(01-02-2013 01:34 PM)TheEastisPurple Wrote:  Since the BCS started there have been 12 teams ranked #15 or worse in BCS bowls and NIU is the only one of them that was non AQ, and not coincidentally the only one completely blasted by ESPN and many CFB fans. UConn took a good bit of heat but they weren't even ranked.


#15 Syracuse in 1999
#22 Stanford in 2000
#17 Purdue in 2001
#21 Pitt in 2005
#22 FSU in 2006
#19 VT in 2009
Unranked UConn in 2011
#23 WVU in 2012
#15 Clemson in 2012
#21 Louisville in 2013
Unranked Wisconsin in 2013

I don't have time to do it since I'm technically working today (and I'm not asking you to do it either), but I would be curious to see what the top 25 looked like in those years. I'm sure some conferences were down and there were probably a few teams that had 3-4 losses that kept them from being ranked higher. The Big East not having a championship game usually seems to throw a 3-4 loss team in the mix and Ohio St being on probation this year sent a so-so Wisconsin team to a BCS game. Point is the system is imperfect and I personally am not happy with it.

Wisconsin certainly didn't belong in a BCS game this year, and even though I made an argument for them earlier, I can easily argue that Louisville doesn't belong either. UCONN certainly didn't belong in 2011. I don't see the point in auto berths for champions if there isn't a playoff and all champions are included.

(01-02-2013 02:19 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(01-02-2013 10:18 AM)MU ATO Wrote:  

(01-02-2013 09:40 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(01-02-2013 09:35 AM)VA49er Wrote:  NIU played by the rules and deserved to be in that game based on the BCS's own rules. I usually like Kirk Herbstreit but his whole thing of blasting NIU really lowers my opinion of him.

Based on the BCS rules yes the deserved to be there. In reality though it's hard to pretend it was an appealing matchup, much like Hawaii and Georgia a few years ago, everyone knew what was going to happen, and it wasn't going to be pretty.

Lame

Roy Kramer and Co. LOVE people like you. If it was Louisivlle getting beat by FSU 31-10 would you be posting the same?

Louisville had a great year against much better opponents than NIU did. Lost at Syracuse and in triple overtime to Connecticut. Beat Kentucky and North Carolina OOC. The only knock I have on Louisville is they got in without having to play a championship game but thats out of their control.

I don't need to justify my feelings on a subject like this, and I'm certainly not to only one that feels the same way. I wasn't happy with Hawaii's BCS appearance, or some of Boise State's appearances either.

Until there is a 16 team playoff there will always be people that feel the way I do and the way you do. I don't understand the reluctance to just create the playoff. It's only 15 games spread over 4 weeks. The current bowl season also covers 4 weeks. Keep the other 19 bowls and raise the requirement for a bowl game to 7 games. It's obviously more complicated than that, but thats a good start in my opinion.

Because ESPN and the deep reaching bias in CFB that networks have created, you believe that. Look at realtimerpi.com, NIU's SOS is ranked 201. Louisville's is ranked 199.

I know it would be easy to say then that neither belonged, which is fine. The point of the thread is that ESPN just makes crap up and people buy it. They are a business, not some friendly group of people just giving out factual information. They give out the message that they want to that will sway people and decisions into the most lucrative situation for them. They don't give a rats ass about the integrity of college football.

What they are thinking is "we can't make as much money if Northern Illinois is playing in our major bowls" but if they say that they don't look very good and more people will call them out. So instead they say "Northern Illinois doesn't deserve to be here. They play a weak schedule and aren't good enough to play in this game." Because let's be honest, the vast majority of CFB fans who watch ESPN aren't going to do one ounce of research into whether or not that claim is accurate. I mean ESPN is the world wide leader in sports, if they say it it's true right?

(01-02-2013 02:19 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(01-02-2013 10:18 AM)MU ATO Wrote:  

(01-02-2013 09:40 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(01-02-2013 09:35 AM)VA49er Wrote:  NIU played by the rules and deserved to be in that game based on the BCS's own rules. I usually like Kirk Herbstreit but his whole thing of blasting NIU really lowers my opinion of him.

Based on the BCS rules yes the deserved to be there. In reality though it's hard to pretend it was an appealing matchup, much like Hawaii and Georgia a few years ago, everyone knew what was going to happen, and it wasn't going to be pretty.

