West Coast Johnny wrote:When you have an 8-5 U-Conn team in the Fiesta bowl - yes the Tallest Midget comment is totally appropriate for the Big East in many years - especially after realignment. I've read many times on this board about how unfair the BCS system is. Now that SMU is a BCS wellfare recipient, the tune has changed.
TCU was the "tallest midget" and it was great, wasn't it? We'd do anything short of selling our soul for that kind of of success. TCU was drooling at the BE because joining would guarantee "tallest midget" status every other, if not every year. Now that you're B12 you're going to disparage the BE because a 8-5 team can win?!! You guys are so pompous. The only reason you'd do that is if you still thought you'd get in BCS just as easily and winning the B12 would legitimize you for national champion consideration, which it would. Sorry, but you guys aren't going to touch a national championship as long as Texas and OU are there. Hope for #2 in a TX/OU down year every once in awhile which gets you back to where SMU hopefully will be often, even if it's the "tallest midget". The house of cards falls on us if the BE loses AQ status, then we'd wish we were in the B12, but we didn't get the invite anyway, so why cry about it at that point? The "unfairness" we mentioned on here was that SMU, TCU, UH and Rice were left in the cold after the SWC demise and program like ours have to break our necks to go undefeated to earn the same bowl as a 8-5 UConn or Pitt can, or an 11-2 Nebraska, Texas or Kansas State, etc. That is unfair and I see no conflict with believing this yet being gungho for the BE. You guys didn't either not too long ago.