ArkansasRazorbacks.com: Football accepts invitation to Liberty Bowl
The University of Arkansas football team has accepted an invitation to play Conference USA Champion East Carolina in the AutoZone Liberty Bowl at 4:30 p.m. on Jan. 2, 2010, in Memphis. The game will be televised nationally by ESPN.
Arkansas will be making its 37th bowl appearance and first under head coach Bobby Petrino. The Razorbacks will be making their fourth appearance in the Liberty Bowl (1971, 1984 and 1987).
Also:
- ArkansasRazorbacks.com: Razorback Bowl Central
- StubHub.com (Affiliate Link): Buy/Sell 2010 Liberty Bowl Tickets
- Razorback Nation (Video): Razorbacks Officially Headed to Liberty Bowl, Jeff Long on Hogs Going to Liberty Bowl
- Brandon Marcello: Razorbacks to play East Carolina in Liberty Bowl
- Chris Bahn: Razorbacks Officially Accept Liberty Bowl Bid
- Robbie Neiswanger: Give Them Liberty: Hogs Accept Invite
- Ron Higgins: Arkansas, East Carolina to vie in Liberty Bowl
At least this should be our last season at Toilet Bowl. I see this as Toilet Bowl City, being at the top of the crime stats nationally. TV is a better option rather than becoming a crime statistic. Arkansas should have won more games as loaded as we are.
I changed my mind about this bowl. I should not call it a Toilet Bowl and I apologize for that. Any bowl is a good bowl. It is a good bowl for our team. And Memphis is a thriving city although it does concern me regarding that I read that it is near the top in crime nationally (Could that be because New Orleans does not keep those stats?). It helps our team to get ready for the next season, too, and that is definitely good. Thanks Blowl Committee for inviting us. Our fans will fill it up!
Second Prize: TWO trips to the Liberty Bowl!
Went to the Liberty Bowl in '85. It was a great time. I think what is important is more practice time and breaking our bad bowl Kharma.
Man, I hope there are no further posts about this being the toliet bowl. Are you kidding me? ANY bowl is good for the Hogs, players and recruits since it is the reward for a successful season and gives the Hogs more exposure.
Do we forget the years without bowls? Or the years where we were outmatched and got a beat down? I don't know the numbers, but my gut feel is that Arkansas is not a good bowl team, or at least for the past 10 years. We actually have a good shot at winning this one against East Carolina – in prime time on ESPN, not a noon on a Tuesday on CSS.
This bowl will go a long way in setting up our momentum for next year, if we play well will have an impact on recruiting, and if Mallett has a good game give him an inside track on the Heisman next year.
I honestly can't think of a bad thing about this opportunity.
Soupdog: We were not overmatched against Wisconsin or Missouri. We did everything against Wisconsin, except win. (a FG, as I recalled was a determining factor…again). In the second we had three of the best running backs in one backfield, but Nutt's defensive coordinator who took over the team didn't, couldn't adjust to Mizzou's running game. Talk about being unprepared. He made Willy Robinson now look like a defensive genius. But Nutt's unfinest hour was the Music City Bowl that I attended where a Minnesota team that had lost 6 straight outplayed Arkansas. There were more Minnesota band members than fans in attendance. (I think that was a game that finished Big Ten teams for consideration for that Bowl). Everybody in the restroom at half-time was incensed by the poor HOG effort. That game soured me and I'm sure many others,on Nutt. Arkansas is due for a bowl victory. Hopefully, Petrino will have his players more ready than Nutt did for the Badgers and the Tigers. We'll see.
Are those bad mouthing the Liberty Bowl and the Razorbacks Nuttaholics and Nutt cases who hate Petrino? Yes, we have a lot of talent, but for those of you who have watched the Razorbacks play, they still have a lot of places for improvement, especially special teams and pass defense. I don't know why some here think that a 5-7 team should go to national prominence in one year. In case, you've not been paying attention, the 'Backs were two FGs away from playing in the Sugar Bowl and one FG from the Cotton. The Liberty Bowl is not a Toilet Bowl. This is a good Bowl for a developing team. The Liberty seats almost 70,000. The crowd will be mostly red. TV time has no competition. East Carolina is not chopped liver, they have had some impressive scalps in the near past including ACC power VA Tech. However Petrino and Arkanss should be hungry for a Bowl win. Like all HOG games it will rest on the OL protecting Mallet and preventing scores in the red zone. I think that the HOG running game will prevail in the red zone; that part of the field where Houston's offense failed.
Since I don't meet your qualifications, I don't think the Liberty Bowl is the toliet bowl but it's close. You make the point perfectly in that we "were two FGs away fro mplaying in the Sugar Bowl…." Being so close but yet we fell so far down and landed in the Liberty Bowl…. just NOT what I expected or wanted. The only 2 postiives: cheap and close. After that… it's YUCK all of the way!
Jim Dogg, I enjoy your posts.
It's fine this year; short drive, cheap ticket. Memphis is OK. We has a shot at the Cap One and missed it wide left.
The West just doesn't have the same quality bowls as the East. If you don't get the Cotton there is not much left. In the East, if you miss the Cap One or the Outback, you still have the Chik-fil-a, next year, the Gator. The SEC needs to flex some of the "Best Conference in America" muscle and line up some real vacation spots. Memphis, Nashville, Birmingham, and Shreveport are destinations for Conf USA, MAC, Wac, Big East kind of teams. The SEC needs to line up some Gulf Coast, South Texas, West Coast, destination bowls.
On the other hand, most years, 6-6 SEC teams are lucky to be getting the extra practice time. This was a strange year with all of the up and down play, teams beating each other. We are going to see more of that in the future if the SEC doesn't take a little more time arranging these schedules. With competition this tough they need to avoid these tough stretches of back to back big games. It is too hard on the kids to get up and play that well without some breaks.
But, no way Auburn and Tennessee should have jumped us for the Outback,Chik-fil-a.
Bingo!!! Also, why are those bowls listed as worth $50K to CBP??? Cause they are NOT the toliet bowl!
Guys, after the major bowls, it's mainly about proximity to draw a fan base. The 'ranking' you go on about doesn't exist. Outback and Chick fil a are close for Auburn and TN, just like Liberty is close to AR. The one that doesn't make sense to me is Georgia to Shreveport – I'm just glad we didn't get that bowl. Remember, bowls want attendance and revenue so their invites are based on those decisions within the conference tie ins.
It's interesting that the perspective is so different for some "fans". At the beginning of the season, some of you were just hoping for a bowl game. Now that we have a bowl game the same folks think we deserve a better bowl. The perception in the SEC is that ARkansas is a lower tier team despite our perception of our performance. Just look at the SEC power rankings on ESPN.com and the AP All SEC team.
Next year is our year to get some love. The close losses to LSU and FL were expected by the media and other experts. The bottom line is that our perception is a few notches higher than the other folks. Until we solidly beat an Alabama, FL, Georgia, or LSU in the same season our standing will not change.
So be happy about a successful season and support your team!
PS…what I want for Christmas? Petrino to follow Richt's lead and fire his d coordinator…
I stand by my comments. Also, I'm ok so far with Willy… (at this point). I believe that we need some additional horsepower on defense vs. coaches.
I don't disagree Soup. I just think that the two need to work together. The SEC West is a much better match with Big 12 teams in Houston, El Paso, and San Antonio than with Big East and USA teams. Add one match with the Pac10 out west and you have a much more appealing list of bowl destinations.
At least they call it the Liberty Bowl and not just the Auto Zone Bowl. Somehow "Chick fil' a" just doesn't make it for me. Nor Outback. Too much like Outhouse, which sounds a lot like "Toilet Bowl." Normally I would pass on this, but I been thinkin bout goin to Memphis to catch some hot Southern blues. You could do worse then bein in Memphis on a Saturday night with a bunch of redneck Razorback fans swarmin town.
Sure, it's good the team gets to practice some more and everybody gets to take football seriously for three more weeks, but I find it hard to get worked up for (I hear it's) Eastern Carolina? Anybody ever heard of 'em? Me neither. What town are they from, Eastern, Carolina? The unkindest cut here is not so much the prestige of the bowl but that of the opponent. After playing the likes of FL, AL, LSU, MS, et al, Eastern Carolina doesn't seem like much of a "reward" for a hard fought season. Who's gonna be up for this the way they were for FL or LSU?
