Another Take from the Mizzou Side of BCS Screw Job - Page 5

Frazod · 12-03-2007, 09:51 AM

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/spo...5?OpenDocument

Mizzou left out of BCS? It's nonsense
BY BRYAN BURWELL
POST-DISPATCH SPORTS COLUMNIST
Sunday, Dec. 02 2007

COLUMBIA, Mo. -- Of course it doesn’t make sense. You know it, I know it, even
the doofuses who continue to perpetrate this idiotic Bowl Championship Series
system have to know just how fatally flawed and hopelessly messed up their
multi-million dollar scam is.

So Sunday night was just one more bit of annoying confirmation of how defective
the BCS is.

From the broad national perspective, to the narrower parochial one, I truly
hate it with all my heart. But since sports is very much like politics --
everything is local -- let’s deal with how Mizzou got robbed Sunday night by
the BCS and its convoluted computers.

Missouri finished its finest season in the history of the program with an 11-2
record, won the Big 12 North, knocked off both arch rivals in Kansas and
Illinois, and the Tigers finished with a No. 6 ranking in the final BCS
standings.

Logic says the Tigers had to get a BCS bowl bid, right?

So why are they sitting on the outside of the BCS with an invitation to the
still prestigious (but non BCS) Cotton Bowl, while five other schools that
ranked lower in the BCS standings -- including the 8th-ranked Jayhawks and
13th-ranked Illini -- received bids to the more preferred BCS bowls?

Seventh-ranked Southern California and Illinois are in the Rose Bowl. Kansas is
in the Orange Bowl, ninth-ranked West Virginia is in the Fiesta Bowl and
10th-ranked Hawaii is in the Sugar Bowl.

So how does any of this make sense? As the news began to filter through the
second floor hallways at the Reynolds Alumni Center on Sunday night, the grim
faces of many Mizzou athletes told the story of the night.

“It’s just a shame we got locked out,” said All-America tight end Martin
Rucker. “How does that happen? Mathematically, logically, it just doesn’t make
sense.”

By the time the Fox network BCS bowl selection show began at 7 p.m., Rucker and
his teammates had already left the building. They couldn’t bear to watch it.
They had been instructed to take the high road and go with the company line
that they’re “excited” to be Cotton Bowl bound.

But Rucker, the senior who has seen Missouri football grow from inconsequential
to important, couldn’t play the game. In the course of 48 turbulent hours, he’d
watched his team go from No. 1 in the country with a legitimate shot at a
national championship bid, to disappointed and disgusted outsiders with their
noses pressed to the glass watching the BCS dance cards being handed out.

Someone asked if this obvious slight was further proof of how badly college
football’s top division needs a playoff system to decide its national champions
and perhaps prevent a situation like this where Mizzou was unjustly left on the
outside looking in.

“I don’t know if you need a playoff system to see that it doesn’t make sense
that one team (Illinois) lost three games and lost to you, and you only lost
two games, and they’re going to a BCS game and you’re not,” said Rucker with a
resigned shrug of his shoulders. “I don’t think we need a playoff system to
understand that, do we?”

You could see the disappointment in their faces as the players got the
official word and most of them quietly left the alumni center without saying a
word. “I have a bunch of players who have a bunch of frowns,” said Pinkel.

But those frowning faces told another story of the night, as well. Is there any
surer sign that Pinkel’s emerging program is heading in the right direction
than the fact that Mizzou football is no longer satisfied with a Cotton Bowl
bid?

Three years ago -- heck, last year -- Missouri loyalists and Tiger players and
coaches would have done somersaults down Broadway if you told them that the
2007 season would conclude with an 11-2 regular season record, a Big 12 North
title, a week on top of the national polls, a legitimate Heisman Trophy
candidate, and a Cotton Bowl bid.

After six years of lesser bowls and underachieving seasons, a trip to a
traditional and prestigious Jan. 1 bowl game, with or without the additional
status of a BCS affiliation, would have been considered a watershed mark for
Pinkel and the Tigers.

