Why we were wrong
by spakajewia on Dec 7, 2009 6:15 PM EST
Email
Print
There were a number of prognostications on this site about which at-large teams would be chosen by which BCS bowls and for what reasons. There were extensive different outcomes analyzed, and as far as I can remember, almost none of them included TCU v. Boise State in the Fiesta Bowl. And to the extent that we expected a Big11 team to go to the Orange Bowl, we thought PSU rather than Iowa would be the choice. Why were we wrong?
I think we were wrong because for the most part we made two incorrect assumptions: 1) the individual BCS bowl committees don't communicate with each other to make the best matchups; and 2) the number one driver for the BCS is short-term financial gain.
I think its clear now that the bowl games do talk to each other, and they do so because their number one driver is not immediate financial gain but rather the long-term viability and success (and long-term financial gain) of the BCS.
The conventional wisdom is that the Fiesta Bowl "took one for the team" by taking both undefeated mid-majors, despite the fact that it wasn't it their immediate financial interest to do so. Well, kind of.
First of all, the immediate financial interest of the bowl games is only concerned with ticket sales; and its likely that Boise State/TCU will still sell out the Fiesta Bowl, or at least come close enough. TV ad revenue was sold long-ago. If a bad match-up hurts TV ratings, it only impacts ad revenue--and through it the amount of money a network will pay the BCS to air a bowl game--in the future.
But the Fiesta Bowl, the Orange Bowl and the rest of the BCS are also keenly aware of the regular calls for a playoff system and realize that they need to balance their immediate profit motives and interest in high TV ratings with the long-term viability of the BCS system as we know it. If one of the two undefeated mid-major teams were not selected--and if Penn State was selected above an Iowa team that it had lost to in the regular season--there would have been plenty of reason to yell at the BCS again for being only interested in money and for refusing worthy teams of their night in the spotlight.
By picking the teams as they did, they helped guard themselves, as much as possible, from such criticism. They completely avoided the possibility of Iowa fans yelping by chosing the Hawkeyes over us. And they have now set up a situation in which it's likely that Florida beats Cincinatti and so you're left with two undefeated teams: the winner of the MNC, and a mid-major team that doesn't have a particularly compelling claim to the national championship because they played a weak in-conference schedule and only beat another mid-major team in their bowl game.
The BCS: crazy like a fox. Bastards.
Thanks for the fanpost! Please do not post any content from a premium site that requires a subscription. Also, if you just want to share a link, quote, or video, please consider using fanshots instead. Thanks.
98 comments
|
5 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Good Work.
I dispute the claim that the fiesta bowl did itself a disservice.
- Many people haven’t seen these teams play this year and I believe are more likely to tune in to see how good they are.
- If BSU or TCU were playing a BCS conference team, the assumption would be that they would lose, so people would be less likely to watch
- People are more inclined to watch 2 teams they know nothing about than 1 or 2 teams they already know are bad. Think of all the sub average-at-best BCS teams we’ve seen (FSU 06, Pitt 05, etc.)
by InScoresOfOtherGames on Dec 7, 2009 6:30 PM EST reply actions
I disagree
I think the common man will stop at “TCU? Boise? There’s a state in Boise? Hell, I ain’t watching that crap.”
"Andrew Jones....SEND IT IN, BIG FELLA!" - Bill Raftery, 4/2/09
by ReadingRambler on Dec 7, 2009 7:05 PM EST up reply actions
Hmmm, I disagree with your disagreement.
In other words, I agree with ISOOG.
Nice fancy talk. You're one of the lawyers, aren't you?
"Andrew Jones....SEND IT IN, BIG FELLA!" - Bill Raftery, 4/2/09
by ReadingRambler on Dec 7, 2009 8:08 PM EST up reply actions
I really don't think the majority of viewers are educated, is my point
"Andrew Jones....SEND IT IN, BIG FELLA!" - Bill Raftery, 4/2/09
by ReadingRambler on Dec 7, 2009 7:05 PM EST up reply actions
I can't imagine why you'd say that
oh. wait. I’ve (foolishly) looked at the ESPN comments. The majority of viewers are morons.
