Crimson Red Sports

Around Campus => The Quad => Topic started by: Marshal Dillon on April 22, 2011, 02:34:23 PM



Title: Utah AG to Sue BCS
Post by: Marshal Dillon on April 22, 2011, 02:34:23 PM
Here we go again. Another "great" football power with hurt feelings. Who's next, Samford, JSU, Slippery Rock?


Title: Re: Utah AG to Sue BCS
Post by: NJRollTide on April 22, 2011, 05:48:54 PM
I know some of you won't like this, but the bcs has no shot at winning this.  They are a monoply and they don't have an antitrust exemption. 


Title: Re: Utah AG to Sue BCS
Post by: 2Stater on April 22, 2011, 05:54:56 PM
I know some of you won't like this, but the bcs has no shot at winning this.  They are a monoply and they don't have an antitrust exemption. 

I've wondered from the beginning how the BCS could get away with this. It was a violation of ant-trust laws from the get-go.


Title: Re: Utah AG to Sue BCS
Post by: cbbama99 on April 22, 2011, 06:11:26 PM
I agree, but I honestly don't know what else could replace the BCS right now. All of the playoff scenarios I have seen don't look like they could work, although I don't buy the whole "miss too much class" or "lose money" arguments made by NCAA presidents. I'm just not sure what the best option is at this point.


Title: Re: Utah AG to Sue BCS
Post by: 2Stater on April 22, 2011, 06:20:36 PM
If they win the lawsuit, which I think they will, they will either have to broaden the playoff scenerio or do away with it completely and go back to the polls.


Title: Re: Utah AG to Sue BCS
Post by: ricky023 on April 23, 2011, 12:04:26 AM
Well polls aren't doing to bad now. They usually wind up having the #1 vs #2 team in the Championship. RTR!


Title: Re: Utah AG to Sue BCS
Post by: XBAMA on April 23, 2011, 12:09:30 AM
this is a win/win for me ... BCS ? sucks .. Utah ? sucks ... I can't lose !
how many times does that happen in a week ? 


Title: Re: Utah AG to Sue BCS
Post by: Reelvalue on April 23, 2011, 10:09:30 AM
BS in the First degree...


Title: Re: Utah AG to Sue BCS
Post by: ricky023 on April 23, 2011, 12:33:05 PM
If an anti-trust suit works then they make college football revamp don't they? If they go to a play-off system won't we lose Spring Training because it goes so far into the New Year? I thought this is what the Presidents of the Universities didn't want. If we are to do anything why not do what CNS suggested, we have a Plus One? RTR!


Title: Re: Utah AG to Sue BCS
Post by: XBAMA on April 23, 2011, 02:31:06 PM
every time I hear Utah it brings this picture to mind that someone posted on TS

(http://farm1.static.flickr.com/89/249270409_664e6841fa.jpg)


Title: Re: Utah AG to Sue BCS
Post by: SUPERCOACH on April 23, 2011, 09:04:21 PM
I agree, but I honestly don't know what else could replace the BCS right now. All of the playoff scenarios I have seen don't look like they could work, although I don't buy the whole "miss too much class" or "lose money" arguments made by NCAA presidents. I'm just not sure what the best option is at this point.

Just go ahead and give the crystal football to who ever wins in the GA dome that first week in December.


Title: Re: Utah AG to Sue BCS
Post by: SUPERCOACH on April 23, 2011, 09:19:56 PM
All they really need to do is go back to the old bowl system that we used to have pre-BCS and make one small tweak.  Any conference that has a contract to send their best team to a certain bowl game (ex SEC #1 to Sugar) has the option to opt out of the game if that team happens to be #2 in the poll.  Whichever bowl game happens to end up with the number one team can then invite the #2 team to come play, and they will be able to get out of their conference's normal bowl game in order to accept the invitation.  I'm not saying I like this system, just pointing out that the BCS stuff they came up with was a complicated and apparently illegal solution to a simple problem of being able to play #1 vs. #2 in a bowl game.

For example, let's say Alabama ends the season as the #1 team.  As the #1 team they would go to their conferences top bowl, the Sugar Bowl.  Now let's say that a Pac 12 team like Oregon ends up #2 nationally in the poll.  In this case Oregon would not be required to go to the Rose Bowl and would have an out clause.  Then the Sugar Bowl could invite Oregon.  However if Oregon finished #1 and Alabama finished #2, then the game would be played at the Rose Bowl and Alabama would exercise their out clause.  The bowl would also need a similar out clause for their contract with the other conference.  In this case the Rose Bowl would be able to opt out of inviting a Big 10 team.

