Christ, assholeskin, yes, that's the joke.You mean the MWC under a different name?
Christ, assholeskin, yes, that's the joke.You mean the MWC under a different name?
Which is why I preferred the old pre-Bowl Alliance bowl system.I am convinced one reason they don’t just go to a straight playoff format is that fans and talking heads love arguing and speculating about it endlessly. That in turn creates more buzz and interest overall and generates better ratings and a lot more money. A straight playoff would be relatively boring.
Pre-BCS when the Rose, Sugar, Orange, Cotton and Fiesta were all on New Year's Day and mattered was pretty damn good.Which is why I preferred the old pre-Bowl Alliance bowl system.
You could conceivably have 3 bowl games on the same day that could be a national championship game. Then EVERYONE would be talking about the outcome all offseason.
i think you have to applaud the effort to crown a "true" and "consensus" national champion ... and that can only happen on the field with teams facing each otherPre-BCS when the Rose, Sugar, Orange, Cotton and Fiesta were all on New Year's Day and mattered was pretty damn good.
That's never coming back, though. We all know where this is going - NFL model on alignment and playoffs.
but to me the bowls always were glorified exhibition games
It wasn't a good system, but it had its charm and I have some great childhood memories of NYD stacking 3 TVs in the family room with my dad to watch all the games. It was also meaningful to teams, students and fans when even if there wasn't a national championship on the line, winning the Big 8 and going to the Orange Bowl was huge.i think you have to applaud the effort to crown a "true" and "consensus" national champion ... and that can only happen on the field with teams facing each other
i admittedly dont remember "the old days" and my first conscious memory is tennessee with tee martin but i think the sport is messy enough as is so i appreciate the effort to "clean up the championship process" but i also realise that the messiness factor is part of the appeal for some ... but to me the bowls always were glorified exhibition games
yes, part of me has always thought that part of the appeal cfb has for some was the pretty much endless reason for discussion as it was and probably still is next to impossible to crown a "real" champion ... but i like fairness
They were still glorious.
The mess of #1 playing #12 and #2 playing #6, and #s 3 & 4 playing each other, and #5 getting stuck in a second tier location playing a non ranked team set up off-seasons of **** talking that will never be paralleled.
It also meant that losing any single game against any opponent at any point in the season could end a title run - which meant that every single game simply mattered more.
we are, but therell never be a system that satisfies everyone as thatd presumably take at least a 20 game season and im not sure were ever getting thereIt wasn't a good system, but it had its charm and I have some great childhood memories of NYD stacking 3 TVs in the family room with my dad to watch all the games. It was also meaningful to teams, students and fans when even if there wasn't a national championship on the line, winning the Big 8 and going to the Orange Bowl was huge.
It was better than the BCS and 4-team playoff eras. But just as 4 teams was an improvement over 2, we'll see 12 as an improvement while still not feeling completely satisfied. We're still a few moves from the endpoint, I think.
Christ, assholeskin, yes, that's the joke.
yep, internet plays a role here as well but i saw a similar development in soccer ... 20 years ago id see some teams and players maybe one or two times a season if they were playing in a big game or against my team in an international competition, nowadays with the internet i could probably follow the entire career of temple's back up qb if i wantedYou also cannot overestimate the regional nature of college football before the huge TV contracts. Bowl games were opportunities to see teams you rarely watched, if at all.
When I was a kid, the west coast games often didn't finish early enough for the AP story and box score to make the Sunday paper. It wasn't easy to find the result of a Lakers, Dodgers or USC game.yep, internet plays a role here as well but i saw a similar development in soccer ... 20 years ago id see some teams and players maybe one or two times a season if they were playing in a big game or against my team in an international competition, nowadays with the internet i could probably follow the entire career of temple's back up qb if i wanted
and how many games did you have on tv every week?When I was a kid, the west coast games often didn't finish early enough for the AP story and box score to make the Sunday paper. It wasn't easy to find the result of a Lakers, Dodgers or USC game.
Before cable, maybe 6. I had 3 main networks and then the NYC/Philly local channels which would give me some small conference or an Ivy in addition to the main network stuff.and how many games did you have on tv every week?
so you essentially saw the west coast teams in the bowls and maybe once if they happened to play one of "your" teams ooc, i assumeBefore cable, maybe 6. I had 3 main networks and then the NYC/Philly local channels which would give me some small conference or an Ivy in addition to the main network stuff.
Yeah. Big 8, I'd see OU-NU and maybe another one if there was a highly ranked team playing one of them. Pac-10, maybe 1 game other than USC-Notre Dame every year. I mostly got a heavy dose of Penn State, Notre Dame, and Eastern independents (which pretty much became the Big East).so you essentially saw the west coast teams in the bowls and maybe once if they happened to play one of "your" teams ooc, i assume
THIS is exactly what I’m ****ing taking about.
They were still glorious.
The mess of #1 playing #12 and #2 playing #6, and #s 3 & 4 playing each other, and #5 getting stuck in a second tier location playing a non ranked team set up off-seasons of **** talking that will never be paralleled.
It also meant that losing any single game against any opponent at any point in the season could end a title run - which meant that every single game simply mattered more.
*largerNew Year's Day used to be an amazing day of college football. It was the Super Bowl viewing for the general public on asmallerscale.
Growing up in California, all I ever saw was Pac-12, Notre Dame, and sometimes Mich v Ohio St. Then out of nowhere I was watching Penn St v Miami in 1987 rooting for PSU…for no reason.You also cannot overestimate the regional nature of college football before the huge TV contracts. Bowl games were opportunities to see teams you rarely watched, if at all.
Projected bracket that’s highly likely and just cancelled bets if that’s not the matchupWhy is Fanduel already accepting bets for a Tennessee/OSU first round game? OSU -7.5, btw.
Projected bracket that’s highly likely and just cancelled bets if that’s not the matchup
What would that be? 8/9?
My (stupid) predictions:
1. Oregon
2. Georgia (gross)
3. Boise (grosser)
4. ASU
5. Texas
6. Notre Dame
7. Penn State
8. Ohio State
9. Tennessee
10. Indiana
11. SMU
12. Clemson
ND path to the championship would go through smu and BoiseWhat would that be? 8/9?
My (stupid) predictions:
1. Oregon
2. Georgia (gross)
3. Boise (grosser)
4. ASU
5. Texas
6. Notre Dame
7. Penn State
8. Ohio State
9. Tennessee
10. Indiana
11. SMU
12. Clemson