So even in the aftermath of the crushing defeat to Oklahoma in the Big 12 title
game, even with the obvious insult by the BCS system, even as some folks will
spend a lot of energy and a ton of venom overanalyzing how the biggest game in
MU football history ended up with a less-than-storybook ending, let’s not lose
sight of the essential ongoing story line.

What happened over the weekend wasn’t the sad end of the story.

The rebirth of Mizzou football is a story that’s just beginning.

**alanm** · 12-03-2007, 01:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pierce

Missouri is just not really an attractive football program, and neither is KU. Both schools are not known for football, and recruits outside of the Midwest aren't too interested in going to Columbia, Mo. or Lawrence, Ks.

Apparently, KU was the more attractive team to the Orange Bowl selection committee. Probably has a lot to do with Lew Perkins selling his team hard.

It really has nothing to do with how attractive a team is. What really matters to Bowl officials is how much of a following a team has that's coming with them. $$$ matters to to the hosts and how much money they can rake in from the fans supporting said teams in that bowl.

chiefsfan1963 · 12-03-2007, 01:31 PM

It's too bad that MU had to play one extra game. It is what it is.

MU has everything to be proud about this year, but they had to have beat OU. They had 2 chances and they didn't do it. They controlled their destiny and they lost. No. 1 teams win.

They have no one to blame but themselves. In the end they better go out next year and kick OU's ass once and for all. That's where all that anger should go!!

KC_Connection · 12-03-2007, 01:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GonzoRox88

Did anybody even watch the BC/VT game? Because I did, and I'm about as impressed by the ACC Champs as I am by Hawaii.

The ACC conference hasn't impressed me all season.

kcpasco · 12-03-2007, 01:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cosmo20002

Missouri is just generally thought of as inferior to Kansas in general in althetics (probably due to KU's superior basketball program) and as a state (probably due to Missouri's abundance of meth labs and hillbillies).

Bottom line--you lose 2 games, you lose the right to whine about what bowl you get. So you're going to the 8th-best bowl instead of the 5th-best. So what? LSU has two losses--maybe you should whine about not going to the title game.

Jesus ****ing Christ, you haven't won shit since 1988 and you act like you win a championship every year, your as bad as Raider fans.

Mr. Laz · 12-03-2007, 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kcpasco

Really?

Last I checked Mizzou was #6 and KU #8, I'm no mathematician but seems like Missouri is ranked higher and just the dumb shits at the Orange wanted to suck you off.

homo .... with all your homo talk

Sure-Oz · 12-03-2007, 01:35 PM

I am confident KU will lose to VT, Reesing will get "nervous" like the mu vs ku game. No one will be talking about KU next year anyway, MU will be back in top 15 contention and making a run again with the incoming recruits.

Pablo · 12-03-2007, 01:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kcpasco

Jesus ****ing Christ, you haven't won shit since 1988 and you act like you win a championship every year, your as bad as Raider fans.

But of the four programs that MU and KU put out there each year on the football and basketball side of things, who can you also count on being good?

That's part of the reason Kentucky got so much love for their football program this year..they weren't that great, but they have always been a NC Contender on the basketball side of things.

If Duke fielded a good football team next year, and went 10-2 or 11-1, they'd be media darlings. The nation loves seeing powerhouse schools..and Mizzou has been far from a powerhouse in anything, ever.

chiefsfan1963 · 12-03-2007, 01:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sure-Oz

I am confident KU will lose to VT, Reesing will get "nervous" like the mu vs ku game. No one will be talking about KU next year anyway, MU will be back in top 15 contention and making a run again with the incoming recruits.

They better find a defense.

kcpasco · 12-03-2007, 01:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Laz

homo .... with all your homo talk

Wow, sucks to know you got proven wrong.

Next time make sure to bring true stats to the table when trying to debate.