Lame

Roy Kramer and Co. LOVE people like you. If it was Louisivlle getting beat by FSU 31-10 would you be posting the same?

Louisville had a great year against much better opponents than NIU did. Lost at Syracuse and in triple overtime to Connecticut. Beat Kentucky and North Carolina OOC. The only knock I have on Louisville is they got in without having to play a championship game but thats out of their control.

Kentucky is a great win? Louisville got destroyed by Syracuse and lost at home to UConn who won 5 games.

I have no idea who you consider a much better opponent. Cincinnati lost to Toledo, USF lost to Ball State, Rutgers got drilled by Kent State. Those are all teams NIU beat.

Cincinnati, Rutgers, and Pitt are the 3 teams Louisville beat who ended up in bowl games. UNC was far and away their best win. Kudos for that.

By the way, Florida will be the first ranked team Louisville will have played all year. Just be honest and say you think Louisville is more deserving because they come from a league with "BCS" attached and NIU is just NIU from the MAC.

(01-02-2013 03:30 PM)Falcon1407 Wrote:  

(01-02-2013 02:19 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(01-02-2013 10:18 AM)MU ATO Wrote:  

(01-02-2013 09:40 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(01-02-2013 09:35 AM)VA49er Wrote:  NIU played by the rules and deserved to be in that game based on the BCS's own rules. I usually like Kirk Herbstreit but his whole thing of blasting NIU really lowers my opinion of him.

Based on the BCS rules yes the deserved to be there. In reality though it's hard to pretend it was an appealing matchup, much like Hawaii and Georgia a few years ago, everyone knew what was going to happen, and it wasn't going to be pretty.

Lame

Roy Kramer and Co. LOVE people like you. If it was Louisivlle getting beat by FSU 31-10 would you be posting the same?

Louisville had a great year against much better opponents than NIU did. Lost at Syracuse and in triple overtime to Connecticut. Beat Kentucky and North Carolina OOC. The only knock I have on Louisville is they got in without having to play a championship game but thats out of their control.

Kentucky is a great win? Louisville got destroyed by Syracuse and lost at home to UConn who won 5 games.

I have no idea who you consider a much better opponent. Cincinnati lost to Toledo, USF lost to Ball State, Rutgers got drilled by Kent State. Those are all teams NIU beat.

Cincinnati, Rutgers, and Pitt are the 3 teams Louisville beat who ended up in bowl games. UNC was far and away their best win. Kudos for that.

By the way, Florida will be the first ranked team Louisville will have played all year.

Exactly THIS. But you have to look somewhere other than ESPN to find this stuff out because it isn't in their best interest to promote schools with smaller fan bases that will make them less money when playing in their major bowls.

(01-02-2013 11:32 AM)ArmoredUpKnight Wrote:  They had their opportunity to shut the critics up. We have seen Utah, Boise State, and TCU do it. But we have also seen disasters in Hawaii and now NIU.

How was that a disaster? NIU was down 17-10 at the end of three. It was a typical game that was close between an underdog and a favorite that was close for a while then the underdog didn't have enough to keep fighting at the end.

(01-02-2013 03:30 PM)Falcon1407 Wrote:  Kentucky is a great win? Louisville got destroyed by Syracuse and lost at home to UConn who won 5 games.

I have no idea who you consider a much better opponent. Cincinnati lost to Toledo, USF lost to Ball State, Rutgers got drilled by Kent State. Those are all teams NIU beat.

Cincinnati, Rutgers, and Pitt are the 3 teams Louisville beat who ended up in bowl games. UNC was far and away their best win. Kudos for that.

By the way, Florida will be the first ranked team Louisville will have played all year. Just be honest and say you think Louisville is more deserving because they come from a league with "BCS" attached and NIU is just NIU from the MAC.

Let's also keep in mind Pitt opened the year with a 31-17 home loss to Youngstown State. Teams grow up and change throughout the year and one game is one game but none-the-less you can't be mad at NIU and it's 1-loss early in the year and forget other transgressions.

Do you really feel like you could replace Louisville with NIU and NIU would have replicated Louisville's success? NIU faced 5 teams with 2 wins or less, thats 45% of their wins coming over teams that won 16% or less of their own games. Louisville faced just 2 teams with 2 wins or less, only 22% of their opponents. One win was by a single point and another by just 7 no less. Louisville might not have played the best teams in the world, but NIU played some really terrible teams that accounted for almost half their wins.


