Anyone else feel like bashing the Big East?

S

solo

Guest
I am tired of hearing about how improved the Big East is and what a great conference it is this year. Much like the poster that said the SEC doesn't play anyone, who did the Big East play? The Big 3 of the Big East (Louiville, West Va, and Rutgers) didn't play one top 25 team OOC. In a conference of only 8 teams, every team has 5 OOC games. You would think that they would each schedule at least one good team. But they didn't. To make matters worse, they all got fairly easy bowl games.

#5 Lousiville vs #15 Wake Forest....5 vs 15 just seems wrong

#13 West VA vs Unranked GT

#15 Rutgers vs unranked Kansas St

When they win their bowls, the TV analytsts will be commenting on how great the conference did in it's bowl games and what a great conference they are. But they won't have played anyone any good.
 
P

ptrigger

New member
Messages
147
Reaction score
3
yeah it was really weird to see go Rutgers on the electronic signs on the Parkway
 
S

solo

Guest
goldenechoes said:
Rutgers really deserved to get a better bowl.
Click to expand...

Yeah, you could certainly make a case for Rutgers getting a better bowl. However, did you look at their OOC schedule? After playing in a weak Big East conference, they played 5 unranked teams OOC. Just about any average BCS conference team would have gone 10-2 with Rutgers schedule. Yes they beat Louisville and took West VA to OT. But they also got beat soundly by Cinci. If your schedule is this easy AND you play in a weak conference, you better win 'em all. You can't expect to be rewarded for beating the Dukes and Vanderbuilts of the world unless you go undefeated.

I also wouldn't be surpised to see KSt play them tough. Both teams have only one quality win all year (Rutgers beat Louisville, KSt beat Texas).
 
F

Fighting_Irish9

Guest
solo said:
Yeah, you could certainly make a case for Rutgers getting a better bowl. However, did you look at their OOC schedule? After playing in a weak Big East conference, they played 5 unranked teams OOC. Just about any average BCS conference team would have gone 10-2 with Rutgers schedule. Yes they beat Louisville and took West VA to OT. But they also got beat soundly by Cinci. If your schedule is this easy AND you play in a weak conference, you better win 'em all. You can't expect to be rewarded for beating the Dukes and Vanderbuilts of the world unless you go undefeated.

I also wouldn't be surpised to see KSt play them tough. Both teams have only one quality win all year (Rutgers beat Louisville, KSt beat Texas).
Click to expand...

You do realize thats one more than us right?
 
B

BGIF

Varsity Club
Messages
43,946
Reaction score
2,922
Anyone else feel like bashing the Big East?

Bashing Big East Football is redundant.
 
S

solo

Guest
Fighting_Irish9 said:
You do realize thats one more than us right?
Click to expand...

I totally agree. If bowl bids were based off merit rather than revenue potential, we would not be in a BCS bowl. Not one high quality victory all season unless you count beating 4 loss GT (soon to be 5 loss).

But fortunately for us, the post season is all about generating revenue and ND willalways be able to do that. And in 2008 and beyond, we will probably be able to be competitive in these monety making matchups.
 
johnnd05

johnnd05

Johnny T. works for me
Messages
4,522
Reaction score
275
solo said:
If bowl bids were based off merit rather than revenue potential, we would not be in a BCS bowl. Not one high quality victory all season unless you count beating 4 loss GT (soon to be 5 loss).
Click to expand...

I don't see why it's okay to have bad losses (Cincinatti and South Florida, anyone?) so long as you have a "big" win against an overrated team like L-ville or Texas. We had the sixth-toughest schedule of any 10-plus win team, beat five bowl-bound teams, and managed not to lose to anyone worse than us ... what did Boise state do to "merit" their BCS spot besides playing the 100th toughest schedule in America?
 
J

jerseyborn1971

Guest
I don't give a damn about any conference, but I am curious as to who everyone thinks the good conferences are and why? Most of the arguments against the BIg East are the same ones you could use against any other conference.

My take is, there are NO good conferences, there ARE good teams.
 
