PDA

View Full Version : Are you fricking kidding me?


saintsfan912
04-17-2008, 11:18 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=3351626

What's with Congress getting involved with sports? You would think they have better things to do like lowering gas prices right??

JagHombre22
04-17-2008, 11:20 PM
well, I do hate the BCS...so fire away Congress!

saintsfan912
04-17-2008, 11:23 PM
The BCS isn't the point. Its the fact that congress sticks their nose in places where it doesn't belong. And look at where the douche bags that brought this up are from: Georgia, Hawaii and Idaho. Like Hawaii and Idaho will ever have a realistic shot at a national title.

JagHombre22
04-17-2008, 11:29 PM
The BCS isn't the point. Its the fact that congress sticks their nose in places where it doesn't belong. And look at where the douche bags that brought this up are from: Georgia, Hawaii and Idaho. Like Hawaii and Idaho will ever have a realistic shot at a national title.

haha...so you're saying that if the BCS is an illegal front for money laundering you don't want Congress to interfere? That's stupid.

and what does the congressmen from GA, HA, and ID have to do with anything...

The BCS is crap and should be reassembled anyways...

congress has every right to put their nose into something as big as the BCS...

BeerBaron
04-17-2008, 11:44 PM
aye. how many of these schools probably receiver some kind of federal money in one form or another? i would say most if not all.....so as long as thats going on, congress has a say in what they do.

plus the schools play eachother over state lines and what not, making it an interstate business...pretty sure congress is within their right to oversee that.

i dont mind it....if we can can the BCS ill be a little happier

VoteLynnSwan
04-18-2008, 12:28 AM
The BCS isn't the point. Its the fact that congress sticks their nose in places where it doesn't belong. And look at where the douche bags that brought this up are from: Georgia, Hawaii and Idaho. Like Hawaii and Idaho will ever have a realistic shot at a national title.

Boise State is in Idaho in case you were curious...

DragonFireKai
04-18-2008, 12:45 AM
Boise State is in Idaho in case you were curious...

Hawaii pretty much deleted any chance of a mid major getting a chance at the national title. BSU's best shot is to lobby the PAC 10 to expand.

YAYareaRB
04-18-2008, 08:54 AM
I don't know why Hawaii is complaining, the school was just awarded about 4.4 Million from getting blasted in the sugar bowl.

boisefan
04-18-2008, 08:56 AM
Hawaii pretty much deleted any chance of a mid major getting a chance at the national title. BSU's best shot is to lobby the PAC 10 to expand.

No, BSU's best shot is to play at least one team a year like Georgia or Ohio State instead of going for loser teams like Idaho State.

BNad
04-18-2008, 09:11 AM
I guess you're assuming Congress doesn't know how to multi-task?

neko4
04-18-2008, 09:45 AM
If congress is going to get involved with sports they should look at EA Sport's monoply of football games

YAYareaRB
04-18-2008, 09:59 AM
If congress is going to get involved with sports they should look at EA Sport's monoply of football games

What do you mean?

boisefan
04-18-2008, 11:05 AM
What do you mean?

Ea makes Madden and NCAA football games.

Sniper
04-18-2008, 11:12 AM
"And Westmoreland said he is still smarting about his Georgia Bulldogs being passed over for the national championship game last year."

Here's a thought you ******* moron. Try AT LEAST winning your division, let alone your conference, before you worry about national title games.

BeerBaron
04-18-2008, 11:13 AM
Ea makes Madden and NCAA football games.

both of those things signed agreements with them though.

anyone else can make a football game, they just can't use real teams. theres no monopoly here

BeerBaron
04-18-2008, 11:14 AM
"And Westmoreland said he is still smarting about his Georgia Bulldogs being passed over for the national championship game last year."

Here's a thought you ******* moron. Try AT LEAST winning your division, let alone your conference, before you worry about national title games.

tell that to oklahomo a few years back...they didnt deserve to be there at all.

saintsfan912
04-18-2008, 12:26 PM
both of those things signed agreements with them though.

anyone else can make a football game, they just can't use real teams. theres no monopoly here

And so did every school involved in Division 1 football. They all agreed to the BCS so they have no right to complain.

