Big Ten, Pac-10 had no choice on Rose Bowl access

 

 The Big Ten announced on Monday at its preseason meetings that the five Coalition (non-BCS) conferences will finally have access to the Rose Bowl under the new BCS agreement which begins after the 2010 regular season.

 Simply put, the first time in the new deal the Rose Bowl loses one of its designated champions (Big Ten, Pac-10) to the BCS championship game, the Rose Bowl must invite a Coalition conference champion if one has qualified for a BCS at-large spot. If this rule had been in effect last season and USC had played in the BCS championship game, the Rose Bowl would have been required to invite 12-0 Utah, the Mountain West champion, which qualified for a BCS at-large berth by finishing No. 6 in the final standings.

(If you’re an SEC or ACC fan and wondering why you should care about this, here’s why. Should you get a second team in the BCS on a year that this rule is enforced, it means your team would be locked out of Pasadena. But that’s another discussion for another time.)

 This is a pretty big deal. A member of one of the five Coalition conferences (Conference USA, Mountain West, MAC, WAC, Sun Belt) has never played in the Rose Bowl, which has been a source of irritation among the other BCS Bowls (Sugar, Fiesta, Orange). Under the previous BCS agreements, the Rose had the right to pass on a Coalition team, which is why 9-3 Illinois took Ohio State’s place in Pasadena two years ago.

A couple of points on that announcement:

Not to be immodest, but we first reported this news on May 29. Here is the link:

http://blogs.ajc.com/barnhart-college-football/2009/05/29/sec-headed-to-a-big-payday-in-2010/

Secondly, understand that the Big Ten and Pac-10 are not granting this access to the Rose out of the goodness of their hearts. Those conferences were told in no uncertain terms that the exclusion of the Coalition conferences by the Rose had to end in the new BCS deal in which ESPN will pay $125 million per year to televise the games.

It was also a way for the BCS to be able to say that it is continuing to expand access to the games, which is something you probably should do when you’re routinely getting hauled before Congress and asked to justify your existence.

Now the folks at the Mountain West Conference, who continue to push for a merit-based eight team playoff, probably looked at this news as another way that the BCS throws them a few more crumbs from the banquet table and hopes they will be satisfied. They won’t be. The next five years of the BCS are going to be filled with a lot of tension and discussion about access and money.

If the six equity conferences (ACC, SEC, Big East, Big Ten, Big 12 Pac-10) in the BCS are smart, the next thing they will do is allow the Coalition conferences to get two teams in the mix if they both finish in the Top 10 of the final BCS Standings. But while that looks fair on paper, there will be some pushback from the big conferences and the bowls. Had that rule been in place last season, when Utah (12-0) finished No. 6 and Boise State (12-0) finished No. 9, one of the big boys, probably No. 10 Ohio State (10-2, went to the Fiesta to play Texas), would have gotten left out. That would not make the bowls or the TV guys, who are paying the bills, very happy.

Stay tuned.

 

 

77 comments Add your comment

saint simons

July 29th, 2009
8:46 am

((((( 45 42 ))))) hahahahahahahahaha

KR

July 29th, 2009
8:50 am

I’ve pretty much given up watching the bowl games other than the BCS Championship Game. If Auburn is in one, I’ll watch that. Otherwise, I only watch them if I don’t have anything better to do.

USC TROJANS ARE CHICKENS

July 29th, 2009
9:03 am

lOCKED OUT OF THE ROSE BOWL?????? The rose bowl had their chance at picking uga in 2007 but OPTED for freakinf Illinois……..That bowl and the pac 10 blows

Jeremy

July 29th, 2009
9:03 am

To Saint Simons:

Congratulations on your 9th win against Georgia since 1974.

9th

CharlotteGator

July 29th, 2009
9:06 am

KR,

Agreed. I can’t remember the last time I watched an Orange Bowl game in its entirety. I think I saw the end of the Paterno/Bowden version a few years ago, and then UF beat Maryland before that.

Even the Sugar Bowl is something I check out only if there’s an intriguing matchup. Last year’s Fiesta didn’t even move the needle that much. I was in and out of watching that game. The last BCS games I watched where UF wasn’t involved was the LSU/OSU champ. game and the LSU/Notre Dame massacre in the Sugar a few years ago.

