Any chance Sparty is picked over Ohio State for the Sugar Bowl?

Home ▸ Archive ▸ College Sports ▸ Any chance Sparty is picked over Ohio State for the Sugar Bowl?
lhslep134's avatar

lhslep134

why so serious?

9,774 posts
Dec 5, 2010 11:16 AM
wildcats20;588267 wrote:No. Without the BCS, TCU is playing in some Shithole Bowl.

False.

The Sugar Bowl would have paired Auburn with the best available team, which throughout it's history before the BCS actually tried to do (pair as good of teams as possible), which is TCU.
Dec 5, 2010 11:16am
R

rock_knutne

Dec 5, 2010 11:35 AM
IMO, this is what's bad about conference expansion because every so often you have a situation where two teams from the same conference have great years and they can't meet on the football field to decide it. The last bastian of playing a true round robin schedule ends in the Pac 10 this year!
Dec 5, 2010 11:35am
E

enigmaax

Senior Member

4,511 posts
Dec 5, 2010 11:45 AM
darbypitcher22;588232 wrote:It worked out this year, but how many years over its existence has it not worked the way it was supposed to because of multiple 1 loss teams?

It has worked the way it was supposed to every season - it has always been a BCS #1 vs. BCS #2. The formula provides a method for determining those teams and the bowl setup provides the forum for those teams to play.
Dec 5, 2010 11:45am
ts1227's avatar

ts1227

Senior Member

12,319 posts
Dec 5, 2010 1:00 PM
rock_knutne;588296 wrote:IMO, this is what's bad about conference expansion because every so often you have a situation where two teams from the same conference have great years and they can't meet on the football field to decide it. The last bastian of playing a true round robin schedule ends in the Pac 10 this year!

The Texas Ten is going to a round robin next year following the departure of Colorado and Nebraska.


In terms of the Sugar Bowl pick, the only team that would even have a puncher's chance of being taken over OSU for the Sugar is Stanford, but OSU will easily get the nod because it's about the money and they will put the butts in the seats.
Dec 5, 2010 1:00pm
believer's avatar

believer

Senior Member

8,153 posts
Dec 5, 2010 1:09 PM
lhslep134;588265 wrote:Valid point.

But the fact that it is an upgrade SHOULD preclude it from being stupid as fuck in terms of crowning a champion. Guess a lotta people on here don't remember the days of split titles (I certainly don't, I was too young, but it sounds miserable).
I remember it well. It sucked.

But so does the current BCS "system." It may have helped set-up a more definitive NC situation, but like so many people have said before, Division 1-A college football is the only collegiate sport that does not have some type of playoff system in place to decide the NC.

I know, I know, I know....it's all about the money but I still think you can appease all the bowls and make money in a true playoff system.
Dec 5, 2010 1:09pm
M

Manhattan Buckeye

Senior Member

7,566 posts
Dec 5, 2010 1:26 PM
lhslep134;588272 wrote:False.

The Sugar Bowl would have paired Auburn with the best available team, which throughout it's history before the BCS actually tried to do (pair as good of teams as possible), which is TCU.

No way.

Pre-BCS the games would be:


Oregon-Wisky (Rose)

Oklahoma-Viginia Tech (Orange)

Auburn-Ohio St. (Sugar)

Connecticut - ????? (Fiesta).

TCU might be there, but they'd be in the mix with Stanford and Arkansas. I agree with wildcats20, TCU isn't getting the nod against those teams.
Dec 5, 2010 1:26pm
A

Al Bundy

Senior Member

4,180 posts
Dec 5, 2010 1:48 PM
lhslep134;588272 wrote:False.

The Sugar Bowl would have paired Auburn with the best available team, which throughout it's history before the BCS actually tried to do (pair as good of teams as possible), which is TCU.

False.

If you want to go back to those days, TCU would have won the SWC which would put them in the Cotton Bowl. Either Stanford of OSU would have been invited to the Sugar Bowl.
Dec 5, 2010 1:48pm
lhslep134's avatar

lhslep134

why so serious?

9,774 posts
Dec 5, 2010 5:17 PM
Al Bundy;588423 wrote:False.

If you want to go back to those days, TCU would have won the SWC which would put them in the Cotton Bowl. Either Stanford of OSU would have been invited to the Sugar Bowl.

In 1997 TCU was in the WAC not the SWC, which doesn't have ties to the Cotton Bowl. I still think the Sugar would have taken the #3 team in the country to face the #2 rather than the #6.
Dec 5, 2010 5:17pm
dwccrew's avatar

dwccrew

Not Banned

7,817 posts
Dec 5, 2010 5:46 PM
Manhattan Buckeye;588401 wrote:No way.

Pre-BCS the games would be:


Oregon-Wisky (Rose)

Oklahoma-Viginia Tech (Orange)

Auburn-Ohio St. (Sugar)

Connecticut - ????? (Fiesta).

TCU might be there, but they'd be in the mix with Stanford and Arkansas. I agree with wildcats20, TCU isn't getting the nod against those teams.

Actually Pre-BCS, wouldn't MSU have gotten the Rose Bowl nod since back then, in case of multiple Big 10 champs, it went to who hasn't been there the longest. Michigan St. would be representing the Big 10 in the Rose Bowl if we still had the pre-BCS rules.
Dec 5, 2010 5:46pm
R

rock_knutne

Dec 5, 2010 5:47 PM
ts1227;588383 wrote:The Texas Ten is going to a round robin next year following the departure of Colorado and Nebraska.

You sure about that? I haven't seen anything about how they will proceed with the conference, no one knows what they will even name it.
Dec 5, 2010 5:47pm
lhslep134's avatar

lhslep134

why so serious?

9,774 posts
Dec 5, 2010 5:53 PM
dwccrew;588764 wrote:Actually Pre-BCS, wouldn't MSU have gotten the Rose Bowl nod since back then, in case of multiple Big 10 champs, it went to who hasn't been there the longest. Michigan St. would be representing the Big 10 in the Rose Bowl if we still had the pre-BCS rules.

Great call, you're right.
Dec 5, 2010 5:53pm
E

enigmaax

Senior Member

4,511 posts
Dec 5, 2010 6:20 PM
rock_knutne;588767 wrote:You sure about that? I haven't seen anything about how they will proceed with the conference, no one knows what they will even name it.

Yes, they have gone to a round robin:

http://www.big12sports.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=10410&ATCLID=1522978
Dec 5, 2010 6:20pm
R

rock_knutne

Dec 5, 2010 6:59 PM
^^^^Thanks for that info, I had no idea that they were going to do that.
Dec 5, 2010 6:59pm