And yea, I know Boise State is in Idaho. Which is why they have NO place to argue about the BCS.

And to the Jags guy: When did I say anything about an illegal front for laundering money? The bowl SPONSORS pay the best football teams in the nation money to play in a football game. The students or players don't get paid so this should have absolutely nothing to do with congress. If you want to play in a real bowl game, win some real football games against some real teams and stop ******* crying.

Sniper
04-18-2008, 12:31 PM
tell that to oklahomo a few years back...they didnt deserve to be there at all.

Oklahomo really isn't necessary. This isn't the ESPN boards. And at least they were in their conference title game. I'm not saying they should have gone, but Georgia didn't even make their conference title game.

BeerBaron
04-18-2008, 02:11 PM
Oklahomo really isn't necessary. This isn't the ESPN boards. And at least they were in their conference title game. I'm not saying they should have gone, but Georgia didn't even make their conference title game.

haha, that was an awesome typo on my part. didnt even realize i said that

regardless, they shouldnt have been there.....

in fact, id be all for doing away with the conf. championships altogether. the only way one should happen is if the 2 teams that would be playing hadn't played in the reg. season. but even then, i wouldnt mind seeing them gone. use that week (for most teams) as a chance to extend the national championship playoff

saintsfan912
04-18-2008, 02:33 PM
I agree they should either be done away with or every conference should have one. It certainly isn't fair when the Pac 10 or Big 10 just award a team a conference title, instead of making them fight for it.

BeerBaron
04-18-2008, 02:38 PM
I agree they should either be done away with or every conference should have one. It certainly isn't fair when the Pac 10 or Big 10 just award a team a conference title, instead of making them fight for it.

cough ohio state cough....

i dont think any division should have one. they say they want to keep the regular season worth something and use it as an excuse to keep the BCS but dammit, those conference title games nullify the reg. season in their own way. especially if the match features 2 teams who've already played eachother which can and has happened.......

DragonFireKai
04-18-2008, 02:46 PM
I agree they should either be done away with or every conference should have one. It certainly isn't fair when the Pac 10 or Big 10 just award a team a conference title, instead of making them fight for it.

The Pac 10 plays a true round robin. Everyone plays everyone. You can't dodge out of playing the upper tier teams. The SEC not only plays fewer conference games, but has more members of the conference, so each team is skipping out on 4 teams. The Pac 10 doesn't just "Award" a title. It's been fought for, more so than any other conference. The SEC has a battle for the conference title, the Pac 10 has a war.

saintsfan912
04-18-2008, 03:27 PM
The Pac 10 has a war? You could call it a war if the teams in the Pac 10 were as good as the SEC. Problem is, they aren't. The most competitive conferences have championship games, no way around that fact. You can't just drop 2 teams from the SEC or Big 12.

DragonFireKai
04-18-2008, 04:27 PM
The Pac 10 has a war? You could call it a war if the teams in the Pac 10 were as good as the SEC. Problem is, they aren't. The most competitive conferences have championship games, no way around that fact. You can't just drop 2 teams from the SEC or Big 12.

It's a war in the sense that an inferior team can get lucky during one game, and with a favorable schedule, they'll come out as the conference champions in the SEC. In the Pac 10, that doesn't happpen, everyone has the same schedule, and in the end, the team that performs the best over the same nine games is the champion. You can't get lucky one time and walk off with the conference.

I find it hilarious that a move that was made for solely financial benefit has been sold to the fans as a move for competition, and you bought it, hook, line, and sinker. You can say that the Pac 10 is USC and everyone else, but pretty much the whole nation has been USC and everyone else. The've lost one non conference game since 2003, and that was to an undefeated Texas in 05. In 06, they took the 2nd place team in the SEC, and beat them by 5 TDs, the first place team in the SEC beat Arkansas by 10 points. The only thing that's slowed USC down in recent years has been injuries.

The idea that a conference championship game makes a conference better is a joke. What has it done to make the ACC competetive? It's the quality of the teams that makes a conference good, not the format.

saintsfan912
04-19-2008, 02:02 PM
So when was the last time an inferior team won the SEC? That makes absolutely no sense. You're gonna say LSU was an inferior team? How about Florida 2 years ago? Did McFadden even play in the game against USC?

