Bowl Games/New Years Let Down

Post by **ScoopBrady** » Thu Jan 08, 2009 4:03 pm

bdoughty wrote:Scoop,

Great movie, bad use of imagery (it takes practice). I just can't see how anyone with even a remote interest in college football would watch a regular season NHL game in place of the BCS title game. For one you have two of the most explosive teams in the nation. Next up in all the years college football, OU and Florida have never played each other. Then you have the two coaches and plenty of storylines.

Trust me, 5 years ago I would have been all over this game.

bdoughty wrote:As for Utah. The rules were setup before the year started. Utah knew going in what an uphill battle it would be. They were shunned by both humans and computers alike. They make, yet another, great case for a playoff.

I know Utah knew going in and everything was set before the season started but that doesn't make it any easier to take IMO. Years ago this wasn't as big of a deal because teams like Utah would never even have a chance of beating elite college programs but over the past 10 years things have changed where the middle-tier teams are damn close to the upper-tier teams on the field but they remain far, far away in the minds of the powers that be. Going into every season knowing that only a handful of teams have a chance to be in the title game has cheapened the sport for me.

bdoughty wrote:So based on that, no matter what the thread is titled, you appear to me as someone who has a passing interest in the college game to begin with. You really never spent much time in the college football threads over the years either. It is not like this system and the spreading out of games is new. They have been playing BCS games since 1998/99. Heck the first game was played on Jan 4th 1999, on a Monday, blasphemy.

I'm a huge NFL freak but I don't spend much time in those threads either. You'll see a handful of posts from me in any sports thread because I just prefer not to talk sports much on web forums just like I prefer to mostly stay out of political threads. The reason is people have very strong opinions about sports, like politics, and it often boils down to people telling someone that they're wrong for having a different opinion than they have or that they should feel a certain way other than the way they feel about it. Hey, I'm guilty of it myself in the past. That just isn't my idea of fun.

I hope it's a good game for the fans sake and good luck to your team.

bdoughty · Post by **bdoughty** » Thu Jan 08, 2009 4:20 pm

ScoopBrady wrote: I know Utah knew going in and everything was set before the season started but that doesn't make it any easier to take IMO. Years ago this wasn't as big of a deal because teams like Utah would never even have a chance of beating elite college programs but over the past 10 years things have changed where the middle-tier teams are damn close to the upper-tier teams on the field but they remain far, far away in the minds of the powers that be. Going into every season knowing that only a handful of teams have a chance to be in the title game has cheapened the sport for me.

I hope it's a good game for the fans sake and good luck to your team.

Appreciate that.

Really it is not that different than College Hoops, so I guess that I do not see the cheapening of the sport aspect. Sure there are a lot of upsets in the early rounds but the usually the Championship and Final Four are usually filled with perennial powerhouses.

It is the nature of the beast.

Post by **Jared** » Thu Jan 08, 2009 4:42 pm

(coming from a biased Florida fan and alum...)

I am totally supportive of a playoff (6 teams, best conference champs), co-existing with bowl games. This year is another example of how crappy the current BCS system (essentially, a one-game playoff) is. Believe it or not, I'd be happy if the winner of the UF-OU game got a share of the national title, and Utah got another share. Utah had an excellent season, and an argument can be made that they are just as deserving as UF/OU.

However, this year's game is a REALLY good matchup...probably the best mythical national championship matchup since Texas v. USC. And, if you're a fan of college football, it's a must watch game.

bdoughty · Post by **bdoughty** » Thu Jan 08, 2009 4:43 pm

pk500 wrote:
bdoughty wrote:I just can't see how anyone with even a remote interest in college football would watch a regular season NHL game in place of the BCS title game.
I have a remote interest in college football, and I'm watching the Leafs-Habs' game tonight.

Maybe it's because hockey is king with me. Maybe it's because this is a sham of a national championship based on a BS system. Maybe it's because there's an unbeaten team that SMOKED Alabama, which was ranked No. 1 for five weeks, and beat three other ranked teams this season.

If New England finished 19-0 last season, wouldn't it have been Super Bowl champion? Then how the hell can Utah go 13-0, destroy Alabama and also have three other Top 25 scalps on its record, and NOT have even a sniff at the championship?