Miles

July 29th, 2009
9:18 am

With the call for change to the current postseason that exists in college football, the traditional meaningful bowl games (Rose, Sugar, Fiesta, and Orange) are slowly being modified such that their metamorphosis will ultimately lead us to a playoff system. A playoff system is coming. It’s merely a matter of time. Not even your beloved antitrust attorneys, Mr. Barnhart, will be able to alter this evolutionary change.

Atlanta Gator

July 29th, 2009
9:18 am

Here’s the logic, folks: the Rose Bowl is not doing anyone any favors. It is protecting its backside, namely, its wallet. Someone at the Rose Bowl Committee has awakened to the fact that it would be better for all concerned to have a 12-0 Utah or a 12-0 Boise State in the Rose Bowl, rather than a 9-3 Illinois or a 9-3 Oregon. Better attendance, better television ratings, better revenue. Frankly, I also suspect ABC/ESPN had a lot to do with this. The networks are not paying hundreds of millions of dollars to watch a mismatch, that no fans don’t watch.

Keep in mind, this rule only applies in years when the Big Ten and/or Pac-10 champion is selected for the BCS title game, and it really only puts the Rose Bowl in the same position as the Fiesta, Orange and Sugar bowls in terms of taking the highest-ranked available team. Picking Ron Zook’s Big-Ten-second-place Illinois team, when Ohio State was playing in the BCS title game in 2007, was a mistake, and I’m sure that ABC/ESPN reminded the Rose Bowl Committee of that in a less-than-gentle manner.

The day is soon coming when the Rose Bowl, Pac-10 and Big Ten are going to have to support a plus-one or four-team play-off because it will be in their financial best interest. Just another brick in the wall, my friends.

Coach Cool

July 29th, 2009
9:21 am

Mr. SEC man:

Please add the Big XII to the list of “six equity conferences (ACC, SEC, Big East, Big Ten, Pac-10) in the BCS”

Thanks for your support.

Ho, hum, Tony...

July 29th, 2009
9:26 am

…I really don’t think the SEC faithful really care about the Rose Bowl or this topic. And to think that you wrote about this on May 29 (not that you are immodest – how can you be when you try to compare yourself to Furman Bisher).

Now go back to Union Point (between Siloam and White Plains – not to be confused with Jimmy Carter’s Plains, GA) and let the REAL writers handle the blogging and other journalistic pursuits.

JaxDawg

July 29th, 2009
9:26 am

KR, CharlotteGator, definitely agree. The biggest problem is after the championship game is decided, then politics/lack of vision take over in deciding the remaining matchups.
In the 07 season, the Rose could have had USC vs UGA or USC could have been allowed to come to the Sugar, and still taken Illinois and had them play Hawaii. Instead of two blowouts that were only entertaining if you were a UGA or USC fan, they could have had two intriguing matchups and most likely two very good games. The whole thing is a joke.

rocksteadyfreddie

July 29th, 2009
9:29 am

rocksteadyfreddie has his fingers crossed that USC gets into the BCS CG so he can watch Utah or TCU beat a big 10 team.

P

July 29th, 2009
9:36 am

Jeremy,

Saint Simons yanked your chain and you barked! Just what he wanted to have happen.

Ron Mexico

July 29th, 2009
9:57 am

Atlanta Gator, while the matchup may not be as attractive, 9-3 Illinois bring a much larger fanbase to the table than Utah or Boise St. Combined. The same with the rest of the Big 10 (sans Northwestern, Indiana, and Purdue) and Pac 10 (Stanford). Selecting Illinois for the Rose bowl that year was no more of a mistake than the Sugar taking a 12-0 Hawaii team. And I guarantee they’d do it again given the chance.

The bigger concern is that this clause effectively locks out any of the ‘equity’ conferences (is that what we’re calling them now?) from playing in the Rose Bowl until after this clause has been completed.

Dave R

July 29th, 2009
10:02 am

USC TROJANS ARE CHICKENS – No, the Rose Bowl did not have the option of taking Georgia in 2007. Since LSU was selected for the BCS title game, the Sugar Bowl had right of first refusal for another SEC team. The Rose Bowl could have selected a higher-ranked team than Illinois (Missouri, Kansas, and West Virginia were available), but they couldn’t have taken an SEC team unless the Sugar Bowl decided to let them.

