I guess so - I thought the poll was titled 'Is the BCS fair?' Dunno how I made that mistake.Did you vote "no" by mistake?
It ABSOLUTELY should be the top 10.
I guess so - I thought the poll was titled 'Is the BCS fair?' Dunno how I made that mistake.Did you vote "no" by mistake?
Well you're an Admin...go change your vote.I guess so - I thought the poll was titled 'Is the BCS fair?' Dunno how I made that mistake.
It ABSOLUTELY should be the top 10.
LOL, can't do that.Well you're an Admin...go change your vote.
Yes and no. It's apples and oranges to compare the time when a sport is beginning to a time (100 years later) when the sport is well-established -- numerous teams were in Alabama's boat at the time. Also, discriminating against teams due to regional bias is not the same as discriminating against teams because of SOS bias....we were there once.
And primarily, they lack the patience to develop the local fan support that will bring them the money they need.What these schools lack is the money necessary to keep great coaches.
My point is -- is that beyond 1 and 2 -- the rest should try to pair up the best matchups as possible......No - it would not have been even close to possible. Most bowls had contracts with conferences. The Rose Bowl would have been the exact same game, but the rest would have been very different from the games that you laid out.
The SEC had contracts with something like 10 bowls. SEC teams had to go to those bowls, even if a better bowl opportunity became available.
I agree the situation is very different. They always are. It just softens my stance a little. SOS bias comes into play when teams cannot increase their SOS due to inability to schedule stronger opponents. I am not saying that is the case here. I am not sure who they have tried to schedule out of conference.Yes and no. It's apples and oranges to compare the time when a sport is beginning to a time (100 years later) when the sport is well-established -- numerous teams were in Alabama's boat at the time. Also, discriminating against teams due to regional bias is not the same as discriminating against teams because of SOS bias.
Not one team is stuck playing a conference schedule - all are able to go independent in order to schedule whoever they wish to play.I agree the situation is very different. They always are. It just softens my stance a little. SOS bias comes into play when teams cannot increase their SOS due to inability to schedule stronger opponents.
Probably too risky in today's environment. I respect BYU for trying it (even though SOS was probably not the motivation), but my bet is they jump right back in a conference as soon as a decent offer is available.Not one team is stuck playing a conference schedule - all are able to go independent in order to schedule whoever they wish to play.. But that's risky, takes guts and determination.
I'm not sure NIU falls into the category of say BSU if that is what you mean. I don't see any level of pressure from their program to be considered elite. They just won and were there when the system put them there.Why do all that when you can just whine about an 'unfair system' until people throw you an undeserved bone just so you'll shut up?
How did the pollsters conspire against UGA in 2007? Ohio State was #1 and LSU was the SEC champion. UGA had no claim to the top 2.NIU being in there was a joke. The sports media and pollsters conspired to jump them way too many places off of their win against Kent St., much like they conspired against Georgia in 2007.
Is anything ever resolved on the internet? :wink:Was this resolved?
Shoot. We solve all the world's prollems. :biggrin2:Is anything ever resolved on the internet? :wink:
Wrong board...you've confused this with NS.Shoot. We solve all the world's prollems. :biggrin2:
When ?I voted not sure. Knowing Alabama's history kind of softens my stance on schools like NIU getting a chance to play big time programs. I understand the arguments against them and agree with them, but we were there once.