GolfHog, you're thinkin' right when you mention winter vacation spots. When are they gonna have the Carribean Bowl, or the Carnival Cruise Bowl? It's only a matter of time before they build a boat big enough for a bowl game. Outside the old traditional NY's Day bowls, the Fiesta is the only one that has gained championship prestige. How bout the Wal-Mart Bowl with the Hogs locked in every year?
It's hard to take any of this bowl stuff seriously nowadays because the BCS has screwed it up so badly. Ya wanna see how bad the educational system in America is fubarred? Look at the BCS. That was designed by our top universities. OK, maybe by the athletic departments of the universities, but still.
Hey, and we could get into the politics of this thing. What legal jurisdiction does the BCS fall under? I saw some sports scribe demanding President Obama get involved in dismantling the BCS and setting up a legitimate playoff system.
Razorbloggers: How about a discussion forum on bowl-playoff systems? It's about time for a grassroots revolution among the fans. If the fans don't clamor for change, it won't change.
Swine, check out Wetzel's article on a playoff system over on Rivals ("Wetzel's Playoff Plan: Money talks") for some interesting takes on the whole bowl/playoff issue. Good read and I'm looking forward to the book on the ins and outs of the BCS he talks about.
Hey simpleton,
Ever heard of Chris Johnson, David Garrard, Jeff Blake, or Robert Jones?
Do they even have cable in Arkansas yet?
Maybe one day you'll get to venture outside the trailer park and see the rest of the world.
Your head coach knows where ECU is. He took his share of "whoppins" from the Pirates back when he coached in C-USA.
BTW, it's EAST CAROLINA……get it right, retard!
Well, since we are jumping onto this site and doing a little name calling, why don't you get your facts straight—-DOOFUS! Please do share the first time that ECU whopped (whooped?) a Booby Petrino coached team.
Wow, if we're gonna compare NFL success stories you better come up with more than 4 names, 3 that are marginal at best. Of those you list, Johnson is certainly the most talented and successful.
Arkansas can boast more than 30 highly regarded and All Pro NFL players. And I'm probably underestimating if you go back 50 years.
So before you start trash talking your 9-4 C-USA team, you might want to consider who and what conference you are dealing with. It will be entertaining to see what you have to post after the Liberty Bowl.
Hawgfan100: Thanks for the tip. Checked it out: as you say, Good read. My favorite part: "Who knew Ari Fleischer wrote like a sixth-grade girl on an iPhone?"
The strongest argument the presidents had, back when there was a ten-game season, was that a playoff would extend the season too long, too many games, too hard on the players, etc. Now some teams play 14 games, including playoff and bowl.
I think the situation with football is similar to national politics: the fans are ahead of the administrators the way the people are ahead of the politicians.
Wetzel's forthcoming book might change some minds, or not, but I still think it will take some serious racket from the fans before the schools capitulate. That can happen: look at how the SEC suspended the refs after the AR/FL game. The schools might get a change of heart if fans boycotted the bowls. That's unlikely to happen, as fans are loyal to their team, not to the administration.
There is always much dissent this time of year, but it doesn't seem to register beyond the fans and scribes.
Swineherd: Guess what? You do not represent all fans. The idea that fans will get upset enough to demand a playoff, especially at this time of the year is thinking in the box. Now if you asked a fan would you like to see a playoff then many would say yes. But qualify that with it would mean that your favorite college team would not be going to a post season game, whereas in the present system, there's better than a 1 to 1 chance of that happening, then the answer will change. The most important thing of all here is the money. Now I know some of you out there don't like money, but when it comes down to it everyone will try to get it. And the bowls produce plenty of it. Here's a calculation for you: Count up the number of fans at the bowls and multiply it by an average ticket price. Add to that the amount of TV revenue that might be generated by 32 games and compare that to 7 games (based on an 8 team field). Coaches, overall, don't want a playoff, the universities like it the way it is, and TV, which drives the present system, loves it. Developing the logistics for a play off is very simple. Just get 8 teams instead of the present two, and have 3 games to settle it rather than just 1. But (and there are so many buts) how do you chose which 8? BCS, AP, Coaches Poll, or Wally Hall? You see you are back where you started but now arguing about those teams that didn't make the 8. And when you get the 8 where do they play? Assuming that the present BCS cities would be lining up for less than the final game would be a stretch. Except for the final game, the other playoff games would be sucking hind tit. The attraction for the cities involved in the quarter and semi-finals would be much less than for bowls. I would agree that a playoff system would open the door for Northern towns with domed stadiums but I'm not sure that's a plus considering the weather for fans getting to the game in Minneapolis in January. Also, if you are a HOG fan which system would give a better chance to get to the championship game, the present one, or hopefully getting into the elite 8 which of course will be tainted by politics. Arkansas had its best chance in the SEC Championship game but didn't quite make it. Anyway, the final 2 teams would be those that have the maximum depth to withstand a three game stretch and the winner might be more of a surviver than the best team. Also, and this is somewhat true of the present system but it would be worse with a playoff, the teams with the most money and prestige would get the best recruiting classes each year and would set up virtually the same 8 teams each year, give or take a team.
But if you really, really, really must have a playoff then I have a system. First every league must have 12 teams in two divisions. The teams must play each team in their division and at least 3 from the other division. A league championship game will be optional but not required (realistically all 8 leagues would opt for the extra game). Otherwise the league champion could be the one with the best win-lost record. There will be 8 national collegiate leagues. The division winners in each league will be in the playoffs giving 16 teams 3 (Total of 15 games for all) playoff games for a team to get to the final. There is still a certain amount of unfairness here (but there always will be) but the 16 teams will be there on merit and no BCS, AP, Coaches Poll or Wally Hall.
Now this won't work at all because of the following: Although the SEC, Conference USA the Big 12 and ACC are already there with 12 teams the Big Ten would have to add 1 and the PAC Ten 2. The Big East 4. The Mountain West and Western Athletic would have to combine letting go of some teams and the Sunbelt (with Arkansas State) and the MAC would be thrown under the bus. The only way that this could occur is if Emperor Obama would ordain it from Washington, as some have suggested (Some here have suggested that Congress should do something. But they fail to understand that many Congressmen come from districts whose schools and towns would be negatively effected by getting rid of bowls. But then again Government can solve all our problems can't they? And if they can run a car company, well, they surely could run college football). If those carping about a playoff here would offer a better plan I would like to hear it. Otherwise go cry in your beer.
jim dogg: Guess what? I do not represent any other fans. I re-read my post to see whether I had stated or implied any such thing, and I could find no evidence to support such a claim. I did call for a discussion forum on the issue.
But coming up with a playoff system doesn't seem that hard. Here, let me crack open a cold one while I lay this out for you. Pssssshhhheew! Aaaaahh. This is so simple even a college president could understand it. Or an Obama hater.
Dismantle the BCS and revert to the old bowl system. Following the bowls give four votes to every scholarship player on every Div.-1 team that played in a bowl. (You can't vote for yourself.) This rewards the players and gives them a voice in the matter. Give them two days to watch tapes of games they missed. The team that polls the most votes is the #1 seed, on thru to #4. Next Saturday 1 plays 4 and 3 plays 2. The following Saturday the winners play for the national championship.
That was too easy. I barely got started on my beer.
Obama hater? Hey, Obama was the one to bring a playoff up and implied that the government should do something about it. Nevertheless, I think your idea of a Caribbean bowl sounds good, but not neccessarily on a boat. They do have a Hula Bowl so why not a Haiti Bowl. And I do like your idea of players deciding who plays for the championship series. But why stop there? The players are employees of the university. Employers should have their say. Board members and alumini (especially alumni) should vote too. And with public universities why not let the citizens vote since they're paying the freight. Also why not let students, faculty, and university maintenence people vote too just to be inclusive? I dunno, letting 18-21 year olds vote for playoff spots? But why not, they can serve their country (if they want to)and as everybody knows that age group is well known for it's perspicacity, gravitas, mature judgment, and being well informed. Just like the average American voter. Although it sounds to me like community and union organizing, I say go for it Swine.(Although you should be warned, the number of people in that age group that actually vote is very low). Pop another beer Swine, I may not agree with you but you do say some interesting things. At least you have a plan.