Incidentally, Tony’s wrong about this, too. The reason why the Rose Bowl never has taken a non-BCS team is that the current BCS selection order rules mean that it doesn’t ever have to. The first choice of a BCS at-large team goes to the bowl that loses BCS #1 (if there is one), and the second choice goes to the bowl that losses BCS #2. Since the Rose Bowl, unlike the other BCS bowls, has two ‘anchor’ teams (in the Big Ten and Pac 10 champs), it never has to pick later than second when selecting an at-large team. This new rule is effectively forcing the Rose Bowl to take a non-BCS team earlier in the selection order than any other BCS bowl would. This is yet another example of the BCS acting against the best interests of the Big Ten and Pac 10, and the Rose Bowl acting against the best interests of the Pac 10, and I don’t know how much longer they’ll put up with it.

Moreover, it’s crazy; just because the best non-BCS teams over the last few years have been MWC and WAC teams doesn’t mean it will be that way in the future (the MWC will very likely stay the strongest non-BCS conference, but individual teams are a lot harder to predict). And if some MAC or CUSA (or even Sun Belt!) team gets into the BCS, it’s a lot more logical for that team to go to the Sugar or Orange Bowl, rather than going all the way across the country for the Rose or Fiesta.

Dave R

July 29th, 2009
10:11 am

Ron Mexico – The Rose Bowl’s selection of 2007 Illinois was a mistake. There were better teams with equivalent fan bases available, in Missouri, Kansas, and West Virginia (plus that probably would have sent Arizona State to the Fiesta Bowl, which would have helped alleviate the Pac 10’s long-standing complaint that it doesn’t get two teams in the BCS even when it deserves to). Passing on Hawaii was not a mistake; anyone who had actually watched Hawaii (or even looked at the box scores of their games) knew they’d be stomped on the first time they played a good team, and that they wouldn’t bring a lot of fans. That’s why they ended up in the Sugar Bowl; they had to go to a BCS bowl by BCS rules, and the Sugar Bowl picked last. The most logical BCS destination for a MWC or WAC champ is almost always the Fiesta Bowl, but I don’t see any rules requiring this.

Marble Rye

July 29th, 2009
10:12 am

So what if Ohio State would have been left out of last year’s Fiesta? They didn’t win their conference. IMO the fairest system that could possibly be implemented would be 1) playoff, that is 2) exclusive to all 11 conference champions plus the top independent. As long as pollsters and voters are deciding who’s in or out, there will never be a fair system.

Tony Barnhart

July 29th, 2009
10:22 am

Thanks for the catch, coach Cool. I fixed it.

And to the group: Always remember that when you’re talking about the best bowl matchups, you have to ask yourself: The best bowl matchups for whom?

If it’s the best bowl matchups for the people watching on television, then you should always have the two highest ranked teams. But the bowls are also concerned about attendance and television ratings because they have to write the checks. What is in the fans’ best interest is not always what is in the bowl’s best interest as a business. I’m not saying that’s right, but I am saying that’s the way it is.

TB

Colorado Dawg

July 29th, 2009
10:25 am

Ho, hum, Tony….. – Get a life. Tony B. is only trying to give us some more information about the BCS because it will affect a SEC team in the future. If you don’t want to read about it, go read the comics – probably more your style.

Atlanta Gator

July 29th, 2009
10:26 am

Ron Mexico—-Sorry, but I disagree.

It’s been so long time since Illinois was a serious national title contender (1984, I believe, when the Illinois were utterly crushed by a mediocre 6-4-1 UCLA team), that they have virtually no following outside of the State of Illinois. It’s no longer about merely filling the stadium; the real money is in the television ratings, and an 11-1 USC vs. a 12-0 Utah/Boise State is going to get better television ratings, especially on the West Coast, than an 11-1 USC in another blow-out against a Big-Ten-second-place Illinois. Probably a better game, too. Sorry.

Furthermore, the Rose Bowl’s traditional Big Ten vs. Pac-10 match-up really loses a lot of its luster when one of the teams is a second-place team, usually a 2nd-place Big 10 team that loses in a rout.

Kid Ray

July 29th, 2009
10:29 am

This does, in fact, stink. Jan 1 used to be great for CFB fans. Now they are taking the last great thing away from us. I love the Rose Bowl at 4 pm on New Years Day. a Great way to enjoy the Holiday. Now who wants to watch BYU or Boise?? Not me.