Falcon I never said Kentucky was a great win either. But it is a win against bottom of the barrel SEC players which are on average better then decent MAC players. Oh yeah, that same Kentucky team destroyed Kent St 47-14.

Bottom line is that I see nothing in NIU very nice 11 win season that makes me feel like they deserved a shot at a BCS game. They played too many teams that barely squeezed out one or two wins.

I dislike the BCS and certainly don't favor Louisville because they happen to have been in a BCS league. Louisville was just a better team. Texas A&M, Clemson, and LSU were the more deserving teams that were passed over.

(01-01-2013 09:37 PM)MU ATO Wrote:  Plus they were talking about DeKalb saying its just outside of Chicago.

Uhhhh no.

Isn't DeKalb 60 plus miles from the Windy City? Hardly "just outside of Chicago" as the announcers said.

(01-02-2013 04:24 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  Do you really feel like you could replace Louisville with NIU and NIU would have replicated Louisville's success? NIU faced 5 teams with 2 wins or less, thats 45% of their wins coming over teams that won 16% or less of their own games. Louisville faced just 2 teams with 2 wins or less, only 22% of their opponents. Louisville might not have played the best teams in the world, but NIU played some really terrible teams that accounted for almost half their wins.


Falcon I never said Kentucky was a great win either. But it is a win against bottom of the barrel SEC players which are on average better then decent MAC players. Oh yeah, that same Kentucky team destroyed Kent St 47-14.

Bottom line is that I see nothing in NIU very nice 11 win season that makes me feel like they deserved a shot at a BCS game. They played too many teams that barely squeezed out one or two wins.

So they beat the teams they were supposed to. Kent State also destroyed Rutgers, but, guys like you and ESPN folks don't want to talk about a BCS co champion losing to MAC schools. Just that they lost to UK.

The MAC enjoyed one of it's best years in a long time and NIU proved to be the best team. The 2nd and 3rd best teams in the MAC BEAT 2 of the Big East co-champions. You keep ignoring that. Yes, NIU could have won 10 games with Louisville's schedule. But, alas UNC would never play NIU in Dekalb.

Could NIU kept it within 20 of Syracuse? Yes.

Could they have beat, UC, USF, Pitt, Rutgers, and Temple. Yes to all those teams.

Would they have lost to UConn at home? No. UConn lost at home to Western Michigan...who lost to NIU by 2 TDs.

Sorry NIU only beat Eastern, UMass, and Akron by a combined score of 149-14. We'll start having teams run the score up on those guys.

Sorry they only beat Army by 1. The same Army who beat BC, Air Force and had Navy on the ropes.

You could say Louisville played a lot of horrible teams that accounted for half their wins.
UK (2 wins)
Missouri State (3 wins....FCS)
FIU (3 wins)
Southern Miss (0 wins)
South Florida (3 wins)
Temple (4 wins)

5 FBS teams...combined 12 wins. With an FCS team who won 3 games. 6 of their wins came against teams with a combined 15 wins...the shame.

And you want to complain about who NIU beat....wow. I'm sure ESPN will touch on all this tonight.

(01-02-2013 04:24 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  Do you really feel like you could replace Louisville with NIU and NIU would have replicated Louisville's success? NIU faced 5 teams with 2 wins or less, thats 45% of their wins coming over teams that won 16% or less of their own games. Louisville faced just 2 teams with 2 wins or less, only 22% of their opponents. Louisville might not have played the best teams in the world, but NIU played some really terrible teams that accounted for almost half their wins.


Falcon I never said Kentucky was a great win either. But it is a win against bottom of the barrel SEC players which are on average better then decent MAC players. Oh yeah, that same Kentucky team destroyed Kent St 47-14.

Bottom line is that I see nothing in NIU very nice 11 win season that makes me feel like they deserved a shot at a BCS game. They played too many teams that barely squeezed out one or two wins.

Firstly they won 12 games. Second....