Hey Hoggs!
Who was that running back you sent to the NFL combine a couple years ago?
The only guy I can remember from that year is ECU's Chris Johnson. He pretty much took the spotlight that year, didnt he?
Too bad, your guy sure had alot of hype going in. I guess the Pirates stole your thunder, huh?
Cheer up, maybe this year will be different. I hear everything's better with bacon!
Who is this douche?
Whatever…just remember, nyfof, this 'bacon' bites back.
Wow, you ECU fans are in for a rude awakening. I guess trash talk is expected, but a 9-4 C-USA can in no way compete with the Hogs, nor any other middle tier SEC team.
C-USA is very similar to the Sun Belt – and look what SEC teams did to Sun Belt opponents. A great example of SEC dominance is Georgia vs Georgia Tech. A top ACC team got destroyed at home against a middle tier SEC team.
I can appreciate your enthusiasm, but you are in for a long Jan 2. It will be fun for the Hog fans.
Why does a playoff system have to get rid of the bowls? Keep all the bowls intact – just use the BCS bowls and a few other bowls as the playoffs, and add a Championship game.
I don't understand why some folks think it's one or the other – you don't have to elimate the current bowls to have a playoff. If anything, there is more revenue and attention since there is more at stake. Part of the problem with the bowls is that except for the 'championship' game, they are meaningless. A playoff creates anticipation, and by the time you get to a true championship game, the game will be larger than the Super Bowl in terms of advertising revenue and TV.
And you don't even have to extend the season – just play the games during the off weeks that currently exist in December. There are 2-3 weekends to choose from.
It is very simple – it's just an issue of politics and control.
Soupd: I advocated dumping the BCS and reverting to traditional bowls. I agree with you: no need to lose the bowls. After the bowls everybody has seen everybody play, and it's pretty clear who the top teams are by then. Let the players choose a final four, and have the teams play it out.
The best reasons not to have playoffs in December: final exams and holidays and injury rehab. But that's no deal breaker.
I don't think the bowls are meaningless. Most of them have no bearing on the championship, but final rankings are made following the bowls. I think the bowls are great for the teams involved and their fans and perhaps for recruiting. Some of them are not so good for TV. I don't think money is everything, as Dan Wetzel claims, but I do think it is a good idea to get paid for the wonderful product you have developed: i.e., a good college football team in a big-time setting.
I agree that a college playoff final would be bigger than the superbowl. Perhaps that is the reason it does not exist. Think?
Personally, any bowl is a good bowl! More especially a bowl nearby such as Memphis.
I do not want to see a play off system in football…because there is just too many injuries and all that a play off would likely mean is the winner would be the last man standing. I just do not see how a team could go to play offs unless we cut out some of the regular season games. I agree that I would love to see more diversity in what bowls that we would qualify to attend but there again I can see that fan attendance is vital for bowls to survive. Perhaps, SEC could flip west/east qualifiers a little more often. However, could you imagine having to travel all the way to the desert town of El Paso, TX to play? However, it is no further than say the Orange Bowl. Alabama played in the Sun Bowl one year and the fans in EP cheared for them because the west coast team bad mouthed the bowl prior to arriving. So, we fans do not want to ever bad mouth a bowl or our team may pay for it. In El Paso, a team may be playing in balmy weather, very cold weather, or a sand storm like fog.
Is it too early to be wondering what talent we will have coming back on our offensive and defensive lines next season? I have been wondering. Has anyone analyzed that and what we may have projedcted as coming in who can play immediately?
Tell me again why the bowls need to be any part of a playoff system?
(I'm with Wetzel on this: keep your bowls if you must but leave them out of the playoffs. Besides being pointless money sucks, they place intolerable and pointless travel requirements on the teams participating in the playoffs…which is exactly what the anti-playoff faction wants.)
"Pointless money sucks"? Hey the schools get money for the games and fans have fun unless they lose, but even then they can still party. Add to that recruiting exposure and extra practice, especially for future starters, Without bowls would colleges be allowed to have winter "Red and White" scrimmages? "Intolerable and pointless travel requirements"?. With that logic when Tennessee plays UCLA or California in the regular season maybe they should they play in Kansas City? Does this mean that teams should avoid playing Hawaii at home. I have heard that players think that a Hawaii trip is a treat. Kids love to travel. They don't travel by bus, car, or train anymore. They use planes. Travel time between coasts is 4-5 hours tops (unless they stop in Chicago).
If there is a anti-playoff faction then there is an anti-bowl faction. The latter being somewhat irrational since a playoff will never happen, and if it does the NCAA and its schools will have such income shock that they would disband it immediately. If there was a playoff, then there would be no bowls and little head to head confrontations between leagues, so league power rankings would not be clear, something neccessary for playoff selections. But enough of speculation, I ask you Hawgfan, be honest now, given this year as one example, but other years will suffice as well, are you willing to give up Arkansas' Liberty Bowl for a playoff system, since Arkansas wouldn't be in a playoff? Every year Hog fans hope for a bowl. And every year it's likely Arkansas will qualify. But in how many years would Arkansas qualify for a playoff birth, even with a good, highly competitive team with signature wins under its belt?
Some may think that I like the BCS. No. I think it's a fraud and a farce hiding behind science (computer rankings). The similarity between it and the subjective AP voting Poll is so close that it looks statistically improbable. One must be highly influencing the other.I suspect that the BCS gives much, much more emphasis to polls than to numbers(The BCS is not a poll, but uses Polls). And the polls are geographically tainted. For example: Wally Hall has said that the final BCS (or AP) showed that the SEC rules. Wally can't count. There are only 3 SEC teams in the top 25. 3. The Pac Ten has 5 and that powerhouse conference the Big Ten, which always loses the Rose Bowl and most of it's bowl games, has 4! Any number of SEC teams with 7-5 records would be favored over many of those teams below the top 10. Ole Miss didn't get in with an 8-4 record although USC did. But according to the BCS, USC played in tougher conference. However, in the AP poll Central Michigan replaces USC. Be serious. No disparagement to CMU which has a great QB, but CMU's signature win was against a very mediocre 6-6 Michigan State team in a game that was decided in the last second. Boston College blew out CMU. Now does anybody really believe that CMU could beat USC, Ole Miss or any 7-5 SEC team. So, bottom line is that the Polls are driven by geogeographic subjective evaluations and the BCS is just more of the same.
The reason I love the bowls is that the head to head confrontations will tell us more about league strengths and weaknesses than the polls or the BCS. If tradition means anything Ohio State will lose to Oregon and the Big Ten teams will fall flat. The SEC will do well. Which will make both BCS and the AP poll look stupid. (More fodder for the playoffniks?). Unfortunately, the SEC and the PAC Ten do not face each other in any of the 32 bowls (hmmm). Another thing about bowls, it will give the hot stove crowd lots of stuff to argue about because of the large number of games and teams involved. I don't have the respect for all scribes that some posters here have. Scribes should be grateful for bowl games because it will give them more insight into relative strengths and weaknesses of teams for next year's predictions.
Again, the 'bowl system' and a playoff can coexist – just use the current bowls and designate playoff bowls – everyone gets their money since all 33 bowls happen, and you could have each conference take a share of the final BCS game:
There are currently 33 bowls. Of those 33, 5 are BCS bowls (including the championship game). All 33 happen over a 3 week period – Dec 19 – Jan 7.
To have an 8 team playoff, you would need 7 games over a 3 week period. This can easily be accomplished over 3 weekends (see NCAA basketball tourney for examples).
So, this is easy guys. Just make the Little Caesar's Pizza Bowl and the Meinke Car Care Bowl your other 2 'playoff bowls' and you're done. No need to extend the season.
You're welcome.
