Indeed, indeed. Hope to see my Wolverines there on the 1st, I do, though it looks quite possible that we won’t get a PAC-10 opponent should we make it there. 
What about Washington State? I suspect both USC and WSU to run through their last opponents and end up co-champs again.
I have to be honest, though. I’m utterly baffled by the new BCS rules. Did they fix the flaw that allowed the Orange Bowl to steal USC and Iowa last year? So is it possibly that OSU gets grabbed by someone else if they don’t make the Sugar Bowl? I’m gonna be pissed if that BS happens again. (Oklahoma in the Rose Bowl without legitimate cause like a nat. championship game, ptooey).
Neurotik: no, it’s still the same. They rotate the order each bowl gets to pick teams in. The Rose Bowl people will always pick the Big 10 Pac 10 matchup, but last year the Orange Bowl got to pick ahead of them and pre-empted it.
And yeah, money is the big reason why there is no playoff. Also, it would be harder to keep the little schools down if there was a playoff. Although it could get interesting once all these conference lawsuits get heard. And did Congress get anywhere with the antitrust hearings, or did the BCS just get off with a chiding from Joe Biden and Orrin Hatch?
Until the Big 10 picks up another team (so as to facilitate a conf. championship game) they should be banned from the national title hunt (or the NCAA should lift the ban on conf’s with less than 12 teams having a title game). The National Champion should have passed a trial by fire, and without that last game against a quality opponent, comparing a Big 10 (or Pac-10) team against someone from the Big XII or SEC is sour apples to delicious and awesome oranges.
The ACC has stepped up to the plate, and now is a legitimate football conference, how long will it take for the Big 10 and Pac 10 to follow suit? I like the idea of ND in the Big 10, but ND has no reason ever to join a conf. due to the fact that they are nationally-televised every week no matter what; alternatively, I say the Big 10 should poach someone from the MAC, NIU or Miami U. The Pac-10 could take Fresno St. and Colo. St., then the people at CSU can stop bitching about how over-rated CU is.
I like Neurotik’s idea of the 8-team playoff, but please disinclude the Big East. They’ve clearly shifted away from an emphasis on football, and care now only of basketball (incidentally, it’s an open-and-shut case as to what will be the best bball conf. as of 2K5). Pitt should move themselves into another conf. for football.
So, in keeping with my above logic (or miscontrived illogic, depending on your POV), I like OU over LSU in the big game this year, 176-0.
PS> Teams like Baylor need to be kicked out of the major conferences. There’s only about 48 or so teams in the country that play to the highest level, and it has to be an embarassment to such a team to go into a game with a starting Vegas line over 50. There’s a place for teams like them (and Houston and Buffalo), and it’s called I-AA.
4 conferences of 12 powerful teams would make things so much easier.
Georgia Tech 17 Duke 41
Colorado 30 Baylor 42
Purdue 26 Bowling Green 27
Kansas State 20 Marshall 27
Mississippi 34 Memphis 44
There’s just a few games this year where your sub-48 teams have spanked teams in the upper echelon. I especially like that Duke score. 
I suggest you drop the arrogant elitism.
As for these new-fangled conference championship games, I don’t see the necessity, and your whining on about them is most unseemly.
Does anyone else feel an insurgence of irony with the dispensing of someone’s remarks as “arrogant elitism” after just trumpetting anything involved with Duke University?
More importantly, BGSU and Marshall make my “upper echelon”. Anyways, these “upper 48” can schedule anyone they want in non-conf. play, and judging by what the currently do, would be happy to enlist someone like that on their schedule during non-conf. play. Then, we’d still get upsets, and you could have a celebration with Dom Perignon and Krispy Kreme donuts cuz the “little guy” won.
And the necessity for conf. champ games is the excitement of having a conference champion.
Here’s my divisions (some teams made the cut due to historical prestige as opposed to current performance, but such is par for the course):
East:
Clemson, MD, Mississippi, Miss. St., NC St., Ohio St., Penn St., Pitt, Syracuse, Virginia, Va. Tech, West Va.
