Yes, NIU deserves to be in the Orange Bowl according to contractual requirements, but win or lose, that's the only reason NIU deserves to be in the game.They deserve to be there as much as Alabama deserves to be in the BCSCG. They followed the exact same set of rules.
To be clear, the BCS system did not put Wisconsin in a BCS game. If the BCS had been allowed to operate as designed, then Ohio State would've been in the Rose Bowl (assuming Nebraska laid the same egg).You are putting words in my mouth (or in my posts). I am not justifying the one with the other - simply pointing out that this system put several very bad teams in BCS bowls this year. Everyone is focused on NIU. That is absurd. They had a better season, and are ranked significantly higher than the Big East or B1G representative. The travesty is not that NIU made it, but that Louisville and Wisconsin made it.
If Ohio State were not on probation, they'd be playing Notre Dame and we'd be in the Sugar Bowl. The BCS rules have nothing to do with Wisconsin being in the Rose Bowl.To be clear, the BCS system did not put Wisconsin in a BCS game. If the BCS had been allowed to operate as designed, then Ohio State would've been in the Rose Bowl (assuming Nebraska laid the same egg).
Rules that the conferences themselves agreed to because no one wanted to see one particular conference get too much money/power/etc.I was contacted by ESPN and ask to stop with my article: I am of the old school and reward those who earn it. NIU, Wisconsin, Louisville had no business in the BCS but the rules are socialistic in nature. If the system were set up to reward the Top 10 then it would look like this:
Alabama vs Notre Dame BCSNCG
Florida vs Oregon Sugar
Georgia vs Stanford Rose
S. Carolina vs Tex A&M Orange
LSU vs Kansas St. Fiesta
What's funny is that with the playoff, that may be what it's all about.Rules that the conferences themselves agreed to because no one wanted to see one particular conference get too much money/power/etc.
Yeah, but it would also hurt the SEC and schools like Alabama in the long term. NIU wining this game would be the worst thing possible for college football.I'm rooting for NIU for no other reason than it would tick a bunch of people off.
Agree totally. If they consistently schedule and beat big name teams, fine. But no one, apart from Midwesterners, wants to watch the MAC in major bowls.Yeah, but it would also hurt the SEC and schools like Alabama in the long term. NIU wining this game would be the worst thing possible for college football.
Willing to bet Birmingham, Alabama is one of the top TV markets for this game when the ratings come out.Agree totally. If they consistently schedule and beat big name teams, fine. But no one, apart from Midwesterners, wants to watch the MAC in major bowls.
Yes, Alabamians love football.Willing to bet Birmingham, Alabama is one of the top TV markets for this game when the ratings come out.
And love to gamble on it as well... which is another big reason why Birmingham is always high in the ratings.Yes, Alabamians love football.
Of course it will be, that is a no brainer, as it will for most other BCS bowls. But I am willing to bet the Birmingham would rather watch a SEC team that is deserving play in this bowl rather than a MAC team...Willing to bet Birmingham, Alabama is one of the top TV markets for this game when the ratings come out.
You indicated no one outside of the Midwest would want to watch a MAC team in a major bowl.Of course it will be, that is a no brainer, as it will for most other BCS bowls. But I am willing to bet the Birmingham would rather watch a SEC team that is deserving play in this bowl rather than a MAC team...
I am not trying to argue, but what I indicated was that no one, apart from the Midwest, would like to watch MAC teams in major bowls... I do not want to see Toledo in the Sugar Bowl, Miami OH in the Fiesta Bowl, or Bowling Green play on New Year's Day.You indicated no one outside of the Midwest would want to watch a MAC team in a major bowl.