Missouri-West Virginia a real yawner!

[ncbama]

College football does not need a Missouri-West Virginia championship game. Neither team has any semblance of a national following. The game will be watched by fewer people than have watched TV since the Heidi Bowl (When no one watched the game because the network switched to a showing of Heidi. The game had a fantastic finish.)

Baseball fans know that a team from Boston, New York, Chicago or Los Angeles should play in the World Series every year. It simply is not good for baseball to have a series sans one of those teams.

The BCS championship game should always have a team from the SEC, Big 10 (or whatever that number is now) or Pac 10. Scratch that. Pac 10 is not specific enough. The team should be from California.

One of the nice things about being an Alabama fan is that UA has fans all over the country. We have a national profile. None of my friends here in NC went to Alabama, but many of them watch every time the Tide is on the tube.

As much as I dislike Ohio State and Georgia, it would be good for college football if both Missouri and West Virginia lost in their last games, and Ohio State and either Georgia or LSU slipped in. Ain't gonna happen, but it should.

 

[ElkhartTider]

who cares who would watch it on tv?...

as of right now those are the two teams that deserve to go...:conf2:

ohio state is a joke... i dont care what anyone says who have they played?

 

[StoneMtnDew]

COMPLETELY WRONG.

A Mizzou-WVU game would be incredibly exciting. Much more so than most BCS title games. The ratings might not be great, but they'd be good and the game would be VERY entertaining.

 

[ElkhartTider]

COMPLETELY WRONG.

A Mizzou-WVU game would be incredibly exciting. Much more so than most BCS title games. The ratings might not be great, but they'd be good and the game would be VERY entertaining.

thats what i was thinking too........

 

[yomatty]

COMPLETELY WRONG.

A Mizzou-WVU game would be incredibly exciting. Much more so than most BCS title games. The ratings might not be great, but they'd be good and the game would be VERY entertaining.

I completely agree. I heard Herbstriet talking this afternoon about how high-scoring and exciting this matchup would be given the 2 offenses.

I could be wrong, but I would think that the BCS championship game is not as dependent on "name" teams as some other sports are for their playoff/championships when it come to ratings.

 

[BamaBowtie]

COMPLETELY WRONG.

A Mizzou-WVU game would be incredibly exciting. Much more so than most BCS title games. The ratings might not be great, but they'd be good and the game would be VERY entertaining.

Right on! It would be a great offensive game. A LOT of big play threats on both of those teams. Now this years Iron Bowl was a REAL yawner...

 

[J.E.B. Stuart]

I think Missouri has to get past the Sooners first. This could end up Ohio State and West Virginia. If they both were to lose this weekend, then Ohio State and Georgia?!?!?!?!?!?

 

[AlabamaSooner]

College football does not need a Missouri-West Virginia championship game. Neither team has any semblance of a national following. The game will be watched by fewer people than have watched TV since the Heidi Bowl (When no one watched the game because the network switched to a showing of Heidi. The game had a fantastic finish.)

Can't speak for everyone, but I'm betting you're alone in this thinking.

One of the nice things about being an Alabama fan is that UA has fans all over the country. We have a national profile. None of my friends here in NC went to Alabama, but many of them watch every time the Tide is on the tube.

And those other schools don't? Pretty naive if you ask me.

 

[bamanut_aj]

It would be great for proponents of a playoff system because the ratings for mizzou-west virginia would be frighteningly low. A couple more years of title games like that and a playoff would be in the very near future.

 

[BamaJama17]

Is there anybody on here that thought it would be Missouri and West Virginia for the playing for the NC??? I know I did not.

 

[BAMA1979]

Missouri and West Virginia would be a very interesting game, but I think we are going to be stuck with West Virginia and Ohio State. I think Oklahoma is going to beat Missouri in a close game.

 

[Crimson Hawk]

COMPLETELY WRONG.

