I accept that Congress is going to waste some time every once in a while. Looking into steroids seemed a bit strange - but whatever.

But now they want to look into the BCS matchups? Please tell me there is SOMETHING more important to investigate than this.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=2245440&campaign=rss&source=ESPNHeadlines

12/2/2005 9:18:09 PM

really


that is sad

12/2/2005 9:35:16 PM

This is a joke, right?

12/2/2005 10:13:22 PM

While I certainly agree that Congress could find more important things to occupy their time, I also think the BCS should be changed by any means necessary.

12/2/2005 10:22:57 PM

congress should stay out of sports...................seriously

12/2/2005 10:48:31 PM

they can't really stay out of a billion dollar industry.. not to mention there is a subcommittee that deals with regulating american sports...

12/2/2005 11:29:10 PM

^agreed, but the bcs is the suck..

Maybe... just maybe this will lead to a playoff system of some type that would be WAY more equitable for the teams that are close but have more losses than some other teams...

12/2/2005 11:30:02 PM

maybe they'll cut out the notre dame bullshit

12/2/2005 11:32:59 PM

Quote :

" This has to be the most retarded, run away congress in history."

12/2/2005 11:49:56 PM

thats what happens when you don't split the power...

12/3/2005 12:04:27 AM

Congress needs to keep their nose out of sports. Period.

12/3/2005 12:05:50 AM

^thanks Barry Bonds

[Edited on December 3, 2005 at 12:16 AM. Reason : ps. you should be studying]

12/3/2005 12:16:12 AM

I'm done

12/3/2005 12:32:56 AM

there is a hell of a lot of money at stake. you think the BCS is a little bit like a monopoly for the schools/conferences that have automatic ties?

12/3/2005 1:01:34 AM

Quote :

"Please tell me there is SOMETHING more important to investigate than this. "

No, just some war, terror, corruption, scandals, economy, future energy supply, and other bullshit. Yep, the BCS is above them all. No cut and run from the BCS.

12/3/2005 1:07:59 AM

Quote :

"maybe they'll cut out the notre dame bullshit"

seriously.. ND gets way to many favors... if they want a BCS game, they should join a BCS conference.. but then again I disagree with the whole BCS conference tie-in.. anyone should be able to get in..

They should draft 3 more bowls into the championship series (Gator, Holiday, Cotton) or create 3 new bowls.. take the top 8 teams in the BCS poll.. put them in 4 random bowls, winners play a week later in 2 other random bowls, then the winners play another week later in the NC at the remaining bowl..and obviously the bowls will rotate like they do right now.. if you do it right.. you can set it up so that #1 and #2 will play in the NC if they are indeed #1 and #2 and win out their two bowl games.

I keep hearing that the reason there is no playoff is because they don't think fans are willing to travel to 3 bowls to watch their team win the NC.. it works for basketball, why wouldn't it work for football..

if 8 teams is too much, then just do 4.. hell.. maybe 5 and a play-in game.. 4 and 5 play in one bowl.. 1 and 3 play in one.. 2 and 4/5 play in a third bowl.. and the 4th bowl will be the 1/3 vs 2/4/5 winners.. no need to add another bowl..

#1
#5

#3
#7

#8
#4

#6
#2

12/3/2005 1:14:24 AM

Quote :

"if 8 teams is too much, then just do 4"

12/3/2005 1:24:02 AM

Quote :

"But now they want to look into the BCS matchups? Please tell me there is SOMETHING more important to investigate than this."

You mean they should have something better to investigate than a multi billion dollar problem??

12/3/2005 2:01:15 AM

Quote :

"maybe they'll cut out the notre dame bullshit"

the hate is hilarious

seriously, find a hobby or something

Quote :

" You mean they should have something better to investigate than a multi billion dollar problem??"

a multi billion dollar problem? k, no

[Edited on December 3, 2005 at 3:50 AM. Reason : d]

12/3/2005 3:49:07 AM

^^ but they DO have plenty of things that need investigating


the BCS is NOT one of them


/rehash

12/3/2005 4:20:28 AM

yeah honestly i think its ok for congress to get in there about steriods but damn the bcs?

12/3/2005 6:18:02 AM

Quote :

"the hate is hilarious seriously, find a hobby or something"

Can you seriously say with a straight face that it isn't bullshit?

[Edited on December 3, 2005 at 12:52 PM. Reason : .]

12/3/2005 12:25:51 PM

Quote :

"if 8 teams is too much, then just do 4"

dude, 8, itself, isn't enough, and you honestly think 4 would do it? There were, what, 5 undefeated teams last year before the bowls. Besides, if you only do 8 (which is what the original BCS did, IIRC), you are still basically having a monopoly that prevents the smaller conferences from getting BCS consideration. In order to have a fair system, you have to give every conference a legitimate chance at it every year. Of course, this scares the fuck out of the BCS schools, because God help them if a Boise State or a Utah comes in and wins it all and takes their money.

So yeah, 16 schools. 11 conference champs get automatic bids and then you have 5 at large bids, selected in a manner similar to the basketball system. fuck this BCS shit and fuck the polls. The polls are the biggest problem with the system. Everybody thinks the polls actually mean something, when all they really show at the end of the year is who lost not last. (yes, "not last")

12/3/2005 8:20:30 PM

Quote :

"I keep hearing that the reason there is no playoff is because they don't think fans are willing to travel to 3 bowls to watch their team win the NC.. it works for basketball, why wouldn't it work for football.. "

1/4 or 1/8 of 18,000 < 1/2 of 80,000

12/3/2005 8:25:21 PM

wtf are those numbers supposed to mean?