Soup: Well you might get your wish (although I doubt it). Representative Joe Barton of the 6th Congressional District has a Bill in the house to demand a playoff because the present system is unfair. Joe's District is long and snaky and touches the Southern border of Dallas and Fort Worth. Joe has a house in Arlington just down the road from TCU. Hmmm. Let's see if Obama gets behind a Republican initiative. You have a plan but, but, but how are you going to select the 8 teams and be "fair". The devil's in the details. 8 teams would shut out TCU, Boise, and similar teams in the future. Barton is responding to TCU fans who don't like being in the "Meaningless" Bowl (I'm sure that BSU fans feel the same way) which will determine the "King" of the outsiders. Very clever of making sure that trap teams won't pull a Utah and BSU upsetting the big guys. But, and this is a very qualifying but, I think that the biggies will rigg and fix the a new playoff scheme even more.
jim dogg-
In addition to the more recent article mentioned above, I have an article by Wetzel for you to read which should address your questions concerning the bowl system more completely than is feasible for me here. Shoot me an email (ratcher@comcast.net) and I'll send you a copy. I would also recommend checking a copy of Wetzel's book out when its released next year; should go into MUCH more detail on this. Suffice to say, the bulk of the money doesn't go where you would think it should.
'“Intolerable and pointless travel requirements”?. With that logic…'
Note that I did say 'for the playoffs.' in respect to this.
"…since a playoff will never happen, and if it does the NCAA and its schools will have such income shock that they would disband it immediately."
You are definitely in the minority on this. What is your source for this precipitous fall off in revenue? Wetzel continuously makes reference to the huge amounts of money a playoff (in virtually any format) would generate and I've yet to see anyone take serious issue with him over his assertion. Often the phenomenal success of the ncaa basketball tourney is cited as an indicator of potential revenue (Wetzel and others believe the football equivalent would create even more fundage…).
"If there was a playoff, then there would be no bowls and little head to head confrontations between leagues, so league power rankings would not be clear, something neccessary for playoff selections."
As has been mentioned, having a playoff system would not necessarily eliminate the bowl system. However, many of them would not be able to handle the competition and would sink further into parochialism and irrelevance. THAT would doom many of them, I suspect, and rightly so.
'Little head to head confrontations between leagues'? Hardly. In addition to the bowls which could survive in such an environment, you would have repeated head to heads between the very best the leagues have to offer: their respective champions. Conference champions would make up the lion's share of the field in any decent playoff plan I've seen so any arguments on 'conference superiority' would still have plenty of ammo to use. If you mean in the regular season, every game would be important as only the conf. champs and the very best of the selected remainder would be allowed in the tourney. I would also recommend a 'strength of schedule' comparison as a tie-breaker to encourage more meaningful games out of conference.
"I ask you Hawgfan, be honest now, given this year as one example, but other years will suffice as well, are you willing to give up Arkansas’ Liberty Bowl for a playoff system, since Arkansas wouldn’t be in a playoff?"
Honestly? I wouldn't have to (see above) but yes I would. The only thing I'd really miss would be the extra practice time.
"But in how many years would Arkansas qualify for a playoff birth,…"
I'd have to hope more than the number of BCS bowls we've qualified for so far.
"8 teams would shut out TCU, Boise, and similar teams in the future."
Not if they're the conference champion. With that stipulation, they could see more playoff time than Arkansas. Check out the brackets in Wetzel's latest article.
Hopefully, there is some legislative action on this front soon as I doubt we'll get sufficient traction soon depending solely on grassroots.
Hawgfan: Thanks for anwering my queries. You have your opinions and I have mine and never the twain will meet (but you at least gave thought to your positions through and I respect you for that). I would differ strongly with you, however, in your noble gesture of throwing the Hogs under the bus for a playoff system. Remarkably fairminded but don't go into politics; most people want what's best for them (even some liberals)not Charlie Brown down the street. I based my assesment of chances for the Hogs to get into playoff brackets on how many times in the near past have the Hogs broken into the top eight in any of the polls that would qualify them for a playoff spot. They had their best shot with the SEC championship game. Your comment "I’d have to hope more than the number of BCS bowls we’ve qualified for so far", shows little faith in our prospects for a BCS Bowl next year. There's a better chance of that happening than playing for a National championship, BCS or playoff. Florida did not win the SEC but is BCS bound. If LSU hadn't lost to Ole Miss the SEC would have 3 teams in the BCS. I'll stick with the Hogs best chances.
Why don't you give everybody here a quick synopsis of Wetzel's plan. I think that you could do that, after all it's not the House's Health Care Bill. I would like to know how many teams he has in his brackets, and most importantly, how are these teams going to be picked? Setting up a chronologically acceptable set of brackets is so simple a cave man could do it. The sticking point is how do those teams get there? It's obvious that the BCS and AP are rigged so how would this be any different? Right now there are 6 BCS leagues and 5 that can go suck hind tit. What is to be done for these leagues? About the same as now I guess; i.e., try to ignore them; stick em in their own bowl. My suggestion was to have 8 super leagues, each with 2 divisions and have champions of each league play each other. How different is Wetzel's? But even there, if one league is very weak and its opponent league is strong and the weaker team happens to upset the stronger in the first playoff game (Alabama – Utah) then screaming will be heard to change the system. Oh, and how about the seeding of these teams? Also, I don't have the faith that you have that the Bowls will survive as well as you think they will. The is a CHANGE that will not happen despite what you and Wetzel want. There is so much uncertainty in changing the system that, and I say it again, it WON'T HAPPEN.
How about putting your (and Wetzel's) considerable energy and intellect into calling for an investigation into college football officiating. I was watching one game last weekend and a receiver was clearly out of bounds and the catch was upheld. The announcers were stunned and as one coach this year stated, and was fined for it, Why do they even have replay if it isn't going to be interpreted properly. It seems to me that this would be an easier and more realistic issue* to deal with but one shouldn't hold one's breath. The Foxes own this hen house – and they would still do so with an improbable playoff system.
*It seems that you keep up with national sports writers. Have you seen any passion on their part about all of the officiating errors in college football. Just wonderin.
Hawgfan:
Just checked out Wetzel's article. It's stupid. I could go on and go on and on about his unconfirmed assertions as well as his personally biased comments but here's just a couple of the most outrageous that points more to his motives rather than to football:
"This would also placate complaints from northern teams who are seemingly always playing bowl games near the campus of their opponent. The Big Ten’s been getting slaughtered of late in bowl games. Well, let’s see Florida or LSU slide around in the snow of Happy Valley some time." "Home games would pump up local economies too. It’s not the people in Ohio’s job to drop their disposable income in Pasadena; they might consider doing it right at home. The entire “economic impact” theory for bowl games makes no sense on a national scale (which this is) because it’s just displaced spending. Just a guess, but I’m sure the guy running the Columbus Applebee’s would enjoy a crowd as much as the guy running the one in Tempe."
(What planet does Wetzel live on. Teams like to travel it's part of a vacation. Aren't the monies spent by people vacationing in the South in the winter and the retirees from the north also disposing of "displaced" income? So let's force people to go to Applebee's in Columbus rather than in Orlando (?). Wetzel, the job of Ohioans is to spend their money where they want to and not where you want them to. This is all demagoguery directed to Midwesteners.
But consider the nastiness implied here about southern schools. Wetzel, old man, the home field advantage did not help OSU against USC this year. Wetzel is somewhat of a redistribution of wealth ideologue – he doesn't like profit either – rather than let the public decide how to spend their own money).
(Interestingly, in Wetzel's brackets only two teams would go to colder climes: Va Tech to Boise and GA Tech to Ohio State. This last has humor value. Tech is rated a 9 with 11-2 record against OSU at 8 with 10-2. Whoa boy. Playing such a game in a refrigerator as opposed to a domed stadium because of a single bracket difference (hmmm).
Also his brackets are chosen from league champions as well as rankings. How are these rankings determined, Well, if you look at Wetzel's then you see that it's determined by.. ta dah.. the present BCS and AP poll.
And this: "The playoff would stage the first three rounds at the home field of the higher-seeded team before shifting to a neutral site, a la the Super Bowl. As a nod to history, it could be a rotation of famed stadiums such as the Rose Bowl. Or the Rose Bowl every year. This doesn’t matter to me."
