Any chance Sparty is picked over Ohio State for the Sugar Bowl?

• dtdtim

  I say there is about a 10% chance (the Sugar Bowl would be stupid to do so), but I have the pleasure of being surrounded by Michigan State fans who legitimately think the odds are in their favor because they beat Wisconsin and Ohio State lost to Wisconsin. They seem to forget a little 37-6 pasting they took at 7-5 Iowa.
  
  They also seem to forget that Ohio State Fanbase>Michigan State fanbase. And by ">", I mean more $.
  
  What say Ohio Chatter?
• karen lotz

  

  0.3% chance.
• karen lotz

  

  And that might be a little high.
• Manhattan Buckeye

  Its too bad that the BCS has a 2-team per conference rule, but MSU will get the short end of the stick. But if they play Bama in the Citrus that is a nice stage for them.
• dtdtim

  I agree that the 2-team per conference rule is awful and needs to be altered. I feel bad for Sparty fans as I know the OSU fanbase would riot if we were left out of a BCS game at 11-1 (Thankfully, I don't think that would ever happen because of our name).
• darbypitcher22

  

  OSU= more $$$$$$ than Sparty... its that simple
• slingshot4ever

  No
  
  OSU travels better and is ranked higher.
• Cleveland Buck

  

  There would be a better chance if the Sugar Bowl didn't get stuck with Hawaii, Utah, and Cincinnati the last 3 years. They want big money and big ratings this time.
• Manhattan Buckeye

  Ark-OSU should bring the fans....and the ratings. Strange that OSU might get a bigger spotlight NOT being in the Rose against TCU. This is probably the second best bowl game. Good for New Orleans!
• Spread All Day

  

  Ohio State is also the better team. Lets not forget that.
• Tobias Fünke

  

  Spread All Day;587992 wrote:Ohio State is also the better team. Lets not forget that.

  With all due respect, how the fuck would you know?
• dtdtim

  Tobias Fünke;588088 wrote:With all due respect, how the fuck would you know?

  
  Agreed. There's no telling who is better. I would put my money on Ohio State but that is irrelevant. Both have relatively the same resume when it comes to actual football.
  
  Ohio State holds the off-the-field advantage, though, in a big way. That's all that matters when it comes to selecting the at-large BCS participants. Michigan State fans just don't seem to understand this. There are few, if any, teams in the country that would be picked over Ohio State given this same scenario. Michigan State is not one of those teams.
  
  Congrats on an outstanding season, enjoy the Capital One Bowl.
• dwccrew

  

  0% chance.
  
  #1) As others have mentioned, Ohio State will bring WAY more money than MSU would. With the BCS, it's all about the money.
  
  #2) Ohio State is ranked higher than MSU and although MSU beat Wisconsin (the team that beat OSU), OSU beat Iowa (the team that manhandled MSU).
  
  Sorry MSU fans, you guys have no shot at a BCS bowl this season.
• hoops23

  

  No chance.
  
  But this proves why he BCS is stupid as fuck.
  
  Playoffs are severely needed.
  
  If the "FCS" division can do it, why not the big boys? Seriously... College Football, well, the FBS, is the only major sport in America w/o deciding a champion by playoff.
• lhslep134

  

  hoops23;588127 wrote:
  But this proves why he BCS is stupid as fuck.

  
  
  Without the BCS, Oregon is playing Wisconsin in the Rose Bowl and Auburn is playing TCU in the Sugar Bowl, and there's no way of knowing who's #1, and you'd probably end up with a split title.
  
  So don't say the BCS is stupid as fuck, it's still an upgrade.
• vball10set

  dwccrew;588110 wrote:0% chance.
  
  #1) As others have mentioned, Ohio State will bring WAY more money than MSU would. With the BCS, it's all about the money.
  
  #2) Ohio State is ranked higher than MSU and although MSU beat Wisconsin (the team that beat OSU), OSU beat Iowa (the team that manhandled MSU).
  
  Sorry MSU fans, you guys have no shot at a BCS bowl this season.

  this...and for the record, I'm in favor of a "plus one" format in lieu of a playoff anyday---the OC wouldn't be anywhere near as much fun during the season without the bantering we have now--jmo
• slingshot4ever

  hoops23;588127 wrote:No chance.
  
  But this proves why he BCS is stupid as fuck.
  
  Playoffs are severely needed.
  
  If the "FCS" division can do it, why not the big boys? Seriously... College Football, well, the FBS, is the only major sport in America w/o deciding a champion by playoff.

  The only goal of the BCS is to put #1 vs #2. The BCS is not designed to give a shit about the at large teams that are selected by other bowls. So no, the BCS isn't "stupid as fuck." It worked out exactly how it should have this year as we will get to see Auburn vs Oregon, which we wouldn't have seen with typical bowl affiliations.
• Mulva

  

  Being an upgrade over the previous system doesn't preclude it from still being stupid as fuck.
• darbypitcher22

  

  slingshot4ever;588172 wrote:The only goal of the BCS is to put #1 vs #2. The BCS is not designed to give a shit about the at large teams that are selected by other bowls. So no, the BCS isn't "stupid as fuck." It worked out exactly how it should have this year as we will get to see Auburn vs Oregon, which we wouldn't have seen with typical bowl affiliations.

  
  It worked out this year, but how many years over its existence has it not worked the way it was supposed to because of multiple 1 loss teams?
• slingshot4ever

  Please note my exact words of "this year".....
• gerb131

  

  Manhattan Buckeye;587940 wrote:Its too bad that the BCS has a 2-team per conference rule, but MSU will get the short end of the stick. But if they play Bama in the Citrus that is a nice stage for them.

  
  I agree with this. Gotta crawl before you can walk.
• lhslep134

  

  Mulva;588206 wrote:Being an upgrade over the previous system doesn't preclude it from still being stupid as fuck.

  
  Valid point.
  
  But the fact that it is an upgrade SHOULD preclude it from being stupid as fuck in terms of crowning a champion. Guess a lotta people on here don't remember the days of split titles (I certainly don't, I was too young, but it sounds miserable).
• slingshot4ever

  Just ask Michigan and Nebraska from 1997. That is the reason we have the BCS today.
• wildcats20

  

  lhslep134;588135 wrote:Without the BCS, Oregon is playing Wisconsin in the Rose Bowl and Auburn is playing TCU in the Sugar Bowl, and there's no way of knowing who's #1, and you'd probably end up with a split title.
  
  So don't say the BCS is stupid as fuck, it's still an upgrade.

  
  No. Without the BCS, TCU is playing in some Shithole Bowl.
• wes_mantooth

  

  wildcats20;588267 wrote:No. Without the BCS, TCU is playing in some Shithole Bowl.

  
  It is actually the Cottonelle Shithole Bowl