It never gets to be easy
by chitownhawkeye on Dec 7, 2009 10:19 PM EST up reply actions
only if you have a contract
with CBS rambler.
(see what i did there?)
We have little tranquility but tons of tranquilizers.
by mikeissurreal on Dec 8, 2009 5:48 AM EST up reply actions
post fail:
Subj: only if your conference has a tv contract
We have little tranquility but tons of tranquilizers.
by mikeissurreal on Dec 8, 2009 5:49 AM EST up reply actions
wasn't that FSU 06 team
involved in one of the highest rated non-championship BCS games? Not to invalidate your point, or anything ;-)
Also, did you watch the Poinsettia Bowl last year? If so you would know that this is a “rematch”. If not, then you’re just like the other 95% of Americans who will also care about this game only slightly more.
by The JuggerNitt on Dec 8, 2009 1:27 PM EST up reply actions
YES
Nobody seems to be talking about this. I’d be willing to bet there’s even less interest in this game than for last year’s Poinsettia Bowl because they JUST PLAYED EACH OTHER. I don’t care if they’re undefeated. I just see a rematch between two teams that were nearly as good last year, and nobody cared. Nobody will care this year either.
there's a little less marketing
for the poinsettia bowl than the fiesta bowl. The fiesta bowl numbers might not be great—though they could be—but they’ll certainly blow the poinsettia bowl numbers out of the water.
I wouldn't trust old rooster me neither.
"nobody cared"
To be fair, they did almost double the tv ratings and viewership of the poinsettia bowl over the previous year.
by PSUinBOSSton on Dec 9, 2009 11:48 PM EST up reply actions
It doesnt hurt that there ia poewrful senator from Iowa who I believe does take part in the BCS oversight
"A good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan executed next week. "
George S Patton
wow
It doesnt hurt that there is a powerful senator from Iowa who I beleive does take part in the BCS oversight
"A good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan executed next week. "
George S Patton
by psu in the w-b on Dec 7, 2009 6:48 PM EST up reply actions
WTF?!
Who the ZUG gave iowa a senator?!
We have little tranquility but tons of tranquilizers.
by mikeissurreal on Dec 8, 2009 5:49 AM EST up reply actions
stupid constitution
"A good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan executed next week. "
George S Patton
by psu in the w-b on Dec 8, 2009 6:31 PM EST up reply actions
TCU-Boise..
Got 34K attendance for their bowl game last year. If the stadium is half empty, it will be the last time you have this type of match up.
Never mistake effort for achievement.
And who knows, maybe that's the point of this venture
"Andrew Jones....SEND IT IN, BIG FELLA!" - Bill Raftery, 4/2/09
by ReadingRambler on Dec 7, 2009 7:16 PM EST up reply actions
stupid
they need to get teams that will fill the stadium. I doubt they will come close
.
We have little tranquility but tons of tranquilizers.
by mikeissurreal on Dec 8, 2009 5:51 AM EST up reply actions
is it, though?
Sure, there may not be tickets available directly through the bowl, but don’t they allocate many tickets to the schools to distribute? Are those all sold out? (they may be, just curious).
Also, ratings will be a bigger indicator of relevance for this game.
by The JuggerNitt on Dec 8, 2009 1:31 PM EST up reply actions
The schools have to guarantee to sell their allotment
Which is 20,000 per school, give or take. Once Boise and TCU don’t sell them, and they won’t, the tickets will hit the secondary market in force. Sart looking for them next week.
The balance of the tickets are corporate type tickets, count on a ton of them going to waste too.
Undefeated or not, those two teams aren’t playing for anything except to be a footnote to the 2009 season, and there is no juice behind either of those two schools that’s getting anybody on a plane to Arizona.
I say let's rock the Orange Bowl, because nobody will remember in five years anyway.
that was basically my point
the Fiesta Bowl has sold all their tickets (which is pretty much guaranteed, isn’t it?) but I don’t imagine the stadium will be filled.