Mr. Laz · 12-03-2007, 01:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sure-Oz

I am confident KU will lose to VT, Reesing will get "nervous" like the mu vs ku game. No one will be talking about KU next year anyway, MU will be back in top 15 contention and making a run again with the incoming recruits.

and the BCS and orange bowl STILL won't want you

Pierce · 12-03-2007, 01:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alanm

It really has nothing to do with how attractive a team is. What really matters to Bowl officials is how much of a following a team has that's coming with them. $$$ matters to to the hosts and how much money they can rake in from the fans supporting said teams in that bowl.

But it's likely that the more attractive a team is, the more money they might bring in due to casual fan interest, etc.

It does not matter. KU and MU will both get national attention. The seasons both teams have had will help with recruiting in the future.

cosmo20002 · 12-03-2007, 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kcpasco

Jesus ****ing Christ, you haven't won shit since 1988 and you act like you win a championship every year, your as bad as Raider fans.

I do believe there have been more than a few conference titles since then. And how many Final Fours? MU would kill for a Final 4. How about even making the Tourney once in a while?

Anyway, this was about getting 'screwed' out of a non-title game by being invited to a non-title game. What was the problem again?

**Skip Towne** · 12-03-2007, 01:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alanm

It really has nothing to do with how attractive a team is. What really matters to Bowl officials is how much of a following a team has that's coming with them. $$$ matters to to the hosts and how much money they can rake in from the fans supporting said teams in that bowl.

I heard the bowl officials said they knew Kansas would bring a much higher class of people.

Pablo · 12-03-2007, 01:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sure-Oz

I am confident KU will lose to VT, Reesing will get "nervous" like the mu vs ku game. No one will be talking about KU next year anyway, MU will be back in top 15 contention and making a run again with the incoming recruits.

That's fine. You shouldn't be too surprised if your defense crumbles in the second half again. They have a tendency to do that lately. If Patrick ran all over your defense, I can't wait to see what McFadden and Hillus are gonna do.

KU will probably be relatively the same team they were this year, next year. Maybe a couple more losses because they'll play a harder schedule, but even if Mizzou does make some great march towards the Big 12 Title again, OU is gonna be waiting on you. With the same roster, the same coaching staff, and the same result.

kcpasco · 12-03-2007, 01:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cosmo20002

I do believe there have been more than a few conference titles since then. And how many Final Fours? MU would kill for a Final 4. How about even making the Tourney once in a while?

Anyway, this was about getting 'screwed' out of a non-title game by being invited to a non-title game. What was the problem again?

But your the great and powerful KU, anything short of NC's aren't exceptable

amirite?