Go Rutgers!

jbub28

July 29th, 2009
10:33 am

to respond to usc trojans are chickens well if you look at the bowl ties the sec champion is locked into the sugar bowl unless they are 1 or 2 which i believe they were neither in 2007 that is why georgia went to the sugar bowl and not the rose bowl do your research

CharlotteGator

July 29th, 2009
10:36 am

jbub28,

Prepare for the onslaught :)

Archie

July 29th, 2009
10:50 am

They need to fix the disparity in the BCS payouts. Utah only got $9 million for their Sugar Bowl win while the other BCS bowl winners got $18 million. That ain’t right. They should get the same payout the other winners get. The non-BCS conferences have grown in stature enough over the last few years that we’re pretty much guaranteed to get one team from the MWC or WAC in the BCS. That’s just as many as the ACC or Big East are going to get, the Pac 10 ain’t getting two teams in. So if they fix the money from the payouts, the non-BCS teams have just as big a slice of the pie as anybody else.

Loyal Homer

July 29th, 2009
10:52 am

Speaking of payouts, do you guys think athletes should be paid a supplement of some form? I certainly do! Read my blog and my opinions on it. Mr. Barnhardt, we’d love to have your thoughts!

http://www.thesportsdebates.com

Island Dawg

July 29th, 2009
10:52 am

Tony, can you please block Saint Simons from your blogs? Thanks. He is worse than Timmy on South Park. Know he has that stupid quip ready to paste at any hour. Boring…

Island Dawg

July 29th, 2009
10:56 am

Homer, they are paid by way of tuition, room and board, and exposure for possibly landing an NFL contract. Also I am not naive enough to think there are not plenty of booster kickbacks as well. I remember R. Edwards cruising Lumpkin in a new Vette, pretty obvious his mom didn’t pay for that

Anonymous

July 29th, 2009
11:17 am

Island Dawg,

I believe that a review of the IP addresses associated with the bloggers “m”, “saint simons”, and a number of the other obnoxious, over-the-top anti-UGA and anti-SEC blog handles will reveal that they are all the same person. I say block every damn account associated with that particular IP address.

I don’t have a problem with anyone strongly expressing pro-GT, anti-UGA, pro-ACC, anti-SEC opinions whatsoever (I’m not a Dawg), but this Little “m” character and his various aliases are clearly intended to be disruptive of the other folks who participate in Tony’s blog, even to the point where the Blog Referee has has posts by him/them deleted in the recent past.

BTW, everyone is aware that every time you make an AJC blog entry the WordPress blog software records the IP address associated with your computer, right? You may not be as anonymous as you think you are. . . .

2BT

July 29th, 2009
11:22 am

Tony Blowhard, can you please ask Damon Evans if the football that Paul Johnson shoved up Mark Richt’s ARSE has been surgically removed yet? Thanks.

G8R GRAD

July 29th, 2009
11:40 am

Atlanta Gator:

First your story of issues in Jacksonville and now your reference to Pink Floyd?

I now have a new found respect for your past!

G8R GRAD

July 29th, 2009
11:43 am

Anonymous:

Hence the pointlessness of your name?

G8R GRAD

July 29th, 2009
11:56 am

On today’s topic:

The Rose has, of recent, become the “Who Cares Bowl” of post-season college football.

But until the Pac 10 installs a conference championship game and the Big 10 fields a competitive team (and, therefore, both continue to fail to get into the BCSCG), their matchups will continue to disappoint.

Anonymous

July 29th, 2009
12:06 pm

G8R GRAD,

I’m Batman.

Mike

July 29th, 2009
12:07 pm

Until the Rose Bowl gets off their crappy Pac10 vs Big Ten deal and let others teams have the opportunity to play in the game (other than when one gets invited to NC game) it should not be considered a BCS Game. Give that title to the Chic Fil a Bowl. It is a class bowl. So tired of the “rose Bowl” being so full of themselves- do what the other bowls do- pick a team to be locked in and at large for other spot

Loyal Homer

July 29th, 2009
12:19 pm

Island, yes they do get all of those things but they really have no time for a job.