RPI of NIU Wins:
32. Kent State
37. Ball State
45. Toledo
78. Central Michigan
97. Buffalo
103. Western Michigan
119. Eastern Michigan
122. Kansas
124. Army
141. Akron
148. UT Martin
151. UMass

Avg of 10 best wins (89.8)
Avg of all wins (99.75)

RPI of Louisville Wins:
25. Cincinnati
38. Rutgers
42. North Carolina
62. Pitt
84. Temple
96. South Florida
106. Kentucky
113. FIU
152. USM
203. Missouri State

Avg of 10 Wins (92.1)


So basically NIU played a better schedule looking at their 10 best wins to match Louisville's 10 wins and then beat 2 more teams that brought their avg down to just below Louisville's. Also NIU's loss was to 83 Iowa and Louisville's losses were to 47 Syracuse and 85 UConn.

(01-02-2013 04:58 PM)Falcon1407 Wrote:  

(01-02-2013 04:24 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  Do you really feel like you could replace Louisville with NIU and NIU would have replicated Louisville's success? NIU faced 5 teams with 2 wins or less, thats 45% of their wins coming over teams that won 16% or less of their own games. Louisville faced just 2 teams with 2 wins or less, only 22% of their opponents. Louisville might not have played the best teams in the world, but NIU played some really terrible teams that accounted for almost half their wins.


Falcon I never said Kentucky was a great win either. But it is a win against bottom of the barrel SEC players which are on average better then decent MAC players. Oh yeah, that same Kentucky team destroyed Kent St 47-14.

Bottom line is that I see nothing in NIU very nice 11 win season that makes me feel like they deserved a shot at a BCS game. They played too many teams that barely squeezed out one or two wins.

So they beat the teams they were supposed to. Kent State also destroyed Rutgers, but, guys like you and ESPN folks don't want to talk about a BCS co champion losing to MAC schools. Just that they lost to UK.

The MAC enjoyed one of it's best years in a long time and NIU proved to be the best team. The 2nd and 3rd best teams in the MAC BEAT 2 of the Big East co-champions. You keep ignoring that. Yes, NIU could have won 10 games with Louisville's schedule. But, alas UNC would never play NIU in Dekalb.

Could NIU kept it within 20 of Syracuse? Yes.

Could they have beat, UC, USF, Pitt, Rutgers, and Temple. Yes to all those teams.

Would they have lost to UConn at home? No. UConn lost at home to Western Michigan...who lost to NIU by 2 TDs.

Sorry NIU only beat Eastern, UMass, and Akron by a combined score of 149-14. We'll start having teams run the score up on those guys.

Sorry they only beat Army by 1. The same Army who beat BC, Air Force and had Navy on the ropes.

You could say Louisville played a lot of horrible teams that accounted for half their wins.
UK (2 wins)
Missouri State (3 wins....FCS)
FIU (3 wins)
Southern Miss (0 wins)
South Florida (3 wins)
Temple (4 wins)

5 FBS teams...combined 12 wins. With an FCS team who won 3 games. 6 of their wins came against teams with a combined 15 wins...the shame.

And you want to complain about who NIU beat....wow. I'm sure ESPN will touch on all this tonight.

I don't need ESPN to tell me what to look at when comparing two teams. Sorry you feel differently than I do about NIU and Louisville. You're entitled to, but I think you make the mistake of believing that I think Louisville belongs in their game either. I never said they do and never said I wouldn't be critical of Louisville when the more than likely lose to Florida.
Want me to congratulate Kent St for beating Rutgers? Would that make you feel better? It's pointless to compare Team A's wins against teams x,y, and z against Team B's wins against teams w,u, and v.

Since you brought it up though, if you want to talk about Louisville and NIU's records against 4 win teams it only gets worse for NIU. NIU played three 4 win teams, losing to one of them. That makes 7 of their 11 wins and accounts for their one loss as well. By that measure, Louisville still better than NIU.

(01-02-2013 01:52 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(01-02-2013 10:15 AM)MU ATO Wrote:  

(01-02-2013 09:17 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  Personally I didn't think NIU belonged in the that game and it actually turned out better for them than I thought it should have. If anything the announcers should have been talking about the choke-job all the teams ranked ahead of NIU pulled in the last week of the season and championship games that put NIU in the top 16. 11 wins three years in a row is impressive, but clearly NIU wasn't capable of putting up a decent fight. ESPN has to build up NIU in that instance to make it seems like they did something worthy of getting into a BCS game. I guess the only word they could come up with was cinderella, even if it didn't fit.
Wisconsin in the Rose Bowl was a laugher too. A good team no doubt, but not worthy of a BCS bowl. The Rose Bowl should have had their pick of Big East teams since Wisconsin's record was so poor. Nebraska and Wisconsin should have been flipped even though Wisconsin won the Big10. All in all, Both Big10 schools still would have lost.