N

njuneardave

Member
Messages
406
Reaction score
14
johnnd05 said:
I don't see why it's okay to have bad losses (Cincinatti and South Florida, anyone?) so long as you have a "big" win against an overrated team like L-ville or Texas. We had the sixth-toughest schedule of any 10-plus win team, beat five bowl-bound teams, and managed not to lose to anyone worse than us ... what did Boise state do to "merit" their BCS spot besides playing the 100th toughest schedule in America?
Click to expand...


because quality losses aren't better than quality wins.
 
S

solo

Guest
johnnd05 said:
I don't see why it's okay to have bad losses (Cincinatti and South Florida, anyone?) so long as you have a "big" win against an overrated team like L-ville or Texas. We had the sixth-toughest schedule of any 10-plus win team, beat five bowl-bound teams, and managed not to lose to anyone worse than us ... what did Boise state do to "merit" their BCS spot besides playing the 100th toughest schedule in America?
Click to expand...

It's not about earning your bowl bid. Other than for the title game. The other bowls are all money making matchups. Boise St didn't earn it. ND didn't earn it. Wake Forest didn't earn it. Really, there is no such thing as earning it.

The ACC didn't have a BCS calibre team in it this year. They had a number of good teams, but no great teams. So did Wake Forest really earn it by winning a conference without a high quality team in it? The same could be said in years past about the the Big East champ, the Pac 10 champ (when 3 loss Stanford went and got thei 4th loss). Winning a conference doesn't necessarily "earn" your spot if your conference doesn't have an elite team that year. So really, nobody earns it.

But to answer your question, having at least one high quality win shows that you can compete at a certain level. ND was not competitive at that level this year. We got thumped and thunmped HARD by every both elite teams we played. We have done nothing to show that we can hang with the likes of LSU. But we can fill the stadium? Sure we can. Again, it's not about earning it. It's about money.
 
johnnd05

johnnd05

Johnny T. works for me
Messages
4,522
Reaction score
275
njuneardave said:
because quality losses aren't better than quality wins.
Click to expand...

Honestly I don't even know how to respond to this. Nobody ever said that "quality losses" (whatever those are) were better than quality wins. What I was saying was that losses to good teams like SC and UM are better than losses to mediocre teams like Cincinatti and South Florida (or Oregon State and UCLA for that matter ...). Similarly, a win against a team like Louisville or Texas (not to mention a season without a win against a team better than Hawaii or San Jose State) does not a BCS-worthy season make.
 
S

solo

Guest
jerseyborn1971 said:
I don't give a damn about any conference, but I am curious as to who everyone thinks the good conferences are and why? Most of the arguments against the BIg East are the same ones you could use against any other conference.

My take is, there are NO good conferences, there ARE good teams.
Click to expand...


In order to answer this question, I think you need to clarify your definition of a good conference. Is a good conference a conference that produces a legit title contender? A conference that produces more than one legit title contender? A conference with depth? Say a conference in which x percentage of te teams are ranked in the top 25? What if you have a conference with a lot of depth, but no really true elite team at the top? Is that a good conference?

If we can clearly define what constitutes a good conference, then we can tackle this question.
 
johnnd05

johnnd05

Johnny T. works for me
Messages
4,522
Reaction score
275
solo said:
But to answer your question, having at least one high quality win shows that you can compete at a certain level. ND was not competitive at that level this year. We got thumped and thunmped HARD by every both elite teams we played. We have done nothing to show that we can hang with the likes of LSU. But we can fill the stadium? Sure we can. Again, it's not about earning it. It's about money.
Click to expand...

(I need to stop getting into these arguments.)

Check the facts: Wisconsin, Auburn, and Arkansas were all ineligible for BCS consideration because their conferences already had two teams in the BCS, and WVU wasn't ranked in the top twelve. Nothing to do with money; everything to do with the rules of the system we have.
 
Last edited:
S

solo

Guest
johnnd05 said:
(I need to stop getting into these arguments.)

Check the facts: Wisconsin, Auburn, and Arkansas were all ineligible for BCS consideration because their conferences already had two teams in the BCS, and WVU wasn't ranked in the top twelve. Nothing to do with money; everything to do with the rules of the system we have.
Click to expand...

You are right, it is the system. And the system we have is designed to make money for:

1. The bowls that comprise the system and
2. The BCS conferences

So yes, it is about money. Why is ND included? Because ND can guarantee that the bowl makes money. Why are confererences limited to 2 particpants? Because they want to make money for ALL the BCS conferences, not just one ro two.