12/3/2005 8:26:52 PM

Quote :

" Can you seriously say with a straight face that it isn't bullshit? "

yeah

oregon is doo doo city

12/3/2005 8:58:45 PM

^ So is Michigan State

12/3/2005 9:36:04 PM

the funny thing is i dont remember college football being as popular before the BCS

12/3/2005 9:46:22 PM

^^^^
For basketball, you are filling up an ~18,000 arena with fans of 4 schools (8 for the first and second rounds). Not taking into account tickets being used by local fans, press, etc. that means each school is responsible for an allotment of 4,500 tickets (or 2,250). This is significantly less than 1/2 of an 80,000 seat football stadium for potentially 3 consecutive weeks.



Bowl trips also tend to be more expensive and more of an event, with people getting there earler and dropping more $$$.

12/3/2005 10:13:39 PM

ND has wins over 7-4 michigan, 5-6 pitt, 2-9 washington, 5-6 purdue, 6-5 BYU, 5-6 tennessee, 6-5 navy, 1-10 syracuse, and 5-6 stanford(by 7 points...).

overall record- 9-2

Losses to USC and MICHIGAN STATE(5-6)


Oregon has wins over 6-5 houston, 8-4 montana, 8-4 fresno state, 5-6 stanford (by 24 to ND's 7), 6-5 ASU, 2-9 washington, 3-8 arizona, 7-4 california, 4-7 washington state, 5-6 oregon state.

only loss is to USC

overall record- 10-1



hmmmmmmmmmm.......

12/3/2005 10:20:28 PM

rabble rabble rabble

if you are gonna be lame enough to mention margin of victory against stanford, you should mention margin of loss vs usc (where ND proved to be on the level, and oregon most certainly did not), not to mention what the teams were ranked when they actually played

[Edited on December 3, 2005 at 10:25 PM. Reason : d]

12/3/2005 10:21:39 PM

I love how all the gamecast reporters are singing the praises of the BCS this year because the AP actually gets a fair say in who plays at the end. They also keep hailing this "three-peat" bullshit nonstop, failing to recognize LSU as the true national champion 2 years ago.

12/3/2005 10:25:34 PM

ND doesnt deserve a bcs bid

Oregon does

life isnt fair though

12/3/2005 10:27:34 PM

ND looked better against USC than Oregon did, and ND will tune in more viewers and sell more tickets than Oregon ever will. BCS is about money, not football, and for that reason alone ND is more deserving.

12/3/2005 10:28:49 PM

the crowd/ratings/story lines are obvious

but notre dame is a better football team than oregon

12/3/2005 10:30:14 PM

no people like notre dame more

its all about money

12/3/2005 10:30:59 PM

I agree with you on ND being the better team, but you can't argue that point and actually convince anyone that has their mind set that Oregon is better. Oregon bandwagon fans can't argue the financial aspects of the decision though.

12/3/2005 10:31:49 PM

yeah money talks

but seriously, its oregon

12/3/2005 10:32:25 PM

fine, even if you mention that stuff, oregon still deserves the bid over ND...

Quote :

"not to mention what the teams were ranked when they actually played"

I don't see how that is very relevant. ND played michigan week 2 when they were ranked #3... other than that it is pretty even.

oh ya, and notre dame lost to michigan state and oregon only lost to usc. but I guess that doesn't matter.

[Edited on December 3, 2005 at 10:34 PM. Reason : .]

12/3/2005 10:32:46 PM

so is it safe to assume that if VT loses, they have no shot at the bcs?

12/3/2005 10:33:41 PM

Quote :

" I don't see how that is very relevant. ND played michigan week 2 when they were ranked #3... "

its very relevant to judge the opponents on where they were at that given point in time[quote]

12/3/2005 10:34:32 PM

its very relevant to judge the opponents on where people thought they were at that given point in time.

they played michigan in freaking week two after michigan beat northern illinois. ya i'm sure they were playing like a #3 team that day.


[Edited on December 3, 2005 at 10:37 PM. Reason : /]

12/3/2005 10:36:17 PM

This is my suggestion for a "playoff"

Eliminate the championship game. In it's place, have the ACC champ play the Big East champ, the Big 10 vs Big 12, Pac-10 vs SEC, etc... throw in 2 "at-large" teams into the mix.

The 4 winners would then be made to to play against each other in the respective "bowl game"

Then one more game a week after the bowl games. The season won't stretch much farther into January if it's only one game. You could also make sure that the last bowl games are no later than Jan 2 so the season can be over by the 8th or 9th.

I don't know how quick conferences would be to throw away the conference championship game (lots of revenue), but it doesn't seem that bad of an idea.

12/3/2005 10:36:32 PM

Quote :

" oh ya, and notre dame lost to michigan state and oregon only lost to usc. but I guess that doesn't matter."

sure, michigan state was top 20 at that point in time

oregon got blown the fuck out by usc, they play in the pac 10, blah blah

they deserve the holiday bowl

12/3/2005 10:36:34 PM

Quote :

"they played michigan in freaking week two"

they also played michigan state when they were top 20, pitt and purdue when they were ranked

etc etc

keep hating

12/3/2005 10:37:35 PM

so basically ND has just played teams that turned out to be sucky

12/3/2005 10:38:22 PM

AND THEN WE LEARNED THAT THEY WEREN'T AS GOOD AS PEOPLE THOUGHT THEY WERE. WHAT A CONCEPT.

12/3/2005 10:38:23 PM

THANK YOU UJUSTWAIT

12/3/2005 10:38:52 PM

holiday bowl!

12/3/2005 10:40:03 PM

i mean dont get me wrong ND is a good team

but phishnlou refuses to acknowlege the pac 10 has teams that are better than them

i think the only pac 10 game he watched this season was at southbend

[Edited on December 3, 2005 at 10:41 PM. Reason : whatever]

12/3/2005 10:40:53 PM