So what makes a school "worthy" of being in a magnificent, magical, almighty, mystifying, breathtaking BCS bowl?

Apparently winning a conference championship by beating a fellow ranked and one loss team and only losing a single game makes you dirt and not worthy of playing a fellow conference champ.

To start with there is nothing 'magnificent, magical, almighty, mystifying, or breathtaking' about a BCS bowl other than the money. The BCS bowls are for the best teams to play in. NIU by losing to a team that ended up being 4-8 and combined with their strength of schedule in my eyes doesn't qualify as one of the best teams out there. Texas A&M,Oklahoma, Georgia, South Carolina, LSU, and Clemson are all better teams to me then NIU. I can't help it if all the best teams are in the big conferences. Yes, NIU won their conference, but to me that shouldn't bump them above some of the teams listed below. As the BCS is written, they won their way in and got their shot. I don't have to be happy about it.

Personally I would have rather seen South Carolina or Georgia against Florida St and let NIU have played Nebraska or Michigan.

Texas A&m - lost to Florida and LSU. Best Win @ Alabama.

Oklahoma - lost Kansas St and Notre Dame. Best Win @ Texas

Georgia - lost South Carolina and Alabama. Best Win @ Florida.

South Carolina - lost LSU and Florida. Best Win @ Georgia/Clemson

LSU - lost to Florida and Alabama. Best Win @ Texas A&M

Clemson - lost to Florida St and South Carolina. Best Win Auburn/NC State

NIU - lost to Iowa. Best Win Kent St.

Bingo! Every team you listed EASILY deserves it over NIU. Winning a weak ass conference and playing a weak out of conference schedule doesn't make you a good team. It means you played nobodies and have a good record. Nothing more. FSU proved that last night.

ESPN blows.

I mute the TV too when Tirico is calling a game.

(01-02-2013 06:20 PM)cocky Wrote:  

(01-02-2013 01:52 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(01-02-2013 10:15 AM)MU ATO Wrote:  

(01-02-2013 09:17 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  Personally I didn't think NIU belonged in the that game and it actually turned out better for them than I thought it should have. If anything the announcers should have been talking about the choke-job all the teams ranked ahead of NIU pulled in the last week of the season and championship games that put NIU in the top 16. 11 wins three years in a row is impressive, but clearly NIU wasn't capable of putting up a decent fight. ESPN has to build up NIU in that instance to make it seems like they did something worthy of getting into a BCS game. I guess the only word they could come up with was cinderella, even if it didn't fit.
Wisconsin in the Rose Bowl was a laugher too. A good team no doubt, but not worthy of a BCS bowl. The Rose Bowl should have had their pick of Big East teams since Wisconsin's record was so poor. Nebraska and Wisconsin should have been flipped even though Wisconsin won the Big10. All in all, Both Big10 schools still would have lost.

So what makes a school "worthy" of being in a magnificent, magical, almighty, mystifying, breathtaking BCS bowl?

Apparently winning a conference championship by beating a fellow ranked and one loss team and only losing a single game makes you dirt and not worthy of playing a fellow conference champ.

To start with there is nothing 'magnificent, magical, almighty, mystifying, or breathtaking' about a BCS bowl other than the money. The BCS bowls are for the best teams to play in. NIU by losing to a team that ended up being 4-8 and combined with their strength of schedule in my eyes doesn't qualify as one of the best teams out there. Texas A&M,Oklahoma, Georgia, South Carolina, LSU, and Clemson are all better teams to me then NIU. I can't help it if all the best teams are in the big conferences. Yes, NIU won their conference, but to me that shouldn't bump them above some of the teams listed below. As the BCS is written, they won their way in and got their shot. I don't have to be happy about it.

Personally I would have rather seen South Carolina or Georgia against Florida St and let NIU have played Nebraska or Michigan.

Texas A&m - lost to Florida and LSU. Best Win @ Alabama.

Oklahoma - lost Kansas St and Notre Dame. Best Win @ Texas

Georgia - lost South Carolina and Alabama. Best Win @ Florida.

South Carolina - lost LSU and Florida. Best Win @ Georgia/Clemson

LSU - lost to Florida and Alabama. Best Win @ Texas A&M

Clemson - lost to Florida St and South Carolina. Best Win Auburn/NC State

NIU - lost to Iowa. Best Win Kent St.

