[NU Sports] Two words for the Oklahoma State boosters

Tue Jan 10 21:25:30 CST 2012

Of course back in the olden days (pre 1995 ?) there was no formal post season process for #1 just a vote by 2 polls. Sometimes by luck, the #1 and #2 teams would play each other in a bowl, but it was rare.   Many years there were major controversies about who deserved #1. Sometimes  the polls split but it was essentially up to the voters. The most famous one of course was when only one vote seemed to matter;when President Nixon anointed undefeated Texas #1 over undefeated Penn State (I think a 3rd team was also undefeated that year) And of course a BT team couldn't go to 2 Rose Bowls in a row prior to 1973 and couldn't go to any other bowl as well thus potentially ending their season without a bowl game 

  So SJT could have really screamed about not being able to win it on the field.  At least today there is an on the field  process even with its flaws

Harry
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

-----Original Message-----
From: "SjT \(Stephen J. Truog\)" <sjtruog at yahoo.com>
Sender: nwu-sports-bounces at tssi.com
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 18:37:47 
To: Arthur Miller<artmiller1 at gmail.com>; bwdolphin146 at yahoo.com<bwdolphin146 at yahoo.com>; Northwestern Wildcats<nwu-sports at tssi.com>
Reply-To: "SjT \(Stephen J. Truog\)" <sjtruog at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [NU Sports] Two words for the Oklahoma State boosters

I don't have a fetish about having a clear-cut champion -- I have a fetish for college football itself and hate seeing it end in such an awful way every year. I would be fine with the old bowl system, I would be fine with a playoff and I would be fine with the Big Ten and Pac 12 just telling the B(C)S to go fish and take their rigged-to-the-SEC system and Big XII Computers with them and play a series of bowl games every year.

What I am not OK with is the B(C)S - the worst of all worlds. It is a system that truly sucks in every way. It has drained attendance, ratings, tradition, excitement, meaning and life itself from college football. And it has given us fewer undisputed champions than the old system. What I am not OK with is having a "champion" shoved down our throat by a bogus system and ESPN hype who didn't even win their conference -- while other conference champions with better records and resumes were not even given a chance.

You can't duck playing good teams -- as most big-time programs do (LSU excepted this year) -- and then tout a second place team as worthy of a shot over a league champion if the regular season truly counts. And then you can't dismiss the legitimate claim that team has for a shared title (the team you never gave a chance to) by saying they never played anyone.

It's just an awful system that needs to end -- and this awful "title" game brings that closer to reality.
So I'm loving the suckage of the B(C)S this year!
- Stephen

PS - I realize the ratings slid last year because of the move to cable, but this year you have an apples-to-apples comparison of cable games for the big bowls -- and you still have a big drop. Even though the games were (at least the first three) much better. That tells me that the B(C)S is driving away fans with their bogus pairings, pomposity and eternal week of welfare bowls that lead up to a depleted "bowl day" and kills the enthusiasm.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
STEPHEN J. TRUOG
sjtruog at yahoo.com
GO CATS!!! GEAUX SAINTS!!!
Super Bowl XLIV Champions!
________________________________

________________________________
 From: Arthur Miller <artmiller1 at gmail.com>
To: bwdolphin146 at yahoo.com; Northwestern Wildcats <nwu-sports at tssi.com> 
Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2012 1:01 PM
Subject: Re: [NU Sports] Two words for the Oklahoma State boosters

Brad nailed it.

Some people need to drop their fetish about having a clear-cut national
champion in D-I college football.  There are too many teams, playing
schedules of widely varying difficulty, and the gap in resources between
the top and bottom programs is too great to make it feasible.

The BCS seems to me a reasonable compromise, but if the chattering class
can't accept it then we should drop it completely and go back to the
pre-BCS days.

Art Miller

On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 1:32 PM, <bwdolphin146 at yahoo.com> wrote:

> Iowa State.
>
> To me that ends the discussion. Alabama's loss was to LSU, OSU's to the
> Cyclones. End of discussion.
>
> I could live with a conference-winner only rule but for those who hold the
> NCAA hoops tourney sacred, there have been plenty of times it was won by a
> non-conference champ. Why is that wonderful in hoops but so awful in
> football?
>
> I dislike the BCS myself but I want a return to the pre-BCS system of the
> 1980's.
>
> I would note though that this year's BCS games were on the whole
> entertaining and well worth watching. But SJT tells me it sucks so I guess
> I didn't enjoy the Rose, Fiesta, or Sugar Bowls and the Orange was
> enjoyable in a weird way (how bad could Clemson get?).
>
> Throw in fun games from Detroit to Dallas and beyond and I enjoyed the
> bowl season a lot.
>
> But I am told it all sucks because some people didn't see the mythical
> national championship (which I really don't care about)  they wanted to, so
> I guess I didn't enjoy myself watching CFB the last month. Oh well.
>
> Brad Wilson
> Sent on the Sprint® Now Network from my BlackBerry®
> _______________________________________________
> nwu-sports site list
> nwu-sports at tssi.com
> http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/nwu-sports
>
_______________________________________________
nwu-sports site list
nwu-sports at tssi.com
http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/nwu-sports
_______________________________________________
nwu-sports site list
nwu-sports at tssi.com
http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/nwu-sports