College Football 2009 Season thread~!

[HailtotheYo]

LOL hey, don't feel too bad ... we're approaching that in 'Nole land as well.

[JStarr]

Maybe once FSU has a non-Alzheimer's sufferer as a coach, things might start to look up again?

[GhostMachine]

The Vols will have to replace two coaches after the bowls are over. Wide Receivers coach is going to LSU, and the Special Teams coach is headed to Florida State.

[HailtotheYo]

The Vols will have to replace two coaches after the bowls are over. Wide Receivers coach is going to LSU, and the Special Teams coach is headed to Florida State.

Uh Jimbo, the point is to get better ...

[Vendetta]

So what if Florida beats Cincy, Alabama or Texas blow one another out and then TCU blows out Boise? That leaves Texas or Alabama undefeated along with TCU. Then you have to pronounce them co national champions? Lets not forget that just because two teams are in the Championship game doesn't mean the BCS has to reward one of those teams the title.

Edited December 9, 2009 by Irish Car Bomb

[Commander Sheepard]

Actually, it DOES mean that the BCS has to award one of those teams the championship. The AP voters don't, however, which is how we've ended up with a split national championship not THAT long ago.

[Big Red Fury]

While I'm sure that the BCS played their part in this, the biggest villains in this story have to be the Fiesta Bowl organizers. Why they would select TCU over Iowa when TCU can't even sell their own place out is beyond me. If they had picked Iowa, we wouldn't have seen this total boning of a contest between TCU and Boise. I think TCU rocks Boise and instead of now two interesting matchups, we get a non-BCS matchup and Georgia Tech/Iowa in a game that NO ONE cares about. It's too bad Colt's pass didn't float a half a second longer because if it had I'm not sure the voters would have put Cincy ahead of TCU. Even though I'm not sure who is better out of TCU or Texas, I think Texas is made to order for Alabama and I think TCU would have given them a much better game. I see TCU, Alabama, and GT rolling, Oregon beating OSU by around 10 and Florida and Cincinnati playing a surprisingly competitive game that Florida will win with another "magical" Tebow moment late in the 4th.

[GhostMachine]

I'm not happy with where Boise State ended up for one reason. As they pointed out on one of the sports shows on ESPN (may have been Colin Cowherd on SportsNation; either that, or it was someone on Mike and Mike In The Morning), Boise State is somewhat overrated. They play a handful of fairly good teams and a bunch of lame teams, and it would have been nice to see them put into a "Put up or shut up" situation against a top tier team. Then either they pull an upset and win, proving they're underrated, or they get crushed and people quit bitching about Boise State not getting any respect and tell the Broncos and their fans to shut the fuck up. (I think Florida would absolutely annihilate them)

I'll tell you two reasons why I think the BCS should either be reworked or just done away with and a playoff system replacing it:

1. The BCS was supposed to solve the problem of co-national champions, yet we've had it happen 2 or 3 times since the BCS started.

2. It doesn't matter how good a team is when they play a few games that are forgone conclusions before they even happen because their opponents are a joke. The idea that Florida could have played for the National Championship if they had beaten Alabama, when a quarter of their schedule was against jobber teams (Charleston Southern, Troy and Florida International), makes me sick. (And I'd say that about ANY team, not just Florida)

[Blaze09]

Um....there was only one time where there was a split champion in the BCS, which was 03 when USC was #1 in both human polls but didn't play in the Sugar Bowl.

[HailtotheYo]

While I'm sure that the BCS played their part in this, the biggest villains in this story have to be the Fiesta Bowl organizers. Why they would select TCU over Iowa when TCU can't even sell their own place out is beyond me.

Learn the system please, before you go and make comments like this.

Firstly, TCU DOES sell out their own place. The game that was publicized with them having an entire section empty was against UNLV ... guess what, top schools in every conference have empty seats against the UNLV's of their schedule too. Did you happen to catch the nationally televised game against Utah ? Because they were cramming people into the place.

