Court finds that Duke could not possibly be a worse football team.

[TripletDaddy]

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

You're correct about which teams have won the football titles. But that isn't my point.

My point is that the BCS is a cartel that is bent on shutting out schools that it doesn't deem worthy to be a part of their little club. The money generated by the BCS has made it impossible to level the playing field for those that are not BCS.

With that I agree.

1. BCS is basically a little monopoly
2. The mids got the shaft
3. This perpetuates the haves/have nots because all the money continues to go to the haves.

I guess it doesnt bother me that much. I respect what you are saying, though.

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by TripletDaddy

With that I agree.

1. BCS is basically a little monopoly
2. The mids got the shaft
3. This perpetuates the haves/have nots because all the money continues to go to the haves.

I guess it doesnt bother me that much. I respect what you are saying, though.

I suppose I feel this way because I've never been a fan of any of the BCS teams. I'm a Ute fan and went to Marist. Both are considered inferior by the cartel.

[TripletDaddy]

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

I suppose I feel this way because I've never been a fan of any of the BCS teams. I'm a Ute fan and went to Marist. Both are considered inferior by the cartel.

This is really the heart of it.

It isn't the fact that someone threw a party.

It is because we were left off the guest list.

If the BCS announced tomorrow that it was sacking the Big East and inviting the MWC instead, BYU would be very happy with the BCS and everything that it provides.

Again, to reiterate, if I could have it my way, I would do away with the BCS and do a 16-team playoff. Since that isn't possible, I have no real beef with the BCS and do not find it unfair.

[Lost Student]

Originally Posted by TripletDaddy

With that I agree.

1. BCS is basically a little monopoly
2. The mids got the shaft
3. This perpetuates the haves/have nots because all the money continues to go to the haves.

I guess it doesnt bother me that much. I respect what you are saying, though.

My beef is not only the money difference, it is the way that the public's perception of our quality of play is affected. The perception of inferiority perpetuates the problem. "You're not in a BCS conf, so you suck (or because you suck)" is a common perception.

While this perception is generally true, there are a lot of non-AQ teams that have better football than a lot of AQ teams.

The real reason we are not in a BCS conference is because we migrated west to avoid religious persecution due to our polygamous nature, new book of scripture, etc., making the desert to bloom like a rose while avoiding the temptations of prosperity in California.

IOW, we are not BCS because we are located in a sparsely populated area and/or are a religious institution (factors that have no bearing on the actual game).

[TripletDaddy]

Originally Posted by Lost Student

My beef is not only the money difference, it is the way that the public's perception of our quality of play is affected. The perception of inferiority perpetuates the problem. "You're not in a BCS conf, so you suck (or because you suck)" is a common perception.

While this perception is generally true, there are a lot of non-AQ teams that have better football than a lot of AQ teams.

The real reason we are not in a BCS conference is because we migrated west to avoid religious persecution due to our polygamous nature, new book of scripture, etc., making the desert to bloom like a rose while avoiding the temptations of prosperity in California.

IOW, we are not BCS because we are located in a sparsely populated area and/or are a religious institution (factors that have no bearing on the actual game).

I agree with this to a point. Yes, there is a perception...and yes, for the most part, the perception is warranted.

I disagree that there is a perception across the board that all BCS teams are better than non-BCS teams.....I don't see anyone lauding Vanderbilt football over Fresno State football, for example.

Speaking of whether the perception is true, what is our record against BCS teams? We have played good ones and sucky ones. How have we done overall? Pretty lousy, actually. And we are allegedly one of the best of ALL non-BCS teams...if not THE best.

So back to your original premise....the reason the perception exists is because...well.....it's pretty much true.

[minn_stat]

Originally Posted by TripletDaddy

This is really the heart of it.

It isn't the fact that someone threw a party.

It is because we were left off the guest list.

If the BCS announced tomorrow that it was sacking the Big East and inviting the MWC instead, BYU would be very happy with the BCS and everything that it provides.

Again, to reiterate, if I could have it my way, I would do away with the BCS and do a 16-team playoff. Since that isn't possible, I have no real beef with the BCS and do not find it unfair.

It annoys me to no end to hear the disdain some people have for the BCS, and yet when a plan is suggested that includes their team but still excludes others, all of their disdain goes away - yet the reasons they cited for their disdain haven’t gone away.

The problem with the BCS is Utah 2004. They pretty much dominated everyone they played. They obliterated the champion of a BCS conference. As I watched the Fiesta Bowl (yes, I cheered for Utah – I generally do when they are not playing BYU), I noticed that almost all of the discussion centered on how great it was that they got invited to play in a BCS game. I kept waiting for the discussion to focus on how they had been ripped off. For weeks afterwards, I kept telling my Ute acquaintances to wipe that smile off their face and get mad. But they took the money, smiled, and shut up. They bent over and took it, willingly, smilingly.

How good was that team? Therein lies the rub. We don’t know, and won’t. With George Mason, we do. They were final four good. No, they didn’t win it all. Neither did BYU or Utah in 1998 hoops. But the possibility wasn’t just theoretical. It was very real, especially for the Utes on the morning of March 30, 1998. We know how good they were.

Was Utah the best football team in the country in 2004? Most people would say “probably not”, but that is all based upon subjective opinions. Utah never got a chance to see how good they were.

[jay santos]

Bottom line on BCS.

1. It's a bad way to choose your champion when a playoff would be so easy, and the fans want it so bad.

2. It's reasonably fair in its current state, both in team selection and in revenue distribution.

3. It's a major improvement on the bowl situation of pre-1995.