How can that system be justified, and why should it be rewarded with 3 1/2 hours of my life?

You make arguments about historical matchups, coaches and storylines, all of which point to one thing: Tonight is going to be one hell of a college football exhibition game.

I don't waste time watching NFL preseason exhibition games because they're meaningless. Just because college football puts its meaningless exhibitions at the end of the season in a pretty dress called bowls and the BCS championship game doesn't mean they're worth my time any more than a Cleveland-Baltimore preseason NFL game Aug. 8.

You can put a dress on a pig, and it's still a pig. That's why I'm watching the Leafs and Habs tonight. At least it means something.

Tonight's BCS title game is college football's version of The Skins Game. It might be fun and good TV, but ultimately it means very little.

And yes, I'd feel the same way if Syracuse was playing. (No, I'm not on acid. )

Take care,
PK

Once again, I would like to mention that I have called for a playoff system, long before the BCS ever existed. On the other hand part of what makes college football so good is that the regular season really does have more importance than every other sport. So yes, the bowls may seem anti-climatic for many but there is one hell of a ride before you get there.

As for comparing a 19-0 New England to a 13-0 Utah. One of those teams has to go through a brutal NFL season, probably one of the hardest as the NFL tends to give the best teams the toughest schedule. On the other hand Utah had games against, "San Diego St, Wyoming, Colorado St, Air Force, UNLV, Utah St and Weber St." A far cry from an SEC type schedule. They came up big against Alabama. Could they pull it off in a 3 or 4 game playoff? I personally do not think so but I would love to see them try.

All I can do is watch the games based on the system that is available. The BCS has been this way for ten years and before that we did not have a system that was really any better in determining a champion before. You call it a meaningless exhibition and from what I gather not worthy of your viewing time. Is this something new for you or have you felt this way since you started watching college football as a youth? Have you ever watched a bowl game? Because it would seem a touch hypocritical if you have, being that they are meaningless exhibitions and on par with an NFL Pre Season game.

Even the undefeated aspect is nothing new. Boise St went undefeated a few years back after beating OU in the Fiesta Bowl. Heck, Utah went undefeated in 2004/05, went to a BCS bowl and kicked the crap out of Pitt. Of course I doubt you would recall that as it was simply another meaningless game played by the Utes.

I am sure that Jared is appreciative of that 2004 undefeated Utah team, as it landed his Gators a terrific coach.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Thu Jan 08, 2009 4:46 pm

bdoughty wrote:Really it is not that different than College Hoops, so I guess that I do not see the cheapening of the sport aspect. Sure there are a lot of upsets in the early rounds but the usually the Championship and Final Four are usually filled with perennial powerhouses.

Cue sound of needle dragging across vinyl album: Say what?

The Final Four is determined by action that occurs on the court in a postseason tournament. College football's "national championship game" is not.

If an NCAA Division I college basketball team finishes unbeaten, it will be the national champion. That's not the case in Division I college football.

Take care,
PK

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Thu Jan 08, 2009 4:51 pm

bdoughty wrote:Even the undefeated aspect is nothing new. Boise St went undefeated a few years back after beating OU in the Fiesta Bowl. Heck, Utah went undefeated in 2004/05, went to a BCS bowl and kicked the crap out of Pitt. Of course I doubt you would recall that as it was simply another meaningless game played by the Utes.

Of course I recall that. But Pitt wasn't ranked No. 1 for five weeks, and it didn't come from the mighty SEC. Did Utah beat three other ranked teams that season, too?

bdoughty wrote:Is this something new for you or have you felt this way since you started watching college football as a youth? Because they have always been this way. Even the undefeated aspect is nothing new. Boise St went undefeated a few years back after beating OU in the Fiesta Bowl. Heck, Utah went undefeated in 2004/05, went to a BCS bowl and kicked the crap out of Pitt.

I have felt this way since the BCS started. The bowl system is flawed as hell, but at least it didn't have one game masquerading as a national championship game.

It also hasn't fallen on blind eyes here that the two biggest proponents of tonight's game as a great spectacle have "dogs in the hunt," so to say. Sorry, boys, but your avatars betray any claims of objectivity just a wee bit.