Anonymous, I feel your frustration and know what you are talking about. But I promise that is not me! I just started a blog and am trying to get our name out there. I live in Georgia so I am pro-SEC.

G8R GRAD

July 29th, 2009
12:23 pm

Anonymous:

Mr. Wayne, don’t you have anything better to do than blog using Alfred’s computer.

sact

July 29th, 2009
12:48 pm

it is past time for the big boy conferences(sec, big 12, pac 10, big 10 ) to walk from the ncaa….they keep their money, dont have to share with the leech programs they now must support, can have their own playoff , and provide a level of super college competition. how long would ncaa stay alive then? we just dont need them ! its going to happen , and sooner is better than later…….will be forced to do it financially

Tom

July 29th, 2009
12:53 pm

Tony said “But the bowls are also concerned about attendance and television ratings because they have to write the checks”

The ratings for uga hawaii and usc illinois had to be dismal. Being a ga fan, I turned the game off in the 2nd qtr and went to bed and so did other people I talked to. It was like a 5a high school team playing a 1a. Same for usc illiois. So they surely weren’t thinking of tv ratings when they put together these games. They rolled the dice. They could have had a huge marquee game with uga usc and a bummer or do what they did and they got 2 bummers. They need to allow teams to opt out of a bowl they are tied to if it makes for a better game. This is what is ruining college football.

jumbeauxtiger

July 29th, 2009
12:57 pm

I agree with you Atlanta Gator that ABC/ESPN was behind the change with the Rose Bowl. The Rose Bowl has steadfastly been opposed to any change to their ‘traditional’ matchup. There was no reason for Illinois to be there in the 2008 game.

CharlotteGator, surely you watched at least the last part of the 2008 Fiesta with Boise State and OU. Many, including me, consider that game a classic.

As a Pink Floyd fan, the reference to them in an earlier post reminded me that LSU has played ‘Run Like Hell’ periodically at its games. Such a cool song :)

Geaux Tigers
Go SEC

god and greyhound

July 29th, 2009
1:01 pm

Tony,

look for the acc to expand soon and increase its domination over the sec. acc will announce the inclusion of Furman, William & Mary, Agnes Scott and Transylvania.

Agnes Scott will be a natural rival for the jackets and provide much better conference competition than duke, rutgers and UConn.

athensdawg

July 29th, 2009
1:08 pm

the BCS is doing the same thing as the democrats right now….screwing up a great opportunity in favor of “tradition” and “politics.” let them continue on their path, and in the end, we’ll see who is left standing. They can only squeeze the golden goose (taxpayers, tv revenue, fans, etc.) so much before they kill it…..and kill it they will….might just be the best thing to happen to everybody.

Mike

July 29th, 2009
1:10 pm

Rose Bowl and USC one of the same…..SNOBS! The Rose Bowl presented by CitiBank…..makes you wanna throw up

Jeff

July 29th, 2009
1:15 pm

Not so fast God and Greyhound. Before we (Tech) argee to play Agnes every year- your going to have to guarentee that we can play at a neutral site like other big rivals do (UGA-UF, TX-OK) and that it will be televised on Raycom as a primetime 10pm game.

Jeff

July 29th, 2009
1:21 pm

Geez….Just heard that Agnes Scott is backing out of joining the ACC if they have to be rivals with the Jackettes- They prefer to play a team that can at least sell out a few games on a regular basis

TonyBFan

July 29th, 2009
1:40 pm

Am I the only one who wishes the 5 non-coalition teams would start a playoff for a Div I-A nat. champ? Maybe then some of these other schools would have to follow suit. I would much rather have seen Utah vs Boise St for a national championship than Utah vs Bama for a bowl title that means nothing to me. Maybe they could even incorporate a championship with the FCS until the big boys wake up. I’m not saying that Richmond could have hung with Utah but it makes for good water cooler talk. What do you think?

Another Dawg

July 29th, 2009
2:16 pm

Mike: Give the Rose Bowl’s BCS spot to the Chick Fil A bowl? ACC 2 losing to SEC 4 is suddenly BCS-worthy?

The Cotton Bowl is the obvious choice if another bowl needs to be elevated.

