- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: BCS Super Bowl: Falcons vs. Patriots...
Posted on 1/16/11 at 11:16 pm to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 1/16/11 at 11:16 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
fluke games happen
NOT IF YOU'RE THE BEST TEAM!!!
ARGHHH!!!!
0
Posted on 1/16/11 at 11:17 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
who was playing for a shot at the title in the fiesta?
UConn and Seattle got just as close to a title. Except UConn and the Big East made a shite ton more money than Boise and the WAC did. All thanks to the corrupt BCS.
This post was edited on 1/16/11 at 11:19 pm
Posted on 1/16/11 at 11:20 pm to RockChalkTiger
Why don't we just forget the regular season and have a 32 team playoff and that's it?
Posted on 1/16/11 at 11:21 pm to RockChalkTiger
quote:
UConn and Seattle got just as close to a title.
not true at all
seattle had a shot at the title
UConn played in an exhibition game
not comparable at all
quote:
and the Big East made a shite ton more money than Boise and the WAC did
the amount per team isn't that much
quote:
All thanks to the corrupt BCS.
what is corrupt about a group of bowls making a contract with teams who generate revenue and attract better tv deals?
if BSU and the WAC are complaining about money, why don't they get better deals themselves?
Posted on 1/16/11 at 11:23 pm to RockChalkTiger
quote:
UConn and Seattle got just as close to a title
How?
Thankfully, the BCS has it correct and a team like UCONN had no shot at a title(unlike your claim).
Posted on 1/16/11 at 11:25 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
generate revenue and attract better tv deals
Yeah, the UConn-OU Fiesta did much better than the Boise-OU Fiesta. Much more competitive, too.
Boise and the WAC have one option. Take the shitty deal the BCS puts on the table, or take nothing. Get rid of the BCS, and everyone has an equal seat at the table.
Posted on 1/16/11 at 11:28 pm to shel311
quote:
How?
Did either team win one this year? Then they both got just as close. UConn had a shot until they lost. So did Seattle.
If you're going to let an unranked UConn play in a BCS game for winning a shitty conference, why would you keep Seattle out of the playoffs for winning a shitty division? Both teams qualified for their sport's postseason by beating the other crappy teams they happen to be grouped with.
This post was edited on 1/16/11 at 11:29 pm
Posted on 1/16/11 at 11:28 pm to RockChalkTiger
quote:
Boise and the WAC have one option. Take the shitty deal the BCS puts on the table, or take nothing.
why don't they make their own deals to make more money?
i mean i hope you realize that the BCS money the SEC and Big10 get are shite compared to their TV deals and home-game revenue.
trust me they like the BCS money, but a school like LSU gets maybe $3-4M max from the BCS money the SEC receives. that's nothing compared to the $17M or so it gets from the CBS/ESPN deal or the $3-5M per home game
quote:
Get rid of the BCS, and everyone has an equal seat at the table.
if the WAC had an equal seat at the table, it would have a tv deal worth a shite on its own
when the WAC is a producer, it will be able to make its own deals on a level similar to the BCS
Posted on 1/16/11 at 11:29 pm to RockChalkTiger
quote:
If you're going to let an unranked UConn play in a BCS game for winning a shitty conference, why would you keep Seattle out of the playoffs for winning a shitty division?
1 gives you a shot at the title
1 gives you an exhibition game
quote:
Both teams qualified for their sport's pstseason
but only 1 was given a playoff entitlement. only 1 had a shot at the title
Posted on 1/16/11 at 11:30 pm to RockChalkTiger
quote:
Yeah, the UConn-OU Fiesta did much better than the Boise-OU Fiesta. Much more competitive, too. Boise and the WAC have one option. Take the shitty deal the BCS puts on the table, or take nothing. Get rid of the BCS, and everyone has an equal seat at the table.
If you are against the BCS, you are against freedom of contract, which makes you a commie and I'm sticking to it.
Posted on 1/16/11 at 11:30 pm to RockChalkTiger
quote:
Did either team win one this year?
The Panthers got just as close to a title as Oregon did this year. So yea, that logic makes zero sense when you're just playing the result that Seattle lost.
quote:
If you're going to let an unranked UConn play in a BCS game for winning a shitty conference, why would you keep Seattle out of the playoffs for winning a shitty division?
Because one can win a title and one cannot.
quote:
Both teams qualified for their sport's postseason by beating the other crappy teams they happen to be grouped with.
1 qualified for a chance to win a title, 1 did not.
Posted on 1/16/11 at 11:33 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
when the WAC is a producer
It will never be a producer, because it is dying. But the Mountain West (which Boise joins next year) could potentially be a producer (it had the #2 team in the final rankings this year) if it wasn't constantly being raided by conferences that have exclusive access to the biggest stage in the sport. Which affects recruiting, TV deals, etc. The 6 BCS leagues have no interest in giving the MWC a seat at the table, despite a proven record of performance, because they have no incentive to split the pie any further. It's much easier to deal with any threats through decapitation than by dealing with them equitably.
Posted on 1/16/11 at 11:33 pm to RockChalkTiger
quote:
Did either team win one this year? Then they both got just as close. UConn had a shot until they lost. So did Seattle.
If you're going to let an unranked UConn play in a BCS game for winning a shitty conference, why would you keep Seattle out of the playoffs for winning a shitty division? Both teams qualified for their sport's postseason by beating the other crappy teams they happen to be grouped with.
You can't be serious
Posted on 1/16/11 at 11:34 pm to RockChalkTiger
You sound like such a bleeding heart.
Posted on 1/16/11 at 11:34 pm to Teddy Ruxpin
quote:
makes you a commie
Communism isn't a bad idea, it just hasn't been tried anywhere with the resources and ingenuity to make it work. Americans can do anything, including make communism work. Socialism, too.
Posted on 1/16/11 at 11:35 pm to RockChalkTiger
quote:
Communism isn't a bad idea, it just hasn't been tried anywhere with the resources and ingenuity to make it work. Americans can do anything, including make communism work. Socialism, too.
Starting to make more sense....
Posted on 1/16/11 at 11:36 pm to shel311
quote:
1 qualified for a chance to win a title, 1 did not.
Which is the whole problem. One sport has a playoff, like the rest of the sporting world. One does not. If college football had a playoff (like in 1-AA), UConn would have qualified. Just like Seattle did.
Posted on 1/16/11 at 11:37 pm to RockChalkTiger
A team that has a sub .500 record does not deserve a title shot.
Posted on 1/16/11 at 11:38 pm to Teddy Ruxpin
quote:
You sound like such a bleeding heart.
Yep, proud Liberal. Not even hiding behind the "progressive" label. But lets try to keep this to sports, and not devolve into ad hominem arguments.
Posted on 1/16/11 at 11:39 pm to KingofthePoint
quote:
A team that has a sub .500 record does not deserve a title shot.
And they've never gotten won. Seattle will not make the Super Bowl this year. The playoff system works.
Page 5 of 6
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News