I sincerely hope you enjoy the game!

Take care,
PK

bdoughty · Post by **bdoughty** » Thu Jan 08, 2009 4:54 pm

pk500 wrote: Cue sound of needle dragging across vinyl album: Say what?

The Final Four is determined by action that occurs on the court in a postseason tournament. College football's "national championship game" is not.

If an NCAA Division I college basketball team finishes unbeaten, it will be the national champion. That's not the case in Division I college football.

Take care,
PK

Twas not my point, I was countering something Scoop said. I was simply stating that like college football, college hoops and the Final Four tend to be dominated by national powers.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Thu Jan 08, 2009 4:55 pm

bdoughty wrote:
pk500 wrote: Cue sound of needle dragging across vinyl album: Say what?

The Final Four is determined by action that occurs on the court in a postseason tournament. College football's "national championship game" is not.

If an NCAA Division I college basketball team finishes unbeaten, it will be the national champion. That's not the case in Division I college football.

Take care,
PK
Twas not my point, I was countering something Scoop said. I was simply stating that like college football, college hoops and the Final Four tend to be dominated by national powers.

10-4.

Take care,
PK

bdoughty · Post by **bdoughty** » Thu Jan 08, 2009 4:57 pm

pk500 wrote:I have felt this way since the BCS started. The bowl system is flawed as hell, but at least it didn't have one game masquerading as a national championship game.

It also hasn't fallen on blind eyes here that the two biggest proponents of tonight's game as a great spectacle have "dogs in the hunt," so to say. Sorry, boys, but your avatars betray any claims of objectivity just a wee bit.

I sincerely hope you enjoy the game!

Take care,
PK

Myself and millions of others will.

I edited my earlier post to call you hypocritical in a loving, caring sort of way, long before you replied.

bdoughty · Post by **bdoughty** » Thu Jan 08, 2009 5:00 pm

pk500 wrote: Of course I recall that. But Pitt wasn't ranked No. 1 for five weeks, and it didn't come from the mighty SEC. Did Utah beat three other ranked teams that season, too?

In 2004 the following wins were against teams that were ranked at the tie they played them.

Texas A&M - this was the opener and ratings really that early mean less than squat as Utah demolished A&M
Air Force
BYU

and finally Pittsburgh

Not as impressive as this year, I will grant you that. Most of the teams were on the bottom rung of the top 25.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Thu Jan 08, 2009 6:31 pm

bdoughty wrote:Have you ever watched a bowl game? Because it would seem a touch hypocritical if you have, being that they are meaningless exhibitions and on par with an NFL Pre Season game.

A handful, tops, since the BCS started and ruined the football orgy of New Year's Day. I watched if Syracuse or Michigan with Mike Hart were playing. I did watch a few BCS "national championship games," including Texas-USC, before I realized, "What the hell is the point?"

My brother, who is a stronger college football fan than me, summed it up well this morning when I asked him if he was going to watch the game. He said: "I'm going bowling, yeah -- it's my bowling league night. I'm not watching that game. It's after the holidays. College football is over, man. It's all about the NFL now."

Loving and caring,

PK

bdoughty · Post by **bdoughty** » Thu Jan 08, 2009 6:53 pm

Well crikey, I never thought to check for a freshness/expiration date on my college football games. Had I known that Jan 1st was the limit, I would have sent OU to the Alamo Bowl and let Texas play for the title.

* Cotton Bowl was on the 2nd this year so I would have left Tech there.

Oh and bad news for Bucknut fans, good news for the rest of us who are not Bucknut fans.
Beanie Wells has decided to go pro.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/draft09/n ... id=3819447

P.S. I bet they have a TV at the bowling alley and the OU/Florida game is on. It will distract his game as no football fan can resist such a great matchup.

greggsand · Post by **greggsand** » Thu Jan 08, 2009 7:16 pm

Bowl Games are more tradition & gambling fodder than anything these days, BUUUT I still watch'em (or at least keep an eye on them).

The problem is the BCS is flawed, a sham, and makes people nuts, but it's not flawed enough to make people NOT watch this game tonight.