Tide Rising

July 29th, 2009
2:21 pm

I think they are talking about making the Cotton bowl the 5th bcs bowl. It would be great because the game will be played in the new 1 billion dollar cowboys stadium. Also, Dallas in recent years has had fantastically freakish warm weather during the Cotton Bowl. The weather was decent last year in Ole Miss game and in 2005 when Bama went our fans were wearing t shirts because it was in the mid 70s in January in Bid D. Some of the young folks on here may not realize that the Cotton used to be one of the 4 major bowls until the Fiesta rose in prominence, the old swc dissolved, and the cotton bowl stadium gradually deteriorated. It would be a perfect fit for a 5th bcs bowl.

ItsMe

July 29th, 2009
2:54 pm

The Rose Bowl gets the best TV ratings outside of the Championship game every year. That is why they love the PAC10-BIG10 matchup. It delivers consistanly good ratings year after year. There is no way ESPN/ABC want to mess with the PAC10-BIG10 matchup. This game is there cash cow. The USC-Illinois game you all like to make fun of was the second highest BCS rated game that year after the title game.

2007-08 BCS Games
Rose: USC-ILL 11.11
Fiesta: W. Virgina-Oklahoma 7.70
Orange: Kansas-Va Tech 7.40
Sugar: Georgia-Hawaii 7.00

Looks like the BIG10 fans had no problem watching there game, where the heck are all the so called football fanatic SEC fans?? Georgia game had terrible ratings.

The fact is the Non-AQ schools (Utah, Boise, Hawaii) have delivered terrible tv ratings. The Orange, Sugar, & Fiesta are ticked off they get stuck with these teams while the Rose doesn’t so they worked in into the new schedule that the Rose has to be open to them.

People love to talk about the underdogs but the TV ratings show nobody wants to watch them.

http://www.bcsfootball.org/bcsfb/tvratings

Steve

July 29th, 2009
3:13 pm

ITS ME….Does the big ten also watch the earlier games…where the SEC kicks their BUTT???????

Steve

July 29th, 2009
3:15 pm

Hey It’s Me Maybe the big 10 fans watch the rose bowl because its the one game they actually MIGHT win….the other bowls that feature big 10 teams are where the SEC is kicking their butts- unless OSU is playing in the NC against the SEC, then the Big 10 fans are treated to a blowout

Mike

July 29th, 2009
3:18 pm

Another Dawg- do agree, cotton bowl is another choice. I mentioned the Chic-fil-a because it is a class bowl along the lines of BCS bowls- payout etc etc. Of course, we would not have the ACC/SEC match-ups like now. I was talking just the bowl

Saint Simons

July 29th, 2009
3:23 pm

45-42 (( I’m the biggest tool ever )). Oh yeah, if you’re reading this mom, will you make me another grilled cheese and leave it at the top of the basement stairs. Thanks mommy.

CharlotteGator

July 29th, 2009
3:35 pm

jumbeaux,

You’re correct. I missed adding that one to my list. Had that game on in the background and started paying attention when my wife started yelling about all the great plays. Then took advantage of the DVR. :)

jumbeauxtiger

July 29th, 2009
3:38 pm

Tide Rising, I remember well as a kid that the Cotton was one of the big 4 bowls on New Years. I would love to see Dallas pick up a 5th BCS bowl.

I do recall vividily that the only time I have tailgated in the morning and it was dark was when we played Texas in the 2002 Cotton Bowl. The game started started at 10am :)

Geaux Tigers
Go SEC

saint simons lover

July 29th, 2009
3:41 pm

saint simons can you bring the extender with you next time?

Adam

July 29th, 2009
3:42 pm

How’s this…

Why not add 2 more BCS Bowl games (replace others if necessary) and then let the non-coalition teams determine who gets which automatic bid. Having four BCS bowl games will probably be the way that the 8 team playoff enters the BCS picture. Add the other 2 games and give the non-coalition teams access to them while preserving the tradition of the Rose, Sugar, Fiesta, and Orange Bowls. My .02

Smarty

July 29th, 2009
3:43 pm

I am amazed at the immaturity of St. Simons, Saint Simons, and all that respond to them. I guess when you don’t have a way to keep 8 year-olds off the blogs, this is what you get.

Paul Lee

July 29th, 2009
3:54 pm

Tony, congrats on the TV Show. Will you still be doing the Thursday radio show with Wes ? Paul

Tide Rising

July 29th, 2009
4:22 pm

Jumbeauxtiger,

Yeah. Few people remember that the Cotton used to be one of the big 4. If and when they add a 5th bcs game they are saying it will be most likely dallas and I think we in Atlanta are a distant 2nd.

