I read a funny (probably fake) comment about a guy who wrote the band director and apologized for laughing at the blind cowbell player. He also apologized for laughing at the Boise dancers cause the writer assumes the dance team director is blind also.
I think this game might have gone a long way in turning the tide with regards to the majority of fans viewing non-AQC teams as inferior to AQC teams by default. The attendance and ratings for this game were very solid. The attendance does not surprise me, but the ratings do, which is a bit surprising. Hopefully this will help TCU fans view their program and other top non-AQC teams as being legitimate powers in college football. http://www.sltrib.com/sports/ci_14133601
Really? It was a sloppy game in which the heavily hyped great hope for non-AQ teams, TCU, basically fell on its face by playing its worst game of the season against a Boise State team that really wasn't that impressive - hell the MVP was arguably the punter. I don't know if that's the show they wanted to put on for a huge national audience.
They do, but when the powers that be keep having teams with one or two losses ahead of unbeaten non-AQC teams you have to wonder. You can pretend it does not exist SirCharles, but denial(de Nile) ain't just a river in Egypt. TCU fans want shots at the top teams, they dont want to be stuck in a limbo game where nobody proves anything against other non-AQC teams.
Any outcome from this game, people would use it to discredit the non-AQ teams. If TCU had romped BSU, then it would be another "crappy/overhyped team" that TCU beat that proves nothing about how good their team is and therefor they have no claim to their ranking or a title shot. Either way, the BCS fluffers will spin it to cover their asses... lame. Like I said, the BCS and the AQers got what they wanted by protecting their interests and isolating the non-AQers. CYOA man, CYOA.
Yes, I dont think Boise (or any non-AQC team) is closer to a legit shot at a NC bid. There is absolutely ZERO chance that a non-AQC unbeaten gets in over an AQC unbeaten. ZERO. Iowa State could come out next year and go 12-0 and would get in over TCU at 12-0 provided there was another unbeaten. And quite possibly an unbeated TCU/Boise would be snubbed by an 11-1 Texas or USC. TCU getting a chance at Florida or Cincinnati(unbeaten AQC team) or even GT(AQC Conference champ) would have done infinitely more for the non-AQC teams than what we saw. Besides, it does nothing because SOMEBODY had to win the non-AQC National Championship game. It matters not who won, since it was a foregone conclusion when they decided the two would play that there would be a winner.
It matters not. Someone was going to win the non-AQC National CHampionship. And it would not matter because at the end of the day, it was two "minor league" teams playing each other.
So, if TCU had played Florida, Cinci, or GT, a win by any of those teams over TCU would have been meaningless?
Just as meaningless as TCU losing to Boise St. But the inverse, had TCU and Boise not been pitted against each other and BOTH won their bowl games, it would have meant even more hell for the B(C)S system that is currently in place.
So, you're essentially stating that no AQC teams ever voluntarily play a team like TCU or Boise State, because there's absolutely nothing to gain from it? That's pretty ridiculous to degrade teams like TCU and Boise State like that.
False. Many people who were hyping TCU as a national champion (working for such upstart anti-establishment venues as CBS and ESPN). Witness this haughty piece penned not less than a few days ago by Dennis Dodd where he all but promises to have the FWAA deliver them a national title over Texas, since although Texas' players are the best, TCU's are the "fastest" and had a better offense....http://www.cbssports.com/collegefoo...-longhorns-youve-got-company-in-your-backyard Such opinion leaders were more than prepared, had Texas Christian performed impressively, to hand them some moral version of a title. Instead, TCU and Boise State both looked like Thursday night WAC teams playing the 10 PM game on ESPN2 in 1993. Except with worse offenses. Dodd, in trying to not eat crow in his morning after wrap-up - pitched the game as a defensive struggle, somehow confusing Boise State with the 85 Bears. I saw their games vs. Tulsa, Nevada, and Louisiana Tech which proved otherwise. And by the way - how many years out of the last 5, since the last expansion/rule change has a non-automatic qualifying conference landed somebody a BCS game since the last rule change in 2006? the answer is 5 out of 5. The way the rules are designed, it's basically a given - in fact, one could even say automatic - that a non AQ conference team will make to the BCS party every year despite all the whining. It's not "automatic" in name only.
This just proves Donny's point that the way the BCS set it up and how it went down was the best case scenario for the BCS. It actually does NOTHING to get a non-AQC team any closer to a shot at the national championship. It could not have gone any better for the BCS than it did. Had it been a shootout, both teams would have looked good, and it would have surely been more exciting, and writers would have that incredible offense of BSU holding their own against a top 5 defense like TCU. A blowout either way and that team would be clamoring for a piece of the pie, and sportswriters would point to the losing team as being unworthy.
Care to provide some evidence of that? (Hint: you can't, because it didn't happen that way, and I fully admit I am making an assumption based purely on the reactions and reasoning used following this game and MANY other non-AQ games in the past... haters gonna hate, fluffers gonna fluff... world keeps spinnin'... keep polishin' that turd, Sam)
What about it? I wouldn't be shocked if people in favor of exclusion bent over backwards to claim that Alabama and Oklahoma (vs. BSU earlier) "didn't play hard" or "had down years". I remember, in particular, that everyone pinned Utah's ass kicking of Alabama squarely on Bama not giving a crap after being knocked out of the championship game.
i guess we all hear what we want to hear and i do remember some people saying that about alabama, but you get that kind of excuse anytime a team loses or struggles. i certainly don't ever here anyone dismiss bsu's game against ou instead most call it one of the greatest bowl games ever.
If they give credit to the non-AQ teams, then great! I'm all for it! So what amount of credit will eventually get them AQ status? Or is that ever going to happen? (seems like a pipedream... money talks, etc) But, either way. To continue to prop up such a crappy system is reh-tah-ded. The day we give all D1 conferences AQ status is the day I shut up. That, or the day we get a playoff. Whichever comes first.