Sorta like how Beaver Stadium has a “sell out crowd” for the Eastern Illinois/Akron/Minnesota (snow storm) games, when we all know the stadium was not at capacity.
by The JuggerNitt on Dec 8, 2009 1:44 PM EST up reply actions
yes,
there’s a difference between ticket sales and attendence.
Maybe there won’t be a full stadium for the Fiesta Bowl, but its not costing them anything this year. I think I read that each school ask for more than its initial allocation of 17,500 tickets…maybe they’ll sell them, maybe not.
Personally, I think we’re all showing an egregious “BCS conference bias,” which is to be expected, but I bet that more people both watch and attend this game than the average BCS commenter seems to think.
I wouldn't trust old rooster me neither.
I think I'm showing an
only 8,700 people attend TCU bias.
Or perhaps a Boise State’s enrollment is less than 19,000 and has less than 70,000 living alumni. By contast the Penn State Alumni Association has more than 145,000 dues paying members.
Or perhaps a Boise is the 112th largest Media Market in the United States bias. By contrast, that would be 31,000 people less than the Jonstown/Altoona media market.
I’m not saying that these teams aren’t good (they are), or that they don’t deserve the bids (they do). I’m saying that Penn State and LSU is going to draw triple the ratings, and would sell twice as many tickets (if not more) if the stadium size allowed for it.
I say let's rock the Orange Bowl, because nobody will remember in five years anyway.
both teams
asked for more tickets, but they are honestly all sold out. No doubt that Iowa has a lot of fans stuck with Fiesta Bowl tickets, but what the hell does the Bowl care, they are sold.
@collegiatestdms
but you are saying
that this matchup isn’t going to create any national interest; i.e. “there is no juice behind either of those two schools that’s getting anybody on a plane to Arizona.”
I think that’s wrong. Only time will tell, but I do think that people will be interested, whether or not they’re TCU and Boise State alumni is almost irrelevant.
[Though note that my initial argument wasn’t that the Fiesta Bowl picked this game b/c of the national interest; they clearly didn’t. They picked it to save their own asses.]
I wouldn't trust old rooster me neither.
Define "National Interest"
Among college football fans, yeah, it will generate interest. If it weren’t on Fox, I’d watch it (their BCS coverage is intolerable, and impossible to watch).
But is this the kid of game that makes a casual fan tune in? I don’t think so.
I say let's rock the Orange Bowl, because nobody will remember in five years anyway.
This game will not beat the ratings of PSU-LSU.
The problem is this game will have a captive audience, that game or no games.
Meanwhile PSU is up against OMGBOWDENSLASTBLOLGAMEEVA, among other games.
I was at the Sun Bowl last year
and it was most certainly not full. Compared to what you’re used to seeing at a Pitt game, yes, but definitely not full. The UTEP vs Tulsa game this year had more people in the stands.
"gotta love the HD"
I was there
It was full.
http://www.life.com/image/84151438
yes, I know that shot is of the Oregon State side, but the Pitt side looked just as full.
+1
Excellent analysis, I had had similar thoughts but hadn’t been able to formulate the thoughts so well to articulate to others.
No!
We were wrong because we are not an elite team anymore! I mean, we were wrong because Jim Delaney and the big 10 hate us! I mean we were wrong because of Jaypa!
Oh sorry. I thought this was FightOnState.
by speedomike on Dec 7, 2009 7:24 PM EST via mobile reply actions
ha
you may have opened the flood gates. But I agree as I’ve stated before, under no circumstance would it have been logical for us to go to a bcs game.
did you think before that there was a circumstance
where the Fiesta Bowl would pick TCU before Iowa, AND pick Boise St before Cinci?
by The JuggerNitt on Dec 8, 2009 1:32 PM EST up reply actions
well, the point was (and I'm going to assume that you thought that that wouldn't happen under any circumstance, either, since no one saw that coming)
is that there are a lot of people throwing out “impossible” and “under no circumstance” and “sure thing” when none of those are the case. Yes, it was more likely that Iowa would get the pick, but that doesn’t mean it is ZERO likelihood that PSU would get it.
