Fanblogs.com - Latest Comments in BCS Busting - Part II

Re: BCS Busting - Part II

Ben Prather — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 09:22:56 -0000

UPDATE:

Only 7 BCS non AQ conference members are still in the picture, with the loss of Air Force and LA Tech.

Wisconsin got one of their needed losses, and Michigan has been eliminated.

Oregon and Oregon State's losses greatly limit the PAC 10's chances. They now need California to win out and have USC with only a single loss to California to get two teams into the top 14.

With losses by both Connecticut and South Florida the Big East now joins the ACC in that both are mathematically eliminated as a potential 2 BCS team conference.

Re: BCS Busting - Part II

Ben Prather — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 01:00:58 -0000

The Rose Bowl has a contract with the PAC 10 and the Big 10. The Fiesta Bowl has a contract with the Big 12. The Sugar Bowl has a contract with the SEC. The Orange Bowl has a contract with the ACC.

These are the five BCS contracted conferences. The Big East is an Automatic Qualifier at large of the BSC bowls.

They will be in, but their placement is not predetermined. I think this year an Orange Bowl appearance is in everyone's best interest.

Re: BCS Busting - Part II

Zac — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 23:30:51 -0000

Ben, purely from a business standpoint, I can see some of these bowl "alliances". I can't see conference alliances to BCS bowls. Those are supposed to be for the top teams, and there's no guarantee the winner of either the ACC or Big East would wind up in the Top-10. Now, obviously (again purely from a business standpoint) it makes sense that the BCS bowls invite those top teams for the best or most popular match-ups. It shouldn't matter whether a given BCS bowl coincidently pits an ACC team with the Big East, but it shouldn't be automatically aligned that way. Unfortunately, for the time being, that's the way it is.

By the way, if you recall, last year's Orange Bowl matched VA Tech against KS, which KS won. The Orange Bowl committee has the option to take a Big-12 team over a Big East team, if the match-up is considered to be better. For the time being, I think the ACC is the only conference with a lock on the Orange Bowl, which I guess they'll be renaming it the Dolphin Bowl.

Re: BCS Busting - Part II

Ben Prather — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 23:44:34 -0000

I seem to remember the Fiesta Bowl from 2004. Great game against the Big East that was...

The truth is that is a good way to travel. It is the same argument as to why the SEC and PAC 10 don't play as often, and why we have geographically aligned conferences to start with.

Personally I want the MWC to have some competition. Let the ACC and Big East enjoy their automatic bids in the Orange Bowl against each other. We will be happier with the #2 team from the Big 12 or SEC and a chance to prove ourselves against a real opponent.

Re: BCS Busting - Part II

Cougar_Fan — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 20:38:04 -0000

in fact I believe BYU's matched up with Florida State next year. I can't wait for that one.

Re: BCS Busting - Part II

Cougar_Fan — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 20:33:50 -0000

Well I would love to see the MWC champ to get matched up with the Big East or ACC champ this year in a BCS game, or better yet the WAC champ against one and the MWC champ against the other!

Re: BCS Busting - Part II

Zac — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 20:03:41 -0000

As in taste great & less filling???

Re: BCS Busting - Part II

Zac — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 20:01:44 -0000

Ben, what's being a sophomore got to do with anything? Besides, I'm willing to bet Cinci, S FL, UConn, Pitt, Rutgers, & WVU would be more than happy to go up against Air Force, BYU, TCU, UNLV, & UT. I don't see their Admin's doing anything to stop if from happening. I don't see a bad match-up across the board, and I don't see a team among any listed which should be ashamed if they lost their respective match-up, no matter who they were paired with. So, bring it on, Cougar Pelt. There's only one way to skin a cat, and that's to make the game happen.

Re: BCS Busting - Part II

Ben Prather — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 18:56:45 -0000

I think they are being sophomoric...

The ACC is brining a whole new meaning to BCS busters.

Re: BCS Busting - Part II

aVoiceInSC — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 13:41:40 -0000

LOL. Classic.

Re: BCS Busting - Part II

War_Eagle_Atlanta — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 12:57:26 -0000

I hear ya, but sports cliche's are part of the game, you know? If we're going to avoid them, we're going to have to come together as a team and put our noses to the grindstone, especially coming into the heart of the season. Everyone on fanblogs will have to give 110% to make it happen, otherwise, our season will come crashing down.

And nothing says crashing like the great taste of Bryan hot dogs, corn dogs, and luncheon meats. There's nothing I like better after hijacking a Ben Prather thread than the delicious taste of Bryan. Look for it in the deli section of your favorite super market. Hmmmm. Bryan. The taste of the South...

Re: BCS Busting - Part II

fosterkeats — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 12:35:52 -0000

"BCS Buster"
"Showdown Saturday"

I'm sick of all these marketing terms, people who know football don't need these stupid names to identify with what is happening each week...

Re: BCS Busting - Part II

Cougar_Fan — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 11:10:06 -0000

oh oops, sorry I made all those duplicate posts... anyways, I was referring to the weeks leading up to the FSU BSU and Utah BYU showdowns. Yeah you're obviously right no way there's 4 in the top ten at the end of the year.

Re: BCS Busting - Part II

Ben Prather — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 10:30:07 -0000

Your excitement is shared, but I think it is too early to dream of a Holy War between unbeatens yet. In another two weeks maybe things will be different.

As for the meat of your post I will address this tonight.

I can not imagine 4 teams in the top 10. Fresno State or Boise State will knock out one and Utah BYU will do the same. I can imagine 5 in the top 25 though.

Re: BCS Busting - Part II

Ben Prather — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 10:26:13 -0000

I did mention that California would need to lose another to keep them down in glancing.

Re: BCS Busting - Part II

PrinceMarko — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 03:23:50 -0000

Like I said earlier in the year. There will be no undefeated team in the BCS.

Teams are catching up to other schools and offensive schemes level they playing field nowadays.

Re: BCS Busting - Part II

Joe — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 02:10:47 -0000

Cal is not totally out of it. There only loss is to No. 26 Maryland, and they beat No. 27 Michigan State.

Re: BCS Busting - Part II

Cougar_Fan — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 23:42:02 -0000

Re: BCS Busting - Part II

Cougar_Fan — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 23:41:13 -0000

Ok Ben, so this time in 2004 Utah was 14th, and when they played BYU that year they were 5th. If both teams run the table up to that game this year I think it would be a safe bet to put Utah and BYU around 3 or 4 this year, especially considering that the MWC is much stronger this year than in 2004, I think it's a very real possibility that the Mountain West gets someone into the national championship! I know that sounds crazy but it shouldn't! why does USC still get a chance even though they lost to Oregon State, and they play in a conference which at least this year is inferior? If they can do that then an undefeated Utah beating an undefeated BYU can do it! or vice versa.
Oh man this is an exciting year. It'll be interesting to see how things go with Fresno State and Boise State since they're also heading towards a colossal match up at the end of the season too! Can you imagine 4 non BCS teams in the top ten!!

Re: BCS Busting - Part II

Cougar_Fan — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 23:39:06 -0000

haha no kidding! Its so funny, cuz It's not really that big a deal anymore! It's an every year occurence!! and I guarantee the non-BCS will manage a better BCS bowl winning % than the Big East and ACC!

Re: BCS Busting - Part II

Cougar_Fan — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 23:33:00 -0000

Re: BCS Busting - Part II

Zac — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 22:13:29 -0000

Heh, heh, yeah, he said "bust", heh, heh...

Re: BCS Busting - Part II

Porcine — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 21:33:20 -0000

Did you see that? It said "bust".