Tide Rising

July 29th, 2009
4:32 pm

Smarty,

I think he’s more like 9 1/2 years old. Most of us have just learned to ignore him though some continue to get baited by him. Same with m. I think people sometimes respond to m just because they find it that difficult to believe someone can be that stupid. Personally I just chuckle when I see Simon’s usual post. It makes me wonder just how much mileage one can get out of a 3 point win.

GWJ

July 29th, 2009
5:27 pm

The entire BCS system is a JOKE!

UGASlobberknocker

July 29th, 2009
7:05 pm

They should make the sixth spot now held by the Big East available to the most deserving champion of the non BCS conferences (adding Big East to that list). MWC is better than the Big East. The ACC is not much better than either the MWC or Big East, but I am realistic enough to know they wont get thrown out.

Also, IMO, ONLY conference champions should be eligible for the championship game..I dont care what the circumstances are. If you cant win your conference , you shouldnt play for #1. I felt that way in 07 when we thought the Dawgs had a shot, although I kept it to myself for obvious reasons.

UGASlobberknocker

July 29th, 2009
7:07 pm

I was in St Simons this week..I kept looking for a billboard that said
45-42hahahahahahahahahahaha..but , no.

I think St Simons really lives in a trailer park in Hahira. The closest he comes to the beach is dumping some river sand besides his above ground pool.

UGASlobberknocker

July 29th, 2009
7:14 pm

Congratulations, Tony, on your new TV show. Finally, something good to watch on a weeknight!!!

UGASlobberknocker

July 29th, 2009
7:21 pm

Finally, a photo of blogger St Simons. click the link

http://mail.live.com/default.aspx?wa=wsignin1.0

lamar

July 29th, 2009
9:35 pm

SAINT SIMON YOU ARE A IDIOT! GT FINALLY BEATS GA IN OVER 8 YEARS & BECAUSE IT NEVER HAPPENS YOU ARE TRYING TO GO OVERBOARD WITH IT! THEN AGAIN GT NEVER HAS BEAT GA SO 20 YEARS OF CHEERING HAS COME TO A HEAD HUH?? ENJOT IT BECAUSE IT WILL BE ANOTHER 20 YEARS! YOU ARE NOT EVEN A FLY ON THE WALL WHEN IT COMES TO FOOTBALL! YOU WAS EVEN SO GLAD YOUR DUMB TEAM MADE A RING WITH THE SCORE! IF GA DID THIS THEY WOULD HAVE RUN OUT OF FINGERS TO WEAR THEM BECAUSE WE HAVE BEAT YOU SO MANY YEARS! ENJOY IT , IT WANT HAPPEN AGAIN IDIOT! GO DAWGS!

JSS

July 30th, 2009
12:01 am

I can’t stop laughing USC is chicken… Hilarious… The same USC program that came to Auburn Alabama and ran the ball down the throat of a SEC elite program… The same USC program that waylaid a ARKANSAS team in their own stadium with the so-called Wildhog that paralyzed the Bengal Tigers… The same So. Cal program that has flown cross country to face any comer? You didn’t want any part of that…

Once again, Barnhardt, I hope you’re more entertaining now then you are on CBS… YAWN!!!

david

July 30th, 2009
12:28 am

Boise St or Utah would fill up Pasadena and spend millions more then Zook’s Il. team – or any 2nd place big 10 (11) team any day– if you think for a minute they wouldnt youre delusional.

david

July 30th, 2009
12:29 am

JSS–nice showing in Corvalis YAWN

Pago Flyer

July 30th, 2009
1:31 am

We watch all Bowl Games…this is college football?

JSS

July 30th, 2009
8:15 am

At least they didn’t roll over like a scolded dog on their own field when they got punched in the mouth… Has that same Bama team that got spanked by a so-called fluke (Utah) stopped running up the score in Athens yet? I won’t bring up what those Gators keep doing to ya’! What’s that record over the last 20 years again?

