06-24-2008, 01:35 AM | #41 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 9,483
|
Quote:
1. BCS is basically a little monopoly 2. The mids got the shaft 3. This perpetuates the haves/have nots because all the money continues to go to the haves. I guess it doesnt bother me that much. I respect what you are saying, though.
__________________
Fitter. Happier. More Productive. "Everyone is against me. Everyone is fawning for 3D's attention and defending him." -- SeattleUte |
|
06-24-2008, 02:04 AM | #42 |
Board Pinhead
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In the basement of my house, Murray, Utah.
Posts: 15,941
|
I suppose I feel this way because I've never been a fan of any of the BCS teams. I'm a Ute fan and went to Marist. Both are considered inferior by the cartel.
__________________
"The beauty of baseball is not having to explain it." - Chuck Shriver "This is now the joke that stupid people laugh at." - Christopher Hitchens on IQ jokes about GWB. |
06-24-2008, 04:10 AM | #43 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 9,483
|
Quote:
It isn't the fact that someone threw a party. It is because we were left off the guest list. If the BCS announced tomorrow that it was sacking the Big East and inviting the MWC instead, BYU would be very happy with the BCS and everything that it provides. Again, to reiterate, if I could have it my way, I would do away with the BCS and do a 16-team playoff. Since that isn't possible, I have no real beef with the BCS and do not find it unfair.
__________________
Fitter. Happier. More Productive. "Everyone is against me. Everyone is fawning for 3D's attention and defending him." -- SeattleUte |
|
06-24-2008, 08:05 AM | #44 | |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Boise
Posts: 261
|
Quote:
While this perception is generally true, there are a lot of non-AQ teams that have better football than a lot of AQ teams. The real reason we are not in a BCS conference is because we migrated west to avoid religious persecution due to our polygamous nature, new book of scripture, etc., making the desert to bloom like a rose while avoiding the temptations of prosperity in California. IOW, we are not BCS because we are located in a sparsely populated area and/or are a religious institution (factors that have no bearing on the actual game). |
|
06-24-2008, 02:16 PM | #45 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 9,483
|
Quote:
I disagree that there is a perception across the board that all BCS teams are better than non-BCS teams.....I don't see anyone lauding Vanderbilt football over Fresno State football, for example. Speaking of whether the perception is true, what is our record against BCS teams? We have played good ones and sucky ones. How have we done overall? Pretty lousy, actually. And we are allegedly one of the best of ALL non-BCS teams...if not THE best. So back to your original premise....the reason the perception exists is because...well.....it's pretty much true.
__________________
Fitter. Happier. More Productive. "Everyone is against me. Everyone is fawning for 3D's attention and defending him." -- SeattleUte |
|
06-25-2008, 11:37 AM | #46 | |
Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 283
|
Quote:
The problem with the BCS is Utah 2004. They pretty much dominated everyone they played. They obliterated the champion of a BCS conference. As I watched the Fiesta Bowl (yes, I cheered for Utah – I generally do when they are not playing BYU), I noticed that almost all of the discussion centered on how great it was that they got invited to play in a BCS game. I kept waiting for the discussion to focus on how they had been ripped off. For weeks afterwards, I kept telling my Ute acquaintances to wipe that smile off their face and get mad. But they took the money, smiled, and shut up. They bent over and took it, willingly, smilingly. How good was that team? Therein lies the rub. We don’t know, and won’t. With George Mason, we do. They were final four good. No, they didn’t win it all. Neither did BYU or Utah in 1998 hoops. But the possibility wasn’t just theoretical. It was very real, especially for the Utes on the morning of March 30, 1998. We know how good they were. Was Utah the best football team in the country in 2004? Most people would say “probably not”, but that is all based upon subjective opinions. Utah never got a chance to see how good they were. |
|
06-25-2008, 02:19 PM | #47 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,177
|
Bottom line on BCS.
1. It's a bad way to choose your champion when a playoff would be so easy, and the fans want it so bad. 2. It's reasonably fair in its current state, both in team selection and in revenue distribution. 3. It's a major improvement on the bowl situation of pre-1995. |
Bookmarks |
|
|