PDA

View Full Version : Tulsa v BGSU and that other crapfest


CORNholio
1/2/2008, 03:07 AM
Why do these crap bowls get to play on the 5th and 6th of Jan? So they can brag about making a January bowl? Put them on the front side of Christmas with all the rest of the cripple fights. Seriously they get their own day and "open" for the NC game. Lame.
Crucifax Autumn
1/2/2008, 04:24 AM
Yeah, dumb, but at least we get 2 more days of college ball
bluedogok
1/2/2008, 02:01 PM
A better question is why is the BCS-CG five days after the final non-championship BCS game? Just seems ridiculous.
MextheBulldog
1/2/2008, 02:06 PM
A better question is why is the BCS-CG five days after the final non-championship BCS game? Just seems ridiculous.

The functional reason is so the Sugar Bowl has a week to prepare. But I agree, too much time in between. Add the Cotton Bowl back into the BCS mix and we can avoid this 'double-booking' bowl site arrangement.

Unless it was a pair of semi-finals on Jan 1 and the champ. game on Jan 8.:D
JohnnyMack
1/2/2008, 02:13 PM
Why do you hate chopping wood?
bluedogok
1/2/2008, 02:14 PM
I think it is more for the hype, there are some stadiums that turn around overnight for college/pro games. Even if using that as an excuse, the host stadium has a game on the 1st, the CG could be on the 4th.
Desert Sapper
1/2/2008, 02:25 PM
Add the Cotton Bowl back into the BCS mix and we can avoid this 'double-booking' bowl site arrangement.


I'm about 1001% sure that the Cotton Bowl is the biggest reason the BCS now has a fifth game. It's just going to have to wait until the completion of the Jerry's World Monsteropolis in Arlington.

http://www.stadiumsofnfl.com/future/cowboys754.jpg
JohnnyMack
1/2/2008, 02:30 PM
The functional reason is so the Sugar Bowl has a week to prepare. But I agree, too much time in between. Add the Cotton Bowl back into the BCS mix and we can avoid this 'double-booking' bowl site arrangement.


I doubt that. I still say the Rose Bowl is going to opt of this thing and be replaced by the Cotton Bowl.

Fox already owns the broadcast rights to the Cotton as well as every BCS game not called the Rose Bowl. It's an easy move for everyone involved.
Dan Thompson
1/2/2008, 03:03 PM
The granddaddy of all bowl games will be in Texas?

The PAC-10/BIG-10/ABC/Rose Bowl rulers will never allow that to happen.:)
bluedogok
1/2/2008, 03:16 PM
The Rose Bowl would still exist, it would just be irrelevant.

A BCS-CG bid could still be offered to a Pac 10/Big 10-11 school, they would have to decide if they prefer "tradition" over a title.
JohnnyMack
1/2/2008, 03:23 PM
The Rose Bowl would still exist, it would just be irrelevant.

A BCS-CG bid could still be offered to a Pac 10/Big 10-11 school, they would have to decide if they prefer "tradition" over a title.

As long as the Rose Bowl payout was equal to a BCS bowls payout and the team wasn't in the top 4 (like either USC or Illinois weren't this year) I can see them not being in the BCS and accepting a Rose Bowl invitation. The Rose Bowl, like it or not does mean a lot to those conferences.
bluedogok
1/2/2008, 05:55 PM
I was referring to a possible lockout of a top two team like that which has happened in the past before the BCS and what it was called before. I agree, if they have no shot at the title game, the Big 10/11 and Pac 10 team would more than likely head to Pasadena. But it would become irrelevant as far as any impact on the MNC, pretty much what it seems like they are trying to do anyway.
JohnnyMack
1/2/2008, 06:01 PM
Yeah I don't think Pete Carroll would decline an invite to the BCS Championship game and say, "Thanks, but even though we're 12 - 0 we're gonna play in the Rose Bowl against a 10 - 2 Wisconsin team instead". :D

I mean the Rose Bowl has an impressive payout and I don't get the feeling they really give a **** if they're included or not.