-
Chitown_Badger said...
They deserved a shot and proved it when they won. How is that a problem?
And actually last year is a justification for including the "best" teams out there...not just randomly saying only conference champs.
This post was edited by RPMadMSU on 5/16/2012 at 12:12 PM
RPMadMSU
- 5 stars Rating: 93
9899 votes total - Eternal Bastion of Common Sense
- (16657)
- 29 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 5 stars
-
Rec-Ball-Legend said...
Yeah that post was terrible, and it doesn't matter the age (I am 25). That's almost like saying I rather win the big ten in hoops than go to the final four. I know for older people, they gave grown up with the RB being the end all be all for any Big Ten team, so they can't shake it's mystique. But, it is a new era and the BCS title game is the best place got any college football team to e at the end of the year, period.
-
RPMadMSU said...
They also choked away a game at home...but wern't really punished for that like other teams would have been...The game that was billed and hyped as one of the biggest regular season games in history turned out to be absolutely meaningless to the MNC chase.
The best team is not the same as a championship team. A championship team earns something that none of its peers earned over the couse of a season...it is not arguable. The title of "best team" is subjective, especially in systems where every team does not play every other team head to head.
Chitown_Badger
- 4 stars Rating: 71
7259 votes total - (8376)
- 29 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 4 stars
-
PRStoetzer said...
I only support two ways forward for college football:
1. Abandon the bowl system and create a 16-32 team NCAA playoff.
2. Go back to the pre-1994 system. Regular season, traditional bowl matchups, and then the pollsters can vote on who the champion is.
tRCMB's resident Wayne State Warrior and Sam's Club Spartan fan.
-
Misterray
- 5 stars Rating: 91
2737 votes total - Source for Decimated Secretaries and Nancies
- (2092)
- 29 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
RPMadMSU said...
Two Major Polls...AP stated in 1936 and the UPI/USAToday/CNN/ESPN since 1950 are the two major crowners of the national champion. A team on top of one of those two the last issues poll of the season is who I recognize as the MNC...even today, even if there are too.
I still use MNC...because even with the BCS its mythical...maybe more so now than under the previous poll era system.
It was by no means perfect, but it's better than the BCS.
Only 30 teams have won a poll championship since 1936. Including years of multiples...only 18 have won more than one. MSU is one of the 18 with 2 titles (52 and 65).
Michigan fans hate and love when I use this system..while it only recognizes 2 Michigan NC's as legit, (same number as MSU) it does give Michigan the right to fully claim 1997 (1948 being the other).
Minnesota fans love it two because they can claim 4 (1936 innaugeral AP, 1940, 1941, 1960).
Nebraska (1970, 1971, 1994, 1995, 1997) and OSU (1942, 1954, 1957, 1968, 2002) are tied with 5 each.
Other B1G teams: PSU (1982, 1986)
These are the only MNC's I recognize as legit.
Giant Moose
- 5 stars Rating: 89
14383 votes total - (8930)
- 29 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 5 stars
-
Chitown_Badger said...
Well, if that game at home had been to someone like a Mississippi St, I would have wholeheartedly agreed that they didn't deserve a shot (in a two team system). But it was to the other best team in the country, so all told, they proved that they were deserving if you consider their full year performance.
RecBallLegend22804
- 4 stars Rating: 77
336 votes total - (547)
- 29 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 4 stars
-
Chitown_Badger said...
Great article, and hard to argue with any of it. A couple thoughts after having been to the Rose Bowl game the past two years...
1) It is an amazing, special experience, and I had an absolute blast each time I went despite losing two heartbreakers.
2) I would give up either one of those experiences in a second if it meant that the Badgers would have instead been playing for the National Championship.
3) Those of you who talk about tradition and the B1G/Pac12 matchup need to realize that that "tradition" has changed over the past few years, and is sure to change more over the coming years
4) I have a hard time grasping why the ADs would give away those potential home games on campus. Can you tell me that, even if you had to go on the road to a place like Alabama, it wouldn't be awesome...especially knowing that you're in the running to win the championship?