By the way, So. Cal went home and away with Utah, home and away with the War Eagle, and UVA, OSU… And what is aggregrate point difference in their loses? 4 points!!! At least they lose on the field, and with the exception of the Stanford loss, they lost to teams that just played better…

Stop living through 17 to 21 year old boys for kicks…

[...] Tony Barnhart gives us a little more detailed look on why this came to pass. We don’t like this one bit, because it could potentially lock out a more deserving team. Scenario, USC is off to play in the BCSCG against a SEC school and Cal is 3 in the BCS standings and Utah is 4. Utah is heading to the Granddaddy. And speaking of Mr. College Football, he’ll be coming to televisions this fall on the CBS College Sports Network. [...]

Dave R

July 30th, 2009
10:02 am

Where do the delusional people who think that the MWC is anywhere near as good as the Big East come from? Do they just not know how bad the bottom half of the conference is? There are only three teams in the MWC last year that would have beat any Big East teams other than Louisville and my Orange more than one time in three on a neutral field. Only five would even manage two out of three against SU or Louisville (SDSU, Wyoming, UNLV, and New Mexico would not). And that was the best year for the MWC ever, and the worst year for the Big East since 2004.

The MWC is far and away the strongest non-BCS league. But better than the Big East? That’s nonsense.

uuugh.

July 30th, 2009
12:32 pm

DaveR. So the BCS is acting out against the Rose Bowl, Pac 10, and Big 10 huh? I guess the tail should wag the dog then.

The Pac10, Big 10, and Rose Bowl have been the road blocks to a playoff system from the get go. It is those substandard conferences with big $ that think their teams should have equal access without having to play a conference championship game. That seems fair. These 2 bad conferences and the has been bowl game are holding up any progress college football could make. I can really see why you support them.

Here’s hoping we get a 1 loss USC and a terrible 1 loss Ohio State team in another boring BCS match up.

At least Fox doesn’t get the games any more…so there is something positve.

Go away Dave R.

RustBelt

July 30th, 2009
6:04 pm

I can’t believe all you so called college football fans bringing up potential tv ratings as a reason a team should or should not make a BCS bowl. Lets not forget we are talking about tax payer funded institutions (except ND and few others) with non paid student athletes playing amateur football. Who gives a rip about advertising dollars? What happened to may the best man/team win, or in this case even get a chance to play? I for one don’t want to see the same teams playing in the same bowls regardless of record. Why are there bowls involved in the first place? Between college programs, the NCAA, and big TV money, we decided to add another middleman in form of bowls. These bowls take some of the financial pie and care about nothing but making money for themselves.
Playoffs for godsake. Conference champs get in automatically, at large bids chosen by sportswriters, first round played at home by the higher ranked team. Why is this so gosh darn complicated?

SuperB

August 2nd, 2009
12:11 pm

Enough is enough! The coalition conferences do not deserve to get the BCS bowls. Put any of the SEC’s second or third-place teams in those leagues and the SEC teams would go 12-0. Despite Bama’s meltdown, the record is clear– the coalition teams have no business playing with the big boys on New Year’s Day. The Conference USA camp in the Rose Bowl?

Djawjuh

August 2nd, 2009
6:50 pm

Two thoughts. One, Tony is a Georgia homer and is in bed with Richt. Richt will need all the help he can get after the upcoming season, Tony Blowhard notwithstanding. And I am a Georgia fan and have been all my life and will be after my life. Richt is a middle tier coach and can’t compete with Miles, Saban an especially Meyer, all of whom have one a National Championship in half the time that Richt has been at Georgia. And we ain’t gotta shot at it again this year either. Thus the explanation that you can be a great coach and not win a NC. Absurd.

Would Bear Bryant be such a heralded coach had he not won six national championships? Come on now.

Second, I find the sobriquet “Mr. College Football” to be grossly inaccurate. What are his credentials for such? None except blogs in the AJC many of which are off the mark such as this one.

One day the AJC should require Tony to respond to the comments on this page.

gi diet recipes free

March 24th, 2010
6:25 pm

Lovely Support,continue incident eye living let least reflect along along expect easily mental finger award battle survey concentration cell detail joint round circle star attract grant examination grant objective responsible unit easily ignore be variation corner appear fit huge group appearance television household convention wing present rural reading goal respond bright regulation than function discussion shoot man policy turn up seriously soil measure record existence definition government office actual name recognition myself add clothes army step public gas company capital media total every complex itself no-one back health