The Bowls in the BCS almost don't have a say in who they pick. The BCS rankings determine that.

Top two go to National Title Game. After that, the champions of each conference are contractually obligated to certain BCS Bowls. Subsequently, when a conference has a rep in the title game and they have a second qualifying team, it is selected in the bowl that the champion is obligated too.

Already you've knocked out pretty much every team except for TCU/BoiseSt. But, TCU/BoiseSt were both higher rated and geographically made more sense than Iowa. They are also both undefeated while Iowa has lost two games. They are also better stories than Iowa.

Here's what I love. Div-3 Football. 11 undefeated teams, all playing for the national title.

Div-2 Football. 1 undefeated and 7 one loss teams, all playing for the national title.

FCS Football. 1 undefeated team and 4 one loss teams, all playing for the national title.

FBS Football 5 undefeated teams, only two playing for the national title.

[Lint]

Well, Congress is getting involved with the BCS...from Yahoo Sports

WASHINGTON (AP)—Dismissing complaints from some members that Congress had more pressing matters, a House subcommittee approved legislation Wednesday aimed at forcing college football to switch to a playoff system to determine its national champion.

“We can walk across the street and chew gum at the same time,” said the subcommittee chairman, Illinois Democrat Bobby Rush, one of the bill’s co-sponsors. “We can do a number of things at the same time.”

The legislation, which still faces steep odds, would ban the promotion of a postseason NCAA Division I Football Bowl Subdivision game as a national championship unless it results from a playoff. The measure passed by voice vote in the House Energy and Commerce Committee’s commerce, trade and consumer protection subcommittee, with one audible “no,” from Rep. John Barrow, D-Ga.

House Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection subcommittee Chairman Rep. Bobby Rush, D-Ill., center, flanked by subcommittee counsel Timothy Robinson, left, and subcommittee member Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, presides over the subcommittee's hearing to markup legislation on a BCS college football playoff system

“With all due respect, I really think we have more important things to spend our time on,” Barrow said before the vote, although he stressed he didn’t like the current Bowl Championship Series, either.

The BCS selections announced last weekend pit two unbeaten teams, No. 1 Alabama and No. 2 Texas, in the Jan. 7 national title game. Three other undefeated teams—TCU, Cincinnati and Boise State—will play in a BCS bowl game, but not for the championship.

“What can we say—it’s December and the BCS is in chaos again,” said the bill’s sponsor, Rep. Joe Barton of Texas, the top Republican on the House Energy and Commerce Committee. He said the BCS system is unfair and won’t change unless prompted by Congress.

The legislation, which goes to the full committee, would make it illegal to promote a national championship game “or make a similar representation,” unless it results from a playoff.

There is no Senate version, although Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, has pressed for a Justice Department antitrust investigation into the BCS.

Shortly after his election last year, Barack Obama said there should be a playoff system.

In a statement before the vote, BCS executive director Bill Hancock said, “With all the serious matters facing our country, surely Congress has more important issues than spending taxpayer money to dictate how college football is played.”

Yet Barrow wasn’t alone in criticizing his colleagues’ priorities; Reps. Zach Space, D-Ohio, and Bart Stupak, D-Mich., made similar arguments. Space said that with people facing tough times, the decision to focus on college football sends the “wrong message.”

The legislation has a tough road ahead, given the wide geographic representation and political clout of schools in the six conferences that have automatic BCS bowl bids—the ACC, Big East, Big 12, Big Ten, Pac-10 and SEC.

The current college bowl system features a championship game between the two top teams in the BCS standings, based on two polls and six computer rankings. Eight other schools play in the Orange, Sugar, Fiesta and Rose bowls.

Under the BCS, the champions of those six big conference have automatic bids, while other conferences don’t. Those six conferences also receive far more money than the other conferences.

The article I read on ESPNs mobile site had a little bit more info on it..but seriously..all the problems in this country and the only thing Dems and Repubs can agree on is the BCS is fucked up?