South:
Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Florida St., Georgia, GT, LSU, Miami, OU, Texas, Texas A&M, TCU
Midwest:
BGSU, Iowa, Marshall, Miami U., Michigan, Mich. St., Missouri, NIU, Notre Dame, Purdue, Tennessee, Wisconsin
Mountain/West:
Az. St., BYU, CU, K State, Minnesota, Nebraska, Oregon, Or. St., UCLA, USC, UW, WSU
Let the flames begin (I’m pre-emptively weeping because I know that this will be greeted with sorrow and angst by all)…
PPS> The “East Coast Bias” is somewhat in effect here, but it’s actually more of a Southeast/Midwest bias, regions which I feel are the strongest as per Coll. Football.
Heres how its going down this season:
USC beats Oklahomo in the Sugar Bowl. Much rejoycing and merriment ensue, by me and my buddies who are on-hand to see it. They give the trophy to Matt (whos numbers are better than Carson’s at this point. Remember him? He won last year.) barely beating out the kid from Oklahoma, primarily due to the win in the bowl and taking the Championship.
And keep this in mind: You blaspheme SC, you answer to O.J.!
She told me she loved me like a brother. She was from Arkansas, hence the Joy!
Okay, I’m confused. You’ve got Bowling Green and Northern Illinois in because they’re having good years, even though they usually suck, but Northwestern and Illinois, both with Big 10 titles within the past few years are out because they’re having down years? And this is just my Big 10-acclimated eyes seeing the obvious. I suspect if I look closely I’ll see a host of other very questionable omissions.
As for the Duke score signalling elitism, let me just say WTF??? Duke has something like 4 wins in the past 6 seasons. They’re worse than Vanderbilt and Baylor put together. They’d have trouble competing in the Michigan Directional State Conference. You must be thinking of some other sport. I suppose you think Kansas is a powerhouse too. :rolleyes:
Yes, your plan is pure arrogant elitism, automatically dismissing anyone who hasn’t won and won big this year as useless. But the fact is that college football programs have their ups and downs. Powerhouses can have long dry spells. Where was Oklahoma in the 90’s? Cellar dwellers can built first class teams and keep them. K State, anyone? Teams can go from bad to good to bad (or good to bad to good) in the space of just a few years. Notre Dame the past 3 years, for example, or Iowa for the reverse trend spread over a few more years. Iowa, in fact would have struggled to be in the top 80, let alone 48, just a few years ago, and yet the past two years have been in contention for the Big 10 title, and have even flirted with national championship hopes. In short, your outright dismissal of some 70 teams as being unworthy to play in the same league as the others is just dumb.
Also, any grouping that leaves the Wolverines and Buckeyes in different conferences is a non-starter. I also see you have the Gators and Vols split up, and probably more to boot. Tsk tsk. I’m surprised you didn’t seperate Auburn and Bama or Texas and OU too, just for kicks.
Agreed. Begone, philistine.
Disagree (if you’re being serious about this point of grammar). The word in question is the object, not the subject, of the sentence. According to this site, the best way to decide between who and whom is to substitute they and them in the original sentence. It may change the meaning, but the point is to decide between the subject form (who/they) and object form (whom/them).
So this thread’s title, rephrased, would then be either
“Oklahoma should play they?”
or
“Oklahoma should play them?”
Which one sounds better, and which one clangs like an extra point off the goalpost?
What flaw? Iowa wasn’t slated for the Rose Bowl because they weren’t Big Ten champions, OSU was. If they had been, they would have had an automatic bid for the Rose Bowl (say, if both were one loss teams, Iowa has the tiebreaker, OSU #2 in the BCS). The Rose Bowl isn’t just for any Big Ten team, it’s for the Big Ten champion.
As per Duke University - an anecdote:
As a young, spry HS Junior, I visited said institution of higher learning to further inform myself as to whether or not I would apply. During an information session, the following exchange took place:
A fellow spry, young gentleman: “Do you recommend taking AP classes and getting B’s, or regular classes and getting A’s?”
Snotty Duke Admissions personnel: “We recommend taking AP’s and getting A’s”
Blah blah blah - I understand you want the best of the best to go to your school and all that nonsense, but the tone and “arrogant elitism” conveyed in that message left a taste of sour apples and not cool, delicious, sweet oranges in my mouth. Also, I despise Duke Basketball 'til the day I die, so that’s sitting on the back-burner as well.
But I digress…
The traditional “rivalry” games can still take place every year. Look at the current situation - just because you’re not in the same conference does not mean that you can’t play each other each year.
I admit that I did go pretty SEC-heavy, but that’s because it’s my favorite conference, and the song that CBS plays coming back from commercials during the SEC games is the best song of this, or any, epoch.
