From today's PTI on ESPN
For more absurd Big 10 logic, check out the comments on this article which has been picked up by DeadSpin and SI.com.
Update: Adams calls out Big [Little] Ten [Eleven] and Pac Ten as playoff impediments.
PWD
Georgia Sports Blog FanShop
- Georgia Bulldogs Women's Sideline Clutch
- Price: $84.99
11 comments:
My fave part was when typical media darling slobbering yankee Kornheiser tried to chime in with the usual 'but they didnt even win their division' junk when Wilbon cut him off and said 'It's not about that!' and that he was 'embarrased by and for' his conference for being the chickensh**s they are. Coming from a Big Ten guy on national television, that means a log, and as usual, to hell with Herbstreit.
Do we honestly care what the Big-10 or anyone else thinks? Yes and No.
Yes, because they determine the BCS. This is where the problem exists. The media, i.e. ESPN or should we call it Big-10 network II, has so much influence that an incoherent and biased opinion becomes an holy edict. Case in point: Herbstreit's begging for UM to be in the MNC game of 2006 even though they did not win their conference versus Herbstreit's insistence that UGA should not be in the MNC game of 2007 because they did not win their conference.
No. We know what the best conference in college football is. We know who routinely must show up and battle ranked teams 7 of 10 weeks, usually 2-3 times in a row. The Big-10, specifically tOSU, is complaining about their loss because they don't want to put the blame where it belongs, on tOSU. SO who cares what they think.
I submit that we stop with the conference rivalry tomfoolery and focus on the real problem, ESPN (Big-10 network II). The comments made by Wilbon are being echoed and we should continue to increase our pressure upon these dim-wits rather than disenfranchised fans from whatever conference.
Adams realizes that the squeaky wheel most often gets the grease. The more we complain about the media's efforts to deride the SEC, since most broadcasters on ESPN have had their careers or teams beat down by an SEC teams, then the more grease we get. The more grease we get, the better off the SEC conference is.
The deadspin and cnnsi links don't go to any related stories.
Like it or not - This puts alot of pressure on our Bulldogs to step it up next year.
Chris - They put up the new tOSU logo post link. Look at the comments on that Georgia Sports Blog post. tOSU fans are all over it spouting nonsense.
Thanks, PWD, for reminding me how much I hate Tony Kornhole.
Why does everyone think that ESPN loves the Big 10 so much? Because Herbstreit went to Ohio State? Then I guess that Mark Schlabach cannot speak since he went to UGA.
ESPN plays a role in this, but it is being diminished since conferences are looking to see about their own networks and keeping the money. Every conference commish is watching the Big 10 network to see if it can pull it off. If it does, the SEC will probably start its own network (which would be cool for non-football sports).
I could buy a bit of the argument about Michigan getting another shot in 2006. Ohio State beat them but not all that convincingly in Columbus. Florida was not looking all that impressive and USC lost to UCLA.
While it is not in the rules, I have long thought that a team should win its conference (or share the title) in order to play for the BCS championship. This is not basketball after all. For that reason I leaned away from Michigan in 2006, but if say Wisconsin had been undefeated that year and had not played Ohio State and was #2, I could have accepted that. They would have been co-champions.
However, whether UGA won its division or not (and ultimately they needed to do that IMHO no matter how "hot" they were down the stretch) really is a moot point in the argument about a playoff. The UF president last year proposed a playoff after his team had just won the whole thing. For those who want a playoff, it is going to take people like Adams changing their minds to get a playoff instituted. I just finished watching "Amazing Grace" and it is pertinent in that it took years and years of Wlberforce bringing his bill to Parliament before slavery was abolished in the Empire and it was also done in a bit of a piece meal manner. Those are lessons the playoff advocates should learn.
All that, and I am not keen on a playoff, just like the politics of it.
The problem is not a bias towards conferences in terms of who the announcers like, but in terms of what TV contracts are in place.
The more the announcers can pump up the big games on ESPN and ABC, the more ad revenue they get. Since the SEC has its biggest TV contract with CBS and not Disney Channels, they do not get the hype.
If it were reversed, Big 10 and PAC 10 on CBS and the SEC on ABC and ESPN, you will get more hype and push for SEC teams.
I think that until a playoff is established, the announcers of all networks, should only ask questions on how the voters will vote, and not talk about who should have a certain ranking until after the votes are in.
Imagine if the media did this while the presidential election was going on. The votes can be swayed. The media now refrains from calling the election until the votes are in. ESPN especially should do the same thing.
Had Notre Dame finished 10-2 and ranked #4, they would have easily been voted to play Ohio State.
What conference is Notre Dame in again?
Oh, yeah...they are independent. They are exempt from this "They didn't win their conference" argument.
If we stay with the current BCS system, this will come up in the future.
Seriously what does Notre Dame have to do with this discussion? They are not part of the Big Ten and they have never played in a BCS Championship game so you can not say "well ND would have gone if they were in the same spot as Georgia". I live in Georgia and have gone to many games in Athens and agree the SEC is by far the best conference in college football. But when Georgia fans start to bring up Notre Dame as an excuse it makes them look like idiots which most Georgia fans are not.
"Seriously what does Notre Dame have to do with this discussion?"
They are not in a conference, Matt. Was I typing in Chinese?
My point was...the argument about how UGA didn't win their conference doesn't hold weight when their are other BCS teams that don't have to worry about whether they won their conference or not. Notre Dame is the most obvious independent team, so I used them.
If you go back and re-read, I wrote that if the BCS STAYS this way, it will come up IN THE FUTURE.
And I'm not using it as an excuse for UGA. Like Mark Richt said, their isn't a rule that states that you have to have won your conference to be the in BCS championship, yet we got punished anyway.
Plus, you're going to have a hard time convincing real, lifelong Dawg fans that Notre Dame doesn't get extra special treatment from the media.
Post a Comment