Boise St win hurts power conferences in the future

[finswin56]

On Fox Sports Net (Ohio), it is being replayed at 7:30 one of these upcoming days. I don't know if it is only the Ohio section that is doing that, but I thought I'd let you know.

Thanks. If you remember the exact day, can you let us know?

 

[Stitches]

Thanks. If you remember the exact day, can you let us know?

I actually just saw the thing that said they were showing the game, while I was watching the Cavs game. I know they are replaying the NC game thursday night. I will try and ccheck and see what day though, because I will want to watch the last quarter again, lol.

Edit: I just looked it up online, and they are replying the game Sunday(1/7) at 8pm EST.

 

[cnc66]

I actually just saw the thing that said they were showing the game, while I was watching the Cavs game. I know they are replaying the NC game thursday night. I will try and ccheck and see what day though, because I will want to watch the last quarter again, lol.

Edit: I just looked it up online, and they are replying the game Sunday(1/7) at 8pm EST.

thanks stiches!!

 

[finswin56]

I actually just saw the thing that said they were showing the game, while I was watching the Cavs game. I know they are replaying the NC game thursday night. I will try and ccheck and see what day though, because I will want to watch the last quarter again, lol.

Edit: I just looked it up online, and they are replying the game Sunday(1/7) at 8pm EST.

Thanks man!

 

[Phalanx]

I'd love to hear the reasoning behind that statement. How has the Pac-10 ever been shafted by the BCS?

It has become almost an annual tradition to shut a Pac-10 school out of a BCS berth in favor of a less-deserving school with more sway in the media, etc. Cal in '04 is only one example among many. Last year, it was 10-1 Oregon getting the shaft; they also got it in '02 when a crappy Nebraska team was chosen to play Miami in the Rose Bowl. Oregon State nearly got the screw job in '01 as well, but the Pac-10 made a stink that year and the Beavers ended up getting in at the last and beating the stuffings out of Notre Lame.

There are many in the West who feel that the Rose Bowl should go back to the pre-BCS set-up, and if you look at the way it has worked out, that game would be better for the Rose Bowl nearly every year. This year, it would have been Ohio State vs. USC, a game infinitely more attractive than Michigan-USC, or even Ohio State-Florida. Kinda makes me wonder if the Rose Bowl will continue to settle for lesser games.

 

[DonShula84]

There are many in the West who feel that the Rose Bowl should go back to the pre-BCS set-up, and if you look at the way it has worked out, that game would be better for the Rose Bowl nearly every year. This year, it would have been Ohio State vs. USC, a game infinitely more attractive than Michigan-USC, or even Ohio State-Florida. Kinda makes me wonder if the Rose Bowl will continue to settle for lesser games.

The Rose Bowl has no choice but to settle for the "lesser game" because those teams you mentioned arent going to pass up the Championship game for the Rose Bowl.

 

[The Confessor]

Would you care to expound on how they don't "measure up" academically?

I would like to hear more on this as well. Sorry, anybody making this type of statement is talking out their A$$-of course I am refering to "The Officials" not Phalanx:wink: . This is the most back-a$$ statement I have ever seen. Most of the top talents playing in the PAC-10 don't make it through their senior season to begin with, and I GARUANTEE you that Pete Carroll didnt tell Reggie Bush, "Glad to see you scored so damn high on your ACT, now I know you can come play at the UCS":tantrum:

 

[Phalanx]

The Rose Bowl has no choice but to settle for the "lesser game" because those teams you mentioned arent going to pass up the Championship game for the Rose Bowl.

I'm not sure you are understanding the point. If the teams from the Pac-10 are always getting screwed out of playing in the big games anyway, they might as well go back to their own bowl. I have given you a number of examples, but another one is the year USC got jobbed out of playing for the title in favor of LSU ('04?). The A.P. ended up voting for USC anyway, but the point is that even though USC was clearly one of the best two teams, they didn't get in the national championship game. I have no idea how the Big-10 feels about this, but in the Pac-10, there is a growing sentiment that it was a mistake to join the BCS.

