Fiesta Crashers
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/story/12619023/fiesta-bowl-ope…
I don't want this to become a debate of what teams deserve to go to BCS bowl games or not...my problem with the BCS is some of the absolute garbage matchups that are made up with either non BCS schools or crappy ACC and Big East schools that in any other year wouldn't sniff a major bowl bid.
December 5th, 2009 at 10:35 AM ^
i dont want to see TCU/Boise/Cincy play eachother, I want them all matched up with traditional powerhouses.
December 5th, 2009 at 10:41 AM ^
agree. if the non-bcs schools keep playing amongst themselves we will continuously be asking "but how good are they? they don't play any big schools! strength of schedule - blargh!" we need to find out if the boise-OU game a few years back was an outlier or the norm.
December 5th, 2009 at 11:17 AM ^
They didn't have any interest in playing Utah after being one win from playing for the National Championship
December 5th, 2009 at 11:47 AM ^
Bama got whipped plain and simple... the other teams have talent and, frankly, are better than UM the past two years. If they Bama was not into it, then how good could they be?
If Bama beat Utah, then people would say, see we told you so. Always excuses being made to try and keep others from sharing the pie.
December 5th, 2009 at 2:23 PM ^
I don't buy that for one second. If Bama couldn't get up to play in the Sugar Bowl, then that's Nick Saban's problem.
Utah beat Bama because they had a great defensive scheme and a 5th year QB who was very disciplined and knew how to run the spread. The defense kept the heat on John Parker Wilson all game long and Bama's defense had no answer for the Utes offense.
That Utah team had some talent too. 2 starters from Utah's defense went in the 2nd round of the NFL draft last year and a few others are expected to get drafted this year.
Making the excuse that Bama didn't have any interest in playing Utah is bullshit. Utah, TCU, BYU, and Boise State have proven over the years that they have legitimate programs and they can all hang with the powerhouses.
December 5th, 2009 at 12:33 PM ^
The so-called "crappy" non-BCS teams are 3-1 in BCS bowls. The Big East is 6-5, a winning record in BCS games. In contrast, the Big 10, which I assume you think is a "traditional powerhouse" is 8-11 and the second worst winning percentage of major conferences. The Big 10 is 0-6 the past three years in BCS bowl games. It really begs the question of who the "crappy" teams are.
December 5th, 2009 at 12:41 PM ^
I'm tired of people that say if your not from a certain conference you're bad. TCU is REALLY good and I think they could beat a team like OSU or even Oregon. Cincinatti is pretty good. Even GA Tech is pretty good.
December 5th, 2009 at 1:47 PM ^
There is no reason to have TCU and Boise, for example, play each other just because they are non-BCS teams. TCU has beaten everyone they have faced, and have done so with a dominant defense and a solid offense. Sounds just like Alabama and Florida, just without the CBS and ESPN worship. I think the big problem is that when most of the major executives and writers were growing up, scholarship limits and general recruiting usually meant that the best teams were from "traditional" conferences and regions. But with fewer scholarships being available and a growing base of talent, elite teams can come out of the Mountain West and C-USA and compete with anyone in the country.