Bottom line: the present bowl system is not a true post season system designed to determine a true champion. The present bowl system is primarily a way to line the pockets of the bowls and conferences with money masquearding as a way to determine the champ. That's why they call it the "mythical national champion".
 
johnnd05

johnnd05

Johnny T. works for me
Messages
4,522
Reaction score
275
solo said:
You are right, it is the system. And the system we have is designed to make money for:

1. The bowls that comprise the system and
2. The BCS conferences

So yes, it is about money. Why is ND included? Because ND can guarantee that the bowl makes money. Why are confererences limited to 2 particpants? Because they want to make money for ALL the BCS conferences, not just one ro two.

Bottom line: the present bowl system is not a true post season system designed to determine a true champion. The present bowl system is primarily a way to line the pockets of the bowls and conferences with money masquearding as a way to determine the champ. That's why they call it the "mythical national champion".
Click to expand...

Or maybe it's to keep a conference like the SEC from generating tons of hype, beating up on each other all season, and then placing four or five teams in the BCS because of weak OOC scheduling.

There are five BCS bowls: now give me ten teams whose performance on the field this year shows they deserve it more than ND.
 
S

solo

Guest
johnnd05 said:
Or maybe it's to keep a conference like the SEC from generating tons of hype, beating up on each other all season, and then placing four or five teams in the BCS because of weak OOC scheduling.

There are five BCS bowls: now give me ten teams whose performance on the field this year shows they deserve it more than ND.
Click to expand...

It just so happens to be a year where there aren't 10 great team out there.

Auburn? Debateable. But rthey did finish the season ranked higher than ND. They also have a quality win against a top 5 opponent (LSU), something ND does not have.

Wisconsin? Debateable. They finished in the BCS ranked higher than ND. They won more games. They were also competitive with Michigan, somethign ND failed to do. If ND played Wisconsin's schedule, ND would also finish 11-1.

But neither of those teams is eligible anyway because of the rules. So this year, I don't really see that ND has "earned it" by having any quality wins. But I do see how we could be inlcuded because there simply aren't any other eligible teams that earned it either.
 
J

jerseyborn1971

Guest
solo said:
In order to answer this question, I think you need to clarify your definition of a good conference. Is a good conference a conference that produces a legit title contender? A conference that produces more than one legit title contender? A conference with depth? Say a conference in which x percentage of te teams are ranked in the top 25? What if you have a conference with a lot of depth, but no really true elite team at the top? Is that a good conference?

If we can clearly define what constitutes a good conference, then we can tackle this question.
Click to expand...

I think those were actually the questions I should have asked. That was the point. You could make a case for any conference based on how you approach the question, "What is the best conference?".
 
johnnd05

johnnd05

Johnny T. works for me
Messages
4,522
Reaction score
275
solo said:
It just so happens to be a year where there aren't 10 great team out there.

Auburn? Debateable. But rthey did finish the season ranked higher than ND. They also have a quality win against a top 5 opponent (LSU), something ND does not have.

Wisconsin? Debateable. They finished in the BCS ranked higher than ND. They won more games. They were also competitive with Michigan, somethign ND failed to do. If ND played Wisconsin's schedule, ND would also finish 11-1.

But neither of those teams is eligible anyway because of the rules. So this year, I don't really see that ND has "earned it" by having any quality wins. But I do see how we could be inlcuded because there simply aren't any other eligible teams that earned it either.
Click to expand...

Okay. This time I think we actually have reached an agreement. If all you mean by "earned" is "had one or more top* quality wins and two or fewer losses" (or something like that), then I agree that ND hasn't earned our bowl bid. But if you mean "had a better season than all but nine (or fewer) other teams", then I think we have.
 
Last edited:
S

solo

Guest
TENNESSEE-IRISH said:
just what exactly is vanderbiult going to bulid there solo? :joke:
Click to expand...


Vanderbuilt, Troybuilt...whatever they are named. That bad football team down in Nashville :)

They actually had a decent defense under Dowhower in the mid 90's. Gave ND a scare one year as I recall. Tenn too that same year.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top