I'm sick of everybody saying the PAC-10 isn't excited to play

[Surfah]

The funny thing about all this, is weren't BYU fans claiming disinterest in going to the crappy Vegas bowl for the 4th straight year as the reason for losing to an average Arizona team?

I am sure there were. When the Vegas Bowl is the best your team can do unless it cracks the BCS it does get old. But it should be a testament to this BYU team that it can get up for a game like it did despite going there for the 5th year in a row.

[Surfah]

If these schools really don't want to be there they don't have to accept the invitation. They can go Notre Dame and say no.

I think more schools should do that. It'd be awesome if TCU and BSU had turned down BCS bowl bids and said that they deserved better than playing each other in the Fiesta Bowl. The money is too good to pass up. But the non-AQ's could pull off quite the coup by doing this. If they all passed up their bowl invites they could have dealt some blows to the bowl system.

[il Padrino Ute]

If these schools really don't want to be there they don't have to accept the invitation. They can go Notre Dame and say no.

I think more schools should do that. It'd be awesome if TCU and BSU had turned down BCS bowl bids and said that they deserved better than playing each other in the Fiesta Bowl. The money is too good to pass up. But the non-AQ's could pull off quite the coup by doing this. If they all passed up their bowl invites they could have dealt some blows to the bowl system.

I dunno - if a non-BCS school turned down an invite to one of the BCS games, I think that would be the end of invites to those games. The best thing would be to accept the invite as TCU and BSU have done, but then take every opportunity each coach/team gets to point out that the BCS teams are such pussies that they were too afraid of having two non-BCS teams lose so they paired up TCU and BSU in the Fiesta Bowl.

[Surfah]

I dunno - if a non-BCS school turned down an invite to one of the BCS games, I think that would be the end of invites to those games. The best thing would be to accept the invite as TCU and BSU have done, but then take every opportunity each coach/team gets to point out that the BCS teams are such pussies that they were too afraid of having two non-BCS teams lose so they paired up TCU and BSU in the Fiesta Bowl.

The only reason the BCS persists is because of the bowls. If all the non-AQ schools rejected these bowl games it would kill the BCS. They wouldn't have enough teams to qualify for bowl games. Bowl games would be canceled. It'd be interesting to see how the bowl sponsors would respond.

[il Padrino Ute]

The only reason the BCS persists is because of the bowls. If all the non-AQ schools rejected these bowl games it would kill the BCS. They wouldn't have enough teams to qualify for bowl games. Bowl games would be canceled. It'd be interesting to see how the bowl sponsors would respond.

That's a good point, but I get the feeling that the BCS would just change their rules about qualifying for one of their bowls (again) to fit their agenda of shutting out the little guys. The BCS really doesn't need non-BCS teams. I think it would rather not have to invite one of the non-BCS teams if it didn't have to.

[Surfah]

That's a good point, but I get the feeling that the BCS would just change their rules about qualifying for one of their bowls (again) to fit their agenda of shutting out the little guys. The BCS really doesn't need non-BCS teams. I think it would rather not have to invite one of the non-BCS teams if it didn't have to.

Oh I get that. But you really think they'd make a sub .500 team bowl eligible?

I think if you hurt the BCS in the pocketbooks and get these cities and sponsors to lean on the BCS, that would do more to bust the system that trying to win the game through their rules.

[U-Ute]

The only reason the BCS persists is because of the bowls. If all the non-AQ schools rejected these bowl games it would kill the BCS. They wouldn't have enough teams to qualify for bowl games. Bowl games would be canceled. It'd be interesting to see how the bowl sponsors would respond.

I'm not buying this for a second.

The reason the bowls exist is so they can sell tickets and make money. Teams like Texas, Ohio State, USC, etc., always sell tickets, whether they are 12-0 or 8-4.

U-Ute

[il Padrino Ute]

Oh I get that. But you really think they'd make a sub .500 team bowl eligible?

