AJC > Sports > Blog > Archives > 2008 > May > 01 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USWhat did we learn from the BCS meetings?
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Okay. The BCS meetings are over and the current system, warts and all, is going to be in place for six more years. But what did we learn during those three days of meetings in South Florida?
1. College football ain’t broke: Those were the last words from Notre Dame athletics director Kevin White when he left us yesterday. Yes, to a lot of fans believe that the post-season is an absolute mess. Those fans have a point. They believe that the incredible interest that would be created by an eight-team or 16-team playoff would more than outweigh any negative impact on the regular season or bowl structure. The men who run Division I-A football, namely the six commissioners of the major conferences, strongly disagree. They have made a business decision that those who are upset with the system will still attend games and still watch on television. And the numbers support their position.
2. The presidents still don’t want a playoff: This is a point that can’t be mentioned enough. Four of the six BCS commissioners told us yesterday that based on the details of the four-team playoff that was proposed by SEC commissioner Mike Slive, their presidents would have no interest. Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe told us that his presidents had already voted against the concept in March. Georgia president Michael Adams has not been able to get to first base with his fellow presidents on his desire just to STUDY an eight-team playoff. I’ve written this many times. The vast majority of the presidents have decided that when it comes to college athletics, a playoff in Division I-A football is their land in the sand. If the presidents don’t want a playoff, it is never going to happen.
3. The TV negotiations are going to be interesting: I had a chance to meet with Ed Goren, the president of FOX Sports. His company begins an exclusive negotiating window in September to retain the rights to four BCS games (Sugar, Orange, Fiesta, BCS Championship) for four more years. The Rose Bowl has a deal with ABC through the game of 2014. Goren made it clear that his company is going to do whatever it takes to hold on to the BCS. To make his point, Goren showed up at Tuesday’s meetings with the Emmy Award that FOX won for its coverage of the Oklahoma-Boise State Fiesta Bowl on Jan. 1, 2007.
ESPN/ABC has made it clear that it regrets giving up the BCS games four years ago and will try to get back in. It could not strike a deal during its exclusive negotiating window in 2004 and let the BCS go to the open market. That’s how FOX got it.
“Oops,” Goren said, making his point that he doesn’t plan to let that happen.
“It looks like we have two very motivated television partners,” one commissioner said.
4. Not all the bowls are happy: One thing is clear in this process. The bowls are consulted about what the BCS does but they do not have any real power in the process. They don’t want to be quoted, but more than one of the BCS bowl execs expressed frustration to me are that the Rose Bowl-Big Ten-Pac-10 axis still has so much power in this process and that they basically just have to go along with it. The Rose, for example, never has to take a team from one of the Coalition conferences if they qualify. You will never see a Rose Bowl where Southern Cal plays Boise State, for example. The Fiesta has hosted a Coalition team twice (Utah, Boise State), the Sugar once (Hawaii) and this season the Orange will certainly get the Coalition team (think BYU) if one qualifies for a game. “It’s just a question of fundamental fairness,” one bowl exec told me. “When it comes to this process, not all bowls are created equal.”
5. The four-team playoff is not dead yet: I wrote yesterday that when it came to a four-team playoff, Slive was really making his opening argument, not his closing argument. How the BCS goes the next four years will have a lot to do with the mindset that goes into the discussion when the commissioners have to deal with this again in April of 2012. If there are several more years of bad match-ups like we had this season, a case can be made for change. If we get a couple of match-ups like Texas-Southern Cal in the Rose Bowl, then the case is not as strong. The fact is that the BCS has gotten a little lucky. In 2006 there was a furor when Florida jumped over Michigan into the national championship game. But then Michigan got waxed in the Rose Bowl and that passion subsided. There was anger when LSU jumped from No. 7 to No. 2 in the final standings last season, but then LSU destroyed the Big Ten champ, Ohio State. A lot can change in four years.
.JPG)
-1.JPG)
Services »
Comments
By KR
May 1, 2008 8:38 AM | Link to this
Fox Sports broadcasts are the absolute worst I’ve ever seen. I’ve watched high school football games on local access channels that were done better.
As long as The Rose Bowl shys away from a matchup like USC-UGA, they will remain meaningless. Turn on a Seinfeld rerun instead.
The conferences have spoken. Until there is a negative financial impact, they’re not going to change. We, the fans, have the power to create that negative impact. What will we do with that power?
WAR EAGLE!