People who talk in absolutes just come across as ignorant. If you modified your statements just slightly to stuff like, “it is very unlikely that PSU will go to a BCS game” then I’d say, “you hit the nail on the head”, but considering numerous people could come up with numerous “logical” (hah! at that word being used to describe the college football postseason) situations that would place PSU into the BCS. Did it happen? no. Was it possible? very. Otherwise it would have been a non issue from the start.
by The JuggerNitt on Dec 9, 2009 11:05 AM EST up reply actions
is it so hard for people to realize for once, unbeaten teams are getting some credit? I personally dont see anything wrong with, or was not completely surprised by the selection. TCU deserves it over Iowa, Boise and Cinci are both unbeaten, so the differences there are minimal. From a football perspective and not (how many people are in the seats, tv ratings etc) , both games have the potental of being very good.
oh, I completely agree
and I’ve always been a proponent of the undefeateds getting their fair shake, but I also realize the reality of things ($$$) and see how that plays a large factor into things. I would almost go so far as to say that if there wasn’t a cap on 2 teams per conference that PSU or LSU would have gotten in over Boise St.
Would I think that was fair? No. Would I think that was unexpected? No.
The same boils down to Iowa, but they have a large enough fan base that the gap in ratings & money wasn’t large enough to warrant picking a team with equal record who won the head to head and was slightly higher in the rankings. If we replaced Iowa with Northwestern (all things but name being equal) I doubt few people would even bat an eye at PSU being chosen over them.
by The JuggerNitt on Dec 9, 2009 11:59 AM EST up reply actions
I tend to disagree with the future interest thing to a degree:
These people, I don’t think, are overly concerned with ad revenue to drive future income: the BCS is moving to a new network in what, a year? It has already signed the deal, so it is probably getting something near a flat rate plus or minus a little based on revenue (I’ve never seen the deal, but I think ESPN probably agreed to a large flat rate with a minor percentage bonus) – thus, the current network doesn’t care about future income.
I would actually posit that this is a clever move since Fox is losing the BCS:
(1) NOW, they have set the consistently increasing precedent of bringing AWFUL games in to make the Sherman Act and Judge Posner happy – 2 mid-majors plus Cinci and GT shows that the games go to anyone who qualifies, not the most profitable.
(2) Despite the precedent in (1), the also leave the BCS with the mess of “Separate but Equal,” still feeding the fire of the non-BCS conferences who want their shots at the big boys.
Thus, Fox has satisfactorily left ESPN (is it?) with people pissed off on both fronts: the BCS conference/name brand football fans are sick of crappy games (at least the Fiesta and Orange, and probably Sugar, WILL suck). On the other end of the spectrum, the little guys are pissed that they aren’t getting their shot at the big boys, and they’re still gonna go tattling to their Congresspeople.
Kudos to you, Fox, on a parting shot at the BCS (remember, a tournament means more games, which Fox can sooner get its grubby mitts into).
"Every player we have, someone-maybe a parent, a grandparent, someone-poured their soul into that young man. They are handing that young man off to us. They are giving us their treasure, and it's our job to make sure we give them back that young man intact and ready to face the world."
-J.V.Pa.
And this is written after 9 hours of studying today - forgive me if its a little redundant or confusing.
But its how I see it. And as per part (1) – when I say AWFUL games, I mean ratings-wise. I respect TCU, and respect OU even less than I ever did now that BSU beat them.
"Every player we have, someone-maybe a parent, a grandparent, someone-poured their soul into that young man. They are handing that young man off to us. They are giving us their treasure, and it's our job to make sure we give them back that young man intact and ready to face the world."
-J.V.Pa.
Fox doesn't select the games
The Bowl committees do.
There was no way to appease everyone this year: there are 5 undefeated teams in Division I-A.
