinkshirts let down the B1G in their inaugural season. SC wins.

Taxslayer.com Gator Bowl
Ohio State vs. Florida Jacksonville, Fla.
New thugs vs the old thugs. tOSU in a close one.

Rose Bowl Game presented by Vizio
Wisconsin vs. Oregon Pasadena, Calif.
This should be great game. Probably turns on special teams, so Oregon wins.

Allstate Sugar
Michigan vs. Virginia Tech New Orleans
Dennard runs wild as the ACC loses yet another BCS bowl.

B1G finishes 6-4 in the bowls.

Posted: **Mon Dec 05, 2011 6:58 pm**

Sudden Sam wrote:
Papa Willie wrote:Houston & Penn State is inaccurate. Let's fix that.

Ouch! You think they'll beat the Cougs?

Well, you could just check out his picks in the first post. He picked every damn game. Google's no help here, BTW.

Posted: **Mon Dec 05, 2011 10:55 pm**

Goober McTuber wrote:The Cotton Bowl has a better match-up than the Sugar or the Orange. The Outback and the Capital One are probably better as well.

The Big 12 was the toughest conference in the nation and got one BCS entrant, while the ACC got two? Of course, it's all about the money - that is, the teams that historically travel well.

If the criteria were solely that a teams fanbase travels well, K-State would be in the Sugar Bowl... unless that committee is completely ignorant of the history of K-State in bowl games. They would have completely overrun Bourbon Street.

As is, they'll completely overrun Dallas. While not a BCS bowl, the Cotton bowl is now a pretty good destination, playing in Jerrahs house.

Posted: **Mon Dec 05, 2011 11:26 pm**

Papa Willie wrote:
Van wrote:Check your math. Since 1991 (the last twenty years) the Pac 12 and Big 10 have split in the Rose Bowl, 8-8.

January 1, 1991 Washington 46 Iowa 34
January 1, 1992 Washington 34 Michigan 14
January 1, 1993 Michigan 38 Washington 31
January 1, 1994 Wisconsin 21 UCLA 16
January 2, 1995 Penn State 38 Oregon 20
January 1, 1996 Southern California 41 Northwestern 32
January 1, 1997 Ohio State 20 Arizona State 17
January 1, 1998 Michigan 21 Washington State 16
January 1, 1999 Wisconsin 38 UCLA 31
January 1, 2000 Wisconsin 17 Stanford 9
January 1, 2001 Washington 34 Purdue 24
January 3, 2002* Miami (FL) 37 Nebraska 14
January 1, 2003 Oklahoma 34 Washington State 14
January 1, 2004 Southern California 28 Michigan 14
January 1, 2005 Texas 38 Michigan 37
January 4, 2006* Texas 41 Southern California 38
January 1, 2007 Southern California 32 Michigan 18
January 1, 2008 Southern California 49 Illinois 17
January 1, 2009 Southern California 38 Penn State 24
January 1, 2010 Ohio State 26 Oregon 17
January 1, 2011 TCU 21 Wisconsin 19
I went back to the '92 Bowl (which would actually have been 20 bowls through the last one) and was looking at the Pac 10 did - so the Pac 10 was 6-11 in that time frame - 7-11 by yours.

Wrong. Even if you only go back to '92 then the Pac 10 is 7-8 straight-up against the Big 10, not 6-11 or 7-11. No matter how you slice it the Big 10 has not beaten the Pac 10 eleven times over the last twenty years.

Besides, the bottom line is the Big 10 is 1-7 in its last eight Rose Bowl appearances, and that's far more relevant now than anything that happened twenty years ago.

Posted: **Tue Dec 06, 2011 12:21 am**

Big Ten

Little Caesars
Western Michigan vs. Purdue Detroit
Alex Carder is the best QB nobody's heard of. A legit NFL prospect, and Purdue will struggle to stop WMU's offense.

Insight
Iowa vs. Oklahoma Tempe, Ariz.
Wow, what a fall for OU. A legit title contender only a few short weeks ago, to playing a hapless Hawkeye team in one of many Who Gives a Fuck bowls sponsored by Sirfindafold. Only chance Iowa has is if OU doesn't care. Still, I'll take OU on talent alone.