(The mention of the Rose Bowl as a "neutral site" shows where the political ideology of this guy lies – Midwest – West Coast. How on earth can a true neutral site be determined? But if this nincompoop had given any thought to this the best site would be "Jerry World" in Arlington. It's in the middle of the country, it's domed and it is the most comfortable for fans. He mentions Camp Randal at Wisconsin that teams are lusting to go to. It's -9 degrees in Minneapolis today and not much different in Madison… and this is only early December! Dumb and dumber.
I could go on but this would take up unneccesary space. Go read it. It's easy to find through Google. My interpretation of Wetzel's piece is that he's an Ohioan who hates bowls because OSU and other Big Ten teams don't win many bowl games. So this is more of getting rid of bowls than setting up a playoff system ( 3 Big Ten teams are included in Wetzel's magic 16 – hmmm). Hawgfan, you're an intelligent guy, how did you get taken in by this guy?
jim dogg–
I don't have time to respond to your post until much later this evening (I work from 5-9 eastern) but I will respond.
"It seems that you keep up with national sports writers. Have you seen any passion on their part about all of the officiating errors in college football."
I keep up with a few (if you want to call it that…), Wetzel, because he and I see eye to eye on the playoff thing. Fiutak and Cirminiello on CFN caught my attention because they give the Hogs some respect most of the time. I like the way all these guys write, no matter the topic. I get most of my info on the Hogs at Razorbloggers (I use their links also). Really helps as I live in Georgia.
I can't remember which of the above I got this from but the best idea I heard on the officiating was to take it completely away from the individual leagues and put it under the auspices of a single entity. Also, require the refs to certify regularly.
It seems we read the same article differently. Wetzel isn't addressing whether or not the teams like to travel; he's addressing a rather common complaint (I've come across it at least half a dozen times this year alone in different places): that southern schools gain a unfair advantage by playing their bowl games, especially the big ones, close to home. Giving the northern schools home field advantage, when they're in the playoffs and earn it, will erase this complaint.
'Economic Impact' The argument is made that the bowl towns need the money generated by their bowl games. Wetzel doesn't deny thi;, he simply says the fans would probably prefer their dollars to go to businesses in their home town. I've spent a fair portion of my life in the Midwest, especially Upper Midwest (Minnesota, Illinois, Wisconsin). I detected absolutely no 'demagoguery' in Wetzel's comments. There is no 'nastiness' directed at southern schools either. Wetzel is merely attempting to address what is, to some northern fans, a very real concern. I don't think Wetzel actually believes the 'unfair advantage' exits but the concern certainly does.
"Wetzel is somewhat of a redistribution of wealth ideologue – he doesn’t like profit either –…"
This is reaching a bit, jd. Wetzel titled his article, in part, 'Money Talks'. He understands completely how important money is; he just wants the bulk of it to go to the teams and the leagues, where it belongs.
"Also his brackets are chosen from league champions as well as rankings. How are these rankings determined, Well, if you look at Wetzel’s then you see that it’s determined by.. ta dah.. the present BCS and AP poll."
Actually they're not (at least not intentionally). Wetzel says: "In addition to the 11 automatic bids, there would be five at-large selections made by a basketball-like selection committee (a group of highly engaged people using common criteria to pick and set the field)." Wetzel is picking the teams he figures the 'selection committee of highly engaged people' would select this year.
Wetzel's choice of the Rose Bowl as one of the 'neutral sites' for the rotating championship was made specifically because the Rose Bowl committee and the Big 11/PAC 10 have consistently dug in thier sizable heels on the issue of a playoff. It's a nod to their clout and his disreagard for it ("Or the Rose Bowl every year. This doesn’t matter to me.”). Jerry's World would be an excellent choice but to be fair (and to avoid a continuation of the 'unfair advantage' accusation) the championship site should rotate among the 'big' bowls.
Wetzel mentions Camp Randall (I've been there at this time of year; it was a blast, made even better by watching the Badgers beat the heavily favored buckeyes) to illustrate his regard for the intra-sectional pageantry of the sport which he contends has gone by the wayside in the BCS era.
"So this is more of getting rid of bowls than setting up a playoff system…"
Wetzel doesn't want to get rid of the bowls; he simply doesn't care ("ignore them") and sees them as an impediment to the next evolution of the sport. A playoff will happen. The only factors that need to be determined now are 'how' and 'when'.
I don't see the political angle you keep referring to either. I guess if you were predisposed you could cobble it up but it would remain just that: cobbled up.
The heart of the issue is power and control verses money. The bowls and the third parties who run them want to maintain the incredibly advantageous arrangement they have (including the power/control it imparts). What I don't get completely is the money part. Wetzel says the schools share upwards of 40% of the revenue generated in 'their' bowl (and typically eat all the travel expenses–gee, what a vacation! You go where you're told {not everyone gets to go to Hawaii] and you get to pay for the trip. Wow!). Why would they want to do that if they don't have to and they don't. The ncaa can run this as they do other tourneys and the schools will make even more money (in addition to the huge money maker the playoff would be) Why don't the presidents jump at this? Makes no sense to me; it's win/win for them and the schools.
"Hawgfan, you’re an intelligent guy, how did you get taken in by this guy?"
:^) Because he's making a lot of sense, that's why!
Hawgfan: I knew it. I knew it, I knew it, You're a Midwestener!
You State: "(‘Economic Impact’ The argument is made that the bowl towns need the money generated by their bowl games. Wetzel doesn’t deny this;, he simply says the fans would probably prefer their dollars to go to businesses in their home town. I’ve spent a fair portion of my life in the Midwest, especially Upper Midwest (Minnesota, Illinois, Wisconsin). I detected absolutely no ‘demagoguery’ in Wetzel’s comments. There is no ‘nastiness’ directed at southern schools either. Wetzel is merely attempting to address what is, to some northern fans, a very real concern. I don’t think Wetzel actually believes the ‘unfair advantage’ exits but the concern certainly does.")
You like Wetzel's playoff plan (actually a scheme) because you are a Midwesterner. For those of you who haven't seen Wetzel's piece, He has 4 of his sweet 16 from the Midwest(?). As I pointed out, according to the BCS and the AP the Pac Ten had 5 in their top 25. How many in Wetzel's 16? 1. ACC ? 1. The Big East 1. Same number as the Sunbelt, WAC, MW, CO USA and the MAC(?). After all the league champions get their bid then there are only 5 at large bids available. How crazy is that. Troy, East Carolina, and Central Michigan playing for the national title and not Nebraska, Arizona, Stanford, Pitt, Miami, Clemson, Ole Miss and on and on. Or to it's most obvious example: Arkansas clobbers Troy and Troy gets a bid and the Hogs do not(?). Also Wetzel would give Notre Dame a shot at an at-large bid, leaving only 4 for the biggies. In case some do not know it Notre Dame is in Northern Indiana. So it's obvious that Wetzel writes for Yankee consumption.
I grew up in Michigan, Ontario, Canada and New York City and I spend my summers in Northeast Ohio so I don't have anything against Midwest teams. I have taken classes at Michigan State but most of my adult life has been spent in Arkansas, Louisiana, and Texas. So I might be biased toward the SEC and even the Big Twelve, but I am realistic in my thinking. Of course it's about money and Wetzel doesn't like whose getting it. Redistribution of wealth by government fiat is called Marxism and I contend that Wetzel's approach is just that. Take from the rich and give to the poor, even if they don't deserve it. That's not political it's economic philosophy. It's human nature for those that have an advantage not to easily give it away. Why am I thinking that fans of the Biggie teams could care less about a level playing field for the minor conferences. Consider Wetzel including the lesser conferences with automatic bids. Isn't this supposed to be about merit and not about being "fair". The biggies will say not only do we have to pay these schools blackmail money to come to lose at our homecomings but now we have to give them our spots at the playoff table? There is no way, even with the Big Ten, that the big conferences are going to swallow that. This playoff thing is going nowhere. But if the Government interferes then I predict that something like a breakup of the present NCAA with a new conference, American Athletic Conference (AAC) perhaps which will include only the biggies and the others can go fish. Theoretically the government cannot dictate personal association, at least according to the Constitution. But maybe they'll use Ricci. My bottom line is that any playoff idea is going to be hung up on the ranking, seeding and selection process. The devil is in the details. I want to read something more realistic and substantive than Wetzels preposterous selection process based on Marxist-Leninist sentimentalities.
