Nah, you're not way off. It's probably a combination of your theory and mine. I have a chip about the Rose Bowl anyway, so that probably clouds my opinion somewhat.
Metroid wrote:I figured it had to do with the Rose Bowl but even that tradition has changed, you don't see Pac-10 vs. Big-10 in the Rose Bowl every year. Remember Vince Young and Texas a few years back? Sure you do see the Pac-10/Big-10 conference winners matched up in a top bowl but the tradition of the Rose Bowl has lost a lot of luster. I think it's more about these conferences keeping their top bowl money they earn than the bowl itself.
Am I way off here?
One of those Texas games was the NC and the other was by luck IMO. Great example was last season, the team in the Rose Bowl should have been OK or Mizzou, but instead they took Illinois who got crushed. Why them and not OK to play USC? Tradition
Metroid wrote:I figured it had to do with the Rose Bowl but even that tradition has changed, you don't see Pac-10 vs. Big-10 in the Rose Bowl every year. Remember Vince Young and Texas a few years back? Sure you do see the Pac-10/Big-10 conference winners matched up in a top bowl but the tradition of the Rose Bowl has lost a lot of luster. I think it's more about these conferences keeping their top bowl money they earn than the bowl itself.
Am I way off here?
One of those Texas games was the NC and the other was by luck IMO. Great example was last season, the team in the Rose Bowl should have been OK or Mizzou, but instead they took Illinois who got crushed. Why them and not OK to play USC? Tradition
I agree but you have to take away all automatic bowl births then, no?
Metroid wrote:I figured it had to do with the Rose Bowl but even that tradition has changed, you don't see Pac-10 vs. Big-10 in the Rose Bowl every year. Remember Vince Young and Texas a few years back? Sure you do see the Pac-10/Big-10 conference winners matched up in a top bowl but the tradition of the Rose Bowl has lost a lot of luster. I think it's more about these conferences keeping their top bowl money they earn than the bowl itself.
Am I way off here?
One of those Texas games was the NC and the other was by luck IMO. Great example was last season, the team in the Rose Bowl should have been OK or Mizzou, but instead they took Illinois who got crushed. Why them and not OK to play USC? Tradition
I agree but you have to take away all automatic bowl births then, no?
Births???
Fantasy Football: "Luck is where preparation meets opportunity"
Metroid wrote:I figured it had to do with the Rose Bowl but even that tradition has changed, you don't see Pac-10 vs. Big-10 in the Rose Bowl every year. Remember Vince Young and Texas a few years back? Sure you do see the Pac-10/Big-10 conference winners matched up in a top bowl but the tradition of the Rose Bowl has lost a lot of luster. I think it's more about these conferences keeping their top bowl money they earn than the bowl itself.
Am I way off here?
One of those Texas games was the NC and the other was by luck IMO. Great example was last season, the team in the Rose Bowl should have been OK or Mizzou, but instead they took Illinois who got crushed. Why them and not OK to play USC? Tradition
I agree but you have to take away all automatic bowl births then, no?
No. They were not forced to take Illinois. Illinois was not the auto bid (OSU was the winner and got the auto bid) and they still took them as an at large.
deerayfan072 wrote:No. They were not forced to take Illinois. Illinois was not the auto bid (OSU was the winner and got the auto bid) and they still took them as an at large.
Your right, OSU won the Big 10 but they went to the National Championship, the Rose Bowl gives the "auto bid" to the champions of both conferences unless one of them goes to the National Championship. If that happens the "auto bid" goes to the second place finisher in their respective conference. It's not really an "at large" pick, Illinois was the 2nd place finishing team in the Big 10.
Now, I have been the biggest hater of the Big 10/Pac 10 Rose Bowl tradition BS ever until this week. I still hate that stupid tradition nonsense but here's what happened at the meeting. They voted on a four team playoff and EVERY commissioner, except one (ACC), voted AGAINST the proposal. Their reasons? Too long of a season, potential trouble with finals and school (It's an NCAA rule that teams can't play out of conference games during finals week), and the potential that it's a slippery slope and a 4-team playoff will just lead to an 8 or 16-team playoff.
We can bash the Big 10 and Pac 10 all we want but it's all of the commissioners (and the Notre Dame AD was in attendance as well) who are to blame for this not coming about. The next time they will meet to discuss potentials for a playoff seriously again will be 2014. So it looks like we're going to have to live with the BCS, Rose Bowl tradition, and people griping for years to come.
Edit: My post above was inaccurate. SEC Commissioner Mike Slive was also in favor of and voted in favor of a playoff. Another interesting note, the WAC Commissioner (representing a bunch of mid-major conferences) voted against the playoff. The system needs unanimous voting for it to pass.
For the record I, like most of you, am in favor of some sort of playoff system. That said....we can gripe about the Rose Bowl and it's "tradition" and we can whine and b!tch until we're blue in the face that we want some sort of playoff system, but unless we're all prepared to stop being enablers for the BCS and stop watching/attending college football games we should all stop complaining. We are fully supporting the people who can make the changes we want but don't, by continuing year after year to keep college football ratings through the roof and continuing to line their pockets. Really whats their motivation? Again I'm as guilty as anyone, I love my Ducks and all college football too much to stop watching, but sadly thats the only thing that will provoke change...abysmal rating and empty stadiums.
Any of you ready to go cold turkey on college football?
Metroid wrote:For the record I, like most of you, am in favor of some sort of playoff system. That said....we can gripe about the Rose Bowl and it's "tradition" and we can whine and b!tch until we're blue in the face that we want some sort of playoff system, but unless we're all prepared to stop being enablers for the BCS and stop watching/attending college football games we should all stop complaining. We are fully supporting the people who can make the changes we want but don't, by continuing year after year to keep college football ratings through the roof and continuing to line their pockets. Really whats their motivation? Again I'm as guilty as anyone, I love my Ducks and all college football too much to stop watching, but sadly thats the only thing that will provoke change...abysmal rating and empty stadiums.
Any of you ready to go cold turkey on college football?
No. I like to complain and argue waaay to much for that
Cafe Home
Fantasy Baseball
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by knapplc » Wed Apr 30, 2008 10:47 am 