Meineke Car Care of Texas
Texas A&M vs. Northwestern Houston
I think Northwestern will want this one much, much more but they are too porous on d. They will not be able to muster enough stops to hang with A&M in the end. Persa can only carry them so far. A&M will simply out-talent the Cats. Plus, they get 'em in Tejas.

Kraft Fight Hunger
Illinois vs. UCLA San Francisco
Illini had talent on both sides of the ball all year, just never put it together. Maybe their interim head coach will have a clue.

TicketCity
Houston vs. Penn State Dallas
Difficult one to predict, imo. If PSU can muster any offense at all, which I think they can against Houston's D, I like the Nambla Lions.

Outback
Michigan State vs. Georgia Tampa, Fla.
If MSU can shake off the Wisky loss and get focused, I think they win this game. Seems like a very even match up.

Capital One
Nebraska vs. South Carolina Orlando, Fla.
Simply put, South Carolina is the better team. I will be surprised if NU scores more than 10 points, and I will be rooting for the Cocks to spurt all over the Pinkshirts.

Taxslayer.com Gator Bowl
Ohio State vs. Florida Jacksonville, Fla.
UF really hasn't impressed at any point this year. OSU improved as the season went on.

Rose Bowl Game presented by Vizio
Wisconsin vs. Oregon Pasadena, Calif.
Whoever has the ball last wins. Can't see either defense doing much to stop the other. I'll take Wisky since they don't turn it over or make mistakes. Oregon might consider converting to a hail mary base offense.

Allstate Sugar
Michigan vs. Virginia Tech New Orleans
Jesus, the BCS isn't even trying anymore to look fair or just in their selections. Good for them, I guess, for blatantly shedding that fake skin. I'll take Michigan since Beamer's been at this for about 80 years now and looks like he's just too tired to care anymore.

6-4 Big 10

Posted: **Tue Dec 06, 2011 12:42 am**

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:Big Ten

Rose Bowl Game presented by Vizio
Wisconsin vs. Oregon Pasadena, Calif.
Whoever has the ball last wins. Can't see either defense doing much to stop the other. I'll take Wisky since they don't turn it over or make mistakes. Oregon might consider converting to a hail mary base offense.

Despite the fact that Wisconsin is #8 nationally in total defense, I think they will have some difficulty handling Oregon's speed and pace of play. Wisky does make mistakes, mostly on special teams, and that could be really costly.

Hail Mary should be capitalized, motherfucker.

Posted: **Tue Dec 06, 2011 12:50 am**

What it boils down to is Wisconsin needs to score when on offense. On defense, they need to prevent Oregon from scoring. If they can score more points they will win the game.

-Shoalzie

Posted: **Tue Dec 06, 2011 1:34 am**

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:What it boils down to is Wisconsin needs to score when on offense. On defense, they need to prevent Oregon from scoring. If they can score more points they will win the game.

-Shoalzie

you forgot the part where the wojo and mitch albom's love child ruminates on the emotional context.

Posted: **Tue Dec 06, 2011 2:00 am**

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote: Allstate Sugar
Michigan vs. Virginia Tech New Orleans
Jesus, the BCS isn't even trying anymore to look fair or just in their selections. Good for them, I guess, for blatantly shedding that fake skin. I'll take Michigan since Beamer's been at this for about 80 years now and looks like he's just too tired to care anymore.

bwah, when has it ever tried to aside from post hoc reasoning? otherwise, funny everyone's all up in boise's ass when it comes to a one-loss team deserving an at-large bid into the bcs but will get the guns out if you mention them playing for the mnc when they're undefeated. guess we found that particular sweet spot for sam and his ilk, eh. re: michigan, the only real argument against their inclusion is that boise and kstate should have been chosen ahead of them, but that's only because of the ranking system everyone bitches about ad nauseum but is suddenly sacrosanct right now. boise > michigan i'll give you, but not kstate. both 10-2, but one of our wins isn't a 10-7 home escape against a d-1aa school, nor were there three straight games giving up 50+ points. our two losses were on the road and could have turned on a play or two (or even a review). not going jon there, just comparing the "quality" of our losses.

as far as any michigan vs. msu whining: eh, that's what happens when you reach for the stars. this has nothing to do with brand name considering were the roles reversed and michigan picked up their third loss in the ccg while state watched, then state would be in the capital one bowl because boise got invited to the sugar instead, hahahahahahahahahaaha.