Bingo! Every team you listed EASILY deserves it over NIU. Winning a weak ass conference and playing a weak out of conference schedule doesn't make you a good team. It means you played nobodies and have a good record. Nothing more. FSU proved that last night.

Thing is that isn't even close to the argument being made in this thread. Your argument is with the BCS system which is an entirely different clusterf**k that has left countless teams that "deserved it more" on the outside looking in. It is hardly NIU's fault that the rules are written they way they are.

The problem I have, and why I started the thread, is that there have been many less deserving teams playing in BCS bowls but nobody says boo because they are in AQ conferences (i.e. they can have an absolutely craptastic season but win their conference so they get to go). Then NIU comes along and has a better season than many of them, is ranked higher than many of them by the BCS rankings, and suddenly it's an abomination.

This thread is about ESPN's obvious bias, not whether the 10 most deserving teams are in the BCS bowls, as they almost never are because of the way the rules are written.

(01-02-2013 06:56 PM)TheEastisPurple Wrote:  

(01-02-2013 06:20 PM)cocky Wrote:  

(01-02-2013 01:52 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(01-02-2013 10:15 AM)MU ATO Wrote:  

(01-02-2013 09:17 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  Personally I didn't think NIU belonged in the that game and it actually turned out better for them than I thought it should have. If anything the announcers should have been talking about the choke-job all the teams ranked ahead of NIU pulled in the last week of the season and championship games that put NIU in the top 16. 11 wins three years in a row is impressive, but clearly NIU wasn't capable of putting up a decent fight. ESPN has to build up NIU in that instance to make it seems like they did something worthy of getting into a BCS game. I guess the only word they could come up with was cinderella, even if it didn't fit.
Wisconsin in the Rose Bowl was a laugher too. A good team no doubt, but not worthy of a BCS bowl. The Rose Bowl should have had their pick of Big East teams since Wisconsin's record was so poor. Nebraska and Wisconsin should have been flipped even though Wisconsin won the Big10. All in all, Both Big10 schools still would have lost.

So what makes a school "worthy" of being in a magnificent, magical, almighty, mystifying, breathtaking BCS bowl?

Apparently winning a conference championship by beating a fellow ranked and one loss team and only losing a single game makes you dirt and not worthy of playing a fellow conference champ.

To start with there is nothing 'magnificent, magical, almighty, mystifying, or breathtaking' about a BCS bowl other than the money. The BCS bowls are for the best teams to play in. NIU by losing to a team that ended up being 4-8 and combined with their strength of schedule in my eyes doesn't qualify as one of the best teams out there. Texas A&M,Oklahoma, Georgia, South Carolina, LSU, and Clemson are all better teams to me then NIU. I can't help it if all the best teams are in the big conferences. Yes, NIU won their conference, but to me that shouldn't bump them above some of the teams listed below. As the BCS is written, they won their way in and got their shot. I don't have to be happy about it.

Personally I would have rather seen South Carolina or Georgia against Florida St and let NIU have played Nebraska or Michigan.

Texas A&m - lost to Florida and LSU. Best Win @ Alabama.

Oklahoma - lost Kansas St and Notre Dame. Best Win @ Texas

Georgia - lost South Carolina and Alabama. Best Win @ Florida.

South Carolina - lost LSU and Florida. Best Win @ Georgia/Clemson

LSU - lost to Florida and Alabama. Best Win @ Texas A&M

Clemson - lost to Florida St and South Carolina. Best Win Auburn/NC State

NIU - lost to Iowa. Best Win Kent St.

Bingo! Every team you listed EASILY deserves it over NIU. Winning a weak ass conference and playing a weak out of conference schedule doesn't make you a good team. It means you played nobodies and have a good record. Nothing more. FSU proved that last night.

Thing is that isn't even close to the argument being made in this thread. Your argument is with the BCS system which is an entirely different clusterf**k that has left countless teams that "deserved it more" on the outside looking in. It is hardly NIU's fault that the rules are written they way they are.

The problem I have, and why I started the thread, is that there have been many less deserving teams playing in BCS bowls but nobody says boo because they are in AQ conferences (i.e. they can have an absolutely craptastic season but win their conference so they get to go). Then NIU comes along and has a better season than many of them, is ranked higher than many of them by the BCS rankings, and suddenly it's an abomination.