With the advent of the BCS the Rose Bowl has become even more of an exhibition, with no bearing on the national championship (see #3). Adding more teams to the fold for the championship will make that exhibition even more meaningless. Think about it...you're looking at possible second place vs second place matchup in Pasadena. Good game most likely, but hardly what the Rose Bowl used to be and mean.
Knibb High football rules
WhiteBoyHatcher ●
- 5 stars Rating: 84
4155 votes total - (2986)
- 29 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 5 stars
-
RPMadMSU said...
Because under the current system the title game is meaningless and a farce. It's a made up title that serves no one.
The Rose Bowl is an awesome setting, its traditional, it's always had the B1G's back, both parties have made a lot of money off of each other and it's the one major bowl that has stayed true to its roots/mission.
That being said...I have no problem with it being excluded from a playoff. Send the winner of the B1G Champ game to a playoff and the loser to the Rose Bowl...same with the PXII. You'll still get sweet match up between two really good teams that represent the style of the B1G and PXII most years. Plus you'll reward division winners who generally have good seasons.
It's not like the RB has ever concerned itself with the MNC before...why should it start now?
In fact I think the 3 old BCS major Bowls should say screw the BCS and follow the same pattern.
B1G FCG runner up v. PXII runner up in Rose Bowl ACC v. BE in Orange Bowl SEC v. B12 in Sugar Bowl
The Fiesta can go back to its roots as a mid major bowl...It's a shameful organization anyway. (Though I think the cotton Bowl should be raised to a higher level...)
Reserve New Years Day to spotlight those three games. (No Playoff on NYD).
This post was edited by SpartanRocky on 5/16/2012 at 12:58 PM
Michigan State does not and will not run the 3-4 defense.
SpartanRocky ●
- 5 stars Rating: 90
16727 votes total - Andrew Bell
- (22336)
- 29 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
MadMaxim said...
I think the Rose Bowl is held in such high regard is because it was the prize for wining the B10. If the prize for winning the B10 was a home playoff game I am sure a bunch of the old guard would cry about not being able to be herded around in oppressive heat to watch a bunch of floats go by and then pay an insane amount to watch a game in Cali, but in a few years it would change. The Rose Bowl will always have its history, but with the insane money and popularity of college football the romantic feel of the grandaddy of them all is starting to feel hollow.
I believe that the BCS while keeping the big bowls at the front end of the mythical championship has changed the game too much and will make it easier to implement a true NCAA championship. While I would have loved to see it, State playing TCU two years ago in Pasadena would not have had the same allure.
Michigan State does not and will not run the 3-4 defense.
SpartanRocky ●
- 5 stars Rating: 90
16727 votes total - Andrew Bell
- (22336)
- 29 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
RPMadMSU said...
Two Major Polls...AP stated in 1936 and the UPI/USAToday/CNN/ESPN since 1950 are the two major crowners of the national champion. A team on top of one of those two the last issues poll of the season is who I recognize as the MNC...even today, even if there are too.
I still use MNC...because even with the BCS its mythical...maybe more so now than under the previous poll era system.
It was by no means perfect, but it's better than the BCS.
Only 30 teams have won a poll championship since 1936. Including years of multiples...only 18 have won more than one. MSU is one of the 18 with 2 titles (52 and 65).
Michigan fans hate and love when I use this system..while it only recognizes 2 Michigan NC's as legit, (same number as MSU) it does give Michigan the right to fully claim 1997 (1948 being the other).
Minnesota fans love it two because they can claim 4 (1936 innaugeral AP, 1940, 1941, 1960).
Nebraska (1970, 1971, 1994, 1995, 1997) and OSU (1942, 1954, 1957, 1968, 2002) are tied with 5 each.
Other B1G teams:
PSU (1982, 1986)These are the only MNC's I recognize as legit.
This post was edited by fishrose on 5/16/2012 at 1:30 PM
tRCMB's resident Wayne State Warrior and Sam's Club Spartan fan.
-
spartan05 said...
Can someone please explain how the regular season will be meaningless? I hear the bowl advocates spout this crap all the time and can't figure it out. It's not like 8-4 teams are going to be playing for a national title. You're still probably going to have to win 10+ games to have a shot.