Crickett
04-19-2008, 02:05 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=3351626

What's with Congress getting involved with sports? You would think they have better things to do like lowering gas prices right??

This should let you know the level of authority Congress has these days. :D

DragonFireKai
04-19-2008, 03:04 PM
So when was the last time an inferior team won the SEC? That makes absolutely no sense. You're gonna say LSU was an inferior team? How about Florida 2 years ago?

How about Georgia 3 years ago? A 6-2 in the SEC Georgia takes on an 8-0 in the SEC LSU, catches them flat footed in the championship game. LSU goes on to the Peach Bowl, where they dismantle a good Miami team. UGA goes to the Sugar Bowl, and gets slapped around by West Virginia. LSU finishes the season ranked 6th, UGA 10th, yet Georgia was the champion. Who do you think the better team was?

Then there's the 2001 game, where a 7-1 in the SEC Tennessee team dropped the ball against a 5-3 LSU team that Tennessee had already beaten once before. Imagine that in the NFL, a team wins it's division despite losing 3 games, over a team that had only lost 2 games and split with the champion, all because one arbitrary game. LSU finished the season ranked 7th. Tennessee was 4th.

That doesn't happen in the Pac 10. The champion isn't chosen in one game, it's chosen over nine games. That irons out luck and chance for the most part. A team might get lucky in one game, but the other eight will reveal that the team isn't that good.

If you want to know which conference is more concerned about competativeness, look no farther than what the conferences did with the extra game the NCAA gave everyone. The SEC added another cupcake at home game to pad stats and earn more money. So did the Big XII, the ACC, and the Big Ten (although that came back to bite Michigan in the ass.). The only conference that differed was the Pac 10. The Pac 10 mandated another conference game to make it a perfect round robin, and ensure that no one could boost their stats by swapping USC or Cal or OSU in favor of Middle Tennessee State.

Did McFadden even play in the game against USC?

Yes he did. He wasn't 100 percent, but he got 11 touches, and he was their only injury. I don't care how good a player is, he's not going to make up 26 points on his own unless his backup is just that bad, and Felix Jones certainly wasn't.

Sniper
04-19-2008, 03:15 PM
I agree they should either be done away with or every conference should have one. It certainly isn't fair when the Pac 10 or Big 10 just award a team a conference title, instead of making them fight for it.

A valid point. (Possibly the first time we've agreed on anything) As much as I hate LSU and all things SEC, LSU had more of a legit argument before the game to be in the NC because they won the SEC. Tennessee had more of an argument to be in the NC game had they beaten LSU because they won the SEC East. Georgia wasn't even top 2 in their conference. How could they be best in the country?

saintsfan912
04-20-2008, 04:25 PM
A valid point. (Possibly the first time we've agreed on anything) As much as I hate LSU and all things SEC, LSU had more of a legit argument before the game to be in the NC because they won the SEC. Tennessee had more of an argument to be in the NC game had they beaten LSU because they won the SEC East. Georgia wasn't even top 2 in their conference. How could they be best in the country?

Did you actually agree with me on something? Wow, hell must have frozen over for us to actually have the same view on any topic.

BNad
04-22-2008, 05:59 PM
A valid point. (Possibly the first time we've agreed on anything) As much as I hate LSU and all things SEC, LSU had more of a legit argument before the game to be in the NC because they won the SEC. Tennessee had more of an argument to be in the NC game had they beaten LSU because they won the SEC East. Georgia wasn't even top 2 in their conference. How could they be best in the country?

My only gripe with the situation last season (as a Georgia fan) is that they voted us above all those teams the week before to get my hopes up.

And also that 1st and goal from like the 1, Kentucky couldn't score on Tennessee to give us a shot at the SEC title. alskjdf;kalsjdfasdf August 30 can't get here any faster.

Sniper
04-22-2008, 08:14 PM
My only gripe with the situation last season (as a Georgia fan) is that they voted us above all those teams the week before to get my hopes up.



And that's dumb in the first place. But truly and honestly, UGA had no claim to the SEC's best, so they DEFINITELY had no claim to the country's best.