Hawgfan I think that you do make clever arguements but I would advise posters (if they're really interested in this) to read Wetzel's article, and read mine and your posts and make up their own minds. Too bad we
can't take a poll to see if readers like Wetzel's approach to bracket selection.
Also, I believe that Wetzel's idea of home field advantage would kill or diminish the bowls to the status of the NIT or worse. Wetzel's or anyone else's idea for playoffs would carve out 14 bowl eligible teams, most of whom are the cream of the crop. So, bowls will be left with the residuum. I'm sure TV will be lining up for those bowls. Sorry. I'm sticking with my original ad hominem about Wetzel: Stupid.
Missed this comment the first time around but, sure I'm a 'Midwesterner', I was born in Arkansas. ;^) I have no regional motives in this. I simply want more, and better, college football.
Since Rivals has apparently taken the article in question down, if anyone would like to read it, just email me (ratcher@comcast.net) and I'll send you a copy.
There is no perfect way to determine the overall champion. As imperfect as the current system is, I want to stay with it. Regardless of the system, there will always be many different opinions on this issue
Granted there is no perfect way to determine the champion but there are certainly 'better' and 'worse' ways to do so. The BCS would absolutely fall under the latter heading.
Currently there are what, five undefeated tams? At the end tf the bowl season you will definitely have at least two undefeateds (because two sets of no-loss teams are set to play each other). Wouldn't the more perfect system leave us with only one? And this champion will have proven its worth on the field beyond any doubt.
You know, the NCAA and conference representatives were able to figure out a fair championship system for basketball, how hard can it really be to figure out a football championship? If anything, it's easier given most of the logistics are set up and in place (the 33 bowls).
March Madness is an incredible revenue generator. Having that anticipation in football could be even greater. I'm convinced it's not about the money, since most would agree that having a playoff would generate more participation, higher ticket sales, and more t-shirts and TV revenue than what exists today.
And as far as locations and the northern/midwest folks complaining about playing in the south, just play all the tournament games in enclosed stadiums. There are enough of those around to cover all the games.
My last comments on this: HAWGFAN, You say "Currently there are what, five undefeated teams (?) At the end the the bowl season you will definitely have at least two undefeateds (because two sets of no-loss teams are set to play each other). Wouldn’t the more perfect system leave us with only one?"
I say No. The last two national champions had 1 and 2 losses. This year's not the norm And with a playoff system there is no guarantee that 2 undefeated teams would survive. In fact, the the prevailing wisdom was that a one loss SEC champion would play for the championship regardless.
"Granted there is no perfect way to determine the champion but there are certainly ‘better’ and ‘worse’ ways to do so. The BCS would absolutely fall under the latter heading.".
OK, the BCS is not good, OK, it's bad. But where is this mythical "better", certainly not with Wetzel's which qualifies as worse.
SOUPDOG: You state, "You know, the NCAA and conference representatives were able to figure out a fair championship system for basketball, how hard can it really be to figure out a football championship? If anything, it’s easier given most of the logistics are set up and in place (the 33 bowls)."
I state: If it was easy it would have already been done. Logistics for football and basketball are apples and oranges. For example, lets be "fair" like March Madness. Let's have the 66 teams now in the bowl games be set up in brackets after a ten game regular season scheduale and play for the championship in February in Ann Arbor. (Unfortunately we have to factor in all of the money that the nonparticipant teams will lose from subtracting 2 games each in the season). Lastly, if you have played both football and basketball you will have noticed that the physical demands are different. The NBA plays what? 100 games a regular season, the collegiates 30; while the NFL only 16 and collegian footballers 12 or 13. You cannot eliminate the physical nature of football in any playoff scheme.
"March Madness is an incredible revenue generator. Having that anticipation in football could be even greater. I’m convinced it’s not about the money, since most would agree that having a playoff would generate more participation, higher ticket sales, and more t-shirts and TV revenue than what exists today."
Baloney; who do you work for the government accounting office. This would be true with a 66 team playoff field, not with 8 or even 16. At the moment the bowls generate hugh cash flows. Count up the number of fans that attend all bowl games and the number of fans that attend all March madness games. Multiply by ticket prices (and why am I thinking that college football stadia hold more fans than basketball courts). What you are saying is that an 8 (or 16) team playoff would generate more income that the present bowl system. Sorry, I don't agree. Tv exposure would be less and certainly attendence figures wouldn't match. It's hypothetical what you say and there is no evidence to prove it. The one place I agree with Wetzel is that it's about the money, all about the money.
Do you really think that more bling is sold because of basketball playoffs rather than at bowl games? Have you ever been to a Hog game at home? A sea of red t-shirts in September and hoodies in November. Where's your figures to back that t-shirt thing up?.
O-LINE: You say "There is no perfect way to determine the overall champion. As imperfect as the current system is, I want to stay with it. Regardless of the system, there will always be many different opinions on this issue"
To which I say. Amen. Common sense at last. I have no problem with the concept of a playoff system, but no one here (or Wetzel) have proposed anything reasonably better than the bowl setup. Insofar as scribes and fans are concerned, scribes will always complain about anything with cherry picked facts, imagined scenarios, home-cooking bias and cost accounting of which they know nothing about. Not all of course, but I would look at anything a journalist or sports opinionist writes with a skeptical and jaundiced eye. Fans primarily are affected by homecooking and will pied piper-like follow a scribe of their likeing. However, everyone is free to express their opinion and who knows, maybe even a fan will come up with an acceptable playoff plan.
Finis: I will bloviate no more on this topic. I have no blow left for this.
But my question of the day is: Will ESPN and other writers dump on Kelly like they did with Petrino?
I say no. Some criticism but not as harsh. That's because Arkansas is not Notre Dame. Attacking Arkansas is fair game but attacking Notre Dame! The scribes may think that they will be struck by lightning or at least by the subway alumni. I would like to see someone go back to the comments about Petrino and see how those anti-Petrino "analysts" now approach Kelly.
I would like to comment on tonight's Heisman's going's on because if your an SEC fan and would like to see Alabama win, the decision tonight could affect that game. First if Colt McCoy doesn't win then that will be the bigget award travesty in the history of the Heisman or the recent so-called Nobel Peace Prizes. Not only was he outstanding this year but his body of work is incredible. Counting only the last game's performance and ignoring the rest of his achievements it would be ridiculous. The emergence of an unknown tackle from Nebraska getting in because of his last game is somewhat puzzling (what happened to Mount Cody?) unless you look at all this from a political standpoint. First eliminate Spiller, too much competition with far more PR. Second, eliminate Ingram. Gerhart of Stanford has more yards and touchdowns than Ingram. If Ingram wins it the howl from the West Coast will be enormous and a cry of hate for the SEC will erupt everywhere. Besides Ingram had a poor, actually bad game against Auburn. Gerhart might win it because like many old-timers here, the voters hate Texas, mainly because that's where George Bush is from. But Gerhart's an outside choice. Now we come to OH and McCoy. Oh maybe the best lineman the world has ever seen, but when building a team you start with QBs and RBs, and they, as Reggie said, are the straws that stir the drink. With the selection of Oh it would also say that many of previous year's great lineman weren't good enough for the award. Don't forget that the last time a defensive player won was Charles Woodson, and he won it against Peyton Manning (of course Woodson played for Big Ten Michigan and Manning for Tennessee of the SEC. That is still considered one of the worst selections ever for the Heisman). Actually Woodson was the only defensive player to ever win it. Oh also brings something distasteful up, perhaps, an ugly PC bit. Rush Limbaugh was let go at ESPN for saying that the sportwriters were inflating McNabb's abilities and accomplishments. Would the same thing be happening here with sportswriters? I tend to doubt it. I think Oh was thrown in to add interest. But Oh's selection would simply mean to me that they didn't want to give it to McCoy or perhaps Gerhart for PC reasons rather than for merit. But it is curious to note that the Big 12 Now has 2 candidates and the supposedly stronger PAC 10 and SEC only 1.