By baloney
May 1, 2008 8:46 AM | Link to this
The real problem in this whole situation is the Rose Bowl and the “alliance” with the Big 10 & Pac 10. They want their cake and eat it too. They will never invite the two most deserving teams to play in their bowl UNLESS it is from their two conferences. On the other hand they will make a push to have their conference team to get in on any of the other NC games at other bowls. Seems like the college presidents would somehow exclude those two conferences from being in a NC game thus putting enormous pressure on them to go along with the other BCS conferences. This is very much like Notre Dame having exclusive rights with NBC for their home games,but the other networks jump at the chance to show them on their network. This too hurts the other teams/conferences that conform to the conferences and BCS alliance. To sum it up, what is hurting this whole process is the Big 10,Pac 10,and Notre Dame want to have the best of both worlds. They get the biggest paydays and they get in on the big money frombeing in the “alliance” BCS.I say exclude them for a while and see if they will come around.
By CV
May 1, 2008 8:51 AM | Link to this
You are right that the disgruntled fans will continue to attend games. I for one do not like the system, but I am going to continue to support my team. I don’t want Georgia Tech to suffer because of the BCS system. I think alot fans feel the same way. Are you going to stop supporting your team because you don’t like the BCS??? NO! It will evenutually come to a head and the commissioners need to realize that. What will it take… fans stop going to the games to prove a point. Then your school and teams suffer. It’s not a good situation to be put in as a fan. The bowls are not equal either. I would love to see them rotate the bowl alliances. The SEC and ACC have almost zero chance of playing the New Year’s Day Rose Bowl. The ACC will never play in the Outback, Cotton, etc… the SEC will never play in the Gator. I think they should rotate the alliances to give teams an opportunity to play in a variety of bowls.
By Scott
May 1, 2008 9:33 AM | Link to this
I’m a die-hard UGA fan, go to every game, home and away. That said, I really don’t care that much about bowl games, unless it’s the BCS Championship. I think we are somehow tricked into thinking that bowl games are important. When we lost to Auburn in ‘05 at Sanford Stadium, I was despondent for a week. When we lost to West Virginia in the Sugar Bowl that same year, I was over it the next morning. Let’s face it, in College Football, you want to: 1. Beat your rivals 2. Win your conference 3. Win the (mock) National Championship Nothing else really matters. And bowl games, except for one, don’t help you accomplish any of these three goals.
By Tech Fan since 1950
May 1, 2008 9:33 AM | Link to this
The BCS is a fraud. The integrity of college football stinks! If the NCAA can have playoffs in its other divisions, then it sure can have one in its premier Division. There are no real excuses not to do so, except stupidity.
By Roswell Ed
May 1, 2008 9:37 AM | Link to this
Next topic please.
The BCS won’t change.
What was the point of a week long meeting.
They do this every year and in the decade its been going on they’ve made 2 changes.
They made it possible for crappy teams to get in and they made the human polls count more.
La-di-freaking-da.
I can’t believe someone paid you to attend the meetings.
You could have Mitch Albomed all these articles Tony and saved your bosses several grand.
Next year just do like M and Ramble On do.
Look up this past week of articles and copy and paste and you’re done.
No hotels no plane rides.
I can’t wait to see another crappy Ohio St team in the final.
By Roswell Ed
May 1, 2008 9:38 AM | Link to this
Next topic please.
The BCS won’t change.
What was the point of a week long meeting.
They do this every year and in the decade its been going on they’ve made 2 changes.
They made it possible for crappy teams to get in and they made the human polls count more.
La-di-freaking-da.
I can’t believe someone paid you to attend the meetings.
You could have Mitch Albomed all these articles Tony and saved your bosses several grand.
Next year just do like M and Ramble On do.
Look up this past week of articles and copy and paste and you’re done.
No hotels no plane rides.
I can’t wait to see another crappy Ohio St team in the final.
By DWG
May 1, 2008 9:59 AM | Link to this
Notre Dame ain’t broke. That’s why no change is comin. When you have your own tv contract and your own slot in the BCS, why change anything? Notre Dame, the Big Two and Pac One are what is wrong with college football. The rest of us have to pay the price and watch exhibition football so they can keep up their tradition of crappy exhibition football.
By Joe Schmoe
May 1, 2008 10:09 AM | Link to this
It is Broken
Until the fans protest by boycotting bowl games, they are not going to give us a playoff.
Good luck with that!
Obviously, they are more interested in a profit than having any concern that our college football champion is decided by a popularity contest.
Hey, why don’t we just do a call in vote like American Idol!
