Plus, part of the beauty of college sports is its ambiguity and open-endedness. You can argue for hours what would have happened in '97 if Michigan played Nebraska, which is a lot more fun than having had the game itself.
So I was just thinking about this, and thinking about posting about it, when I saw this article.
The small-government Republicans are going to hold a Congressional hearing about the "deeply flawed" BCS system.
Fuck them.
Granted, I think that there are some possible antitrust problems in a system that shuts out all of the smaller conferences. And a system that allows a representative from the wretched Big East an automatic BCS bid but shuts out one-loss Oregon is clearly messed up."Too often college football ends in sniping and controversy, rather than winners and losers," [House Energy and Commerce subcommittee Chairman Joe] Barton said. "The current system of determining who's No. 1 appears deeply flawed."
Barton said he does not have legislation in mind to force a change, but said he hopes congressional hearings will spur discussion and improvements. It won't be the first time Congress has looked at the BCS. In 2003, the Senate probed whether the system was unfairly tilted against smaller schools.
I take that in a heartbeat over the spectacle of Congressional oversight of a bowl system. Aren't these the same assholes who talk about getting big government out of everyday life? Goddamn, if Teri Schiavo weren't enough, we're going to be smacked with a hearing about whether Auburn should be on BCS-bowl life support?
And doesn't a subcommittee on energy and commerce have bigger wells to drill? Have they ever heard of -- hell, I don't know -- the motherfucking oil industry?
For incompetent meddling in college football, one of the only sources of pure joy in life, Rep. Joe Barton (R-Tex.) is the biggest asshole in the world.
11 comments:
"You can argue for hours what would have happened in '97 if Michigan played Nebraska, which is a lot more fun than having had the game itself."
Why play any of the games, then?
Hold a tournament already: the conference champions of each of the 11 leagues, first-round byes for the top 3. No at-large bids. No arguing about at-large bids. No arguing about anything.
Beautiful simplicity. Win your conference, and you're in.
And it would make the regular season more interesting, not less.
I think that sucks because the No. 4 team in the Big 10 or the SEC could usually pummel the shit out of the No. 1 team in any of the mid-majors.
I also pity the die-hard fan who would have to pay to travel to three post-season games, two of them on one-week notice. You'd have to be a millionaire to afford that.
All of which is beside the point of my post. Let's say I agree. Do you still want Congress meddling with the bowl system? Hell no.
"I think that sucks because the No. 4 team in the Big 10 or the SEC could usually pummel the shit out of the No. 1 team in any of the mid-majors."
That certainly wasn't the case last year w/ Utah. Even this year, Fresno State almost beat USC, and the Bulldogs didn't even win their conference. Wisconsin was, what, the third best team in the Big 10? The Badgers gave up 42 points to Northern Illinois this year.
Only the Sun Belt Conference is really overmatched these days. Even the MAC is improving, and all the mid-majors will continue to do so, which is why the power conferences need to keep the current system going - so none of these smaller schools have a chance to play in the major money-making games.
The Big 10, SEC, ACC, etc. don't want football to become like basketball, in which the tournament money is split much more equally among the 33 conferences. In fact, even the NCAA tournament will probably be ruined ... err, expanded to 96 teams or maybe even 128. That way more at-large teams from the top leagues will be included, and those conferences will keep more of the $$$.
No, Congress shouldn't be involved. But that doesn't make it any less outrageous.
Akron-Florida State would be really awesome.
how about Wisconsin-Bowling Green? Wait... nevermind.
i'd happily sit through both of the above if it meant we'd have been able to see Auburn-Oklahoma and USC-Utah last year
Then why not just have a system where you'd see those teams play, and let the garbage teams go to the Alama Bowls of the world?
Or better yet, just go back to the time when the Rose Bowl was just the Big 10 versus Pac 10, drop the pseudoscience, and let football be football.
"Even the MAC is improving"
if i wasn't laughing so hard, i'd be able to properly make fun of this.
You know BG did play Wisconsin the final score was 56-42. Not a bad game and as i recall one that BG could have won.
And before we start ripping on the MAC, which conference has the most starting NFL quarterbacks? Here's a hint: It starts with an M, ends with E, has an "id-american conferenc" in the middle (well, at the beginning of the season anyway).
Let's not forget in 2003 the MAC also had 2 teams in the Top 25 after bowl wins (Miami and BG).
and no, congress should stick their hands into the BCS or any other college football ranking system. They should be concerning themselves with larger matters.
should NOT... sorry
Post a Comment