Michigan State does not and will not run the 3-4 defense.
SpartanRocky ●
- 5 stars Rating: 90
16727 votes total - Andrew Bell
- (22336)
- 29 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
WhiteBoyHatcher said...
Glad to see you chimed in.
I think that Spartan fans in general (Hollis included) hold the Rose Bowl so near and dear to their heart because we are chasing the dream of getting back there. I wonder if we had beaten Wiscy last year, and beaten Oregon, if so many people would still hold this steadfast opinion.
I'm sure it's a fantastic setting and I would love to go see MSU play there as conference champs, but to me, the Rose Bowl lost a great deal of its mystique and prestige when it got sold out as part of the BCS equation.
Spartan Punk
- 4 stars Rating: 77
2234 votes total - (3239)
- 29 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 4 stars
-
Chitown_Badger said...
Well, if that game at home had been to someone like a Mississippi St, I would have wholeheartedly agreed that they didn't deserve a shot (in a two team system). But it was to the other best team in the country, so all told, they proved that they were deserving if you consider their full year performance.
RPMadMSU
- 5 stars Rating: 93
9899 votes total - Eternal Bastion of Common Sense
- (16657)
- 29 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 5 stars
-
RPMadMSU
- 5 stars Rating: 93
9899 votes total - Eternal Bastion of Common Sense
- (16657)
- 29 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 5 stars
-
fishrose said...
I disagree with this. The NCAA recognizes a large number of polls and mathematical formulas as "major selectors." The biggest problem with this list is that many of the mathematically-based formulas awarded championships retroactively for seasons before the formula was written and enacted. I strongly feel that any of these "major selector" championships that were awarded in the same year the games were played are legitimate.
When counting by this method, Michigan State has 5 national championships in 1951, 1952, 1955, 1957, and 1965. The 1966 championship was not awarded by a major selector. Michigan also has 5 counting by this method, with every championship after 1932 being awarded in the same year by a major selector.
Also, by your criteria MSU would have 3 MNCs. The won the AP Poll in 1951, the UPI in 1952, and the Coaches' Poll in 1965.
This post was edited by RPMadMSU on 5/16/2012 at 2:14 PM
RPMadMSU
- 5 stars Rating: 93
9899 votes total - Eternal Bastion of Common Sense
- (16657)
- 29 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 5 stars
-
fishrose said...
I disagree with this. The NCAA recognizes a large number of polls and mathematical formulas as "major selectors." The biggest problem with this list is that many of the mathematically-based formulas awarded championships retroactively for seasons before the formula was written and enacted. I strongly feel that any of these "major selector" championships that were awarded in the same year the games were played are legitimate.
When counting by this method, Michigan State has 5 national championships in 1951, 1952, 1955, 1957, and 1965. The 1966 championship was not awarded by a major selector. Michigan also has 5 counting by this method, with every championship after 1932 being awarded in the same year by a major selector.
Also, by your criteria MSU would have 3 MNCs. The won the AP Poll in 1951, the UPI in 1952, and the Coaches' Poll in 1965.
RPMadMSU
- 5 stars Rating: 93
9899 votes total - Eternal Bastion of Common Sense
- (16657)
- 29 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 5 stars
-
RPMadMSU said...
Nothing...it means nothing in terms of national championship now and it never really had prior to the BCS. The B1G Champ didn't even always go...back in the days of the no repeat rule.
What it was and always has been is an exhibition between a top "eastern" style team and a "top" west coast style team to culminate the Tournament of Roses in Pasadena (Interestig fact, after the first RB game when Michigan embarassed Stanford in the "Tournament East-West Football Game", the Tournament of Roses adopted Chariot Racing as their culminating event for the next 15 years). The B1G/PXII agreement came to be because no other E or W conferneces were even close in terms of level of play to have a meaningful marketable competition. There are still many on ToR committees who are upset with the breaking of this mission when the RB joined the BCS...which is why Illinois got to go a few years ago.
I'm just suggesting returning the Rose Bowl back to that. An example of a powerful B1G v. an example of a PXII team (doesn't need to be the champions) With 12 teams in each league, the odds are pretty good you'd still get a good match up and an interesting exhibition.