This year, I doubt that it matters to most of the country who played Ohio State since they went undefeated, but I think that they are glad it wasn't USC after watching them handle Michigan the way they did. Again, the Rose Bowl missed out on the best possible bowl scenario.

 

[Phalanx]

I would like to hear more on this as well. Sorry, anybody making this type of statement is talking out their A$$-of course I am refering to "The Officials" not Phalanx:wink: . This is the most back-a$$ statement I have ever seen. Most of the top talents playing in the PAC-10 don't make it through their senior season to begin with, and I GARUANTEE you that Pete Carroll didnt tell Reggie Bush, "Glad to see you scored so damn high on your ACT, now I know you can come play at the UCS":tantrum:

Your argument makes sense if the conference is all about football, but it isn't. Academics plays a large role in these decisions, and when I say academics, I mean the research and contributions to knowledge that are being accomplished at each school, not how some kid does on his SAT scores. I don't know anything about Boise State academically, but I do know that the Pac-10, and specifically the four California schools, feel that they don't measure up to conference standards. It seems a shame, because in football they would make a great addition.

 

[The Confessor]

Your argument makes sense if the conference is all about football, but it isn't. Academics plays a large role in these decisions, and when I say academics, I mean the research and contributions to knowledge that are being accomplished at each school, not how some kid does on his SAT scores. I don't know anything about Boise State academically, but I do know that the Pac-10, and specifically the four California schools, feel that they don't measure up to conference standards. It seems a shame, because in football they would make a great addition.

Oh cmon, BS-BS-BS. If this was true, then why isnt Cal-state Poly, U-Cal San Diego, or U-Cal Santa Barbara in the PAC-10? The reason they dont want Boise State in the PAC 10 is becuase Boise State isnt seen as a financial gain. You keep contradicting yourself by saying you dont know anything about Boise State Academically, then follow up by saying they dont measure up to conference standards.....Sorry, but I also dont see many rocket scientists coming out of Washington State.:wink:

 

[Phalanx]

Oh cmon, BS-BS-BS. If this was true, then why isnt Cal-state Poly, U-Cal San Diego, or U-Cal Santa Barbara in the PAC-10? The reason they dont want Boise State in the PAC 10 is becuase Boise State isnt seen as a financial gain. You keep contradicting yourself by saying you dont know anything about Boise State Academically, then follow up by saying they dont measure up to conference standards.....Sorry, but I also dont see many rocket scientists coming out of Washington State.:wink:

If you read my earlier post, you will see that I am not citing my own opinion. I am not the one that decided that Boise State was not an acceptable conference addition, I don't have a vote on this one.

 

[King Felix]

pac-10 wouldnt add more teams. they just got it set up so you play every team every year.

 

[Crowder52]

And the "STRENGTH OF SCHEDULE" factor. It really does. Last nights game was ground-breaking on many levels and could be the start of a new era in college football.

It shows that these teams that run the table in a lesser conference with a bad SOS can play with the big boys and WIN!!!!!!

The next time you have 2 teams fighting for 1 spot; SOS might not come into play as much or at all. Team with the best record might get the opportunity to play. No more, a 1-loss team from a power conference is better lets reward them. Those days might be coming to an end.

This simply makes no sense. Oklahoma was not a great team this year. If Boise had beat Michigan or USC, then I think your theory might have a little more credibility. A new era in college football? Talk about hyperbole...

 

[spydertl79]

If that was true then I would think a lot of teams like Wisconsin and Kentucky would leave their conferences and move to the CUSA or WAC.

 

[Rafiki]

If that was true then I would think a lot of teams like Wisconsin and Kentucky would leave their conferences and move to the CUSA or WAC.

Wisconsin and Kentucky would have probably lost to OSU.