I think if you hurt the BCS in the pocketbooks and get these cities and sponsors to lean on the BCS, that would do more to bust the system that trying to win the game through their rules.

I think if they could keep all the money for themselves, they'd invite a winless BCS team. The only reason any of the bowls exists - BCS or the rest - is to make money.

[Surfah]

I'm not buying this for a second.

The reason the bowls exist is so they can sell tickets and make money. Teams like Texas, Ohio State, USC, etc., always sell tickets, whether they are 12-0 or 8-4.

U-Ute

[il Padrino Ute]

U-Ute beat me to it.

The BCS came to be because the schools that produce the most tv revenue got together and decided that they ought to do something to make even more money for themselves. It's a fact that sucks, but more people would rather tune in and watch Nebraska play Auburn than the U play the Y.

[U-Ute]

U-Ute beat me to it.

The BCS came to be because the schools that produce the most tv revenue got together and decided that they ought to do something to make even more money for themselves. It's a fact that sucks, but more people would rather tune in and watch Nebraska play Auburn than the U play the Y.

This is the thing people forget about the bowls: it isn't to produce a national champion, its to make money by selling tickets and filling hotels/restaurants.

That's why we have the TCU/BSU matchup in the Fiesta Bowl. It isn't some conspiracy to pit the two non-AQ teams against each other to keep them irrelevant. It was the best financial decision to try and pull in the two best regional teams. If Ohio State and Notre Dame were both eligible and the Fiesta Bowl could get them, do you think they'd still take TCU and Boise?

The fact that it pits two non-AQ teams against each other to keep them irrelevant is just a convenient by-product.

The fans of college football have tried to demand a way to figure out who the national champion is, and so they've tried to ram this square peg into a round hole, but make no mistake, their priority is money.

U-Ute

[Surfah]

U-Ute beat me to it.

The BCS came to be because the schools that produce the most tv revenue got together and decided that they ought to do something to make even more money for themselves. It's a fact that sucks, but more people would rather tune in and watch Nebraska play Auburn than the U play the Y.

I am not disputing that. But if all of a sudden all the other bowls went belly up because of a refusal to play it would hurt the BCS. After all like you said it's all about money. The bowl sponsors, stadiums and cities wouldn't take too kindly if these schools refused to participate in protest to the BCS.

Let's take this year for example. 15 bowl games including a BCS bowl would be in jeopardy. Now the BCS bowl they'd just replace with two other BCS schools, probably Iowa and someone else, maybe VT. But the other bowl games would be in serious trouble.

[Surfah]

This is the thing people forget about the bowls: it isn't to produce a national champion, its to make money by selling tickets and filling hotels/restaurants.

That's why we have the TCU/BSU matchup in the Fiesta Bowl. It isn't some conspiracy to pit the two non-AQ teams against each other to keep them irrelevant. It was the best financial decision to try and pull in the two best regional teams. If Ohio State and Notre Dame were both eligible and the Fiesta Bowl could get them, do you think they'd still take TCU and Boise?

The fact that it pits two non-AQ teams against each other to keep them irrelevant is just a convenient by-product.

The fans of college football have tried to demand a way to figure out who the national champion is, and so they've tried to ram this square peg into a round hole, but make no mistake, their priority is money.

U-Ute

That's why I am saying you hurt them where you can. You take away their revenue. If you can't hurt them directly you hurt the bowls outside the BCS games. Then those guys go to bat for you.

[il Padrino Ute]

I am not disputing that. But if all of a sudden all the other bowls went belly up because of a refusal to play it would hurt the BCS. After all like you said it's all about money. The bowl sponsors, stadiums and cities wouldn't take too kindly if these schools refused to participate in protest to the BCS.

Let's take this year for example. 15 bowl games including a BCS bowl would be in jeopardy. Now the BCS bowl they'd just replace with two other BCS schools, probably Iowa and someone else, maybe VT. But the other bowl games would be in serious trouble.

Ok, I see where you're coming from now. I tend to agree with what you're saying in that it would bring not-so-good attention to what's happening.