That looks like geographic bias to me...Originally Posted by RBA
That looks like geographic bias to me...
BINGO!
The two opponents in the NC game deserve to be there. They got it right. To anyone who may think that TCU belongs in the NC game - based on what argument over either Oregon or Auburn? Is TCU's 13-0 regular season record as strong as that of Oregon's or Auburn's? No way IMO.
If a MAC or Sun Belt team goes undefeated, should they be given NC game consideration?
Now I'm not the biggest fan of the current structure of the BCS system, and you won't get much argument from me on what some (including various members of Congress) say is an unfair distribution of BCS revenue. And that's because it is harder for a non-BCS school to get into those premier games with the big pay outs, and the bottom line is simply because of the conferences they play in and their SoS.
But last year non-BCS conferences got a record 24M from BCS Bowl games. The blunt of it going to TCU and Boise State. So I think these two teams, even looking at the conferences they play in, are getting plenty of exposure and recognition. Now TCU, and Utah, obviously understand their "situation", being in a non-BCS conference (MWC) and the "lack" in their SoS, because they've both bolted to the Pac-10 and Big East. And more power to them too. Let's see how they do.
But IMO, TCU made a statement this year in the Rose Bowl, just like Boise did a few years back vs Oklahoma.
Institute a play-off system.:
"In my day you had musicians who experimented with drugs. Now it's druggies experimenting with music" - Alfred G Clark (circa 1972)
I would say that the argument that could be made is that they are better than one of those teams. I am not saying they are, but they could be. I don't care about their schedule being as tough, I care about the team being better.
TCU has apparently turned down a rematch with Wisconsin in 2011 because it was a one-time arrangement with no return game in Fort Worth.
http://sports.espn.go.com/dallas/ncf...ory?id=6106632
I'm sure that game with Baylor will help them get to the NCG next year.
Seems like a lose-lose for TCU, good for their AD.
First off, they WON against Wisconsin so if Wisconsin wants to prove that it was a fluke so bad they should be the ones who should be willing to make sacrifices. When was the last time a boxing champion catered to the demands of the guy they just beat?
Second, with TCU moving to the Big East they don't need to load up their non-conference schedule as much as before.
Third, it is not irrational to make Wisconsin agree to a game in Fort Worth, it seems UW just expects TCU to self-sacrifice for the good of UW.
Lastly, I would think it would be in UW's interest to play a game in one of the richest football talent states in the country. With TCU's move to the Big East combined with all the local talent they have to recruit, there is a very good chance they will become a perennial football power.
And in regards to playing Baylor, I think they are a step up from Youngstown State.
This wasn't a situation where the Wisco AD went to TCU. This was set up by a third party (probably ESPN) to try and get a early season marquee game set up. So it wasn't a negoiation between the schools it was a one time lets see if this will work type of thing given the momentum of the Rose Bowl and here is the deal.
TCU is moving to the Big East, but not this season and they still need to play much better nonconference teams. The terms should be very secondary. They already lost Texas Tech from their schedule, but the fact is playing Wisconsin in Lambeau Field in December is better than playing Baylor or Texas Tech at all. This is short sighted by their AD and I don't want to hear them crying next December when they aren't playing for the NCG despite going undefeated again.
I'm sure TCU was challenged mightly by Tennesee Tech last year...that is a huge step above Youngstown State. Maybe they will duck OSU again when given the chance to play them.
I don't know if I would call it short-sighted, winning games helps recruiting, which in TCU's case could hurt almost every major program in the country that goes into Texas to pick off a recruit, namely the Big 12 schools like OU and OSU.
I overlooked that they weren't moving into the Big East into the 2012 season, but they can still use that as a selling point to incoming recruits. They have to replace a lot of the players from last years team so I doubt they go undefeated, but if they do, I'll they have to do is point to their win against UW that they can compete with big teams. Also the MWC has more than held their own in big games (slap of reality).
The Big 10 has been living off it's reputation for about a decade now, really it's OSU and some programs that have up and down years.