By shane #1
May 1, 2008 10:19 AM | Link to this
I don’t look for any changes in the BCS system. It is a matter of money, pure and simple. The Big 11 brings in the Mid West, Notre Dame is very popular in Mid West and the Norteast, including NYC, and the Pac 10 covers the left coast. These are the major markets folks, meaning more advertising dollars. It is simple demographics. The Big 11, Pac 10, and Notre Dame have more fans than anybody else. So the SEC, Big 12, or the ACC will have to earn a slot in the BCSCG to face an opponent that has been anointed by the media. Do We wonder why OSU et al are anti-playoffs?
By AGTfan
May 1, 2008 10:35 AM | Link to this
What we learned is that the powers that rule college football don’t care one bit about the fans that buy the tickets and paraphanalia.
I’m just one person, but I’ve refused to watch an BCS bowls for a few years. Join me. Boycott the BCS. You vote with your actions. If you keep watching BCS games, buying tickets and paraphanalia, you’re voting for things to stay the same. The college football establishment will never change just because the fans want them to. ONLY when the fans start witholding their money will anything happen.
BOYCOTT THE BCS!!
By There are too many bowls !
May 1, 2008 10:39 AM | Link to this
Not mentioned in Tony’s columns lately,but true…
Did you know that the NCAA has approved another two worthless bowls for the post season ?
(Congressional and St. Petersburg Bowls)
This is doing more top hurt college football than any playoff or non playoff controversy ever could.These minor (and I do mean minor) bowls are sparsely attended and for the most part meaningless. They have taken on the feel of a scrimmage more than a real contest. in fact, it’s gotten so bad that lots of teams will bad mouth the bowl that they are getting ready for because it’s not important enough. Embarrassing.
Kill these half baked bowls now. Kill half of them (or more) give us back the special matchups that we used to have during bowl season !
By I needed a good laugh
May 1, 2008 10:44 AM | Link to this
Quote: “I don’t want Georgia Tech to suffer because of the BCS system.”
Thanks CV. I needed that.
By DWG
May 1, 2008 10:45 AM | Link to this
A GT fan is boycotting BCS bowls. So is the GT team.
Someone had to say it.
By GT
May 1, 2008 10:57 AM | Link to this
LOOK AT THE BIGGER PICTURE.THE SAME PEOPLE-BASICALLY COLLEGE PRESIDENTS-WHO ARE MAKING THESE TOTALLY UNFAIR,ARBITRARY,POLITCIALLY AND ECONOMICALLY MOTIVATED DECISIONS ARE ALSO RUNNING COLLEGES. HIRING PROFESSORS-SHAPING THE FUTURE EDUCATED AMERICA.THE 2 GOALS SEEM TO BE SIMPLE: ME, I.
WHY NOT THROW THE BIG 10 AND PAC 10 OUT UNTIL THEY LEARN THAT COOPERATION AND TEAM DOES NOT MEAN I,ME.
JUSTICE AND FAIR ARE WORDS IN A DICTIONARY. NOTHING MORE.
By Kyle
May 1, 2008 10:58 AM | Link to this
You want the BCS fixed? Don’t watch the bowl games. Empty ratings, buildings, and pockets will lead to true national champion via a playoff system. Boycotting the BCS will do more than whining will, I assure you of this. Hit them where it hurts, in the wallet.
By Other things to boycott
May 1, 2008 10:59 AM | Link to this
Tech fans boycott the BCS
Falcons fans boycott the Superbowl
Jamaican bobsled team boycotts the winter olympics
Kate Moss boycotts food
By MB
May 1, 2008 11:08 AM | Link to this
Total waste of time and attention.
There’s waaayyyy too much money being made to even consider a change, and that will be the case again in 2012. IF I live that long, I’ll be surprised if a change is a realistic possibility in 2050, for that matter.
Imagine going in to your boss at a company making record profits, and then suggesting that you radically change the way you do business in a way that angers key partners and adds complexity to the business, but would likely add, percentage-wise, a modest revenue gain. Sorry, kid, not worth the risk.
By AltamahaDawg
May 1, 2008 11:14 AM | Link to this
The past few years controversy have not been because the top 2 team only get in, its how they came to be the top two team. Is that not obvious to the commisioners? My theory is that the expansion to 4 teams would allow pollsters to feel less pressure to basically decide the champ(s) that last week, and just let the objectivity of voting for the best teams fall whEre it may. Somebody ends up #5 and out, as a result of honest evaluation, great. But dont arrange the final poll specifically to get two teams that have the most “right”. Basically, now the polls are irrelavant. You can’t claim the polling is about comparitive placement, and then the last week, suspend that and try to “cover” for the built in problems of the BCS. (for what its worth, UGA making the NCG, would have been more of an exposure of the problems with the system, but to just leapfrog and flop teams around simply points out how inconsistant the whole deal is).
