(05-25-2014 09:01 AM)jaredf29 Wrote:  It's an interesting concept based on merit, but as we know college football isn't based on merit. It's based on seclusion of those who would challenge a system set up to keep a select few rich. That's why we only received a playoff now, and now that there's a playoff structure there's talk about a split. It's never been about competition or the best teams, it's about $.

(05-26-2014 11:30 AM)The Real LHS81 Wrote:  

(05-25-2014 09:01 AM)jaredf29 Wrote:  It's an interesting concept based on merit, but as we know college football isn't based on merit. It's based on seclusion of those who would challenge a system set up to keep a select few rich. That's why we only received a playoff now, and now that there's a playoff structure there's talk about a split. It's never been about competition or the best teams, it's about $.

actually the BCS WAS about the best teams and those that do not like it never seem to understand that

the major conferences had built bowl games that they OWNED and operated and had built up into something major, but that arrangement was hampering the ability to have top teams meet each other in a bowl game because of conference obligations

the BCS allowed those obligations to be removed to pair the top teams

pretending that allowing each conference champion to have a spot in a 16 team playoff is "fair" or "gives access to those that deserve it" is asinine and nothing but begging bowl holder talk and people pretending that winning some weak conference with an 8-4 (or 5-6 record once in the case of north Texas state) is somehow as meaningful as winning the SEC, Big 12, Big 10, ACC or PAC 12 are just lying to themselves and fooling themselves

and when the times happened that teams were highly ranked and coming out of conferences besides those conferences they got their spot in the BCS

so access was available and access was granted........it was just that access was not granted for existing or performing at the "top" of a conference that is extremely weak and that is what those that want "equality" really want they want a conference equivalent of affirmative action

and we all know that is a failure and we all know it ends up providing less than positive results so lets take a pass on that and not further screw up college sports with more of it

(05-26-2014 04:25 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(05-26-2014 11:30 AM)The Real LHS81 Wrote:  

(05-25-2014 09:01 AM)jaredf29 Wrote:  It's an interesting concept based on merit, but as we know college football isn't based on merit. It's based on seclusion of those who would challenge a system set up to keep a select few rich. That's why we only received a playoff now, and now that there's a playoff structure there's talk about a split. It's never been about competition or the best teams, it's about $.

actually the BCS WAS about the best teams and those that do not like it never seem to understand that

the major conferences had built bowl games that they OWNED and operated and had built up into something major, but that arrangement was hampering the ability to have top teams meet each other in a bowl game because of conference obligations

the BCS allowed those obligations to be removed to pair the top teams

pretending that allowing each conference champion to have a spot in a 16 team playoff is "fair" or "gives access to those that deserve it" is asinine and nothing but begging bowl holder talk and people pretending that winning some weak conference with an 8-4 (or 5-6 record once in the case of north Texas state) is somehow as meaningful as winning the SEC, Big 12, Big 10, ACC or PAC 12 are just lying to themselves and fooling themselves

and when the times happened that teams were highly ranked and coming out of conferences besides those conferences they got their spot in the BCS

so access was available and access was granted........it was just that access was not granted for existing or performing at the "top" of a conference that is extremely weak and that is what those that want "equality" really want they want a conference equivalent of affirmative action

and we all know that is a failure and we all know it ends up providing less than positive results so lets take a pass on that and not further screw up college sports with more of it

Pure BS, sure at the start there would be some blow outs and some conference would not be gain any ground (SBC/MAC/CUSA) but the AAC and MWC could build up. See UCF/Baylor, heck look at the AAC in basketball.

(05-27-2014 09:12 PM)ecumbh1999 Wrote:  

(05-26-2014 04:25 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(05-26-2014 11:30 AM)The Real LHS81 Wrote:  

(05-25-2014 09:01 AM)jaredf29 Wrote:  It's an interesting concept based on merit, but as we know college football isn't based on merit. It's based on seclusion of those who would challenge a system set up to keep a select few rich. That's why we only received a playoff now, and now that there's a playoff structure there's talk about a split. It's never been about competition or the best teams, it's about $.

actually the BCS WAS about the best teams and those that do not like it never seem to understand that

the major conferences had built bowl games that they OWNED and operated and had built up into something major, but that arrangement was hampering the ability to have top teams meet each other in a bowl game because of conference obligations

the BCS allowed those obligations to be removed to pair the top teams

pretending that allowing each conference champion to have a spot in a 16 team playoff is "fair" or "gives access to those that deserve it" is asinine and nothing but begging bowl holder talk and people pretending that winning some weak conference with an 8-4 (or 5-6 record once in the case of north Texas state) is somehow as meaningful as winning the SEC, Big 12, Big 10, ACC or PAC 12 are just lying to themselves and fooling themselves

and when the times happened that teams were highly ranked and coming out of conferences besides those conferences they got their spot in the BCS

so access was available and access was granted........it was just that access was not granted for existing or performing at the "top" of a conference that is extremely weak and that is what those that want "equality" really want they want a conference equivalent of affirmative action

and we all know that is a failure and we all know it ends up providing less than positive results so lets take a pass on that and not further screw up college sports with more of it

Pure BS, sure at the start there would be some blow outs and some conference would not be gain any ground (SBC/MAC/CUSA) but the AAC and MWC could build up. See UCF/Baylor, heck look at the AAC in basketball.

I wouldn't worry about him ECUmbh, he's just spewing nonsense to troll.