Nevertheless, how does all this affect the championship game for the SEC. I profer that if MCCoy doesn't get it then the whole state of Texas will be up in arms, especially if Ingram gets it. It will stir up the Longhorns to an even higher pitch than just for the championship game. An Alamo attitude. No respect. Win one for the Micker. I'm not saying that this will be the major factor in the game. But would anyone doubt that Colt would die or kill trying to win that game as vindication (remember Tebow last year – the Sooners and Bradford were personal). For the sake of the SEC put away your visceral hatred for Texas and hope McCoy wins. Alabama doesn't need anymore of an extra effort from Texas then the Horn's already will give.
On the other hand, if Ingram doesn't win it then he will be the odds on favorite next year – perhaps in competetion with Mallet. The Heisman group now seems to avoid repeats. If Ingram gets it this year , Mallet has a shot.
My personal favorite for the award other than McCoy? Jeremiah Masioli of Oregon, but he's not on the ballot. If you haven't seem this guy he's like McCoy on steroids with his running game.
Whoops, my bad. It's Suh not Oh. Shows you how much I know about this guy. And I forgot Spillers not in it. Other wise OK.
Hey hogs how many national championships have you actually won? Thats what I thought! The same amount as the Pirates. Stop trying to ride the good teams in the SEC and pretend like your them. We in the Football world know the difference. Thats like riding a beautiful girl around in your mamas car and pretending its yours. She might be kin by blood but you did not buy the car Lets get one thing straight right now. You are not Florida and will never ever ever be. We have played teams with alot better programs than you have ie West Virginia, Boise State, Virginia Tech. We do not want or need your respect just because you play in the SEC. You kind of remind me of Boise with that where is Eastern Carolina crap. I tell you what call one of them up now and ask them where its at. Home of the Greatest Athelete of all time baby Micheal Jordan. You better come out of that little country that you live in.
You are like your friend,NYFO FAM, or perhaps you are him? A bit loose with the facts. I saw the comments about the smack-downs given to Bobby Petrino by these fearsome Pirates, so I checked and found that they have never beaten him once as a head coach!
And, now you are questioning our rights to commment as we see fit because we have never won a national championship. I believe no one is making a comment that requires "credentials". That said, the Hog Nation and others fully recognize our claim to the 1964 National Championship. Arkansas was the only undefeated team standing after the bowls that year and the Football Writers of America and all the others that awarded their championship recognition AFTER the bowls (AP & UPI shutdown their polls after the regular season in those days) named the Arkansas Razorbacks as National Champions.
"I say No."
I think you miss the point. In a playoff there can't be more than one undefeated team. The BCS will certainly leave us with more than one this year (and in any year there are more than two no-loss teams). That can't in any way help us get to our goal of establishing a true champion.
"But where is this mythical “better”, certainly not with Wetzel’s which qualifies as worse. "
"Worse"? How? If you've actually read his proposal with an open mind, I don't see how you could come to this conclusion. I'll tell you what: 'his' solution (which isn't really 'his'; several people have offered up a playoff system. There are many ways to go about it. His is just one of the best.) will give you an undisputed national champion–every time. The current system will only do that when the most favorable conditions exist (which, in the ten years we've had this turkey, have occurred exactly twice). I'll listen to your case provided you back it up with more than opinion and assertion.
"…if it was easy it would have already been done."
Wrong. It's not about 'easy' or 'hard'; its really about power and control. It won't get 'easy' until those who have the power and control are persuaded to give it up.
"The NBA plays what? 100 games a regular season, the collegiates 30; while the NFL only 16 and collegian footballers 12 or 13. You cannot eliminate the physical nature of football in any playoff scheme."
"One of the apologists’ greatest whines is that a playoff would make the season too long. It’s conceivable that some teams would play 17 games. The guys in the other divisions of college football manage to do it though and as Texas Tech coach Mike Leach points out, the Texas high school season can go 16 games long and the best players are often on both offense and defense. The NFL plays a much longer season with just 53-man rosters.
The length of the season is just another smoke screen."
Wetzel, 'Money Talks' article.
"Baloney;…"
Wetzel, and the other playoff advocates, would take issue with you on this. What's your source(s) for the assertions you make in this paragraph? Also, this statement needs some serious backing up as well:
"…scribes will always complain about anything with cherry picked facts, imagined scenarios, home-cooking bias and cost accounting of which they know nothing about."
"Fans primarily are affected by homecooking and will pied piper-like follow a scribe of their likeing."
Not this one. I follow no one and nothing blindly–ever. You have to convince me with well-thought-out arguments backed up by facts, which Wetzel has. And you haven't.
Hawgfan: One more time: I would like you state here that you think your Guru Wetzel's playoff plan makes any sense realistically or merit wise. I.e, Giving Conference USA, Sunbelt, MAC, Mountain West, and Western Athletic Conferences automatic bids in a 16 team field that leaves only 5 at-large bids to be divided between the now 6 BCS Biggies. Maybe only 4 since Wetzel leaves it open for non-conference Midwestern Notre Dame to receive an at-large bid. For those of you who have actually been following this ping pong match, here are Wetzel's brackets (based of course, on those hated BCS standings)
16 Troy 15 Eastern Carolina
1 Alabama 2 Texas
9 Georgia Tech 10 Iowa
8 Ohio State 7 Oregon
12 Penn State 11 Virginia Tech
5 Florida 6 Boise State
13 LSU 14 Central Michigan
4 TCU 3 Cincinnati
Wetzel's addition of 5 minor conferences to automatic bids makes as much sense as Paul Krugman or Keith Olberman. The above are the facts Birdwood not opinions or assertions. Defend it. I would also refer you to today's article in the Democrat-Gazette's sports Section by a Dallas Morning News sports writer. He goes over the same issues I have brought up in my posts. Better give him an e-mail scolding him about "opinions" and "assertions" Not all scribes or fans are willing to jump into a playoff system site untried.
Sorry about Wetzel's Brackets. Something's don't transmit in this format. This should work.
1 Alabama
16 Troy
2 Texas
15 Eastern Carolina
3 Cincinnati
14 Central Michigan
4 TCU
13 LSU
5 Florida
12 Penn State
6 Boise State
11 Virginia Tech
7 Oregon
10 Iowa
8 Ohio State
9 Georgia Tech
I might add that BYU, Miami, and West Virginia would take the spots allotted to the 3 Smallies. That Oregon and a Big Ten team would match up (In the Rose Bowl no doubt), is convenient of course,but it does follow Wetzel's using the BCS) That CMU is given a higher seed than East Carolina in this scheme, implies that the USA Conference is weaker than the MAC. I don't think so, but there will always be controversy.
"One more time: I would like you state here that you think your Guru Wetzel’s playoff plan makes any sense realistically or merit wise. I.e, Giving Conference USA, Sunbelt, MAC, Mountain West, and Western Athletic Conferences automatic bids in a 16 team field that leaves only 5 at-large bids to be divided between the now 6 BCS Biggies."
Ok, I do.
"Wetzel’s addition of 5 minor conferences to automatic bids makes as much sense as Paul Krugman or Keith Olberman."
You seem to be having some difficulty with Wetzel's inclusion of the smaller (to quote him "lousy') conferences. I'll let him answer your charge:
"Just like the wildly popular and profitable NCAA men’s basketball tournament, champions of all 11 conferences earn an automatic bid to the playoff.
Yes, all 11, even the lousy conferences. While no one would argue that the Sun Belt champ is one of the top 16 teams in the country, its presence is paramount to maintaining the integrity and relevancy of the regular season. While the idea that the season is a four-month playoff is both inaccurate and absurd – best proven this year – college football’s roller-coaster regular season needs to be protected.
That’s accomplished by two things. The first is playing on the home field of the higher-seeded team until the title game (more on this later).