So if you arent going to change the BCS, how about at least try to tighten up the “rules” and methods of the polls that supply the BCS. Like Mark Richt said, if conference game matter, and they prabably should, stop voting that down. If ranking the week before don’t matter, why have them? And how in the world is NOT even having a CCG on equal footing? Ah sorry, forgot who that was that didn’t.
It looks to me that the whole Not having a playoff drama, simply was a smokescreen for not addressing some of the real problems with the current system. If THIS is the best thing, fine, why wouldn’t they try to do everything possible to improve it. Sounds like they did absolutely nothing at this meeting but pat each other on the back, and recite the good ol’ boys oath.
By Miles
May 1, 2008 11:16 AM | Link to this
Fret not…Mike Slive will stay the course…hell hath no fury like the determination of the SEC Commissioner!
By AGTfan
May 1, 2008 11:16 AM | Link to this
A GT fan is boycotting BCS bowls. So is the GT team.
That’s fair enough. I can see the humor too. Hopefully in a few years Paul Johnson can make me test my resolve.
But I’m not just a GT fan. I’m also a college football fan. I don’t live in GA so I rarely get to see GA Tech. During the season, I usually watch a few games each week. I shut that down for the BCS. I don’t watch the BCS bowls. I would have enjoyed watching Ohio State get their yearly beating, but I didn’t. Even as a GT fan, I pull for the DAWGS most of the time. I believe that next year they will be playing in the BCS championship. I won’t be watching. If by some miracle Paul Johnson gets Tech turned around quicker than expected and Tech goes to a BCS bowl, I WON’T BE WATCHING. I want a change.
If you watch the BCS bowls, you’re voting for things to stay the same. The decision makers base their decisions on what we DO, not what we say.
BOYCOTT THE BCS!!
By FLA DAWG
May 1, 2008 11:19 AM | Link to this
The outcome of the So. Fla. BCS cocktail party is over with no surprises. The reasons Tony lists above are also no surprises. I’d like to see the SEC pull out of the BCS after making a tv deal like ND. We’d have plenty of viewership that would directly impact the BCS. Non conference teams would be welcome to play. The SEC would crown it’s own National Champion.
By Jason
May 1, 2008 11:32 AM | Link to this
It is a mess, but a “boycott” of BCS games is a pipe dream. That simply won’t make an impact. It’s like consumers boycotting Exxon because they make a ton of money. Good luck with that.
It’s really all about money. As long as the conferences are making tons of it, the system will not change. It would be great if the networks (FOX and ABC) spoke up and stated that they wanted a playoff system - and that they would pay a premium for it. If the conferences saw an opportunity for even more revenue, then a playoff idea would gain more than a token meeting.
All that said, if UGA plays for the mythical BCS Championship next season, I’ll still be there spending my money, because a boycott would only hurt me.
By ColoradoDawg
May 1, 2008 11:40 AM | Link to this
Folks, let’s be realistic here. The only conference that consistently gets screwed by the BCS is the SEC. The other conferences recognize that their champions would get bounced in the semi-final game and you’d probably have a rematch of two SEC teams in the final. They know their conferences can’t compete with the SEC, so they want to keep the fraud of a National Championship and can continue to have a puncher’s chance of winning it (any schlub can throw a lucky haymaker every now and again). As for the Rose Bowl, to hell with them. The SEC ought to reestablish its tie to the Sugar Bowl and tell the #2 team to come to them. You want to be the best, come play the best…the SEC does it every week.
By Wil Walton
May 1, 2008 11:53 AM | Link to this
Well now, here comes the age-old jockstrap question: to support or not support? It’s a dilemma that is plaguing college football fans across the south. Do we support our team(s) that are playing in the BCS Championship game (and crushing Ohio State, again)? Or do we not support our team(s) so that we can force the BCS out? On one hand, you’re pulling for your favorite college team, but more importantly, you are supporting the players of that team so they get a reward for entertaining us for 3 months. On the other hand, you’re supporting a flawed, ruthless, and greedy system that is exploiting the players of your favorite team. Is this a business (professional football) or is it recreation for college students (amateur sport)? I think that may be the underlying question.
By T
May 1, 2008 11:54 AM | Link to this
I saw very little of the BCS bowl games last year. Hate Fox carrying the games. They start too late, at best you get to watch the first half.. (some of us do have to get up and go to work the next day).. the Fox coverage has too much of an NFL feel.. one of the reasons I love college ball so much is .. it isnt the NFL… I wish ESPN would take it away from Fox.. they are the worst.
