Link: Orange Bowl rep to NIU: We didn't even want you here

[Tide1986]

You misunderstand - I did not say that they deserve to be in the BCSCG. I said that they deserved to be in their BCS bowl and played under the same BCS rules/formulae that put Alabama in the BCSCG.

They played very well last night - in the game and within a TD going into the 4th qtr. They simply didn't have the depth to hang with FSU.

You and I watched different games last night. The NIU team I saw was manhandled most of the game. A team averaging around 40 points a game scores only 10 points, and Lynch gets only 44 yards rushing when he had been averaging 3 times that amount. From a purely football standpoint, NIU proved itself to be a decent homecoming opponent for most of the big time football programs.

 

[crimsonaudio]

That's basically all they wanted was the obvious answer. They were short-sighted on everything else. But nobody back then knew the SEC would be this dominant.

It's not about the SEC - this year it is, but many other years, no - it's about fairness. I still can't wrap my head around how any team not in the top 10 deserves the big pay day of a BCS bowl game. I don't care if you're the SEC champion, if you aren't ranked in the top 10, you don't deserve the payout.

It's never made sense to me.

But then I recall when my kids got trophies playing soccer, regardless of their team's record. The BCS is the same thing.

 

[B1GTide]

You and I watched different games last night. The NIU team I saw was manhandled most of the game. A team averaging around 40 points a game scores only 10 points, and Lynch gets only 44 yards rushing when he had been averaging 3 times that amount. From a purely football standpoint, NIU proved itself to be a decent homecoming opponent for most of the big time football programs.

We went into the game expecting to see different things, and we saw different things. Neither of us should be surprised.

 

[Tide1986]

We went into the game expecting to see different things, and we saw different things. Neither of us should be surprised.

Agreed, I actually expected NIU to perform better than they did.

 

[crimsonaudio]

'Manhandled' is a good description.

http://scores.espn.go.com/ncf/boxscore?gameId=330010052

Had FSU focused more on the run instead of constantly trying to throw with such a poor QB, they would have scored in the 50's, easily.

 

[B1GTide]

It's not about the SEC - this year it is, but many other years, no - it's about fairness. I still can't wrap my head around how any team not in the top 10 deserves the big pay day of a BCS bowl game. I don't care if you're the SEC champion, if you aren't ranked in the top 10, you don't deserve the payout.

It's never made sense to me.

But then I recall when my kids got trophies playing soccer, regardless of their team's record. The BCS is the same thing.

I know that you know this, but I'll state the obvious anyway - if the BCS rules had not been set up as they were, we would not have the BCSCG. This idea would have been placed on the scrap heap. The sharing of revenues with the other conferences, and the admittance of teams from non-BCS conferences into the "party", was a requirement to get the votes.

The 4 team playoff kills some of this stuff, but some will remain. The fact remains that the bowls are about making money, not producing compelling games. If your primary goal is producing more compelling post season games, go to a 16 team playoff.

 

[crimsonaudio]

The fact remains that the bowls are about making money, not producing compelling games. If your primary goal is producing more compelling post season games, go to a 16 team playoff.

Where have I said I wanted more compelling games? To me it's simply a matter of what's deserved.

BTW, did you see the (lack of) attendance at the Orange Bowl last night? No one cared enough to attend, apparently. You think attendance wouldn't have been better it were two top 10 teams playing?

I completely understand why the rules are in place, but that leads us to a deeper congo anyway - whether or not there should be 120 FBS teams in the first place...

 

[B1GTide]

Where have I said I wanted more compelling games? To me it's simply a matter of what's deserved.

I meant the broader "you", not you personally. For most in the threads discussing this issue, their main point has been that the games are boring to them as fans. Well, the BCS/bowl system only gives you one compelling game each year. If you happen to get another entertaining game, it is just a coincidence, not the goal of the system.

 

[Bamabuzzard]

We went into the game expecting to see different things, and we saw different things. Neither of us should be surprised.

Just curious, what were you "expecting" to see and obviously saw that convinced you NIU belonged in that game? Granted, I'm not a football coach or an expert on the game. But just from a common fan's eye it was obvious NIU physically was outmatched. As I mentioned above, physically, they barely could challenge FSU much less threaten to win the game. Even the announcers said coming out of halftime if it hadn't been for that one fake punt NIU would have been averaging almost less than 2 yards/play. The vaunted QB Lynch who all the "experts" (aside from Herbie) said would challenge FSU looked overwhelmed. He had flashes but overall couldn't compete or make the game competitive.

I think we're too hell bent on "everybody having a turn" type mentality. Much like 'Audio saying above. Everybody gets a participation trophy. After watching last night's game, I have no doubt in my mind the system got that one wrong. NIU wasn't in the same class as FSU and wasted a BCS spot when a more competitive team could/should have been there.

 

[B1GTide]

Just curious, what were you "expecting" to see and obviously saw that convinced you NIU belonged in that game?