E2: Ah..here is the other article

Federal legislation that could lead to a college football playoff tournament will move a step closer to reality on Wednesday in a hearing before a subcommittee of the U.S. House of Representatives.

The Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection will consider a bill that would allow the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to prohibit any bowl game from calling itself a "national championship" unless the game is "the final game of a single elimination post-season playoff system." The subcommittee is expected to vote on the proposal on Wednesday after a line-by-line consideration of the bill.

"With everything going on in the country, I can't believe that Congress is wasting time and spending taxpayers' money on football," Bill Hancock, the BCS executive director, said in a phone interview with The Associated Press. "We feel strongly that managing of college sports is best left to the people in higher education."

Written and sponsored by Rep. Joe Barton (R-Texas), the bill is a direct attack on the BCS and, if enacted, would bring the long simmering controversy over the BCS to an end. In a legislative process that is long and can be tortuous, the hearing is a significant step. This is the furthest any bill on the BCS controversy has ever progressed on Capitol Hill.

At a hearing on the BCS issue in May, Barton demanded a playoff and warned BCS officials that if "they sit on their hands and yawn, this legislation could end up on the President's desk for his signature." This week's development, according to a spokesman for the committee, is Barton's response to the BCS's refusal to consider a playoff.

Wednesday's hearing is known as a "markup," a procedure that allows any committee member to propose amendments to the bill, followed by committee action on the amendments. The procedure is frequently used to iron out technical problems in the bill's language and to provide a forum for compromises among committee members on substantive issues.

Barton's bill is supported by Rep. Bobby Rush (D-Ill.), the chairman of the subcommittee. If the subcommittee approves the bill, it will move to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, where Barton enjoys some leverage as the ranking Republican. The next steps would be a vote on the floor of the House, passage by the Senate, and approval by President Barack Obama. Obama has said in numerous interviews on ESPN and on "60 Minutes" that he supports a playoff system.

The bill would give the FTC the authority to regulate the college football postseason with the power to obtain injunctions and to assess huge fines against any organization that promotes a "national championship game."

If enacted into law, the rule would become effective for the 2011 college football season and would affect bowl games played late in 2011 and in January of 2012.

"We're pleased that Congressman Barton's bill is moving forward because it will require the BCS to choose -- either make college football's championship a competitively earned honor or admit that it's currently the equivalent of being elected homecoming king," said Matthew Sanderson, a founder of Playoff PAC, a political action committee aimed at electing members of Congress who favor a playoff system.

[JStarr]

While I'm sure that the BCS played their part in this, the biggest villains in this story have to be the Fiesta Bowl organizers. Why they would select TCU over Iowa when TCU can't even sell their own place out is beyond me.

Learn the system please, before you go and make comments like this.

Firstly, TCU DOES sell out their own place. The game that was publicized with them having an entire section empty was against UNLV ... guess what, top schools in every conference have empty seats against the UNLV's of their schedule too. Did you happen to catch the nationally televised game against Utah ? Because they were cramming people into the place.

The Bowls in the BCS almost don't have a say in who they pick. The BCS rankings determine that.

Top two go to National Title Game. After that, the champions of each conference are contractually obligated to certain BCS Bowls. Subsequently, when a conference has a rep in the title game and they have a second qualifying team, it is selected in the bowl that the champion is obligated too.

Already you've knocked out pretty much every team except for TCU/BoiseSt. But, TCU/BoiseSt were both higher rated and geographically made more sense than Iowa. They are also both undefeated while Iowa has lost two games. They are also better stories than Iowa.

But the Fiesta did have a say, almost complete say in fact, and they DID choose to match up TCU and Boise State. Their reasoning was simple...they liked the idea of two undefeated teams playing in their game. The rest of the Cartel loved the idea because it keeps those pesky scrub-conference teams from making any of the big boys look bad.

