NDL Forum

Dolemitesooner wrote:please don't argue with jsence Shel

please

I'll pay you

Dolemitesooner wrote:please don't argue with jsence Shel

please

I'll pay you

shel311 wrote:

Dolemitesooner wrote:please don't argue with jsence Shel

please

I'll pay you

I agreed with him you dork.

Cnasty wrote:

Dolemitesooner wrote:please don't argue with jsence Shel

please

I'll pay you

He isnt, he is actually agreeing with him which is worse.

shel311 wrote:

NCSUholmey wrote:

shel311 wrote:

OracleHCR wrote:I just don't like their "victim" attitude about having to earn the respect. Teams always have to go on the road to earn respect and get the notoriety of being a bigtime college football team. They don't have a few winning seasons in a row and demand bigger schools play home and away series with them and when they don't tell everyone the schools are scared to play them.

THem turning down a 2 for 1 with Nebraska then crying about no one wanting to play them really soured me on Boise.

why go play twice when the other team only will go once.

Uhh, because they want to do everything they can to win a national championship?

Can't think of a better reason than that.

Or, if you turn it down, that's fine. But don't start whining about how no one wants to play you.

autiger730 wrote:I'm with shel, don't turn down the shit and whine about no one wanting to play you. If you want to play them bad enough, you will hit the road.

shel311 wrote:

texasfan4444 wrote:Haters.....it would be good to have a BCS buster. Maybe then there could be some serious talks as to why the system is flawed by the people who can actually do something about it.

Well if they make the title game, that is evidence that the system isn't flawed.



And it's good to see Cdub wishing injury on a college kid. Pure gold.

shel311 wrote:

autiger730 wrote:I'm with shel, don't turn down the shit and whine about no one wanting to play you. If you want to play them bad enough, you will hit the road.

They certainly don't share the same motto as the Fresno coach, ANY TIME!! ANY WHERE!!

Dolemitesooner wrote:

shel311 wrote:

Dolemitesooner wrote:please don't argue with jsence Shel

please

I'll pay you

I agreed with him you dork.

ok just don't speak to him. If we all ignore him he will go away.


That does not work with me so don't try it

autiger730 wrote:

shel311 wrote:

NCSUholmey wrote:

shel311 wrote:

OracleHCR wrote:I just don't like their "victim" attitude about having to earn the respect. Teams always have to go on the road to earn respect and get the notoriety of being a bigtime college football team. They don't have a few winning seasons in a row and demand bigger schools play home and away series with them and when they don't tell everyone the schools are scared to play them.

THem turning down a 2 for 1 with Nebraska then crying about no one wanting to play them really soured me on Boise.

why go play twice when the other team only will go once.

Uhh, because they want to do everything they can to win a national championship?

Can't think of a better reason than that.

Or, if you turn it down, that's fine. But don't start whining about how no one wants to play you.

what incentive does any team with a 60-100k seat stadium have to schedule a home and home with a team that has a 35k seat stadium? None. If they want to play some big boys, 2 for 1 is their only option. I'm with shel, don't turn down the shit and whine about no one wanting to play you. If you want to play them bad enough, you will hit the road.

Mtwasik wrote:so the top four teams, play in two bowls, then the winners go on to the championship.

shel311 wrote:THem turning down a 2 for 1 with Nebraska then crying about no one wanting to play them really soured me on Boise.

NCSUholmey wrote:Stepping up to the Mountain West next season will be a big upgrade, making the SOS almost a non-issue when they will play much better teams each week.

VeniVediV1ci wrote:

NCSUholmey wrote:Stepping up to the Mountain West next season will be a big upgrade, making the SOS almost a non-issue when they will play much better teams each week.

Not sure about that, you still get teams like Wyoming, CSU and UNLV and it's not a BCS conference

NCSUholmey wrote:

VeniVediV1ci wrote:

NCSUholmey wrote:Stepping up to the Mountain West next season will be a big upgrade, making the SOS almost a non-issue when they will play much better teams each week.

Not sure about that, you still get teams like Wyoming, CSU and UNLV and it's not a BCS conference

true. The MWC should be getting close to becoming an auto-qualifier though right? I thought the BCS had that if a conference has a certain average BCS finish, they can earn or lose the auto-qualifier status

Under the terms of the agreements with the bowls and television rightsholder, the ACC, Big East, Big 10, Big 12, Pac-10 and SEC will have annual automatic qualification for their champions for the 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 and 2013-14 seasons.

Results from the 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011 regular seasons will be evaluated to determine whether a seventh conference earns automatic qualification for the 2012-13 and 2013-14 bowl games.

The process is as follows:

* The evaluation includes the following for each conference

(1) Average Ranking of Highest-Ranked Team, the ranking of the highest-ranked team in the final BCS Standings each year (if a conference does not place a team in the final BCS Standings, then its highest-ranked team is determined by the conference member that has the highest average ranking in the computer rankings used in the BCS Standings),

(2) Average Conference Ranking, the final regular-season rankings of all conference teams in the computer rankings used by the BCS each year, and

(3) Top 25 Performance Ranking, the number of teams in the top 25 of the final BCS Standings each year, with adjustments to account for differences in the number of members of each conference.

A conference will become the seventh automatic qualifier if it finishes among the top six conferences in both No. 1 and No. 2 and if its ranking in No. 3 is equal to or greater than 50 percent of the conference with the highest ranking in No. 3.

* Further, a conference will be eligible to apply to the Presidential Oversight Committee for an exemption if it finishes among the top six in both No. 1 and No. 2 and if its ranking in No. 3 is equal to or greater than 33.3 percent of the conference with the highest ranking in No. 3, OR

If it finishes among the top seven in either No. 1 or No. 2 and among the top five in the other and if its ranking in No. 3 is equal to or greater than 33.3 percent of the conference with the highest ranking in No. 3.

No. 3 above, the "Top 25 Performance Rating," will be calculated as follows: Points will be awarded to the conferences based on their teams' finishes in the top 25 of the final BCS Standings each year. Points will be awarded as follows:

Teams finishing 1-6: 4 points for each team Teams finishing 7-12: 3 points for each team Teams finishing 13-18: 2 points for each team Teams finishing 19-25: 1 point for each team

The point totals will be adjusted to account for the size of the conference, as follows:

Conference membership | Adjustment

12 or more member | no adjustment

10 or 11 members | points increased by 12.5 percent

9 or fewer members | points increased by 25 percent

* The computations will be made according to the conference's membership on Dec. 4, 2011.

If the BCS continues under the same or a similar format, conferences will be evaluated on their performances during the 2010 to 2013 regular seasons to determine which conferences without bowl contracts will have automatic qualification for the bowls that will conclude the 2014-2017 regular seasons.

Mtwasik wrote:Case in point, MWC refuses to participate in ESPN's bracket buster for basketball each February, with the arguement that we're not a mid-major conference. And then we go and get four total teams in the NCAAs, two more then the Pac-10, so we kind of proved our point there.