Nothing with respect "belonging". I just expected to see them play their hearts out and be competitive for 2-3 quarters. I never gave them a snowball's chance in hades of winning the game.

 

[Tide1986]

I know that you know this, but I'll state the obvious anyway - if the BCS rules had not been set up as they were, we would not have the BCSCG. This idea would have been placed on the scrap heap. The sharing of revenues with the other conferences, and the admittance of teams from non-BCS conferences into the "party", was a requirement to get the votes.

The 4 team playoff kills some of this stuff, but some will remain. The fact remains that the bowls are about making money, not producing compelling games. If your primary goal is producing more compelling post season games, go to a 16 team playoff.

Are you including the Bowl Coalition and the Bowl Alliance, predecessors to the BCS which omitted the PAC-10, Big-10 and the smaller conferences?

 

[Bamabuzzard]

Nothing with respect "belonging". I just expected to see them play their hearts out and be competitive for 2-3 quarters. I never gave them a snowball's chance in hades of winning the game.

When the system puts a team in a bowl of that magnitude (a marquee bowl). The thought of not having "a snowball's chance in hades" shouldn't even be a thought. The two teams should be of a quality that both legitimately have a realistic shot to win. This was a waste of a lot of people's/companies' time, money and left out a deserving team. I know everybody sees the bowls outside of the championship game different. But a marquee bowl should at least put two teams against each other who both have a legitimate shot at winning. Don't you think?

 

[bamacon]

Bama would have scored 4 tds in the first quarter just running the ball. This should have been like UGA vs. Hawaii a few years back. Who you win against most certainly matters. I put the "closeness" of the game entirely on the coaching staff of FSU and their stubbornly stupid offensive game plan.

 

[bamacon]

How bad was this game? I'd say that FSU played as bad last night as they did in the 2nd half of their NC St. Loss, and they still won by 3 touchdowns.

 

[Bamafaninco1]

People forget this is the Boise State rule. The Herbstreit's of the world and Orin Hatch's of the world decided that BSU was such an amazing football power that they should be included in the BCS talk. The BCS schools amended their rules to allow the Non-AQ's a seat at the table and low and behold you get NIU this year. This is what happens when you get what you wished for. NIU get a BCS game cause BSU was beating up on the WAC so easily they got a seat at the table, it doesn't matter if they deserve it, it is what the majority of people wanted a few years ago and they got it. Maybe the Orange Bowl Committee and the ACC should have voted against the rule changes back then.

 

[B1GTide]

But a marquee bowl should at least put two teams against each other who both have a legitimate shot at winning. Don't you think?

Sure, but my point remains the same - I would much rather have these games along with the BCSCG than better bowl matchups with no #1 vs #2 game. My second point - NIU got there following the same rules that put FSU, Wisconson and Louisville in these bowls. In fact, NIU was ranked higher than two of those teams using the same formula that has Alabama ranked #2 and playing in the BCSCG.

 

[rizolltizide]

How can you know this? NIU played a MAC schedule and lost to 4-8 Iowa. Do you seriously think that Wisconsin or Louisville would have lost to Iowa and not gone undefeated against NIU's remaining schedule?

Here's NIU's schedule after Iowa: Tennessee-Martin, Army, Kansas, Central Michigan, Ball State, Buffalo, Akron, Western Michigan, UMass, Toledo, Eastern Michigan, Kent State.

I can't see Wisconsin or Louisville doing anything but going undefeated against that schedule.

That's a veritable murderer's row. Verily.

 

[Bamabuzzard]

Sure, but my point remains the same - I would much rather have these games along with the BCSCG than better bowl matchups with no #1 vs #2 game. My second point - NIU got there following the same rules that put FSU, Wisconson and Louisville in these bowls. In fact, NIU was ranked higher than two of those teams using the same formula that has Alabama ranked #2 and playing in the BCSCG.

Oh I agree regarding the "rules". But the "rules" were changed to allow a NIU team in who obviously didn't deserve to be there. What I mean by "deserve" is from a competitive standpoint they had no business being in that game. As mentioned above, this is nothing more than what the Boise St supporters wanted a few years ago. So they made enough noise, garnered enough support and last night is the product of it.

 

[B1GTide]

Oh I agree regarding the "rules". But the "rules" were changed to allow a NIU team in who obviously didn't deserve to be there. What I mean by "deserve" is from a competitive standpoint they had no business being in that game. As mentioned above, this is nothing more than what the Boise St supporters wanted a few years ago. So they made enough noise, garnered enough support and last night is the product of it.

And NIU fans and alumni loved the product.

We will never have a system that pleases everyone.

 

[rgw]

Anyone thinking NIU acquitted themselves well by hanging in there, I disagree. FSU's offense bumbling around the field had more to do with the perceived competitiveness of that game through 3 quarters. If they just ran the ball more, I think that game could have been 31-10 by the end of the 3rd.