U of M thread (in the Lions Forum) :)

[Niffla]

The bitterness almost makes the 4 straight losses worthwhile...;-)

I've already mentioned it in this thread that I agree that State gets the nod due to head to head (THIS year) as far as the "better" team goes. But the stuff about being wronged because Mich is headed to the Sugar....too funny.

You got your asses kicked by Notre Dame and Nebraska. The loss in the BTC isn't why Sparty is getting penalized. Look back at those two ass beatings if you want a reason. Want a better bowl than Mich? Don't get slapped around by two teams that Michigan beat.

And why does Mass keep bringing up the 4 game win streak? WTF does that have to do with THIS year? Zero. And anyway -- just think, if State strings together another 10 in a row to make it 14 straight over UM, you'll only be 25 games behind in the all-time series!!

[Niffla]

I'll be honest. Even though yes, I hate the BCS, and yes, if I had a vote that mattered I'd vote in a second for a playoff.

But I'll gladly be a hypocrite in this situation and applaud the BCS for screwing over State...for the simple reason that it's State. Hooray for the Bowl Championship Series!!!!

[froot loops]

So now, here's another question. Clearly you think teams like Kansas State "deserve" to go to a BcS game more than Michigan because they are higher in the BcS standings. Yet at the same time, you think Michigan being higher in the standings than MSU is a travesty of biblical proportions. So which is it? Are the BcS standings the measuring stick or not? Either they should be used as the measuring stick or they are stupid and inaccurate. It can't be both..

I never said Michigan being ahead of Michigan State in the BCS standings was a travesty. Point to a post in which I said that. I can save you some time, I didn't say it. You're burning a strawman. I think State is the better team but it was Rose Bowl or bust and I've argued that the Big Ten didn't deserve a second team(neither did the ACC). To me if you get your ass kicked twice like Va Tech did, you have no business being in a BCS game. Boise deserves it. There's something wrong when you get hammered like Va Tech did and don't suffer any consequences.

[froot loops]

I'll be honest. Even though yes, I hate the BCS, and yes, if I had a vote that mattered I'd vote in a second for a playoff.

But I'll gladly be a hypocrite in this situation and applaud the BCS for screwing over State...for the simple reason that it's State. Hooray for the Bowl Championship Series!!!!

Again it didn't screw over State

[Niffla]

You feel like State deserves a better bowl than Mich, no?

[Jamie H]

I never said Michigan being ahead of Michigan State in the BCS standings was a travesty. Point to a post in which I said that. I can save you some time, I didn't say it. You're burning a strawman. I think State is the better team but it was Rose Bowl or bust and I've argued that the Big Ten didn't deserve a second team(neither did the ACC). To me if you get your ass kicked twice like Va Tech did, you have no business being in a BCS game. Boise deserves it. There's something wrong when you get hammered like Va Tech did and don't suffer any consequences.

I'm not burning a strawman any more that you are. I haven't seen a single Michigan fan on here say anything other than the BcS is a crock of crap (other than Niffla, who is just being funny), yet you keep claiming otherwise.

Almost no Michigan fans like the BcS, even though it favors big name schools like Michigan. I haven't talked to even one Michigan fan this year who likes it. After the bullshit in 2006 and this season regarding rematches, why would you even begin to believe that Michigan fans would support the BcS?

That is different than being happy we are playing in a good bowl game. I honestly don't see K-State as being all that much different than Michigan (2-loss teams from BcS conferences), so I'm not crying many tears for them. TCU and Boise are non BcS conference teams. They always get screwed unless they go undefeated because they rarely play more than 1 or 2 games all season against anyone decent. If they didn't give the Sugar Bowl to Michigan, they weren't going to give it to TCU or Boise either. So AS FAR AS THE CURRENT SYSTEM GOES, sure, I'm happy Michigan was eligible for a good bowl and was picked. That doesn't mean I like the BcS.

But almost every Michigan fan I know of would gladly give up a Sugar Bowl here or there to get a real playoff in college football. Again, I haven't spoken to even one that thinks the BcS is a good system.

[chemiclord]

The only people who think the BC$ is a good system are the people making money off of it.

Unfortunately, those people are the ones who get to choose what system is used.

[Jamie H]

Exactly. The BcS conferences get a huge guaranteed payday from the BcS. HUGE. Sure they MIGHT get an even bigger payday with a new playoff system. But if you are already making $10 million at your current job, do you quit and take a new job because it MIGHT pay you $12 million?