The second is by giving the chance for an easier first-round opponent – in this case No. 1 seed Alabama would play No. 16 Troy. Earning a top two or three seed most years would present a school a de facto bye into the second round. Why not leave the Sun Belt out and offer a real bye? The extra home game would create tens of millions of dollars in revenue (a carrot to the school presidents).
The season still matters this way. By winning the SEC championship game Saturday, Alabama gets Troy and enjoys home-field advantage in Tuscaloosa until the title game. By losing it, Florida gets Penn State and has to hit the road if it can beat the Nittany Lions.
On the flip side, it brings true Cinderella into the college football mix for the first time. Is it likely that East Carolina could beat Texas? Of course not, but as the men’s basketball tournament has proven the mere possibility (or even a close game) draws in casual fans by the millions.
Perhaps the most memorable college football game of the last few years was Boise State-Oklahoma, in part because Boise was the unbeaten underdog that wasn’t supposed to win. When the Broncos did, in dramatic fashion, they became the talk of the country. There would’ve been historic interest in seeing if they could do it again the following week.
Why wouldn’t college football want that?
For even lower-rated conferences – the Sun Belts, C-USA – allowing annual access to the tournament would not only set off celebrations on small campuses it would actually increase interest for everyone. It would not simply make the regular season matter more it would make more regular seasons matter.
Right now, last Friday’s MAC championship game between Central Michigan and Ohio was virtually meaningless. It wouldn’t be if a berth to the playoffs was riding on it. There’d be a reason to watch.
Who’s against more must-see games?
With the bigger conferences, a championship would take on greater value. Does anyone without direct rooting interest really care that Georgia Tech won the ACC title game Saturday?
They would now. The final week Big East and Pac-10 games (Cincy-Pitt, Oregon State-Oregon) would’ve had greater meaning because if the Panthers and/or Beavers won, it would’ve caused at-large bids to get gobbled up by UC and Oregon.
The interest in every game would increase exponentially – dare I say, every game would actually matter."
So, preserving the 'sanctity' and pertinence of the regular season (a MAJOR concern for many in the anti-playoff camp) with the added benefit of creating even more interest in virtually every game (I was one of those who didn't pay any attention to the ACC Championship game this year. If a playoff slot or two would have been riding on it though, I certainly would have watched.) What's so difficult to understand about that? Isn't that something all fans would want? Not to mention giving the 'little guys' much more of a chance than their ever going to get with the BCS. I mean we get TCU vs. Boise this year, a repeat of last year's match up, correct? Wow. How exciting. In Wetzel's brackets, we'd get a Florida/TCU match up in the second round. That's a game Id love to see but we never will.
You also seem to find a weakness in Wetzels use of the "hated BCS standings' to create his brackets. Personally, since he uses conference champions to fill 11 of the 16 slots, with presumably 2nd place teams or very deserving teams (ala his committee's selections, right?) to fill out the field, I don't think he's using it as much as you claim, especially, as you note, three teams in the BCS top 16 didn't make his brackets. Remember, there wouldn't be any polls used in his system, only the conference champs and the committee's selections.
"I would also refer you to today’s article in the Democrat-Gazette’s sports Section by a Dallas Morning News sports writer."
I looked for this but couldn't find it (going back to the 10th). However, if you'd post a link, I'll be happy to look it over. Glad to see you decided to 'blow' some more…;^)
Hawgfan: Seems like there was no reply button for you last comment. The article appeared on page 11 C Sunday's (12-13-2009) Democrat Gazette and was written by Tim Colislaw of the Dallas Morning News. It has probably appeared in the DMN before being in the Demozette. As for Wetzel not necessisarily using the BCS rankings: throwing out the 3 mini-leagues, they match up almost perfectly. Except that he puts Penn State at 12 (13 in the BCS) and LSU at 13 (12 in the BCs). No bias there for a Big Ten guy upgrading PSU. It's moot since they are going to play each other. Please don't lecture me about "facts". Check your own.
No reply button to your last post either. Using the BCS ranking isn't a sin except to use them to determine a NC as the BCS does. I'd wager you'd get the same teams (roughly) going by simple won/loss records. It actually doesn't matter how you arrive at the field; just that you do and the playoffs begin.
re: Facts
Make more/better use of them and you won't get lectured.
Least of the East: ARKANSAS does have a NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP. In 1964 the Football Writers awarded Arkansas their national championship. Arkansas went undefeated and won it's bowl game, but the AP and UPI gave their NC to Alabama, who lost to Texas in their bowl. Arkansas had beaten Texas in the regular season. AP and UPI gave their title to Alabama before the bowls. Which goes to the point of the discussion: The only way to determine a championship is to have the contenders play. The championship that is decided by the votes of journalists is a bogus title.
Eastern Carolina, wherever that is, has never even been ranked in a national poll much less been a contender for a national championship, as Arkansas has done several times.
I must admit I did not know that the Greatest Jerk of All Time was from Eastern Carolina. I thought he played at North Carolina.
You'll have a better understanding of the SEC when the middle-tier Razorbacks break all the offensive records of the Liberty Bowl.
I must agree with you about the current system because it sucks. Its designed for schools like Notre Dame. Have you ever seen a school that can roll off about ten losing seasons in a row and still get the coverage they get? Its about the money that runs through that program. This school will never see the glory days again, unless the NCAA allows paying players to build programs. Its a sad story, but college football has changed so much. At one time most of the players would try to go and play for a hand full of brand named schools,even if they had to ride the bench. Now good players want to be seen, so they will come to schools like East Carolina over Notre Dame. This is why we are having this discussion right now. There is so much parity in college football now. Honesty speaking I have alot of respect for what the SEC has been able to accomplish in this day and time. I have much respect for your Arkansas team. You have alot of talented players. But please believe me when I tell you, we have the talent in all areas to hand you a loss. Your coaching staff we are very familar with and can easily match. Your individual talent on the field is not superior to ours, as a matter of fact I think the two teams match up pretty good. This game will come down to turnovers and execution. So good luck to you guys!
Hey——a reasoned response is always welcome! Nothing here to disagree with.
"how many national championships have you actually won?"
Depends on what you mean by 'actually'. We have one disputed championship to our credit (which is more than ecu can say). The only reason it is disputed is, at that time championships were awarded before the bowls were played. Alabama and Arkansas were undefeated when this title was awarded to Bama. After the bowls were played Arkansas was the only undefeated team. That's why the titles are awarded after the bowl season today. That's also why many folks consider that championship to belong to Arkansas in fact if not in name.
As to the rest of the horseshit you spew in your post, I'm with the earlier poster: come on back after the game, if you dare. Our defense is better than Houston's. We may play the same type of offense with the same type of team as Houston but your boys will find us a bit tougher to handle. Come on back now, y'hear?
I did not know that Michael Jordan went to Eastern Carolina! Thought he went to UNC. I could have sworn that I saw him playing Arkansas down in Pine Bluff.
And, Arkansas won that game.
You do know that ECU is headed for their Waterloo! Even Skip knows that!
Eastern Carolina is geographical region of North Carolina. It is approx. the size of the entire state of Arkansas and this is just the eastern part of the state. There is a Central and Western region, but the east is the largest. This is where Jordan was raised and he went to college at UNC. UNC stands for the University of North Carolina and ECU stands for East Carolina University.
The Razorbacks seem very over confident. I went to see ECU practice the other day and they look really good!
This game could result in a good ol fashion hog killing! You Razorback fans should try some of eastern NC bbq, it's good!! mmmmmmm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5SQg4IvGc0&fe…
In today's local paper there was an op-ed piece by Al Neuharth, founder of USA Today and former CEO of Gannett, titled "How to fix the BCS before Congress does." He suggests something similar to what I wrote above, something simple: He says let the winners of four designated bowls play for the championship. That would be an 8-team playoff, and that is enough to be legitimate. I don't believe a 16-team playoff is necessary nor desirable unless you eliminate the bowls, which will not happen.
When high-profile people such as Neuharth start clamoring for a playoff, you know the drumbeat is growing loud across the land. And, as he points out, national politicians have started speaking out in favor of a playoff.
Can the college presidents be so out of touch with the fans and the media that they will fail to fix the problem, soon? Probably.