No one seems to care that a team could lose to a couple MAC teams on their way to winning the Big Least or ACC and then still get a BCS game. Where's the outrage there?
I stopped reading after a couple paragraphs.
Absolutely unreal. This guy has probably never seen Ball State play a game. If the Big 10 gets two BCS teams that is just not right. IMO, Ball State is better than any Big 10 team and that includes Penn State.
one point:
I read elsewhere that the ACC has a CONTRACT with the Orange Bowl.
The ACC will be in a BCS game even if they have a terrible season and would have not 'qualified'.
The Big Ten and PAC-10 also have a bowl contract (Rose Bowl).
Just from a pure logic standpoint, he knocks Utah because they beat a Michigan team that lost to a bad Toledo team at the same time failing to see that a pretty bad MAC team went in and beat Michigan, so what might a good MAC team do against a good Big 10 team?
A better Big 10 team, Illinois, lost to a higher class of MAC team in WMU.
So if our bad can beat their bad, and our good can beat their good, cannot our best at least compete with their best?
funny how he thinks Pitt is deserving of a BCS game more than BSU, BSU, and Utah. didnt Boise State beat Bowling Green easily at home, while Pitt lost to BG at home? just one example of how much an idiot he is
DSniu41 Wrote:funny how he thinks Pitt is deserving of a BCS game more than BSU, BSU, and Utah. didnt Boise State beat Bowling Green easily at home, while Pitt lost to BG at home? just one example of how much an idiot he is
Boise beat BG, but it was anything but easy. In fact, most Boise fans say that BG gave them there toughest test at home in quite awhile falling 20-7.
BG vs. Boise St.
BG shut out Boise in the second half and pretty much held their own statistically for the game with the three turnovers proving costly.
Redwingtom Wrote:DSniu41 Wrote:funny how he thinks Pitt is deserving of a BCS game more than BSU, BSU, and Utah. didnt Boise State beat Bowling Green easily at home, while Pitt lost to BG at home? just one example of how much an idiot he is
Boise beat BG, but it was anything but easy. In fact, most Boise fans say that BG gave them there toughest test at home in quite awhile falling 20-7.
BG vs. Boise St.
BG shut out Boise in the second half and pretty much held their own statistically for the game with the three turnovers proving costly.
Before BG's game at NIU I looked in the program and noted the score of that game against Boise State and I was thinking, hmmm, they were a tough out for Boise.
If IU, UofI and Mich are part of the "meatgrinder" of going thru the Big 10, then doeesn't that make Toledo, CMU and WMU even more of a meatgrinder?
And with Wyo beating Tenn and Pitt leading the Big East (and beating ND), I'd say the MAC's mediocre can compete w/ the country.
Thank goodness correctly-programed computer models don't insist on this bias.
The other problem with the bias is it doesn't give non-BCS schools a chance at all. I mean, either say these schools are not part of the same Division of play as the BCS conferences or give them a fair shake.
The other day, Kornheiser was like, "These schools are not as good. They need to get into BCS conferences." And his co-host, Dan LeBatard, I think, was like, "What are they supposed to do, go knock on doors? 'Hey SEC, we'd like to join." And Kornheiser replies, "Yes. They say, 'We are very serious about playing at the highest level."
I mean that is the level of idiocy non-BCS leagues face. They are effectively legislated out of the major games and paydays, giving them no chance to grow a program the way Miami or Louisville did. They get this one bone thrown to them of how they can make a BCS game, and have to face the same lunkheaded smack talk even when they meet the criteria laid out for them. Slate had a great article this week about how cutthroat NCAA football is becoming and the new SEC deal will make it even worse.
"Off the Mark!"
This columnist attempts to cite several facts to support his argument. As I read an individual point, I said to myself, "The MAC beat them." Then I'd read another point and think, "Well, a MAC team beat them." And so on.
Bottom line is this person did nothing more than peripheral research in an atttempt to support his argument. More in depth research would have resulted in a column supporting the opposite view.
But when you spoil his (and other BCS slappys') argument with facts, they always fall back on the old standby......."they couldn't stand up to a schedule like [pick a BCS conference] plays week in and week out.
Oh, you mean like 7 or 8 home games? No nonconference away games? I'd say that the schedule that MAC teams play, and especially the west this year is just as brutal. But people like him have their minds made up - they played in BCS programs, support them in person and in the media and can't stand to have their narrow world view destroyed by facts. The world is changing but these folks want none of it.
Okie Chippewa Wrote:More in depth research would have resulted in a column supporting the opposite view.
I don't think more research would have made a difference. Schlabach had his mind made up from the start. He's a puppet of the BCS system just like many of the other brainless twits in the media.
the MAC West is brutal this season
glad the level of play has improved from the deplorable crud we've fielded the last 3 seasons
This is why we have the blogosphere.
There is an argument to be made on the topic, but he falls way short. Pretty typical of an ESPN writer/article. It is is not like this article passed a peer review process!
One major problem is the "all or nothing" proposition non-BCS teams face. Squads such as Boise St, Utah, Ball State, and (earlier) Tulsa have ZERO chance of making a near-top tier bowl like the Cotton, Gator, or Peach Bowls.
It would be better if the BCS added those bowls to the mix, enabling deserving non-BCS teams an opportunity to be in the limelight.