Posted: **Tue Dec 06, 2011 3:06 am**

Yeah, it's not about brand. The Sugar Bowl accidentally spilled a bottle of White-Out on all those other teams ranked ahead of you. Happens all the time.

Whining? You must've been building huts in Africa when cfb fan's favorite pastime became lamenting over the BCS, even the hoards without a dog in the fight. "Sugar Bowl" should be a badge of pride, yet Michigan's a punch line for being there. This is a problem.

For me, it was Rose Bowl or bust. Beyond that I didn't care who went where, because when left to the devices of the BCS, it was a foregone conclusion their corruption would fuck shit up. As for Michigan vs MSU, no whining is necessary. MSU's got nothing to prove there. To the rich and glamorous and Tied for 3rd Place in Conference go the BCS spoils I guess - though everyone will just facepalm and shake their heads - while MSU will have to settle for actually having the better football team. I'm just trying to figure out if it's good or bad to have a superior opponent in an inferior bowl game.

Posted: **Tue Dec 06, 2011 3:20 am**

maybe you should wait to reply until after you're done pretending you don't have a boo boo over this whole thing. i said branding wasn't an issue w/r/t why michigan's going to the bcs and state isn't. please explain how it is if i'm wrong. be sure to address the point where state is outside of the top 14 and therefore ineligible for an at-large invite. i also said the bcs was horseshit from the start, so why don't you try to argue that with me by saying the exact same thing i am.

there are four teams ahead of michigan in the bcs standings who were eligible for at-large invites: boise, kansas state, vatech, and baylor. aside from who travels well, boise got ho-bagged; baylor has three losses and when has a three-loss team ever gotten an at-large invite; i already went over why michigan has a pretty good argument about why they deserve the invite more than kstate; and vatech and their acc schedule is the punchline here, not michigan.

otherwise, hope you enjoyed your time in the sunshine. best run you've ever put together and still couldn't get over the hump.

Posted: **Tue Dec 06, 2011 12:33 pm**

Chris Petersen, who is not the type given to complain about much publicly, gave a press conference whereby he expressed some pretty harsh (for him) opinions on the BCS....the only reason I post this link is because I've never heard him say anything negative about the system before this....you can hear the disappointment in his voice at Boise being overlooked...

http://www.ktvb.com/sports/Coach-Pete-s ... 58593.html

Posted: **Tue Dec 06, 2011 12:51 pm**

Felix wrote:Chris Petersen, who is not the type given to complain about much publicly, gave a press conference whereby he expressed some pretty harsh (for him) opinions on the BCS....the only reason I post this link is because I've never heard him say anything negative about the system before this....you can hear the disappointment in his voice at Boise being overlooked...

http://www.ktvb.com/sports/Coach-Pete-s ... 58593.html

Jesus Christ, you fucking retard... not all of us get our news from the pony express... being that we don't live on the North Pole like you.

I don't watch much tv and I've seen the interview a couple of times on espn just while making breakfast and making calls to the east coast.

How about you give us a history lesson and let us know that Boise State was once a "Jr. college" much like
Stanfraud.

This isn't the "NFL forum" where your leader (poptard) knows as much about "Social History"... as the common rat.

mkay ???

Posted: **Tue Dec 06, 2011 2:04 pm**

M2 wrote:I don't watch much tv and I've seen the interview a couple of times on espn just while making breakfast and making calls to the east coast.

given the fact that he just gave the interview yesterday afternoon, if ESPN is playing it that much then it must be of some significance.....I was thinking maybe some people who hadn't seen it might be interested.....

Jesus Christ, you fucking retard... not all of us get our news from the pony express... being that we don't live on the North Pole like you.
How about you give us a history lesson and let us know that Boise State was once a "Jr. college" much like
Stanfraud.

This isn't the "NFL forum" where your leader (poptard) knows as much about "Social History"... as the common rat.

mkay ???

are you shitty me?

thanks for the sig dude.....

Posted: **Tue Dec 06, 2011 2:14 pm**

The BCS sucks harder than Toolio on a Friday night in the Castro. I had not seen the interview. I think it’s great that we have a coach speaking up and going against the party line. Hopefully more coaches will speak up.