By Wil Walton
May 1, 2008 11:56 AM | Link to this
Colorado, that’s great!
By PercyHarvinFan
May 1, 2008 11:59 AM | Link to this
The More I look into this the more depressing the outlook appears.
Its not all about the money some of it is about simple nostalgia. The Big Ten and Pac 10 want to maintain the supremacy of the Rose Bowl, not by fielding superior teams but by using fear to prevent the natural evolution of college football to occur.
Notre Dame’s obcession with the past is so intense that they would prefer the national championship be decided each year based on the team’s place in the history of college football.
No, the only way for a playoff to come about is through the slow process of replacing the college presidents and confrence commissioners with a younger generation of Americans that live in the present and not in the past.
By aj
May 1, 2008 12:04 PM | Link to this
The point is, the BCS is in violation of Anti-trust regulations. They are breaking federal laws.
Once even one of the other 60 or so D-1 teams file their Federal lawsuit, this whole system will be struck down by the courts.
The fact that teams like, Conneticut, Vanderbilt, Baylor, Iowa State, Northwestern, Cincinatti, Duke, etc. are entitled to a 3 million dollar check every year, because of the conference they align themselves with, is collusion and restriction of trade at it’s highest level.
Try this in the real world and see how quickly you are put out of business. It is time for all the so called mid-majors, a term coined to create a caste system in college football, file a federal lawsuit.
The BCS has made irrelevent all other bowls and horded all the money into the hands of a few. Which is illegal. Teams like BYU, Fresno ST., Air Force, etc. can’t be put behind the bottom rung of other BCS conferences in terms of dollars paid out, without an illegal system.
Unless every D-1 school is guaranteed BCS money, then the law is coming.
All the promises to the other D-1 schools have been broken. It’s time for the courts to decide.
aj
By Wil Walton
May 1, 2008 12:07 PM | Link to this
PercyHarvinFan brings up an aspect that (along with $, power, etc.) could be a component in the corruption.
By Roswell Ed
May 1, 2008 12:17 PM | Link to this
Next topic please.
The BCS won’t change.
What was the point of a week long meeting.
They do this every year and in the decade its been going on they’ve made 2 changes.
They made it possible for crappy teams to get in and they made the human polls count more.
La-di-freaking-da.
I can’t believe someone paid you to attend the meetings.
You could have Mitch Albomed all these articles Tony and saved your bosses several grand.
Next year just do like M and Ramble On do.
Look up this past week of articles and copy and paste and you’re done.
No hotels no plane rides.
I can’t wait to see another crappy Ohio St team in the final.
By Roby
May 1, 2008 12:36 PM | Link to this
Other than the rich leagues/teams wanting to stay rich, a tournament should be a no brainer. Think NCAA Basketball tournament, but instead of 64 teams (there are far more D-1A teams in basketball) there would be 32 teams or 16 games. Use the same bowl system to stage these games with the lesser bowls staging the first round. This system would have 31 games (roughly the same amount of bowl games now) and would run over 6-7 weeks beginning in December and ending as we do now in the second week of Jan. There would be far more money, far more interest and it would be far more fair the the “lesser” leagues. Everyone would win, with possibly the exception of the Pac 10, Big 10 and ND who want it all.
By BuzzFactor
May 1, 2008 12:55 PM | Link to this
Plus one will not improve the situation enough. 8 or 16 team playoff has to happen, one day anyway.
The hoarding of the NCG by the BCS big 4 is corruption at its worst. There are several qualified bowls that could fill the 5th spot, including the (Peach)Chick-fil-a Bowl.
By War Eagle 02
May 1, 2008 1:00 PM | Link to this
If the Big 10 and Pac 10 don’t want a playoff system why don’t the Commisioner’s of the other conferences pressure them to play a conference championship game. USC and Ohio State benefit every year because they don’t have to play one last good team in a championship game like the SEC, ACC, Big 12. It’s complete BS!
By Steve Qua
May 1, 2008 1:14 PM | Link to this
This whole discussion is shameful.
I may be just another warm hearted father of two college students but hear me loud and clear; college students are children and should not br forced to take the pressure of any kind of chanpionship past the one that is decided by won-lost record withing their respective conference.
Get over it, this game should be played for the kids, not for the bored by life fans.
By Wil Walton
May 1, 2008 1:21 PM | Link to this
War Eagle, the Big 10 & Pac 10 won’t do a conference championship game because they don’t want to risk a loss for the team that they want to push for national exposure ($$$).