The bowl committees absolutely care about TV ratings because they form the basis for negotiations for TV contracts with Fox, ESPN, etc. The ratings from this year will be part of the next TV contract they negotiate, no question about it.
I wouldn't trust old rooster me neither.
"there was no way to appease everyone this year"
I would have been pretty appeased if they blew up the BCS system and started a playoff ;-)
by The JuggerNitt on Dec 8, 2009 1:35 PM EST up reply actions
Spakajewia bringin it
Nice work, rec’d. I particularly enjoyed:
I think its clear now that the bowl games do talk to each other, and they do so because their number one driver is not immediate financial gain but rather the long-term viability and success (and long-term financial gain) of the BCS.
"For me the game wasn’t grounded in reality. It was about the uniform you put on that turned you into a warrior. It was about the mythology of the battle, the victory, the defeat, the struggle." - Mike Reid, PSU '69
this seems highly logical
for the BCS committee. i disagree simply because i am not convinced anyone on the BCS committee is actually capable of rational thought.
personally, i think they just drew names out of the hat and when the Fiesta Bowl picks came out they desperately wanted to call a mulligan.
"They say in Happy Valley that if God wasn’t a Penn State fan, why is the sky blue and white?" Fortt said. "Who am I to argue with God?"
candid photo of Fiesta Bowl Committee
by Mr. Rosewater on Dec 8, 2009 4:51 AM EST reply actions 3 recs
rec'd
We have little tranquility but tons of tranquilizers.
by mikeissurreal on Dec 8, 2009 5:52 AM EST up reply actions
I think an important fact overlooked here is the Bristol effect.
The word coming out of Bristol was that PSU did not deserve to be in a BCS bowl. Time and again the talking heads said this on the air, the blog columnist for the Big Ten all but put on an Iowa campaign every day, and in the end the drummed up enough dialouge on the subject that it became an issue the “average” college football fan knew about. What really irkes me in this situation is that the Bristol folks pointed to one issue: the head to head results of this years game. But they totally disregarded prior precedent, when they failed to mention the fact that this very same Iowa team has done the same in the past. Also where are the pundits talking about the “fairness” Miami and Clemson are receiving from the Gator Bowl folks.
Also on a side note CJ Spiller got completely robbed by the Heisman folks. He has a had a solid year, and should be going to New York over Suh. Yes Suh has had a great year, but when did his push really begin? Saturday night when Herbbie and Musburger started hyping his 4.5 sack performance. Well in case your TV remote didn’t have a recall button you would have missed out on Spiller’s gutsy 233 yard 4 TD performance while fighting a foot injury that hobbled him in between plays.
I am Laura Nichols and I like Bacon.
BSD is an addiction, and this is the first step.
Wait
Spiller isn’t even going? Seriously?
"Andrew Jones....SEND IT IN, BIG FELLA!" - Bill Raftery, 4/2/09
by ReadingRambler on Dec 8, 2009 11:26 AM EST up reply actions
Spiller has clearly been better than Tebow H. Concussed (aka Tebow’s evil brother).
"Andrew Jones....SEND IT IN, BIG FELLA!" - Bill Raftery, 4/2/09
by ReadingRambler on Dec 8, 2009 11:27 AM EST up reply actions
I can’t believe that Tebow is going to New York, he has absolutely no business getting an invite there. Christ, I am going to be glad when he is a fullback next year and we don’t have to hear about him as often.
by Bob Sacamano on Dec 8, 2009 12:21 PM EST up reply actions
unless the gov. of florida has anything to say about it
if he had any ACTUAL authority, we’d see tebow starting in jacksonville next season
We decide when you hear the snap count...
The Bristol Effect
Perhaps. But think of it this way. If it were a Saturday in November and Penn State, LSU, Iowa and Georgia Tech are exactly who they are now, where is College Gameday that Saturday. At Penn State/LSU or Iowa/Georgia Tech?