This thread is about ESPN's obvious bias, not whether the 10 most deserving teams are in the BCS bowls, as they almost never are because of the way the rules are written.

all true. I stated I don't like the system but according to the system NIU earned their chance. they got it and proved that they weren't ready. I have no argument against ESPN's bias and I have a problem with it too, unfortunately NIU helped reinforce their mindset.

(01-02-2013 07:35 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(01-02-2013 06:56 PM)TheEastisPurple Wrote:  

(01-02-2013 06:20 PM)cocky Wrote:  

(01-02-2013 01:52 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(01-02-2013 10:15 AM)MU ATO Wrote:  So what makes a school "worthy" of being in a magnificent, magical, almighty, mystifying, breathtaking BCS bowl?

Apparently winning a conference championship by beating a fellow ranked and one loss team and only losing a single game makes you dirt and not worthy of playing a fellow conference champ.

To start with there is nothing 'magnificent, magical, almighty, mystifying, or breathtaking' about a BCS bowl other than the money. The BCS bowls are for the best teams to play in. NIU by losing to a team that ended up being 4-8 and combined with their strength of schedule in my eyes doesn't qualify as one of the best teams out there. Texas A&M,Oklahoma, Georgia, South Carolina, LSU, and Clemson are all better teams to me then NIU. I can't help it if all the best teams are in the big conferences. Yes, NIU won their conference, but to me that shouldn't bump them above some of the teams listed below. As the BCS is written, they won their way in and got their shot. I don't have to be happy about it.

Personally I would have rather seen South Carolina or Georgia against Florida St and let NIU have played Nebraska or Michigan.

Texas A&m - lost to Florida and LSU. Best Win @ Alabama.

Oklahoma - lost Kansas St and Notre Dame. Best Win @ Texas

Georgia - lost South Carolina and Alabama. Best Win @ Florida.

South Carolina - lost LSU and Florida. Best Win @ Georgia/Clemson

LSU - lost to Florida and Alabama. Best Win @ Texas A&M

Clemson - lost to Florida St and South Carolina. Best Win Auburn/NC State

NIU - lost to Iowa. Best Win Kent St.

Bingo! Every team you listed EASILY deserves it over NIU. Winning a weak ass conference and playing a weak out of conference schedule doesn't make you a good team. It means you played nobodies and have a good record. Nothing more. FSU proved that last night.

Thing is that isn't even close to the argument being made in this thread. Your argument is with the BCS system which is an entirely different clusterf**k that has left countless teams that "deserved it more" on the outside looking in. It is hardly NIU's fault that the rules are written they way they are.

The problem I have, and why I started the thread, is that there have been many less deserving teams playing in BCS bowls but nobody says boo because they are in AQ conferences (i.e. they can have an absolutely craptastic season but win their conference so they get to go). Then NIU comes along and has a better season than many of them, is ranked higher than many of them by the BCS rankings, and suddenly it's an abomination.

This thread is about ESPN's obvious bias, not whether the 10 most deserving teams are in the BCS bowls, as they almost never are because of the way the rules are written.

all true. I stated I don't like the system but according to the system NIU earned their chance. they got it and proved that they weren't ready. I have no argument against ESPN's bias and I have a problem with it too, unfortunately NIU helped reinforce their mindset.

yup

and yet no one on here, or at ESPN, gives a rip about Georgia Tech playing in a bowl with a 6-7 record. GT petitioned the NCAA BEFORE they played Florida State and said it was unfair that they were being FORCED to play in their conference championship game because if they lost (oh my) then they wouldn't get to play in a bowl (boo hoo).

So the NCAA, in all of its wisdom, allowed GT to be exempt from the very rule they had a committee agree upon this summer so they could have their bowl. As a result, 8-4 MTSU didn't get a bowl game, and MTSU beat GT @GT this year by 21 points!

And yet no one on ESPN, or on here apparently, seems bothered by that. But a 12-1 team from the MAC plays in a big money game and HOLD THE PHONES lets have a freak out because a team that has won 21 of its last 22 games hasn't "earned" it.

BTW, the two previous Orange Bowls were lost by greater margins by teams that "deserved" to be there, but no one seems to care about that either.