By potato dawg
May 1, 2008 1:36 PM | Link to this
War Eagle 02 I agree and the big east should have to play the highest ranked none bcs team before bowl selection. Also I’d like to see a grass roots movement to boycott the Rose Bowl until they come around. The rose bowl isn’t interested in what’s best for college football as a whole. If they were Georgia would have played USC last year.
By PTC Dawg
May 1, 2008 1:53 PM | Link to this
This entire situation REEKS.
We College Football fans might as well watch figure skating after our Conference Championship games are over. Voting on a so called Champion is NO WAY to do things.
By Top Dawg
May 1, 2008 2:06 PM | Link to this
Georgia would have destroyed Ohio State too. It should have been UGA and LSU in the NC game this past year.
The BCS is a joke.
By War Eagle
May 1, 2008 2:13 PM | Link to this
All good points by War Eagle02, Wil and potDawg, but my opinion is the College presidents will still have a invisible shields saying “WE DO NOT WANT PLAYOFFS”, too much bowl pressure. The bowls are a strong financial tool for colleges. They represent tradition, fan support plus you can have FUN and spent wallets of money.
By steverino
May 1, 2008 2:18 PM | Link to this
Another thing that is not mentioned when discussing the PAC-10/BIG-10 power axis is that those are the only conferences of the six that don’t have a championship game. Their teams have one less game, therefore they have one less chance to lose and tarnish their regular season ranking. Thus it follows that they will have better chance of getting into the BCS title game. Without a conference championship game, and if Fla HADN’T jumped over Michigan, we would have had an Ohio St/Mich title game. Given how badly they got stomped in the bowl games that year, THAT MNC would have been a complete travesty.
By RJ
May 1, 2008 2:19 PM | Link to this
The NCAA does not have a national championship award for Division I-A football (because it does not have a championship tournament), but it does for all other NCAA sports. The awards for D-I football are/were the BCS Championship or the AP or old UPI. So, until the NCAA decides that it really cares about declaring a national champion, they are content to leave things to the big money bowls.
By Other things to boycott
May 1, 2008 2:31 PM | Link to this
The big 2 and pac 1 should keep playing each other in the rose bowl every year. They can become irrelavant like ND and the Ivy league. We can replace them with Conf. usa and the wac. Until you put it on the line and play a conf. championship game like the big boys, these crappy conferences will always be living in the past and slowly fade into obscurity.
By harold phelps
May 1, 2008 2:47 PM | Link to this
The Rose Bowl will never invite anyone from the other conferences outside of the PAC-10 & BIG-10,let alone Boise State.
By JB
May 1, 2008 2:51 PM | Link to this
A plan????????
We, the fans who want a playoff, should all pick out a game that we don’t attend, for our respective teams. Yeah, it would suck and would be VERY painful but the powers that be love to say that CF is fine and snub theirs noses at us.
If each fan base chose not to attend their schools game against East Bumble, it would say something. A small painful statement for us season ticket holders but the only way we could give the high and mighty a tweak.
HBTD!!!!!!!!!!!!!
By RedandBlack
May 1, 2008 3:02 PM | Link to this
Boycott the rose bowl, the pac-10, and the big-10. Support your teams in the bowls, but boycott the rest.
By FLA DAWG
May 1, 2008 3:09 PM | Link to this
JB has a good idea and I agree. But we should pick ONE GAME in the regular season. What is the first big game for So. Cal. this season?
Then boycott the Rose Bowl Game.
By JustMe
May 1, 2008 3:11 PM | Link to this
It just sounds like the only major problem with college football is us, the fans. We need to stop supporting football in order for these idiots to realize that a play off is needed.
This is completely illogical, but this is their logic.
By Top Dawg
May 1, 2008 3:23 PM | Link to this
Boycott the Rose Bowls AND THEIR SPONSORS. Do not watch the game. (Will anyone really lose any sleep over missing that snorefest anyway?) Do not buy anything from their sponsors. Contact their sponsors and let them know how we feel. Somebody start a website, and let’s get all football fans to ban together and boycott the Rose Bowl this year!!!
By D3
May 1, 2008 3:40 PM | Link to this
The problem, as mentioned by Mr.CFB, is the Rose Bowl BS. They would rather have crappy match-ups every single year, as long as they get their big 10-pac 10 crap. Even heard Perry(huge USC fan) from the Rude Awakening this morning saying the other conferences should start a playoff without the Big 10 and Pac 10 and see who comes around first after the playoff starts.
The Rose Bowl could have had USC-Georgia and opted for USC-Illinois. Are you kidding me? I just don’t understand it. Its really a shame that one bowl gets to decide the fate of college football, especially considering the fact that it hasn’t been relevant in years (USC-Texas was nat’l champ. so that doesn’t count).