A Mizzou-WVU game would be incredibly exciting. Much more so than most BCS title games. The ratings might not be great, but they'd be good and the game would be VERY entertaining.

COMPLETELY RIGHT. _big:

 

[teamplayer]

College football does not need a Missouri-West Virginia championship game. Neither team has any semblance of a national following. The game will be watched by fewer people than have watched TV since the Heidi Bowl (When no one watched the game because the network switched to a showing of Heidi. The game had a fantastic finish.)

Baseball fans know that a team from Boston, New York, Chicago or Los Angeles should play in the World Series every year. It simply is not good for baseball to have a series sans one of those teams.

The BCS championship game should always have a team from the SEC, Big 10 (or whatever that number is now) or Pac 10. Scratch that. Pac 10 is not specific enough. The team should be from California.

One of the nice things about being an Alabama fan is that UA has fans all over the country. We have a national profile. None of my friends here in NC went to Alabama, but many of them watch every time the Tide is on the tube.

As much as I dislike Ohio State and Georgia, it would be good for college football if both Missouri and West Virginia lost in their last games, and Ohio State and either Georgia or LSU slipped in. Ain't gonna happen, but it should.

It's that kind of thinking that has ruined professional sports and is in the process of ruining college athletics. If Missouri and West Virginia are ranked 1 and 2, they absolutely should play for the title. It doesn't matter if no one watches except real college football fans. The networks and advertisers may not like it, but real college football fans will. I'm tired of all the singers and dancers and twelve hour pre-game show crap that the network people think they need to add for entertainment value. I watch sports for the competition and don't care about all the other crap. If they will take care of the game, there will always be fans. If there are fans, there will be money. When they start to make decisions based solely on money and entertainment, the fans start to go away because the game becomes a side-show. If the fans go away, the money goes away. I wouldn't go to that crap basketball league that they call the NBA if they gave me a free limo ride, free tickets, free meal, and a free nights stay at a five-star hotel.

 

[RT3413]

COMPLETELY WRONG.

A Mizzou-WVU game would be incredibly exciting. Much more so than most BCS title games. The ratings might not be great, but they'd be good and the game would be VERY entertaining.

I think you could have any two programs in the BCS CG and the ratings would be huge. It's an event broadcast and the teams really don't add much to it one way or another.

And if it is WV/MU then look for an Over/Under of around 100. It will be an amazing game with upwards of 1,000 yards of total offense.

 

[THE BAMA IRISHMAN]

COMPLETELY WRONG.

A Mizzou-WVU game would be incredibly exciting. Much more so than most BCS title games. The ratings might not be great, but they'd be good and the game would be VERY entertaining.

Very entertaining indeed. WV is a very exciting team and Missou can put on quite a show. I will tune in because I love college football. :BigA:

I remember throughout the 70's how others would suggest Alabama was boring running the ball. I saw it as a thing of beauty. Rushing for 300 or 400 yards a game. Exciting stuff. :BigA:

 

[StoneMtnDew]

I'd really like to see an OSU/WVU game just to see OSU fans try to pretend they would have any shot at all of winning the game.

I sure hope WVU makes it. I'll root for them, although if they wear the yellow jerseys again I might have to think twice.

 

[bamanut_aj]

It's that kind of thinking that has ruined professional sports and is in the process of ruining college athletics. If Missouri and West Virginia are ranked 1 and 2, they absolutely should play for the title. It doesn't matter if no one watches except real college football fans. The networks and advertisers may not like it, but real college football fans will. I'm tired of all the singers and dancers and twelve hour pre-game show crap that the network people think they need to add for entertainment value. I watch sports for the competition and don't care about all the other crap. If they will take care of the game, there will always be fans. If there are fans, there will be money. When they start to make decisions based solely on money and entertainment, the fans start to go away because the game becomes a side-show. If the fans go away, the money goes away. I wouldn't go to that crap basketball league that they call the NBA if they gave me a free limo ride, free tickets, free meal, and a free nights stay at a five-star hotel.