The first year the BCS "championship" game gets lower ratings than PK's Leafs-Habs game, we'll have an 8 game playoff next year.

I'll be watching, but I'll be pissed about it!

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Thu Jan 08, 2009 7:19 pm

greggsand wrote:The first year the BCS "championship" game gets lower ratings than PK's Leafs-Habs game, we'll have an 8 game playoff next year.

Canadian ratings? If so, get your brackets ready for next fall!

Seriously, though: If this is such a dream matchup that is captivating all football fans, then why hasn't this thread buzzed with pre-game hype, discussion of matchups, predictions, etc., today?

Take care,
PK

Post by **Jared** » Thu Jan 08, 2009 7:45 pm

pk500 wrote:Seriously, though: If this is such a dream matchup that is captivating all football fans, then why hasn't this thread buzzed with pre-game hype, discussion of matchups, predictions, etc., today?

Because the controversy and annoyance that the BCS creates is strong enough to override the compelling matchup of OU-UF. That's how bad the BCS is: it turns off fans from games that people would have been really excited about ten years ago (and before the BCS, matchups that would have never happened, creating even more excitement).

I really like bowls - I love interconference matchups that never happen, and that they are meaningful "meaningless" games (to collegiate players, coaches, etc. bowl games are still important). And I'm one of those freaks that is happy to watch California - Miami, or Missouri - Northwestern, or even bits of UConn - Buffalo. Keep the bowls, but add a short playoff as well. You can even have the semis on New Year's Day, adding more luster to 1/1 as THE day for football.

bdoughty · Post by **bdoughty** » Thu Jan 08, 2009 8:08 pm

pk500 wrote: Seriously, though: If this is such a dream matchup that is captivating all football fans, then why hasn't this thread buzzed with pre-game hype, discussion of matchups, predictions, etc., today?

Take care,
PK

DSP is a pretty eclectic bunch. There is plenty of hype for the game. You just need to go where the football (or for that matter college sports) discussion is happening, like rivals.com, the ESPN boards, etc. It is like saying the NBA thread here is a good judge of how many watch it during the regular season. This is a video game forum first and foremost. Real life Hockey, Racing and Soccer is discussed here more than college sports. Like I said, pretty eclectic bunch. Nothing wrong with that but not a good measuring stick for how the BCS title game is perceived.

One hour to the most under hyped, meaningless, exhibition game of the year!

XXXIV · Post by **XXXIV** » Thu Jan 08, 2009 8:41 pm

Jared wrote: Because the controversy and annoyance that the BCS creates is strong enough to override the compelling matchup of OU-UF. That's how bad the BCS is: it turns off fans from games that people would have been really excited about ten years ago (and before the BCS, matchups that would have never happened, creating even more excitement).

I really like bowls - I love interconference matchups that never happen, and that they are meaningful "meaningless" games (to collegiate players, coaches, etc. bowl games are still important). And I'm one of those freaks that is happy to watch California - Miami, or Missouri - Northwestern, or even bits of UConn - Buffalo. Keep the bowls, but add a short playoff as well. You can even have the semis on New Year's Day, adding more luster to 1/1 as THE day for football.

Nods in agreement...

1) This is the ONLY bowl game I care about...Since we have gone to the current system the others feel like exhibitions. While I have enjoyed watching some of them ...The Feeling of intensity I had felt watching Bowl games decades past just wasnt there. New Years Day was a big ass deal when I was growing up.

2) The timing of the game is terrible. It feels like the season has been over for a month....

The game needs a playoff. I would love a playoff... but since the greedy bastards care more about money than the actual sport how about they take us back to the old system and just add a game after. The top two teams after its all over play in one game on a magical thursday night.

JRod · Post by **JRod** » Thu Jan 08, 2009 9:28 pm

Playoffs would kill off all tension in the regular season.

Just go back to the way it was, all the major bowls all day long on New Year's. The national championship in a playoff system would probably be just as boring as the Final in March Madness or the Super Bowl.

A little controversy never hurt anyone.

Post by **ScoopBrady** » Thu Jan 08, 2009 10:20 pm

JRod wrote:Playoffs would kill off all tension in the regular season.