By sumguy
May 1, 2008 4:05 PM | Link to this
We won’t see a playoff system for several reasons.
1- You would have to reduce the regular season to 10 games and no CCG because I think that the presidents want the players to play a maximum of 14 games. Reduction of games in the long term would hurt smaller schools because there are less opportunities for them to get money games. But if there was room in the schedule it allows for Big time OOC games to take place because the only games that matter are your conference games.
2- If you reduce the number of games to 10 you would likely have to reduce the size of conferences with CCG (SEC, ACC, Big 12, C-USA, MAC) to avoid undefeated co-champs (due to unbalanced scheduling).
3- Playoffs work in every other sport (see basketball) because the all the conference champs get automatic bids. To be fair it would have to be a 12-16 team playoff. I’d perfer that there be 16 conferences.
I do want a playoff system, but only if there is a fair and unbiased way of doing so (ie there are no polls) .
By Cuz
May 1, 2008 4:25 PM | Link to this
Who watched the Rose Bowl? I saw a few plays and it looked like I was watching a remake of “They died with their boots on” with Errol Flynn. Might as well stage the game at the Little Bighorn.
By SOL
May 1, 2008 4:59 PM | Link to this
What we learned? We learned that the Big 10 and Pac 10 are rational. Not a surprise:
http://www.sportsobsessedlawyer.blogspot.com/
By GT80
May 1, 2008 5:15 PM | Link to this
I don’t care if the BCS changes (it wont) but what i care about is having to endure bad matchups and 4 hours bowl games. Who watched the last half of the Sugar Bowl other than die hard Dog fans? Fox is a problem in this. They are willing to pay huge cash to broadcast the games then they have to show too many commercials and the games stretch out to 4 hours.
Really, what difference does it make, it’s simply college football, a fun diversion and a way to support your school.
By DawginJackson
May 1, 2008 5:39 PM | Link to this
I like Fox on the NFL but their college coverage is pretty bad. In the sUGAr bowl they had Fran T. in the booth. Fran is a great GA alum, but not really known for his braodcasting. Gimme Verne (Oh MY!!!)and CBS anyday for SEC ball.
By Bravesfan79
May 1, 2008 5:42 PM | Link to this
The Sport that most resembles College Football is Bodybuilding competitions! Everyone gets on stage, poses, BUT DOSENT FIGHT!!!
ALL HYPE….NO ACTION!!
GT80…..maybe not having a real champ and crappy seasons year after year dosent matter to you….but for the REAL sports fans that love COMPETITION and not just some excuse to get wasted….College Football is a sham.
The system mocks our intelligence as fans and we should be ashamed to support it. I for one, refuse to watch any bowl game that dosent have my favorite team in it.
By longtimeGTfan
May 1, 2008 7:24 PM | Link to this
I heard M was spotted on a trailways bus heading to Athens. Thank God and Trailways that UGA fan is heading back home!
By CarolinaJacket
May 1, 2008 7:44 PM | Link to this
longtime, you have hit the nail on the head. The so-called M is no more of a Tech fan than are all the atleast upfront Dawg fans who speak their their loyalty to their school. And Yellowblood is also rather suspect. Back to the subject, the gutless wonders who won’t give us a playoff system should be railroaded and/or tar and feathered out of town. The present system truly sucks — but now they are adding a coupld of other toilet bowls. That should really make things better.
By War Eagle
May 1, 2008 9:02 PM | Link to this
TopDawg, in all due respect boycotts are not effective in this country anymore. It has been water down to political incorrectness. Rose Bowl is the ‘Daddy of Bowls”, its a Hollywood feel good. UGA should played USC for second place last year according to polls, which I believe was right. The two best teams LSU and UGA should played for the SEC title, but dawgs did not win the BIG GAMES. BCS WILL NOT CHANGE SOON, SO 2008 WILL PROBABLY SEE A SEC TEAM AGAINST BIG TEN AND ANOTHER EMBARRASSMENT FOR SPOILERS.
By son_sir
May 1, 2008 9:09 PM | Link to this
If the NFL operated like NCAA D-1 football, what chance would the Giants have had to be world champs ? If you lose a couple of games, then peak at the right time you have no chance in the current worthless system. On another note, there shouldn’t even be a poll of any kind until at least week 5 of the season. Each year a lot of schools are unfairly forced to climb the ladder of preconceived notions.