The way everyone's been describing the system, it's like a bunch of guys drafting their fantasy football teams over a case of beer in the garage. "Um, you took Cincinnati, okay, I'll take...um...Boise State." Sometimes, I wonder if the people in question AREN'T half in the bag.

[HailtotheYo]

But the Fiesta did have a say, almost complete say in fact, and they DID choose to match up TCU and Boise State. Their reasoning was simple...they liked the idea of two undefeated teams playing in their game. The rest of the Cartel loved the idea because it keeps those pesky scrub-conference teams from making any of the big boys look bad.

The way everyone's been describing the system, it's like a bunch of guys drafting their fantasy football teams over a case of beer in the garage. "Um, you took Cincinnati, okay, I'll take...um...Boise State." Sometimes, I wonder if the people in question AREN'T half in the bag.

Partially true.

They had control over their first pick, but only AFTER the Orange Bowl selected. The way the selection process works, the Bowl played on the date nearest the national title game (the Orange Bowl this year) gets the first selection after the contractual obligations are filled. Then it goes to the bowl played second nearest (the Fiesta) and then the bowl immediately following the Rose (the Sugar).

Before the selectiongs they looked like this (contractual obligations).

NT = Texas/Bama

Rose = Oregon/OSU

Orange = GT/?

Sugar = Florida/?

Fiesta = ?/?

So then the Orange Bowl selected and they took Iowa ... and collectively fucked Boise/TCU. The Fiesta chose Boise St (made the most sense) and then that left the Sugar with the choice between Cincy/TCU. They chose Cincy.

The Fiesta didn't fuck 'em, the entire selection process did. TCU should be in the Sugar with Florida, Iowa with Boise St in the Fiesta, and Cincy in the Orange with GT .... those make the most sense. But the BCS would never dare put itself on the line like that and at the same time produce what might have been the least looked forward to BCS Bowl game to date. It is very clear what happened. As I said before, fuck the BCS.

Oh, and I didn't make any of that up ... here's the BCS selection process and everything else link

[Blaze09]

Fuck Brian Kelly, that lying POS

[Maxx]

Oh please, what was he supposed to say? "Yeah, I'll take the Notre Dame job if it's offered to me!" What happens if he doesn't get offered the job? Looks like a douche, probably upsets his team and would probably ruin his recruiting as commitments wouldn't want to go play for a guy who's ready to bolt on the program.

It sucks they can't just be honest, but you've got to play it safe.

[Blaze09]

That's not the problem. The problem he was lying the whole time there. When he got there, he made some demands in order for him to stay there. Cincy starts to actually carry out on those demands because they are finally getting the money, and he bolts. Then there is this....

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20091210/SPT0101/312100073/1055/NEWS/Bearcat+players+among+last+to+know

I'm just digusted with the whole situation.

[Maxx]

Alright, not telling his players first when he said he would is really scummy. But the demands were logical, he had no idea how long he'd be at Cincinnati, what if Notre Dame had decided to keep Weis or go with someone else? You've got to plan for the future but leave your options open, its just the way things works.

[HailtotheYo]

It isn't like it's a big surprise. Sure, he handled it like a douche, but the guy has ALWAYS wanted the ND job and has been very open about it. It's a dream job for him ... and he took it.

Yeah, expected better handling of the situation but really, everyone knew it was going to happen if ND made the call.

[Lowerdeck]

The least he could have done was stayed with the team until after the Sugar Bowl, then made the jump to Notre Dame. Everyone knew he was going to go there anyway, so it's not like it was going to make a difference with recruiting.

Go to the biggest game in your programs' career, and jump ship before Florida kicks its head in.

[Meacon Keaton]

It would actually make a HUGE impact on recruiting. The Quiet Period is coming up. Kelly needs to pitch the Irish to as many kids as he can over the next couple weeks, because he won't be able to by the time the Sugar Bowl is done. And signing day is in the first week of February. Maybe I'm a blind Notre Dame fan, but I think showing up in South Bend to get to work right away was the only choice the man had.