Also, the system would be dynamic, i.e. the bottom could be sloughed off if need-be, and the top of the have-nots could enter into my new Super-Sexy League. Also, I’m just trying to limit entry here - so I guess I am being an elitist. If need be, it could be expanded to 4 16-team divisions, and then you’d add more teams that didn’t make my initial cut.
And this has what, exactly, to do with football elitism? Duke football is not, and will not be for the foreseeable future, an elite program. (This of course could change if the right coach were hired and the Duke AD decided it were a priority.)
Ah, so if the Southwest Illinois State A&M Fighting Groundhogs have the season of their lives, go 12-0 including a couple wins over big names in non-conference games, and have a legit chance of beating the Noles or whoever in the championship game, then they get to enter the Super-Sexy League and compete for the championship next year, after their star quarterback bolts for the NFL early and their all-senior starting O Line graduates. Now I understand. Thankyou for demonstrating the wisdom and fairness of this wonderful system.
Duke University in general - not Duke Football. If you go to my original statement, I said “…Duke University” not “Duke Football.”
So, if SISAMU does that now, do they play in the title game? No.
Is TCU going to be in the title game this year even if they end up undefeated?? No.
So my system is equal in fairness to the current one as per the have-nots, who do not, currently have a legitimate shot anyways.
Oklahoma should play Rodgers and Hammerstein.
And they will, probably at halftime.
That’s SWISAMU, not SISAMU. You’re lucky you’re not on their campus, making a mistake like that!
Well, your system gives them no hope whatsoever. The existing system allows them a theoretical chance, and indeed, in my hypothetical I said they were considered to have a legit shot at the #1 team, which TCU in fairness doesn’t have. If they did, they’d be sitting at 2-4 in the coach and AP polls, and probably be at 2 in the BCS rankings. So there you have it.
Actually, I just checked, and the Horned Frogs would be 4th in the BCS with a 2-5 ranking in the polls instead of the 9-10 they have. To move up further they’d have to have played a tougher schedule as well (or have the 1 loss teams lose again), which is precisely the sort of thing which would have them higher in the subjective polls as well. So, in conclusion, if TCU had played and beat Mississippi and UCLA instead of Vandy and Arizona, they’d have an outside shot. Not outside the realm of possibility.
Basically, your system removes some of the injustices of the current system (#3 team getting snubbed), and replaces it with another (70 teams getting left in the cold). I’d rather tweak the system to fix the former without introducing the latter. An 8-team playoff using something like the BCS ranking system or an NCAA selection committee would suffice. Radical reorganization and compulsory conference playoffs aren’t necessary.
You’d probably twist an ankle.
In other news, the number one thing that CAN be done to help fix the problems of the BCS is to make the AP and Coaches poll come out only after the 6th week of the season. Completely handicaps strong teams that no one ranks at the beginning of the season.
Sorry, I didn’t realize that you had this much support. I guess God really did intend on the Pac 10 and the Big 10 to play in the Rose Bowl. Maybe that is why the First few Rose bowls were the following:
01/01/02 ROSE BOWL MICHIGAN 49, STANFORD 0
01/01/16 ROSE BOWL WASHINGTON STATE 14, BROWN 0
01/01/17 ROSE BOWL OREGON 14, PENNSYLVANIA 0
01/01/20 ROSE BOWL HARVARD 7, OREGON 6
01/01/21 ROSE BOWL CALIFORNIA 28, OHIO STATE 0
01/02/22 ROSE BOWL WASHINGTON&JEFFERSON 0, CALIFORNIA 0
01/01/23 ROSE BOWL SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA 14, PENN STATE 3
01/01/24 ROSE BOWL WASHINGTON 14, NAVY 14
01/01/25 ROSE BOWL NOTRE DAME 27, STANFORD 10
01/01/26 ROSE BOWL ALABAMA 20, WASHINGTON 19
01/01/27 ROSE BOWL STANFORD 7, ALABAMA 7
01/02/28 ROSE BOWL STANFORD 7, PITTSBURGH 6
01/01/29 ROSE BOWL GEORGIA TECH 8, CALIFORNIA 7
01/01/30 ROSE BOWL SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA 47, PITTSBURGH 14
Just because humans didn’t understand God’s desires until later doesn’t mean they didn’t exist.