The Sugar Bowl got Florida and Cincinnati. Who is going to watch that, suicidal Florida fans and masochistic Cincinnati fans?
The BCS Bowls are going to find themselves so damn smart that they wind up out of business. Meanwhile, the Capital One Bowl might have the biggest bargain in the history of Bowl Games.
I say let's rock the Orange Bowl, because nobody will remember in five years anyway.
A Saturday at the beginning of this November?
I think they’d go to Iowa/Ga. Tech because I’m pretty sure that at one point this November both were ranked in the top 10, or at least pretty close, and both were ranked higher than eitehr PSU/LSU.
I think that the default assumptions on this blog are too tilted to think that the powers that be in college football do everything only for the immediate $$$ and don’t try to maintain any sort of credibility about looking for the matchups of the best teams.
Gameday went to Air Force or BYU this year for their game against TCU for pete’s sake. The college football establishment does not just solely gravitated to the ten programs with the biggest fanbases, as much as we might wish they did. There are other factors at work here.
I wouldn't trust old rooster me neither.
I'll grant you that
ESPN does it’s share of marketing other schools. But I would postulate that the reason for that is by making more schools marketable that they increase their ratings for the Boise/Fresno game that they invariably televise on a Thursday night.
Penn State versus LSU would be a monumental regular season college football game. It would be simply a huge game that draws tremendous national interest. If you think that Iowa & Georgia Tech knocks that game out of primetime, well, that’s crazy talk.
I say let's rock the Orange Bowl, because nobody will remember in five years anyway.
This ^
If the BCS Bowls pick games not how they’d like to, but instead take a dive to preserve the system, how is that to their advantage? Are they thinking the consistent drumbeat against the BCS will die down in future seasons because they pitted TCU against Boise in 2009? Every single year there will be a tidal wave of hate toward the current system (unless something happens like 2005, when there just happened to be 2 clear-cut teams at the top) unless the BCS Bowls provide a less-profitable matchup simply to preserve their maximum profit-based system. Doesn’t make sense to me.
The BCS is an imperfect system in many ways
and so it will never be immune for criticism. However, the level of criticism will vary from year to year depending on a) how many undefeated and other teams with legitimate claims to the MNC there are and b) how well the BCS does in selecting “worthy” teams to play in the BCS games.
The BCS has no control over issue a, but complete control over issue b. They can keep the criticism of their system as low as possible—though its never going to reach zero or even approach it—by selecting the most “worthy” teams. While its hard to say what makes one team more “worthy” than another—its national following, ability to sell tickets and get eyes on the TV are certainly not factors that make a team “worthy.” Rather, worthiness is approximated by the BCS rankings, as well as other common sense metrics, like head-to-head match-ups, etc.
The President of the United States has publicly said that he thinks the BCS is a bad system. Whether or not you like Obama or think he has any business talking about this, its reflective of the fact that the BCS is on very shaky ground and enjoys low public support. It needs desperately to maintain its credibility for it to continue to exist. Picking the most “worthy” teams allows it to maintain that credibility. The benefits it gains in credibility—though difficult to measure—are more valuable than whatever costs it may incur in lost revenue, etc. from picking the teams it does.
I wouldn't trust old rooster me neither.
The BCS is hated by casual "football" fans.
Especially ones that follow one NFL team, and then the playoffs. That’s the vast majority of generic “football” fans. College football is still very much a niche sport, and it’s most ardent supporters tend to be a little bit more traditional. My guess, is that if you only asked people who consider college football to be their favorite sport whether or not they want a playoff, you’d find it’s much closer to 50/50.
Seriously, what does President Obama know about college football? He went to the University of Chicago for Tebow’s sake. Please, if I have any questions about economic theory or nuclear fisson, I’ll talk to him, but can we leave college football to the State U grads of the world?
There is nothing in the world that the BCS can do gain credibility in the eyes of someone who thinks a playoff is the only way to determine a champion. What the BCS needs to do if it wants to survive is concentrate on keeping it’s core constituants and fans, (The SEC, Big Ten and Big XII specifically) happy.
