|
Not Good for SMUModerators: PonyPride, SmooPower Re: Not Good for SMUBaylor was ranked 5. Tcu wasn't getting in anyway. Don't suck up to those jack wagons.
Re: Not Good for SMU
Oh, my bad. Cincy could happen... Pony up!
Re: Not Good for SMUI personally think there will be a greater push to have an 8 team playoff instead of 4. 4 is too inclusive even for the P5. There will be one mad P5 program every year. That will change.
Back off Warchild seriously.
Re: Not Good for SMU
Agree. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk An atheist is a guy who watches a Notre Dame-SMU football game and
doesn't care who wins. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
Re: Not Good for SMU
Agree 100%. It adds two games and makes it a bigger event. Plus, SEC will push hard as it's a virtual lock that they would get 2+ teams. Pony up!
Re: Not Good for SMUIf Baylor had Texas on the front of their jersies they woud be in.
Re: Not Good for SMUAt some point they realize the money trumps trying to keep some tie-in to the existing bowls and it goes to 8, right?
Would they still be OK with making the existing bowls quarterfinals and then add two more weeks of playoffs? Shake It Off Moody
Re: Not Good for SMU8 is a foregone conclusion. Too many power brokers left out.
Re: Not Good for SMU
Same for TCU. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk An atheist is a guy who watches a Notre Dame-SMU football game and
doesn't care who wins. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
Re: Not Good for SMU
Because I miss typed. Should have said Big12, not Big10
Re: Not Good for SMU
Add to it that the only undefeated team came from the perceived weakest conference = recipe for disaster. Plus I strongly suspect they want representation from all corners of the US. That's somewhat accomplished by having each P5 conference winner represented. Last thing TV networks want is a KC Royals / Milwaukee Brewers WS.
Re: Not Good for SMU
The current bowl format plus 4 team playoff maximizes revenue for the P-5 conferences. As fans all we think about are the 4 teams, but there are bowl games attached to this as well. I am willing to bet that the SEC is raking in the cash this season with 'Bama, Ole Miss and Miss St. in the playoffs/$$$ bowls faster than they ever did in the past. They couldn't do this during the BCS. Max 2 teams per conference in the BCS. Because the P5 is making more $$$, don't expect change for years. If you stop and think about it, the Big XII got snubbed and is still doing better $$$ under the new system. Nothing to see here... Move along. Some rise by sin, and some by virtue fall
Re: Not Good for SMUTcu would have gotten in if they had a conference championship and had beaten baylor in that game. As it stands they didn't and don't have a stronger case than Alabama, Oregon, the defending (and only undefeated team) champs or OSU who blew out the other team in their championship game.
The b12 tried to game the system and loses in the 4 team playoff. There's no conspiracy theory or bias against a private school. The committee made a huge mistake ranking tcu third going into the last week. They should have been 5th at best.
Re: Not Good for SMUTCU got passed because Baylor, FSU, and Ohio State all added a quality win to their resumes yesterday. TCU did not. That has nothing to do with TCU being private and everything to do with TCU playing Iowa State
Who is onlineUsers browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 7 guests |
|