Imagine MSU v. USC had they not been on probation last year? That still wouldn't get you excited?
Michigan State does not and will not run the 3-4 defense.
SpartanRocky ●
- 5 stars Rating: 90
16727 votes total - Andrew Bell
- (22336)
- 29 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
SpartanRocky said...
It doesn't make the regular season meaningless, but it makes each individual game worth less.
In the current system, the only way to absolutely guarantee a SHOT at the NC game is to go undefeated. If you lose once, you're out unless all but 1 BCS conf. teams also have at least 1 loss.
A play-off means 1-loss is no longer fatal, meaning teams don't quite have to be on their toes. If there's no home field advantage incentive, you could have a 7-0 Big 10 team (say, Ohio State), rest its starters vs. UM so that it's best prepared for the CCG. If you need to win the CCG to guarantee a shot at the title, then you're better off losing a game in order to have your starters at 100% of the game that "really" matters. It could potentially kill rivalries that have more tradition than the sacred Rose Bowl.
Also, I really think an 8-16 team playoff kills the regular season. You'll have 2-loss and sometimes even 3-loss teams playing for the N.C., especially if you go to an "all conf. champs" format that would have included an 8-4 regular season La. Tech team last season, at the exclusion of some 10 W BCS conf. teams.
-
RPMadMSU
- 5 stars Rating: 93
9899 votes total - Eternal Bastion of Common Sense
- (16657)
- 29 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 5 stars
-
MadMaxim said...
Yeah but if you go with first round campus sites that La. tech team is playing at LSU. What that does is reward LSU with a superior regular season. A loss during the year would be the difference between playing the worst of the auto-qualifiers or a top 10 at large team. It would make the conference championships the most important, and if you miss out on that then the out of conference games become important as you would most likely have to be ranked higher then 15 to guarantee a spot. Sure, superior teams would be left out but there are more then enough opportunities to earn your way in and there still would be the same importance on each game throughout the year.
Michigan State does not and will not run the 3-4 defense.
SpartanRocky ●
- 5 stars Rating: 90
16727 votes total - Andrew Bell
- (22336)
- 29 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
SpartanRocky said...
1) Campus sites are dead this time around. By using non-AQ champs as "a reward" for BCS conf opponents, you're conceding that the non-AQ teams really don't belong in the discussion, and are being used as cannon fodder. Give me OK State vs. South Carolina in round 1 instead of OK State vs. Northern Illinois.
2) Your reasoning for superior teams being left out is that . . . what? You're creating a double standard here; non-AQ champs get preference over, in your own words, superior teams, in a system that supposedly has the top squads in the country vying for the NC. So the BCS conf. teams had better win all their games, non-conf. and in-conf., but the non-AQs just have to win their conference, no matter how bad they are?
1. If we are talking about all conference champs I assume the first round would have been at campus sites. Maybe non-AQ teams are not on the same level but they at least deserve a chance, if not then take all non-AQ schools and put them in division 1 FBS-2 and take them out of the picture. It is like the championship games, anyone think that Georgia was better then Bama? They earned their way in.
2. There is a finite number of teams that can play. By auto-qualifing champs you can take all voting, computers and such out of the equation. No matter what your name is you can win your way into the playoffs. All any team has to do is win their conference to get in, be it a historic powerhouse or bottom feeders. The BCS teams also have the ability to impress the committee and earn an at-large bid. But if a playoff only included the top 8 teams or whatever it was, a TCU or Boise would NEVER get to play in it. Call me
but voters and computers would be fixed to keep them out. So yeah for the first round the top few seeds would have less then desirable match-ups, but the middle would be great, and so would every other one. Plus the one time the Sunbelt rolls into the SEC and knocks of a team would be wonderful. -
Chitown_Badger
- 4 stars Rating: 71
7259 votes total - (8376)
- 29 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 4 stars
- Post a New Topic
- Back to Topics
- « Previous Topic
- Next Topic »
- Boards ▾
- Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6
Why does the big10 love the rose bowl so much?