I say let's rock the Orange Bowl, because nobody will remember in five years anyway.
that's an interesting point
I guess I don’t know to what extent I agree with you that college football is a niche sport. But I would argue that the BCS knows better than either of us what it needs to do to survive.
Also, Obama taught at the University of Chicago law school, but didn’t go to school there. He went to college football powerhouses: Occidental College, Columbia Univesity, Harvard Law School.
I wouldn't trust old rooster me neither.
if I have any questions about economic theory or nuclear fisson, I’ll talk to him
HAhahahahahahahahahahahahaha…
GEAUX TIGERS!!!
what about the Levi effect?
I care about his opinion, too!
by The JuggerNitt on Dec 8, 2009 1:37 PM EST up reply actions
Were you flipping through his Playgirl spread while you wrote that?
You don’t have to answer, I know you were.
Bristol effect?
More like Delaney effect.
disagree a bit...
….if you’ve watched more than that one Nebraska game. Suh has been consistently dominant, but the stat sheet only blew up in the last game. Suh actually had a “sexier” statistical season in 2008. 3 TD’s (2 pick sixes one on offense), forced fumbles, pass break ups, etc.
Tough to gauge the positions that don’t have gaudy stats, as you know c-easy.
I am not disagreeing with Suh's stats nor his dominance
I was able to watch maybe 3 Nebraska games this year not counting the game last Saturday night. What bothers me is that Spiller has been in the conversation pretty much for the last 10 weeks. He has carried a Clemson team that is meh on offense at best without him. Suh has been discussed, but nothing to the amount he got after the game the other night. I just felt that when Herbie started his man crush on Suh the landscape changed.
I also agree with you that it is tough to gauge the impact of a lineman on the team around him, and the games he plays in at large. Suh, like our own Odrick is a terrific player. But I really do not see where he was the most outstanding player of the season. There were other story lines this year that were bigger and with more of an impact than Suh. But hey hats off to him. I think he is a great player, I would have rather seen Spiller there instead of him or Tebow.
I am Laura Nichols and I like Bacon.
BSD is an addiction, and this is the first step.
by carolinaeasy on Dec 10, 2009 9:06 AM EST up reply actions
like you said
Suh should have been picked over Tebow, not Spiller.
and while we’re on topic….no love for Kellen Moore? I know strength of schedule is a factor, but dang…that dude put up some serious numbers.
+1 for Moore,
-1 for Spiller and falling for the medias own trick. Spiller had a great game against GT, but was taken out of the running by the previous dud. He was effectively taken out of the running by running for less than 20 yards in a loss to SC where they needed the offense. More deserving than Tebow? What kind of standard is that? You are more deserving than Tebow.
More deserving than Suh? No way (although I’m admittedly a pro-defensive players type of guy). Also, you must not have been paying attention. They have been trumpting Suh for Heisman finalist since July. If anything I would say they locked in on him too early.
by PSUinBOSSton on Dec 10, 2009 10:31 AM EST up reply actions
Well I might be a little biased
being from South Carolina, but the guy did make an impact in that game before his foot injury. I’ve watched him all year thanks to my dvr, and the guy should have been there, I liken his impact on his team to that of MRob in 05. I didn’t fall for any media trick on that one sorry.
Also I have been paying attention. There might have been a fringe movement for Suh, but the serious discussion did not begin until Saturday night. Also the new “Internet” ballot might have something to do with the “what have you done for me lately”attitude at play.
I am Laura Nichols and I like Bacon.
BSD is an addiction, and this is the first step.
by carolinaeasy on Dec 10, 2009 10:49 AM EST up reply actions
I think the big difference between Spiller and MRob is about 3 wins.
Regarding Suh, I guess we just disagree. I have been hearing many serious discussions about Suh getting to New York consistently since July. I have also heard very little shock about him getting invited. Althuogh I haven’t heard enough shock about Tebow getting invited.
by PSUinBOSSton on Dec 10, 2009 3:48 PM EST up reply actions
Well, the shock wouldn't be there, since we all knew it would happen
but there is certainly quite a bit of disgust.
by PSUisMyHeart on Dec 10, 2009 3:49 PM EST up reply actions
Kellen Moore?