(01-02-2013 08:13 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  and yet no one on here, or at ESPN, gives a rip about Georgia Tech playing in a bowl with a 6-7 record. GT petitioned the NCAA BEFORE they played Florida State and said it was unfair that they were being FORCED to play in their conference championship game because if they lost (oh my) then they wouldn't get to play in a bowl (boo hoo).

So the NCAA, in all of its wisdom, allowed GT to be exempt from the very rule they had a committee agree upon this summer so they could have their bowl. As a result, 8-4 MTSU didn't get a bowl game, and MTSU beat GT @GT this year by 21 points!

And yet no one on ESPN, or on here apparently, seems bothered by that. But a 12-1 team from the MAC plays in a big money game and HOLD THE PHONES lets have a freak out because a team that has won 21 of its last 22 games hasn't "earned" it.

BTW, the two previous Orange Bowls were lost by greater margins by teams that "deserved" to be there, but no one seems to care about that either.

valid points but bottom line is GT won their bowl game, and it wasn't a BCS bowl which this thread is kinda about. MTSU should have gotten an invite over a 6-6 team. I understand GT's position because aafter 12 games they were at 6-6 and qualified for a bowl. IMO it should be a 7 win minimum for bowl eligibility.

(01-02-2013 08:13 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  and yet no one on here, or at ESPN, gives a rip about Georgia Tech playing in a bowl with a 6-7 record. GT petitioned the NCAA BEFORE they played Florida State and said it was unfair that they were being FORCED to play in their conference championship game because if they lost (oh my) then they wouldn't get to play in a bowl (boo hoo).

So the NCAA, in all of its wisdom, allowed GT to be exempt from the very rule they had a committee agree upon this summer so they could have their bowl. As a result, 8-4 MTSU didn't get a bowl game, and MTSU beat GT @GT this year by 21 points!

And yet no one on ESPN, or on here apparently, seems bothered by that. But a 12-1 team from the MAC plays in a big money game and HOLD THE PHONES lets have a freak out because a team that has won 21 of its last 22 games hasn't "earned" it.

BTW, the two previous Orange Bowls were lost by greater margins by teams that "deserved" to be there, but no one seems to care about that either.

I agree but I don't think you read the whole thread if you don't think anyone here cares. The MTSU/GT thing wasn't mentioned though, and that too is BS.

(01-02-2013 08:25 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(01-02-2013 08:13 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  and yet no one on here, or at ESPN, gives a rip about Georgia Tech playing in a bowl with a 6-7 record. GT petitioned the NCAA BEFORE they played Florida State and said it was unfair that they were being FORCED to play in their conference championship game because if they lost (oh my) then they wouldn't get to play in a bowl (boo hoo).

So the NCAA, in all of its wisdom, allowed GT to be exempt from the very rule they had a committee agree upon this summer so they could have their bowl. As a result, 8-4 MTSU didn't get a bowl game, and MTSU beat GT @GT this year by 21 points!

And yet no one on ESPN, or on here apparently, seems bothered by that. But a 12-1 team from the MAC plays in a big money game and HOLD THE PHONES lets have a freak out because a team that has won 21 of its last 22 games hasn't "earned" it.

BTW, the two previous Orange Bowls were lost by greater margins by teams that "deserved" to be there, but no one seems to care about that either.

valid points but bottom line is GT won their bowl game, and it wasn't a BCS bowl which this thread is kinda about. MTSU should have gotten an invite over a 6-6 team. I understand GT's position because aafter 12 games they were at 6-6 and qualified for a bowl. IMO it should be a 7 win minimum for bowl eligibility.

You understand GT's position? C'mon, they had a chance to win to conference championship AND play in a BCS bowl. How many 6-6 teams would kill for that chance?

I understand the topic is specifically BCS bowls but in terms of "deserved" GT is a worse offense, and them winning their game doesn't make it right. LaTech or MTSU could have beat USC too and that would have been great for those programs.

And I also don't understand how fans of teams in the 5 Little Sisters of the Poor conferences can continue to spout off ESPN's talking points about a non-AQ not "deserving" to play in a money bowl. You're rooting against your own best interests.

Edit: and let me clarify, I'm not sticking up for NIU. Screw them. When Ohio was 7-0 and ranked their fans were constantly calling Ohio overrated and bragging about how they beat UMass and Akron by larger margins, as if that mattered. In my opinion, a lot of this is just karma. My support is for nonAQ v AQ.