Big Ten Bowl Thread

• Automatik

  

  KnightRyder;1004210 wrote:nothin like watching two .500 teams battling it out

  What bowl will your team be playing in?
• lhslep134

  

  Automatik;1004323 wrote:What bowl will your team be playing in?

  His irrelevant 'Noles are playing Notre Dame. Remember when FSU was ranked #5 to start the year? Haha
• Scarlet_Buckeye

  

  WebFire;1003928 wrote:So you agree that Alabama and Arkansas should not be in BCS games?

  Not sure how you came to that conclusion...
• lhslep134

  

  Tiger2003;1003996 wrote:What the hell do we have rankings for?.

  To pair the top 2 teams, and to give non-AQ's a chance at a marquee bowl they otherwise would have had a 0% chance of getting into before the BCS system.
  
  Those aren't the only reasons, but 2 of the main ones.
• WebFire

  Scarlet_Buckeye;1004338 wrote:Not sure how you came to that conclusion...

  Because you agree on this...
  

  It's just retarded then. To knock a team for playing an additional game. Michigan didn't even get the chance to play in that game, they weren't good enough.

• Scarlet_Buckeye

  

  WebFire;1004501 wrote:Because you agree on this...

  My comment...
  

  Scarlet_Buckeye;1003924 wrote:Hear, hear.

  
  ...which agrees with...
  
  

  Tobias Fünke;1003705 wrote:It's just retarded then. To knock a team for playing an additional game. Michigan didn't even get the chance to play in that game, they weren't good enough.
  

  ...does not suggest that...
  

  WebFire;1003928 wrote:So you agree that Alabama and Arkansas should not be in BCS games?

  I'm saying... Michigan didn't even play in the B1G title game; therefore to sit there and say "Well Michigan State has 1 more loss than Michigan does... therefore Michigan > Michigan State" is childs play. MSU only has that extra loss because they made the B1G title game; a feat that Michigan couldn't do. So why should Michigan State be punished for that extra loss when you could argue that if they didn't make it, then Michigan might have, and Michigan might have that extra "L" that Michigan State now has.
  
  Now... as for the Alabama piece... Alabama and Arkansas would [arguably] be deserving of a BCS birth even with the addition of an extra "L." Michigan, on the other hand, would NOT be deserving of a BCS birth if they had an additional "L." Thus my point in saying that your comparison is irrational.
  
  Michigan (IMO) is barely deserving of the bid they got without that extra "L." Teams like Boise State, Kansas State, and Arkansas (yes, I know... you can't have more than 3 schools from one conference), S. Carolina, Baylor, and Michigan State are all (IMO) more deserving than Michigan.
  
  /Roast
• WebFire

  Scarlet_Buckeye;1004665 wrote:My comment...
  
  
  
  ...which agrees with...
  
  
  
  
  ...does not suggest that...

  You need to read one more up. It was the basis for the argument which you agree upon.
  
  
  
  

  Scarlet_Buckeye;1004665 wrote:I'm saying... Michigan didn't even play in the B1G title game; therefore to sit there and say "Well Michigan State has 1 more loss than Michigan does... therefore Michigan > Michigan State" is childs play.

  
  I said no such thing. Take Michigan out of it. I said losing 3 games is the easiest way out of the BCS. Period. Has nothing to do with Michigan.
  

  Scarlet_Buckeye;1004665 wrote:MSU only has that extra loss because they made the B1G title game; a feat that Michigan couldn't do. So why should Michigan State be punished for that extra loss when you could argue that if they didn't make it, then Michigan might have, and Michigan might have that extra "L" that Michigan State now has.

  Sorry, but you can't complain about LOSING your conference title game for your 3rd loss, and being excluded from the BCS. Again, it has nothing to do with Michigan. You had the opportunity on the field to get it done, but didn't.
  

  Scarlet_Buckeye;1004665 wrote:Now... as for the Alabama piece... Alabama and Arkansas would [arguably] be deserving of a BCS birth even with the addition of an extra "L." Michigan, on the other hand, would NOT be deserving of a BCS birth if they had an additional "L." Thus my point in saying that your comparison is irrational.

  Huh?
  

  Scarlet_Buckeye;1004665 wrote:Michigan (IMO) is barely deserving of the bid they got without that extra "L." Teams like Boise State, Kansas State, and Arkansas (yes, I know... you can't have more than 3 schools from one conference), S. Carolina, Baylor, and Michigan State are all (IMO) more deserving than Michigan.

  Arguably though.
  

  Scarlet_Buckeye;1004665 wrote:/Roast

  Your dinner is about the only thing roasted.