Posted: **Tue Dec 06, 2011 2:16 pm**

Sudden Sam wrote:M Club makes a good point. I have ranted and raved about Boise's weakass schedule and yet suggested they got hosed with their bowl invite.
I still think Boise should be playing in a better bowl and against a better opponent than they got.

that's the problem with being in a conference like the Mountain West, is that you're tied to bowl games.....the Maaco Bowl got first pick and took Boise State...that's just the way that goes....

But I have to agree that a 10-2 Michigan should go to the Sugar over an 11-1 Boise State. I could see BSU being UM's opponent, but only because I despise VaTech and I think the ACc is a joke of a conference.

I have no problem with Michigan being in the Sugar Bowl....they're a good team that travels well and should be playing there.....

I did jump at the BCS's exclusion of 11-1 Boise...musta been a sympathy thing. But see, I don't mind adjusting my thinking on matters such as these.

Note: I have congratulated Hoke and UM on an excellent season elsewhere.

the thing is Sam, this is the fourth time Boise State has been in the top 10 and been excluded from a BCS at large berth and that just doesn't make much sense to me, especially given that the Sugar Bowl opted to take a team that shouldn't even be allowed to buy tickets to the Sugar Bowl, more less play in it.....

Posted: **Tue Dec 06, 2011 2:24 pm**

Alabama is simply too slow to play football in the PAC 12 week in and week out.

They'd be lucky to win a few games.

Hell, they gave up 21 points and 350 yards to a "high school" (Georgia Southern)

The last time "Alabama" played a team from west of "the Rockies"... they were blown out in their own backyard (Utah).

It's best that they stick to playing four high schools a year and a horrible in conference schedule. So, they can get to the MNC without having to play in their own CCG.

Posted: **Wed Dec 07, 2011 12:23 am**

M Club wrote:i said branding wasn't an issue w/r/t why michigan's going to the bcs and state isn't.

Nobody said it was. Seems you're arguing with yourself on that one. I knew once MSU lost the CCG they wouldn't be eligible for a BCS game. That's why I said it was Rose Bowl or bust.

I take issue with the system as a whole, as does 99.999999% of college football fans. You call that whining. So be it.

Posted: **Wed Dec 07, 2011 2:09 am**

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:
M Club wrote:i said branding wasn't an issue w/r/t why michigan's going to the bcs and state isn't.
Nobody said it was. Seems you're arguing with yourself on that one.

:? :? :?

i must have misread this then:

Yeah, it's not about brand. The Sugar Bowl accidentally spilled a bottle of White-Out on all those other teams ranked ahead of you. Happens all the time.

you must have lobotomized yourself just before bringing up whining. i was specifically talking about the back and forth between umich and msu fans, not people criticizing the bcs as a whole. yes, the system sucks. i'm part of your occupy bcs and am not particularly whoooohooo because we're in the sugar bowl instead of the gator. well i am, but only because i don't have to wake up early this year to watch. bowl games are stupid, the world knows it, yet your team gets the predictable shaft and omg the conspiracies!!!!! next thing you know you sound like drew sharp or, even worse, this guy.

Posted: **Wed Dec 07, 2011 3:17 am**

M Club wrote:
MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:
M Club wrote:i said branding wasn't an issue w/r/t why michigan's going to the bcs and state isn't.
Nobody said it was. Seems you're arguing with yourself on that one.
:? :? :?

i must have misread this then:

Yeah, it's not about brand. The Sugar Bowl accidentally spilled a bottle of White-Out on all those other teams ranked ahead of you. Happens all the time.

you must have lobotomized yourself just before bringing up whining. i was specifically talking about the back and forth between umich and msu fans, not people criticizing the bcs as a whole. yes, the system sucks. i'm part of your occupy bcs and am not particularly whoooohooo because we're in the sugar bowl instead of the gator. well i am, but only because i don't have to wake up early this year to watch. bowl games are stupid, the world knows it, yet your team gets the predictable shaft and omg the conspiracies!!!!! next thing you know you sound like drew sharp or, even worse, this guy.

Once you two get going, I feel guilty carrying the "last post whore" mantle. Just sayin'.

Posted: **Wed Dec 07, 2011 3:40 am**

Goober McTuber wrote: Once you two get going, I feel guilty carrying the "last post whore" mantle. Just sayin'.

Your title is "last word whore", dumbass. It says so right under your fag nic.

But don't despair, you've still got "trite ankle biter" going for you.