I don’t think the media wants to give the Heisman to David Klingler or Andre Ware again.
"Andrew Jones....SEND IT IN, BIG FELLA!" - Bill Raftery, 4/2/09
by ReadingRambler on Dec 10, 2009 10:45 AM EST up reply actions
Oh, damnit, my bad
I confused Moore with the guy at Houston
"Andrew Jones....SEND IT IN, BIG FELLA!" - Bill Raftery, 4/2/09
by ReadingRambler on Dec 10, 2009 10:45 AM EST up reply actions
I hadn't looked at it that way, but
doesn’t it make more sense to make sure you spllit up TCU and Boise State? There are 5 undefeateds, right now. Matching up TCU and Boise State GUARANTEES there will be no less than two (with the outside possibility that there could be 3). If you have each of them play a 1 (or more) loss team, you at least increase the probability that you’re only left with 1 (while taking the risk that you’re left with 4).
Not sure what the conference tie-ins are, but matching up Boise State and Iowa in the Fiesta, TCU and Florida in the Sugar and Cincinnati and Georgia Tech in the Orange, could have accomplished this. I picked these particular matchups for geographic/maximum potental travel/ticket sales possibilities.
"the secret to loving your job is having a hobby that you really despise"
Just imagine GT vs. Cincy
500 yards passing, 500 yards rushing.
"Andrew Jones....SEND IT IN, BIG FELLA!" - Bill Raftery, 4/2/09
by ReadingRambler on Dec 8, 2009 12:33 PM EST up reply actions
People would see that final score
and say “Damn, I didn’t know they had an Orange Bowl in basketball, too”.
"the secret to loving your job is having a hobby that you really despise"
maybe
I suppose my whole argument is essentially that the BCS committees are wholly rational actors aimed at mitigating their risk and maximizing their long-term profit.
My guess is that putting the teams where they did is less risky than your approach, though they are guaranteed to be left with two undefeateds. While under your scenario there’s a chance that there would only be one undefeated, there’s also a decent chance that, say, TCU beats Florida or Boise State beats Iowa. And that really makes them look stronger. But there’s no way to prove it one way or another.
I grant that, following my logic, you could end up with your scenario rather than the scenario that they did pick.
Great signature by the way. If only I despised drinking.
I wouldn't trust old rooster me neither.
in your matchups
there’s still a good chance of 2 undefeated teams, a decent chance at 3, and a remote chance of 4. In the situation we have now there is going to be guaranteed 2 undefeated teams (with a remote chance of 3), but most people are going to dismiss the winner of the TCU/Boise St game, saying that they beat no one (even though this isn’t necessarily true, it is going to be the default assumption of any undefeated mid-major).
by The JuggerNitt on Dec 8, 2009 1:42 PM EST up reply actions
Totally agree,but
the BCS being the BCS if you end up with 4 undefeateds (even though that seems unlikely), they can shrug and say “whaddya gonna do? it’s the best system we have” (b.s. as it may be). However, with two undefeateds, they can’t use that argument since they guaranteed it was going to happen by way of their match-ups.
Not saying my scenario is better, but it is a better chance of only 1 defeated than guaranteeing that there won’t be only 1.
"the secret to loving your job is having a hobby that you really despise"
Told you so
a few weeks back that it would be Cap 1/LSU and Delaney worked OT to get IOWAY ahead of us because they were and beat us at home too…and to the excuse that we deserve it because we travel well…well my sources from inside the Bowl selection group states that IOWAY travels just as well and besides as carolinaeasy states ESPN hates our guts and I cannot stand their smug, snickering bunch of bufoon announcers either…well, I rather think I Hate them…GO STATE ! Beat Tigers !
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
SHOP THE BLACK SHOE DIARIES STORE
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
