CSNbbs

As the rich get richer, the little guy gets screwed once again.

http://blog.al.com/solomon/2010/04/ncaa_...own_s.html

"If you look at a league that has eight conference games, they could win two games in their conference if they schedule their nonconference for four wins to be bowl-eligible," he said. "That has happened, and I think those are issues."

I felt compelled to respond to some of those yahoos.

Records hasn't had anything to do with bowl games for a long time. It's all about attendance.

(04-18-2010 12:48 PM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote: [ -> ]I felt compelled to respond to some of those yahoos.

Nice. Too bad they have selective hearing and selective memories.

They sure are a special bunch. It is sooooooooo easy to get those inbred necks riled up......

(04-18-2010 06:03 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote: [ -> ]Records hasn't had anything to do with bowl games for a long time. It's all about attendance.

Attendance is down at the venues. It's the tv ratings these folks are interested in. If you look at he tv ratings for most bowl games, they are no better than the UAB/UNC NIT basketball game.

This is sad. The best teams should go to the bowl games and just going 6-6 in a bcs conference doesnt mean your the worthy of being ahead of a non bcs school. oh well, the rich get richer. Thanks for nothing Big 12

(04-18-2010 06:03 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote: [ -> ]Records hasn't had anything to do with bowl games for a long time. It's all about attendance.

Teams with winning records are always given preference over teams with 6-6 records. At least until now. I can point out specific examples if you want.

(04-19-2010 09:08 AM)HSV_BLAZER Wrote: [ -> ]
(04-18-2010 06:03 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote: [ -> ]Records hasn't had anything to do with bowl games for a long time. It's all about attendance.

Teams with winning records are always given preference over teams with 6-6 records. At least until now. I can point out specific examples if you want.

Only because it was required by the NCAA until now. However, given a 7-5 BCS team verses a 9-3 or better non BCS team, who do you think will get the better bowl.

(04-19-2010 04:42 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote: [ -> ]Only because it was required by the NCAA until now. However, given a 7-5 BCS team versus a 9-3 or better non-BCS team, who do you think will get the better bowl?

The fact that it had been required but the rule had changed is the point of the article. The example I saw was last years GMAC, where a 9-3 Troy team could have been pushed aside by a 6-6 Notre Dame team (assuming they'd have taken it).

MB's point about bowls wanting the teams that bring the most fans to spend money locally, not the best record, is quite correct.

I think we should all give the NCAA some credit for finally dropping the pretense.

I was thinking more in terms of giving them a monodigital salute.

(04-19-2010 07:59 PM)UAB Band Dad Wrote: [ -> ]I was thinking more in terms of giving them a monodigital salute.

Yep, the old mono-medial-digit truly proclaims "Come and see the (injustice) inherent in the system. Help! Help! I'm (we're) being repressed!" And, just exactly how we feel about it...

(04-19-2010 09:32 PM)USAFBlazerFan Wrote: [ -> ]
(04-19-2010 07:59 PM)UAB Band Dad Wrote: [ -> ]I was thinking more in terms of giving them a monodigital salute.
Yep, the old mono-medial-digit truly proclaims "Come and see the (injustice) inherent in the system. Help! Help! I'm (we're) being repressed!" And, just exactly how we feel about it...

The bowl system has been a farce for years. I remain opposed to ANY 6-6 team being rewarded for mediocrity.

This, plus the basketball tournament expansion, just ensures I will no longer care about college athletics on the whole, and will only watch UAB.

WesternBlazer

ATTALLABLAZE

Memphis Blazer

BlazerJoe

ATTALLABLAZE

bpblazer

stc

HSV_BLAZER

Memphis Blazer

UAB Band Dad

mixduptransistor

UAB Band Dad

USAFBlazerFan

Blaze4Pres

Grammar-Nazi