Posted: **Wed Dec 07, 2011 3:51 am**

Goober McTuber wrote: Once you two get going, I feel guilty carrying the "last post whore" mantle. Just sayin'.

mgo and i get going? you must have been too busy getting the last word in some other thread to have noticed all of two replies to each other. homeboy and i generally see eye to eye save the occasional good-natured hahahahaha state sucks we beat you four straight years! not quite the five-times-a-day, 20-quote embed, you're fat, you're old back-and-forth between you and fatty mcbuttspray, but we're trying.

Posted: **Wed Dec 07, 2011 4:03 am**

yeah, I love how attention whore Goobs feels the need to embed quotes ad-infinitum to get in yet another worthless one liner.

certainly he's not the only dipshit guilty of this, but he's the lead attack poodle in most every case and the other poodles dutifully get in line.

Posted: **Wed Dec 07, 2011 8:27 pm**

M Club wrote:
MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:
M Club wrote:i said branding wasn't an issue w/r/t why michigan's going to the bcs and state isn't.
Nobody said it was. Seems you're arguing with yourself on that one.
:? :? :?

i must have misread this then:

Yeah, it's not about brand. The Sugar Bowl accidentally spilled a bottle of White-Out on all those other teams ranked ahead of you. Happens all the time.

Yeah, you misread it. "Other teams ranked ahead of you" should've tipped you off, as MSU is ranked BEHIND you. I never complained about MSU not being in a BCS game. You brought up MSU vs UM on your own, in response to my saying this Sugar Bowl matchup is a joke...which it is, and everyone including you knows it.

Posted: **Thu Dec 08, 2011 3:27 am**

total joke. i'd much rather see us play boise than vatech.

i brought up msu because you're an msu fan and i figured you were privy to all the whining from your people about michigan going to the bcs instead of them, as if the sugar bowl invite actually came down to just those two teams. lead culprit: kurt cousins. should probably be a little more "eh, don't get to play in a bcs bowl because we were too busy winning the division."

don't know why you're going on about the teams ranked ahead of michigan: two of them are sec teams so can't get invited, one of them parlayed the schedule-softly-to-get-a-bcs-invite strategy into a bcs invite, one has three losses, and the other has a horrible metric profile. boise got ass fucked, though. or maybe now you're telling us that rankings are the end all, be all?

Posted: **Thu Dec 08, 2011 4:49 am**

Jsc810 wrote:Mid major teams like Boise, TCU, and Houston should go to BCS bowls, if they go undefeated.

I'm going to mark this day down as the day BSU changed from being a "mid-major" to not a "mid-major"....now that they're moving to an AQ conference (AQ for the time being), they'll no longer have to go undefeated to get to a BCS game....

just win the conference and you're in.....

weird

T1B

Your immediate bowl picks.

Re: Your immediate bowl picks.

Re: Your immediate bowl picks.

Re: Your immediate bowl picks.

Re: Your immediate bowl picks.

Re: Your immediate bowl picks.

Re: Your immediate bowl picks.

Re: Your immediate bowl picks.

Re: Your immediate bowl picks.

Re: Your immediate bowl picks.

Re: Your immediate bowl picks.

Re: Your immediate bowl picks.

Re: Your immediate bowl picks.

Re: Your immediate bowl picks.

Re: Your immediate bowl picks.

Re: Your immediate bowl picks.

Re: Your immediate bowl picks.

Re: Your immediate bowl picks.

Re: Your immediate bowl picks.

Re: Your immediate bowl picks.

Re: Your immediate bowl picks.

Re: Your immediate bowl picks.

Re: Your immediate bowl picks.

Re: Your immediate bowl picks.

Re: Your immediate bowl picks.

Re: Your immediate bowl picks.

Re: Your immediate bowl picks.

Re: Your immediate bowl picks.

Re: Your immediate bowl picks.

Re: Your immediate bowl picks.

Re: Your immediate bowl picks.

Re: Your immediate bowl picks.

Re: Your immediate bowl picks.

Re: Your immediate bowl picks.

Re: Your immediate bowl picks.

Re: Your immediate bowl picks.

Re: Your immediate bowl picks.

Re: Your immediate bowl picks.

Re: Your immediate bowl picks.

Re: Your immediate bowl picks.

Re: Your immediate bowl picks.