See, I totally disagree with this. The only tension is surrounding a handful of teams. When more teams have something at stake that creates more tension. The only tension as it is now involves whoever happens to be in the top 2 spots. If you lose early you can get back in it but if you lose late forget it. I don't really consider that tension. Plus, I'll take 4 weeks of playoff tension over 12 weeks of regular season tension any day of the week.

XXXIV · Post by **XXXIV** » Thu Jan 08, 2009 10:52 pm

Pretty cool half...in a weird way.

Florida should feel good...They could be down 21-7 and should be down at least by 6.

JRod · Post by **JRod** » Thu Jan 08, 2009 10:52 pm

ScoopBrady wrote:
JRod wrote:Playoffs would kill off all tension in the regular season.
See, I totally disagree with this. The only tension is surrounding a handful of teams. When more teams have something at stake that creates more tension. The only tension as it is now involves whoever happens to be in the top 2 spots. If you lose early you can get back in it but if you lose late forget it. I don't really consider that tension. Plus, I'll take 4 weeks of playoff tension over 12 weeks of regular season tension any day of the week.

A playoff system would still mean the regular season is pretty irrelevant. Okay so you have 16 teams. If you are in the top 10, what's the motivation late in the season. Especially if you are in the top 5. Lose a game and you get knocked out? No so there will be more throwaway games.

Now there would be a lot of interest in teams on the bubble more so than March Madness. But playoffs are not about the best best team it's about the hottest team. See NFL.

The thing that is hurting college football is the BCS. Either do away with the BCS and go to the old system or go to a playoff system. But the BCS is killing college football.

XXXIV · Post by **XXXIV** » Thu Jan 08, 2009 10:57 pm

JRod wrote: A playoff system would still mean the regular season is pretty irrelevant. .

DISAGREE!!!

You have to make the playoffs...and it would probably be an 8 team playoff. Thats 2 less teams than make the joke of a BCS.

Teal · Post by **Teal** » Thu Jan 08, 2009 11:06 pm

XXXIV wrote:
JRod wrote: A playoff system would still mean the regular season is pretty irrelevant. .
DISAGREE!!!

You have to make the playoffs...and it would probably be an 8 team playoff. Thats 2 less teams than make the joke of a BCS.

By that token, March Madness is pretty irrelevant...

So 34 has the ball, and he scores!

Post by **ScoopBrady** » Thu Jan 08, 2009 11:23 pm

JRod wrote:A playoff system would still mean the regular season is pretty irrelevant. Okay so you have 16 teams. If you are in the top 10, what's the motivation late in the season. Especially if you are in the top 5. Lose a game and you get knocked out? No so there will be more throwaway games.

So you'd rather see all the tension surrounding 2 teams each week rather than a number of teams? The motivation would be homefield advantage in the early rounds. If you seed the teams that make the playoffs and don't play on a neutral site until the Championship game then being at number 5, losing, and dropping into the 9th spot just cost a team homefield advantage in a playoff game.

JRod wrote:Now there would be a lot of interest in teams on the bubble more so than March Madness. But playoffs are not about the best best team it's about the hottest team. See NFL.

The champion of the NFL is the team that becomes the best after a 16-game regular season. They play well enough to make the playoffs and then beat the best-of-the-best in the league over the span of 3-4 weeks to earn the championship. And are you honestly trying to tell me that the National Championship game tonight isn't between the two hottest teams to finish the college season?

JRod wrote:The thing that is hurting college football is the BCS. Either do away with the BCS and go to the old system or go to a playoff system. But the BCS is killing college football.

I agree that the BCS is killing college football but I'm of the opinion that it has been damaged too much to go to anything other than a playoff system at this point.

Teal · Post by **Teal** » Thu Jan 08, 2009 11:54 pm

I attended a Div. II NCAA school, Jacksonville State, back in '92, when they won the national championship-same year as Alabama. And I can tell you, from firsthand experience, there's nothing like seeing your team play well enough to make the playoffs, take on all comers, and emerge victorious. No doubt about who should be lofting that trophy at the end of the season.
For me, it's the only way to go!

Besides, does a playoff render the NFL season irrelevant? I think not.