Boycotting the National Championship game?

Submitted by FL_Steve on

Like many others, I am appalled that the national championship game is hosting two teams from, not only the same conference, but the same division. After the BCS bypassed UM from a rematch with Ohio in 2006; 2007 bowl season, I will not be watching the game. Just wanted to get the opinions of the MgoBlog community.

CRex

January 9th, 2012 at 9:56 AM ^

Neilsen is how the papers report ratings, but not how cable networks sell ads.  These days when you set your cable box to ESPN, FSN, BTN, etc the fact you watched that channel is recorded.  When you open up a ESPN3 stream, ESPN records that.  That is how conference specific networks or niche networks can survive and thrive.  It's how ESPN3 got off the ground.  They have minimal Neilsen prescense, but they can tell how many people turned their channel on during a specific event or requested a stream from their server.

Neilsen remains useful for broadcast since a TV antenna doesn't phone home when you tune in to the channel.  Cable boxes and online streams though tell the network you're watching.  So refusing to pull up the pregame show or the game on ESPN3 will be noticed if enough people do it.

Picktown GoBlue

January 9th, 2012 at 12:46 PM ^

still supports me splitting the cable and connecting TVs without converter boxes.  The provider, and thus, ESPN, will have no way of knowing if I'm watching ESPN or MeTV reruns of Andy Griffith.  I'm still undecided which path I'll choose, though.  Even with 30 points on this game, I'm still out of contention, but perhaps Les will go back to his bizarre time management ways or something strange.

And there's always the scouting angle for our next game, albeit with an updated roster.

Wolverman

January 9th, 2012 at 11:58 AM ^

 I'm not watching not only because of the Michigan Snub a few years back , but because i think Ok. state had a legitimate shot at beating LSU. If Alabama wins then what , they split 3 ways with LSU and Ok State or is it a 2 way split. The whole situation they made here by voting Alabama in is huge potential mess.

 I still think LSU will win this game. This is pretty much a home game for LSU.

Doc Brown

January 8th, 2012 at 9:07 PM ^

meh. It is what it is. I am watching. Roll Tide. 

I just believe boycotts are whiney and dumb.

edit: How the eff is this flamebait? God forbid, I hold a differing opinion.

archangel2k12

January 8th, 2012 at 9:46 PM ^

Is to go back to exactly how it was before the BCS.  Everybody plays their bowl games and whoever is number 1 in the end is the Champ.  If the Coaches pick someone else, they can be the coaches champ, like Nebraska was, and the champs will still be the champs, like we were.  There are way too many teams to pick the two best to play in one game without a playoff, and I for one am not in favor of a playoff.  The whole thing is WAY OVER-THOUGHT.

maizenbluenc

January 9th, 2012 at 7:21 AM ^

but I think the major bowls move back to New Years Day (and screw the NFL if it is a Sunday too, New Year's day was ruined this year), and the two best teams (determined by the current BCS method or whatever) play a plus one game for the National Championship.

This would then require a team to win its Conference to make the major bowl, and then win the bowl. Meaning of regular season stays intact (unlike for Alabama this year). Meaning of Division and Conference title remains intact. Meaning of the Rose Bowl remains intact. Ability to choose between teams (like Clemson if they had beat WVU) that appear less deserving over teams that appear more deserving on January 2nd remains intact.

Why doesn't Delany see it my way?

wolverine1987

January 9th, 2012 at 9:42 AM ^

either. IMO LSU has already show that they are the best team in college football, and the second best team is not even close. If they lose to Bama  it means nothing--they still had a WAY better season in every respect, beat Bama in Bama, and are the better team no matter what happens tonight. And if instead of tonight's game, we had say an 8 team playoff and LSU lost, that would still be the case. To use an NFL example, the Steelers are way better than Denver, and the game last night changed nothing, all it did was make their superior regular season meaningless.

BlueintheLou

January 8th, 2012 at 9:07 PM ^

It was a poor decision (er, computing), and it will further harangue the BCS as a broken system. However, what's done is done. I'll watch. I'd still vote for LSU eve if they lost.

BlueinGR

January 9th, 2012 at 12:07 AM ^

That's why I think a Bama win could be the best thing to happen for those who are against the BCS.  If Bama wins, how can anyone honestly say that they are the best team in the country, especially if they win by only a few points?  It could be tough to say no to a plus one setup in that situation.

Waters Demos

January 8th, 2012 at 9:07 PM ^

Oversigning is my primary reason.  They're not college football teams as far as I'm concerned, but instead some halfway position between college and pro.

LSAClassOf2000

January 9th, 2012 at 9:48 AM ^

....but only because I want to see how much more proof I will receive that the BCS really is a pile of steaming guano. It's also the last CFB game this year, and even if it is like a doomed network show with a forgone conclusion, I can't help wondering how it REALLY ends.  

That being said, LSU in my pool for a mere 3 points, although I really would rather Alabama win so they will perhaps think about meaningful reform in the bowl system. Of course, ESPN will want to have a chat with the reformers first...

Lionsfan

January 8th, 2012 at 9:08 PM ^

Damn....I wanted to be the one to post this thread tomorrow.....

But no I'm not watching. I'll get an update on the score from ESPN texts, but I'm not watching. I just don't care. LSU wins - good, they deserve it (not according to that Grantland guy though). Bama wins - huge shitstorm, LSU AP champions, and a fast forwarding to the end of the BCS

FL_Steve

January 8th, 2012 at 9:29 PM ^

I agree, if the system is flawed, and this is recondized and accepted, then by defalt they should choose a team other than Alabama in this senario. The game is meaningless in my eye also, as mentioned above.

NOLA Blue

January 8th, 2012 at 9:09 PM ^

ESPN bias created this mess, and ESPN is who profits/loses based on viewership of their lovechild.  They can take their "SEC-speed" and shove it.  Not a dime from this viewer.  (And yes, I boycotted all SEC games as well... except the Georgia-MSU game.)

invisiblespoon

January 8th, 2012 at 9:09 PM ^

When I lived in Atlanta the SEC hype was unbearable but I won't boycott the game.  Life comes in seasons it's the SEC's time to shine right now but this won't be forever.