I got in essentially this same argument against a friend of mine (a Big 10 alum) who complained that TCU doesn't play anybody or if they do they don't go through the grinder week in and week out like big 10 teams. But to me, the BIG 10 is way over-rated, and that the strength of the BIG 10 was actually more comparable to the MWC than it was to the SEC. They have been living off reputation for a few years, my opinion is that the style of play is inferior i.e. tough and slow. Although some teams have shifted a little offensively because they were out-schemed for years and finally figured it out. And for the record the MWC's record in BCS games is 3-1 and their one loss was to Boise State.
"Since the league's inception in 1999, the Mountain West Conference has earned 46 bowl bids and holds a 29-17 all-time record in those games, including an 11-3 mark against BCS automatic-qualifying conferences since 2004. The MWC holds an overall record of 13-7 against opponents from BCS AQ leagues in bowl games, including wins over the Pac-10 (six), SEC (two), ACC (two), Big Ten (one), Big 12 (one) and Big East (one).
Over the past seven seasons (including 2010), the MWC owns the best win percentage in bowl games among the 11 conferences with a 22-9 mark (.710). The SEC is second with a 36-19 (.655) record, followed by the Big East at 21-14 (.600) and the Pac-10 at 20-15 (.571). "
http://www.themwc.com/sports/m-footb...010711aad.html
Yeah the MWC is just as good as the Big 10. That's why it's three best programs are leaving it.
Bowl game winning percentages are a very poor way to look at conference strength. I'm not taking away from the accomplishments of the MWC, but individual match ups have a lot more to do with Bowl records than the overall strength of the conference.
You don't like the Big 10 and that's fine, but the conference really isn't slipping depsite what Mark May says. The style of play has more to do with the fact that they play cold weather games in November and need to be able to win games that way. The top end teams have the talent to compete with the top end teams in any conference.
The bottom line here is that TCU is always going to face an uphill battle if they are playing in the MWC of the Big East of getting into the NCG. In either conference you need to win every game, do it convincingly and have played a solid non conference schedule. TCU needs to play teams like Wisconsin and they aren't in a position to be dictating the terms of that game. And if they don't want to play those games that's fine. I just don't want to hear them crying when they aren't playing in the NCG.
Why wouldn't a non-AQ jump at the chance to move to an automatic BCS conference? The current system is a flat out a joke in regards to competitive spirit. What it does is sets up a system that rewards tradition and history while overlooking the creative destruction of competition.
Under the current system, non-AQ schools are relegated to second class citizens however there have been these pesky teams who nag at you because they threaten your sweet heart deal. Boise State, TCU, BYU, Utah you don't like them because they have the nerve to try to knock tradition off it's pedestal. And they have been successful at it. (since were putting words into each others mouths)
I'm not blaming those schools for leaving, but the fact is if the conference was stronger from top to bottom they wouldn't be a non AQ. But it's not so if those schools want to play in the big game they need to play the big schools. If you're TCU and you get a chance to play Wisconsin you take it no questions asked.
I have no problems with any of those programs in fact I lived in Utah for several years and follow Utah and BYU pretty closely. I don't mind if they want to "knock tradition off it's pedestal", but they have to earn it like the programs that built that tradition did. Not playing games like this isn't the way to do it.
No way TCU should have agreed to this game without a return trip. Would make absolutely no sense for them.
As for strength of schedule, Sagarin says TCU's was #76 last year. Ohio State's schedule was rated #70. Obviously a huge difference.
Yet had OSU beat Wisconsin they would have played for the National Championship and TCU didn't. Look I'm not arguing fairness here because we won't get anywhere. The fact is TCU can't turn down these games under any condition if the NCG is their goal.
The football fan in me is upset that TCU turned the game down. This would be along the lines of the Boise-VaTech game this past year, no?
But yeah, but a business/program standpoint, I can't blame TCU for turning it down. But they are not going to sniff the national title game with this schedule.
http://www.mwcconnection.com/2011/1/...tball-schedule
And I don't care what the computers say, that schedule pales in comparison to what any of the BCS conferences deal with week and and week out.
...which is precisely why we have computers to do rankings instead of just people.
Cincinnati Reds: Farm System Champions 2022
Posting Permissions
|
Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please. |
Reply With Quote