By My View
May 1, 2008 9:56 PM | Link to this
The TV networks are the only hope. They are the only ones with the power to speed up the process of getting a playoff. They would have to form a pact. Don’t outbid each other until there is change. As a matter of fact they should all place the same bid, and let the commissioner come up with a formula to see who airs the BS, oops, I mean BCS games. Since they like using formulas to make important decisions.
Maybe that type of pact could nullify a contract, but without a network to bid higher they would have to deal with it. Like fans have to deal with the BS. Or is it BCS.
By My View
May 1, 2008 10:05 PM | Link to this
Top Dawg, I’m with you. I’ll watch the Rose once every four years. Soon to be once every five. When they host the MNC. And if that match up is a head scratcher, I won’t even watch that year.
I think before they create a playoff, they will expand the BCS It will be a flawed attempt to appease the fans. JMO.
By longtimeGTfan
May 1, 2008 11:58 PM | Link to this
This is what I been saying for years. Take the top four teams in the final poll. Even if one conference has 2 or 3 teams in it. Let #1 play #4 and #2 and #3 play each other exactly 2 weeks before Jan. 1st. Then on Jan 1st at 9:pm play for the national championship and also let this be the last game of the college season. No more 30 day layoffs for the teams and no more draging out the bowl season. It is si simple but the BCS and the people that are getting rich off of the kids will never let this happen.
By Reality Check
May 2, 2008 12:20 AM | Link to this
I’m not going to argue with Notre Dame athletics director Kevin White’s statement that “college football ain’t broke”.
I will say this though: The NCAA basketball and baseball tournaments are better, make much more sense, and have a way of crowning a true champion year in a year out.
Broke or not, better is better and money is money whether it comes from the Rose Bowl or the same venue during the NCAA football tournament that the majority of fans want.
By sowegadawg
May 2, 2008 6:33 AM | Link to this
many people say the bowl system is all about the money. that cannot be totally true. a division 1a playoff would be the single most important sporting event in the history of sports. the money generated would be beyond enormous and much greater than the revenues at present. not having a playoff is mostly about the college presidents not wanting to give up any more power or control over the last sport that they still have any say about.
there is also plenty of griping about the matchups in the bcs games. they were not all that great before, with the conference tie-ins and the early bids to teams, undertable deals, we were still left with many bad games. the acc and big east are making out like bandits these days, in the past they had no automatic bid into a bcs caliber bowl, and continually send 3-lose teams to the bcs. the system at present is not good, but still we get a 1 vs 2 that is sometimes really 1 vs 2, and we probably get that more often than when there was no bcs. might as well live with it.
or we could use my plan. the sec generates our champion. we then challenge any team to play our champ in the sugar bowl. the winner is national champ. no takers—-SEC CHAMP—- is NATIONAL CHAMPION.
GO DAWGS, SIC UM
By Doug
May 2, 2008 8:37 AM | Link to this
Why not have a “tournament” amongst four to eight teams that would either replace or be in addition to some smaller bowls, outside the BCS / NCAA - think NIT. Then maybe once the value is displayed, evolve into a national championship tourney - again think NIT as it was bigger than the NCAA tourney at one time in our past. Could this be passed by some progressive conferences / presidents?
By Paul
May 2, 2008 10:39 AM | Link to this
Thanks for the update Tony. I don’t think this is all bad. I’d like to see CFB schedules simply get tougher. No more of these FBS teams on BCS team schedules. Make the regular season the playoff.
As for the rose bowl, they are largely irrelevant and proved it by taking an average Illinois team over UGA which would have been the best matchup of the bowl season and the most interesting. They have a premeire time slot for a snorefest almost every year. Save Vince Young besting michigan… the afternoon Rose Bowl Game is dinner time for those of us in the south who don’t care much about that bowl since it went to Big 10 vs Pac 10…
By Crimson Bob
May 3, 2008 11:35 PM | Link to this
It’s time for the “Grandpappy” Bowl to be placed in a nursing home. Other than the BCS Championship game with Texas and the PAC 1 Trojans, when has the Rose Bowl had any legitimate national interest? I’d rather watch the Rose Parade.
What’s going on with post season Div I football? Championship games on weekday evenings? Major bowls being broadcast after Jan 1? 632 post season bowl games? The post season stinks and the BCS is the most odorous offender. New Years Day will never be the same.
By Bob
May 6, 2008 11:41 AM | Link to this
You poor dolts carry on like a team (probably a university you never attended) winning a football game increases your bank account, your girlfriends bust size, and acts as male enhancement drug for you (which you need)
Get over it - it is a game - ENTERTAINMENT. Nothing more, nothing less.