I'm not a lawyer by any means, but it sounds like all that was needed in the first place were a few well placed and co-ordinated out clauses in the existing conference/bowl contracts.

If the #2 team wants to decline the invitation, then they just play the normal bowl games and the #2 team would probably be punished in the final poll for not accepting the challenge.  So if #1 lost, then the next highest team to win their bowl game would jump #2 in the final poll.


Title: Re: Utah AG to Sue BCS
Post by: 2Stater on April 23, 2011, 09:46:19 PM
I like it SC. Call the BCS and tell 'em this this is the way it's gonna be.  #+


Title: Re: Utah AG to Sue BCS
Post by: cbbama99 on April 23, 2011, 10:05:53 PM
All they really need to do is go back to the old bowl system that we used to have pre-BCS and make one small tweak.  Any conference that has a contract to send their best team to a certain bowl game (ex SEC #1 to Sugar) has the option to opt out of the game if that team happens to be #2 in the poll.  Whichever bowl game happens to end up with the number one team can then invite the #2 team to come play, and they will be able to get out of their conference's normal bowl game in order to accept the invitation.  I'm not saying I like this system, just pointing out that the BCS stuff they came up with was a complicated and apparently illegal solution to a simple problem of being able to play #1 vs. #2 in a bowl game.

For example, let's say Alabama ends the season as the #1 team.  As the #1 team they would go to their conferences top bowl, the Sugar Bowl.  Now let's say that a Pac 12 team like Oregon ends up #2 nationally in the poll.  In this case Oregon would not be required to go to the Rose Bowl and would have an out clause.  Then the Sugar Bowl could invite Oregon.  However if Oregon finished #1 and Alabama finished #2, then the game would be played at the Rose Bowl and Alabama would exercise their out clause.  The bowl would also need a similar out clause for their contract with the other conference.  In this case the Rose Bowl would be able to opt out of inviting a Big 10 team.

I'm not a lawyer by any means, but it sounds like all that was needed in the first place were a few well placed and co-ordinated out clauses in the existing conference/bowl contracts.

If the #2 team wants to decline the invitation, then they just play the normal bowl games and the #2 team would probably be punished in the final poll for not accepting the challenge.  So if #1 lost, then the next highest team to win their bowl game would jump #2 in the final poll.

Sounds like a winner to me. I also think there are FAR too many bowl games, but that is a whole 'nother argument all together.


Title: Re: Utah AG to Sue BCS
Post by: ricky023 on April 24, 2011, 04:54:04 AM
Hey SC that is a great gmae plan. I vote for it. This is as you say the old system and the bowls still make all the money. RTR!


Title: Re: Utah AG to Sue BCS
Post by: CrimsonFever on April 24, 2011, 01:01:50 PM
Hey SC that is a great gmae plan. I vote for it. This is as you say the old system and the bowls still make all the money. RTR!

Ricky.  I said something real mean to you today and I am truly sorry for saying it.  You are a real preacher and I did not know that, so i am sorry.  Praise the Lord.


Title: Re: Utah AG to Sue BCS
Post by: CrimsonFever on April 24, 2011, 01:04:30 PM
Hey SC that is a great gmae plan. I vote for it. This is as you say the old system and the bowls still make all the money. RTR!

Ricky.  I said something real mean to you today and I am truly sorry for saying it.  You are a real preacher and I did not know that, so i am sorry.  Praise the Lord.
I hope my mom ups my allowance so I can get cable tv. This constant trolling is getting old.  I have a date with Antoine Dodson tomorrow.


Title: Re: Utah AG to Sue BCS
Post by: Chechem on April 24, 2011, 01:22:39 PM
Hey SC that is a great gmae plan. I vote for it. This is as you say the old system and the bowls still make all the money. RTR!

Ricky.  I said something real mean to you today and I am truly sorry for saying it.  You are a real preacher and I did not know that, so i am sorry.  Praise the Lord.
I hope my mom ups my allowance so I can get cable tv. This constant trolling is getting old.  I have a date with Antoine Dodson tomorrow.

You know, CF, you shouldn't drink when you post.


Title: Re: Utah AG to Sue BCS
Post by: ricky023 on April 24, 2011, 02:08:29 PM
Hey SC that is a great gmae plan. I vote for it. This is as you say the old system and the bowls still make all the money. RTR!

Ricky.  I said something real mean to you today and I am truly sorry for saying it.  You are a real preacher and I did not know that, so i am sorry.  Praise the Lord.

You are forgiven from me for anything. God Bless you CF and the family. May your day be a Blessing. RTR!