Bcs Keeps Tinkering

[milohimself]

That statement wasn't directed particularly at you, just at all the people on here who defended Auburn's would-be spot in the Orange Bowl but berated Cal for complaining about getting screwed.

And yes, USC deserved a spot ahead of both of them. They were defending national champions and undefeated.

 

[allvol]

Originally posted by MyBloodRunnethOrange+Apr 30, 2005 9:13 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (MyBloodRunnethOrange @ Apr 30, 2005 9:13 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-allvol@Apr 29, 2005 3:48 PM
Don&#39;t get people too excited.   :blink:  "Plus 1" sounds like an extra game between bowl participants &#39;after&#39; the bowls, when in fact it is just a 5th BCS bowl game played at one of the 4 BCS bowl sites.  Essentially, instead of 8 BCS teams, there will be 10.  All but #1 and #2 will play in the Fiesta, Orange, Rose, and Sugar.  Then, the #1 and #2 teams will play in the NC game on a rotating basis between the 4 bowls.  Essentially, in January 2007, the Fiesta Bowl will host 2 BCS bowl games.

So they can get in two more at large teams I assume. No doubt it&#39;s in response to all the crying that Cal did about not making a BCS game, not to mention all the crying that ESPN did on their behalf. Talk about a team who needs to shut up and get over it. Texas Tech showed us why Texas deserved to go instead of Cal. Besides, Texas is a top ten team year after year (ouch, did I actually say that?). What is Cal? A one year wonder [/quote]
Its actually in response to all the non-bcs conferences complaints about being left out of all the money.

 

[MyBloodRunnethOrange]

Originally posted by allvol@May 2, 2005 12:54 PM
Its actually in response to all the non-bcs conferences complaints about being left out of all the money.

That makes sense, but I doubt that the non BCS teams will get very much more consideration than they&#39;ve been getting unless they have a season like Utah did last year.