[Niffla]

But almost every Michigan fan I know of would gladly give up a Sugar Bowl here or there to get a real playoff in college football.

No question. In a freaking second. And I still find all of this Michigan going to the Sugar a tragedy talk so hilarious. I mean who really gives a shit.

There's only one bowl that really matters anymore, and honestly it would have mattered to me very little whether Michigan went to the Sugar, Capital One, or frigging McDonalds Sweet & Sour Sauce Bowl. They had a great season and exceeded all expectations, and the bowl (where ever it was going to be) was just gravy.

[froot loops]

You feel like State deserves a better bowl than Mich, no?

I don't feel that Michigan deserves to go to the Sugar Bowl. Boise deserves to go to it over Michigan and Va Tech. And three other teams do as well. I think MSU is the better team, but they lost the championship game and that hurt their standing.

[Jamie H]

There's only one bowl that really matters anymore,

Yep. The BcS has rendered almost the entire bowl season into a replica of the NIT tournament. No one gives a shit except for fans of the two teams playing. The lower bowls were always like that, but in the past the major bowls all held a ton of interest. Not any more.

If they switched to a +1 format where they played a title game with the teams determined AFTER all the major bowl games the games would become infinitely more interesting.

[froot loops]

I'm not burning a strawman any more that you are. I haven't seen a single Michigan fan on here say anything other than the BcS is a crock of crap (other than Niffla, who is just being funny), yet you keep claiming otherwise.

Almost no Michigan fans like the BcS, even though it favors big name schools like Michigan. I haven't talked to even one Michigan fan this year who likes it. After the bullshit in 2006 and this season regarding rematches, why would you even begin to believe that Michigan fans would support the BcS?

That is different than being happy we are playing in a good bowl game. I honestly don't see K-State as being all that much different than Michigan (2-loss teams from BcS conferences), so I'm not crying many tears for them. TCU and Boise are non BcS conference teams. They always get screwed unless they go undefeated because they rarely play more than 1 or 2 games all season against anyone decent. If they didn't give the Sugar Bowl to Michigan, they weren't going to give it to TCU or Boise either. So AS FAR AS THE CURRENT SYSTEM GOES, sure, I'm happy Michigan was eligible for a good bowl and was picked. That doesn't mean I like the BcS.

But almost every Michigan fan I know of would gladly give up a Sugar Bowl here or there to get a real playoff in college football. Again, I haven't spoken to even one that thinks the BcS is a good system.

I think you are living a lie, I'm trying to help you see it. Saying the BCS is a crock is something perfunctory that everyone needs to say but they really don't mean it. When you bring up all of these stats on Michigan getting bids, you sound very proud of it. All of the tradition that Michigan and Alabama have is tied up into these bowls. To me the BCS and the bowls are the same.

And as long as Alabama/Michigan gets the spoils of the BCS it will never change. Complaining about it and hoping for a playoff is like complaining about the weather.

[Niffla]

I don't feel that Michigan deserves to go to the Sugar Bowl. Boise deserves to go to it over Michigan and Va Tech. And three other teams do as well. I think MSU is the better team, but they lost the championship game and that hurt their standing.

It's arguable, sure. As far as the other teams being perhaps more "deserving" than Michigan I mean. But are you really that concerned about those teams being so wronged? Highly doubt it. You wouldn't have even wasted your breath on it if it was a team other than Michigan. You're pissed....because it's Michigan. That's it.

[froot loops]

TCU and Boise are non BcS conference teams.

Thats the one thing that is really weird. Once they established the BCS it pretty much elevated the 6 conferences, but two of those conferences are the ACC and the Big East. They don't deserve to be elevated. Back in the 80's the power conferences were much, much better but they hadn't discovered the joys of cupcakes. Look at Va Tech's schedule, its terrible. Why do they get the advantage over Boise or TCU. The ACC is not a good football conference.

[Niffla]

I think you are living a lie, I'm trying to help you see it. Saying the BCS is a crock is something perfunctory that everyone needs to say but they really don't mean it.

Yeah. True. I gotta be honest...I say it, but deep down I really don't mean it. As a UM fan I don't know what I'd do without the 2011 bid to the Sugar that nobody on the planet is going to remember 24 hours after it ends outside of Mich & VT fans. Yes. This bid tilted it for me. Keep the BCS.