While some people think that it would be an awesome, exciting game (and I'm not disagreeing), when it gets down to ratings, some people are going to cringe. Sorry, but mizzou-wv won't grab the high ratings that other match ups would. Fox is covering this BCS Championship for the first time, and if they have a couple of mizzou-wv games their first few years RATINGS-wise, they'll start howling for the playoff. Why the playoff? Because as you narrow down to the final, those games will garner ratings almost as high as a good Championship game. It's like when the Steelers and the Cowboys make the SuperBowl vs the Panthers and the Jaguars. The playoffs leading up to the Big Game were awesome, then the Big Game got here and not everyone watched. I'm NOT disagreeing that wv-mizzou could be neat to watch for the football lovers, but one of these days someone is going to realize that "we have to guard ourselves against games like this" from a rating$ standpoint.

 

[RT3413]

Fox is covering this BCS Championship for the first time, and if they have a couple of mizzou-wv games their first few years RATINGS-wise, they'll start howling for the playoff.

Umm, yeah. The TV networks have been offering the NCAA what would amount to a cargo ship filled with Gold bars for an 8-team 3 week playoff for years. The last number I heard was larger than the annual SuperBowl contract (but over 7 games). Money is NOT why the NCAA won't go to a playoff in D1 - it's why they WON'T go to a playoff.

The college presidents who make up the NCAA rightly fear that if football starts to bring in that much money they would loose what little control they have now over those programs.

It's like when the Steelers and the Cowboys make the SuperBowl vs the Panthers and the Jaguars. The playoffs leading up to the Big Game were awesome, then the Big Game got here and not everyone watched.

There's never been a year since the last episode of MASH when the SuperBowl isn't the highest rated program of the year. Ad revenues have climbed year over year over year. You could put any two teams in that game and still go off the charts.

The fact is the BCS Championship Game is getting to that level. If they got smart and held it on a Saturday (or even a Friday or Sunday) night instead of a Monday, the ratings would be closer to the SuperBowl - again, regardless of the two teams involved.

 

[BamaSkins]

I was curious so I looked it up...and as I thought - West Virginia plays a pancake schedule...no wonder they are 10-1

Western Michigan...cream puff
Marshall................cream puff
East Carolina.........cream puff
So Florida.............started strong but fell apart late
Syracuse.............cream puff
Miss St................just ok
Rutgers...............started strong but fell apart late
Louisville.............not the Louisville of old
Cincinnati...........another puff
Connecticut........huh?
Pittsburgh...........nothing

...what excites anyone with this schedule
...any SEC team would cruise through this schedule
...why ole Miss would have won 7-8 games with this schedule
...the Big East is a puff league
...yes they may jump up and beat a good team every now and then
...but hey if you only had to get up for one or two games a year, come on
...does anyone actually think WV could have gone through the SEC this year with only one loss
...I don't think so
...they wouldn't have survived a trip through the Big 12 or Pac 10 or ACC or even the Big 10 without more than one loss
...yes they look good playing puffs every week but put them on the field against quality teams week in and week out - they lose more than one game
...(my very humble opinion)

 

[TideRollsInVa]

The BCS championship game should always have a team from the SEC, Big 10 (or whatever that number is now) or Pac 10. Scratch that. Pac 10 is not specific enough. The team should be from California.

In the last 10 years a team from a Conference not listed has been ranked #1 in one of the polls 5 times, soon to be 6 out of 11 if things hold up. The BIG-12, as far as spreading the wealth, has done well with OU, UN, UT and even CU won an NC in 90, funny that it was shared by GA T, another Conf that is not discussed above.

Do some really believe a BCSCG is of little worth without an SEC, BIG 10 or a PAC 10 Cal team (why not just say USC). Or are we talking rating? Sorry, I'm not selling air time nor do I have an AD that I intend to have aired durring the BCSCG.