Forget about all the debates of conference vs conference or whatever and remember this (which has already been said): TCU FREAKING BEAT BOISE ST IN A BOWL LAST YEAR! LAST YEAR! TCU's team was worse, and Boise St was undefeated. Now, it is ona bigger stage, and we get the SAME game! So stupid. Boise State is actually overrated and I would have liked to see them get exposed by another team. TCU is legit, but now they only get to face the overrated Boise State. I think some of TCU's best players are seniors, so this may not matter too much for next year, but I think after Texas wins that TCU will end up as #2, so that will at least be nice for TCU.
THERE ARE LEGITIMATE OBJECTIVE MEASUREMENTS THAT EXIST. They just don't support his argument. The MWC got to play 14 automatic qualifying conference schools during the regular season. The conference was 5-9.
did you factor in the records of MWC teams and the records of their out of conference opponents? Regardless, it was one point in a post. I am not posting in this thread trying to say the MWC should be a BCS conference. I don't care to be honest with you I just wanted to play a BCS school and not an overrated team that was undefeated last season and lost to a TCU team (a TCU team half as good as this one) in a bowl game
great. still don't care. not the point of my post. YOU WIN THAT ARGUMENT. You can drop it now...no one else cares either
That's certainly not an argument at all by itself. Who did they play? Which teams were playing? If the #8 team in the MWC plays the #1 team in the SEC and loses, what does that tell us about each conference? Beyond that, how did other conferences do against automatic qualifying schools? I guarantee you they didn't all having winning records against each other. What if another Big6 conference had a worse record than 5-9? The best way to measure the best teams in conferences against each other is to simply have them play. You know, TCU vs. Florida.
If TCU loses to Boise State, do we start hearing arguments that TCU didn't play up to its potential because it didn't care about playing Boise? You know, the same thing many Alabama and Oklahoma fans said?
it's actually funny to me how you are blatantly trying to be an *******. But I'll bite b/c I'm bored...no. To me it would mean that Boise was the better team and deserved to win
If they look pretty flat and uninspired then sure. If a team who faces a disappointing opponent in a bowl game looks flat or uninspired, especially in the first half, you bet that could be a reason. Granted, that would be on the coach moreso than anything, but its happened before.
How does what MWC teams not called TCU did is not a legitimate objective measurement of whether TCU (or any other non-BCS team) can beat a BCS conference champion. Further, for the record, not every conference is a member of the BCS. They are part of FBS, but there are 6 so-called BCS conferences. Their champion gets an automatic BCS bid. A non-BCS conference team (like TCU) is often call a "BCS buster." Are you new to college football, or does this entire scheme elude you on a conceptual level?
You have to admit, he is doing a good job. Either he is trying to be a jackass and succeeds, or he doesn't understand the BCS scheme, or he simply isn't very bright. I suspect it is that second option. Maybe he could tell us which of the three it is.
http://www.bcsfootball.org/bcsfb/faq What is a BCS Conference? "The media and others often mis-use this term. All 11 conferences in the Football Bowl Subdivision are 'BCS Conferences.' " http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=3814472 "If a lawsuit is filed against the BCS, though, Shurtleff could end up suing the state he represents. Utah is a member of the Mountain West Conference and Utah State belongs to the Western Athletic Conference; both leagues are members of the BCS." Now, what were you saying about understanding the BCS?
That is actually incorrect on a number of levels. FBS is the Football Bowl Subdivision. This was formerly known as division 1-A. NOT every conference was invited to the BCS party (also the BCS money). If Shurtleff sues the BCS, he will actually be suing the 6 conferences that comprise the automatic bids. The suit will be on anti-trust grounds. In short, the buffoon you quoted doesn't even grasp the theory of the legal challenges being threatened regarding the current system, let alone who the respective entities are. Succinctly, you and your "source" are full of crap.
Wait, are you serious? I just provided you with definitive proof of my statement and you are declaring them "full of crap" because I proved you wrong?
This is almost as entertaining as that guy that keeps trying to convince us that John Lopez isn't a tool.
Would you kindly point to one source of proof in his statement? You see, in my post, I provided a link to the official Bowl Championship Series website that clearly states all eleven conferences are members of the BCS. Are you saying that the BCS is just making that up? I never made a statement that every conference gets an automatic bid to the BCS. What I did say, and is a fact, is that the Mountain West Conference is a member of the BCS.
Your source completely and totally fabricated who would be the subject of a potential lawsuit regarding the BCS. Not only that, he got it very, very wrong. Why should we read further than that to tell that you have chosen very poorly on who to rely on? Just to entertain your asinine point, yes, the BCS is making it up. It would not be the first time that an organization fudged on the truth publicly knowing they are about to get sued. What a concept.
