NCAA Conference Realignment & Expansion Message Boards
NCAA Map

Discussions by Conference:
  It is currently Fri Apr 18, 2014 1:15 pm

Help support CollegeSportsInfo.com by shopping

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 51 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Dec 19, 2004 11:12 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2003 1:09 pm
Posts: 1540
Yeah, but K State actually LOST to mid-major Marshall that year.

You think it's justified to keep Cal out of a BCS bowl after a WIN over a mid-major. How does a LOSS affect things? Looks to me like the Big XII was pretty overrated that year if their best team couldn't even beat a mid-major. I don't care what the meaningless polls said.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 19, 2004 11:35 pm 
Again, when was the Marshall game and what games were played afterwards...


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 12:57 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2003 1:09 pm
Posts: 1540
What difference does that make? Typically, non-conference games are played before the conference season. It was their last non-cnference game of the season & it was a LOSS. That's the key point, not when it occurred. K State that year had its ups & downs - big win over Oklahoma, big loss to Marshall.

This thread is criticizing Pitt for not being bowl-worthy as a 3-loss team. No one is saying that K State shouldn't have gone to a BCS bowl that year, so there is no need to justify their record. The point is that Pitt is not unique in BCS history as a 3-loss conference champion. I have given 5 other examples, Pitt makes #6 in the 7-year BCS history.

Just as other 3-loss teams won their conferences during a "down year," so has Pitt. If ever a conference has had a "down year," this year's Big East is it. However, the Big East is a BCS charter member & the membership has decided to give them the opportunity to rebuild & recoup. If they can't do it, they won't surive in the BCS, but it's not going to be decided on this season. Nor will it be decided on what any of the current Big East membership has done over the past 25 years. It will be based on whether the Big East can be competitive in the immediate future. We'll see.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 8:16 am 
This thread is criticizing the BIG EAST for sending Pitt to the Fiesta Bowl while invoking Liberty Bowl-bound Louisville as its BCS standard-bearer for 2004...


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 8:18 am 
Again, the BIG EAST is making Louisville their b-i-t-c-h, which is most ironic when you consider the histories of the Metro Conference and C-USA...


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 9:55 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2003 1:09 pm
Posts: 1540
Good points, Mr Ouija. I was only responding to part of the article. I agree that that the Big East is not a BCS caliber conference at this time. Because of that, they are grasping at straws & doing some heavy politicking to try to maintain their status - noe of which will matter ultimately if they can't get it done on the field.

Although the Big East looks foolish, using Louisville to prop up their credentials, how does this make Louisville their b*tch? After all, the health of the conference is in Louisville's long term interests. I'm sure they are happy to be used in this manner. CUSA may not be so happy.


Last edited by friarfan on Mon Dec 20, 2004 9:58 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 10:36 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2003 10:57 pm
Posts: 1275
Location: Portland! (and about time!)
One thing I WILL say- you MUST, MUST have autobids if you have a tournament. Never mind that this is the only way the conferences will even buy into a new system (and they do have the power on this issue)... you devalue the season MORE by de-emphasizing conference play. De-emphasizing like that would probably threaten the fabric of the entire game. You just don't do that.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 11:15 am 

Quote:
One thing I WILL say- you MUST, MUST have autobids if you have a tournament. Never mind that this is the only way the conferences will even buy into a new system (and they do have the power on this issue)... you devalue the season MORE by de-emphasizing conference play. De-emphasizing like that would probably threaten the fabric of the entire game. You just don't do that.


How does having playoffs de emphasize conference play?


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 11:16 am 

Quote:
What difference does that make? Typically, non-conference games are played before the conference season. It was their last non-cnference game of the season & it was a LOSS. That's the key point, not when it occurred. K State that year had its ups & downs - big win over Oklahoma, big loss to Marshall.

This thread is criticizing Pitt for not being bowl-worthy as a 3-loss team. No one is saying that K State shouldn't have gone to a BCS bowl that year, so there is no need to justify their record. The point is that Pitt is not unique in BCS history as a 3-loss conference champion. I have given 5 other examples, Pitt makes #6 in the 7-year BCS history.

Just as other 3-loss teams won their conferences during a "down year," so has Pitt. If ever a conference has had a "down year," this year's Big East is it. However, the Big East is a BCS charter member & the membership has decided to give them the opportunity to rebuild & recoup. If they can't do it, they won't surive in the BCS, but it's not going to be decided on this season. Nor will it be decided on what any of the current Big East membership has done over the past 25 years. It will be based on whether the Big East can be competitive in the immediate future. We'll see.


The lost to them EARLY in the season! Duh! Early on doesn't count because teams are just getting warmed up.

They beat OK in the champ game! THAT counts.

Who did Pitt beat? No one.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 11:18 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon May 05, 2003 10:30 am
Posts: 1359
Location: Baltimore, MD
Pounder is absolutely correct. You must have automatic bids for conference winners in a playoff system. At least the top 6 or 8 conferences.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 11:57 am 
It's whoever the best 8 or 16 teams are.

If that means all P10, ACC, BXII, B10, and SEC teams, then d**n well that's how it is.

Maybe there can be a mid major playoff for the BE, MWC, WAC, CUSA, MAC, and SBC?


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 1:23 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon May 05, 2003 10:30 am
Posts: 1359
Location: Baltimore, MD
Did you ever hear of a playoff sytem which did not include league (or division or conference) champions? Of course not.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 1:42 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2003 1:09 pm
Posts: 1540

Quote:


The lost to them EARLY in the season! Duh! Early on doesn't count because teams are just getting warmed up.

They beat OK in the champ game! THAT counts.

Who did Pitt beat? No one.



What a bunch of crap!

If the early games don't count, why do they play them?

Why is it when a BCS school loses to a non-BCS school, they were "just warming up, so it doesn't count." When a BCS school wins, it just proves that they are better.

The fact is that KState played Marshall in their fifth game of the year that year, which is about midway through a normal 11 game schedule (although K State played an unususal 13 game schedule that year). Still warming up in the fifth game? You've got to be kidding!

Of course, beating OK in the championship game counts. It counts big time. But the Marshall game counts too. It showed that K State wasn't as good as it looked in beating OK. And that loss by OK also showed that they weren't as good as everyone thought they were.

The fact is that the 2003 Big XII was one of the most overrated conferences ever. They went 2-6 in bowl games & the 6 losses were by an average of 16 points. One of those wins was over Navy, which only beat one I-A team with a winning record all year & one of its losses came against a I-AA team.

The fact is that K State was a four loss team because they deserved to be a four loss team & they represented an overrated conference that wasn't all that good in 2003. Duh!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 2:53 pm 
Since when has Louisville ever been concerned with "the greater good"...

http://www.courier-journal.com/cjsports/news2003/11/05bigeast/big-4-east-old-7013.html


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 8:30 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2003 1:09 pm
Posts: 1540

Quote:
Since when has Louisville ever been concerned with "the greater good"...

http://www.courier-journal.com/cjsports/news2003/11/05bigeast/big-4-east-old-7013.html


Who ever said Louisville was concerned with "the greater good?" ???


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 51 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
 

 




Looking for College Sports apparel? Support our partner:








Support Our Partners: Search Engine Marketing - Search Engine Optimization - Search Engine Training - Online Marketing for Restuarants

Subway Map Shirts - Food and Travel

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group