12-03-2007, 09:51 AM
Frazod Did you hear what I said? Join Date: Aug 2000 Casino cash: $-566615	Another Take from the Mizzou Side of BCS Screw Job http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/spo...5?OpenDocument Mizzou left out of BCS? It's nonsense BY BRYAN BURWELL POST-DISPATCH SPORTS COLUMNIST Sunday, Dec. 02 2007 COLUMBIA, Mo. -- Of course it doesn’t make sense. You know it, I know it, even the doofuses who continue to perpetrate this idiotic Bowl Championship Series system have to know just how fatally flawed and hopelessly messed up their multi-million dollar scam is. So Sunday night was just one more bit of annoying confirmation of how defective the BCS is. From the broad national perspective, to the narrower parochial one, I truly hate it with all my heart. But since sports is very much like politics -- everything is local -- let’s deal with how Mizzou got robbed Sunday night by the BCS and its convoluted computers. Missouri finished its finest season in the history of the program with an 11-2 record, won the Big 12 North, knocked off both arch rivals in Kansas and Illinois, and the Tigers finished with a No. 6 ranking in the final BCS standings. Logic says the Tigers had to get a BCS bowl bid, right? So why are they sitting on the outside of the BCS with an invitation to the still prestigious (but non BCS) Cotton Bowl, while five other schools that ranked lower in the BCS standings -- including the 8th-ranked Jayhawks and 13th-ranked Illini -- received bids to the more preferred BCS bowls? Seventh-ranked Southern California and Illinois are in the Rose Bowl. Kansas is in the Orange Bowl, ninth-ranked West Virginia is in the Fiesta Bowl and 10th-ranked Hawaii is in the Sugar Bowl. So how does any of this make sense? As the news began to filter through the second floor hallways at the Reynolds Alumni Center on Sunday night, the grim faces of many Mizzou athletes told the story of the night. “It’s just a shame we got locked out,” said All-America tight end Martin Rucker. “How does that happen? Mathematically, logically, it just doesn’t make sense.” By the time the Fox network BCS bowl selection show began at 7 p.m., Rucker and his teammates had already left the building. They couldn’t bear to watch it. They had been instructed to take the high road and go with the company line that they’re “excited” to be Cotton Bowl bound. But Rucker, the senior who has seen Missouri football grow from inconsequential to important, couldn’t play the game. In the course of 48 turbulent hours, he’d watched his team go from No. 1 in the country with a legitimate shot at a national championship bid, to disappointed and disgusted outsiders with their noses pressed to the glass watching the BCS dance cards being handed out. Someone asked if this obvious slight was further proof of how badly college football’s top division needs a playoff system to decide its national champions and perhaps prevent a situation like this where Mizzou was unjustly left on the outside looking in. “I don’t know if you need a playoff system to see that it doesn’t make sense that one team (Illinois) lost three games and lost to you, and you only lost two games, and they’re going to a BCS game and you’re not,” said Rucker with a resigned shrug of his shoulders. “I don’t think we need a playoff system to understand that, do we?” You could see the disappointment in their faces as the players got the official word and most of them quietly left the alumni center without saying a word. “I have a bunch of players who have a bunch of frowns,” said Pinkel. But those frowning faces told another story of the night, as well. Is there any surer sign that Pinkel’s emerging program is heading in the right direction than the fact that Mizzou football is no longer satisfied with a Cotton Bowl bid? Three years ago -- heck, last year -- Missouri loyalists and Tiger players and coaches would have done somersaults down Broadway if you told them that the 2007 season would conclude with an 11-2 regular season record, a Big 12 North title, a week on top of the national polls, a legitimate Heisman Trophy candidate, and a Cotton Bowl bid. After six years of lesser bowls and underachieving seasons, a trip to a traditional and prestigious Jan. 1 bowl game, with or without the additional status of a BCS affiliation, would have been considered a watershed mark for Pinkel and the Tigers. So even in the aftermath of the crushing defeat to Oklahoma in the Big 12 title game, even with the obvious insult by the BCS system, even as some folks will spend a lot of energy and a ton of venom overanalyzing how the biggest game in MU football history ended up with a less-than-storybook ending, let’s not lose sight of the essential ongoing story line. What happened over the weekend wasn’t the sad end of the story. The rebirth of Mizzou football is a story that’s just beginning.
Posts: 121,710

12-03-2007, 01:31 PM	#62
chiefsfan1963 Veteran Join Date: Oct 2001 Casino cash: $10005060	It's too bad that MU had to play one extra game. It is what it is. MU has everything to be proud about this year, but they had to have beat OU. They had 2 chances and they didn't do it. They controlled their destiny and they lost. No. 1 teams win. They have no one to blame but themselves. In the end they better go out next year and kick OU's ass once and for all. That's where all that anger should go!!
Posts: 1,948

12-03-2007, 01:35 PM	#66
Sure-Oz Stay positive, don't give up Join Date: Dec 2001 Casino cash: $1809383	I am confident KU will lose to VT, Reesing will get "nervous" like the mu vs ku game. No one will be talking about KU next year anyway, MU will be back in top 15 contention and making a run again with the incoming recruits.
Posts: 46,292