Why does everyone assume the ACC gets two BCS bowls?

[pumpkinhead33793]

Lol. The B10 actually changed the selection process for their bowl games after the 2006 season because there was 2 straight years where Michigan was passed over by bowl games in favor of teams that finished a respective 2 and 3 games behind them in the standings. Michigan has been chosen for a grand total of 3 at large bcs bids in bcs history despites being eligible as an at large 6 times ( all 3 times another b10 team was available other than michigan that team was chosen ahead of michigan). Michigan isnt even a top 5 traveling fanbase in the b10.

Just fucking stop. With that logic, they WERE chosen to play in the sugar bowl in 2011 when it was somewhat of a surprise.

They don't pick the games based on how well teams travel! They pick them on who they think is the strongest team. You know that, I really think you do!

 

[rmilia1]

As to usc they attend bcs title games and the rose bowl (not that that is traveling) but usc hasnt sold their allotment of tickets to any other bowl game in over 20 years and that includes the 02 orange bowl where it was estimated that over 80% of the fans in attendance were iowa fans. Usc and michigam do bring good tv ratings but neither of them travel well.

 

[pumpkinhead33793]

No one in their right mind thought that Michigan was going to still go to the national championship after losing the game before.

 

[rmilia1]

Just fucking stop. With that logic, they WERE chosen to play in the sugar bowl in 2011 when it was somewhat of a surprise.

They don't pick the games based on how well teams travel! They pick them on who they think is the strongest team. You know that, I really think you do!

Michigan was the only other b10 team eligible in 2011 and if you think bcs bowls dont care about money and only care aboyt which team is better then I cant help you overcome your naivete. Because thats laughable.

 

[pumpkinhead33793]

As to usc they attend bcs title games and the rose bowl (not that that is traveling) but usc hasnt sold their allotment of tickets to any other bowl game in over 20 years and that includes the 02 orange bowl where it was estimated that over 80% of the fans in attendance were iowa fans. Usc and michigam do bring good tv ratings but neither of them travel well.

That is a flat out lie about USC. And even if it was only TV ratings, it still negates your entire thought that teams are only taken who travel well because the real money is made with the ratings.

And back to Michigan, they traveled REALLY WELL to Dallas vs Alabama. You would never know it though because they got crushed.

 

[rmilia1]

That is a flat out lie about USC. And even if it was only TV ratings, it still negates your entire thought that teams are only taken who travel well because the real money is made with the ratings.

And back to Michigan, they traveled REALLY WELL to Dallas vs Alabama. You would never know it though because they got crushed.

Umm no its not. Usc travels for shit. Period. They cant evrn sell out home games. Lol

 

[TigerBait1971]

Umm no its not. Usc travels for shit. Period. They cant evrn sell out home games. Lol

this is a factual statement

 

[pumpkinhead33793]

Here is bleacher reports list:

1. Michigan
2. Ohio State
3. Nebraska
4. Alabama
5. Auburn
6. Penn State
7. Texas A&M
8. Notre Dame
9. LSU
10. Tennessee
11. USC
12. Florida
13. Texas
14. Florida State
15. Oklahoma
16. West Virginia
17. Wisconsin
18. Oregon
19. Virginia Tech
20. Boise State

There are other lists and they are all similar to this. Obviously they throw in some teams who have recent success too. But Michigan, USC, Nebraska, who have all had down years of late and are still near the top of these lists, it is not BS.

I have yet to find any list with Wisconsin in the top 10. Sorry.

 

[rmilia1]

Ill play along because I know that top 20 you just ranked is bs. Go ahead and provide the link to the site, hell any site, that ranks michigan number 1 for traveling fanbases and ilk admit defeat. Im guessing you cant but go ahead and prove me wrong. Michigan is AT BEST the 5th best traveling fanbase in their oen league and they are probably 6th behind penn st and usc 12th?? Fucking please. Link should be easy so post it.

 

[pumpkinhead33793]

Ranking the Most Loyal College Football Fanbases | Bleacher Report

Yeah you gotta do the slide show.

 

[Smart]

Loyal doesn't mean travelling. Ohio State and Nebraska are indisputably better travelling fanbases. Anyone who says otherwise hasn't been to games with both teams. Wisconsin and Iowa, at least at the games i've been to, fill opposing stadiums much better than Michigan does. I haven't seen much of PSU, but it makes sense considering how far away they are to Madison.

Based on the games i've been to, R. is right in this case.

 

[pumpkinhead33793]

How well you travel is a part in overall loyalty. I attended Purdue and the 2 games Michigan played there was just as many UM fans as Ohio State and even IU and Notre Dame. Now that is only one shitty team in Purdue. But it is common for Michigan to be in this discussion.

I can't find an actual 'traveling' list by a source other than people on a message board like this.

So that is as good of an article list as you are gonna find.

 

[rmilia1]

Listen man im not saying michigan doesnt travel well. Almost all b10 teams do, thats why the league gets 2 bcs bids almost every year despite being a "laughingstock" fot years. However the league wouldnt have had to change the rules regarding bowl selection based on UM getting passed consistently in pecking order if they traveled better than most teams in the b10. The final straw was the 06-07 season when a 6-6 iowa team was chosen ahead of an 8 or 9 win hmichigan team to match up with a 9-3 texas. There is no way that happens unless the bowl game knows for a fact iowa is going to bring more fans and thats not the only time it happened. Its no big deal an we are arguing semantics because the 5th or 6th best traveling base in the b10 is still probably a top 20 fanbase

 

[Jonny Valtimore]

Ranking the Most Loyal College Football Fanbases | Bleacher Report

Yeah you gotta do the slide show.

Bleacher Report though.. really? I could post a damn list on there.

 

[pumpkinhead33793]

Listen man im not saying michigan doesnt travel well. Almost all b10 teams do, thats why the league gets 2 bcs bids almost every year despite being a "laughingstock" fot years. However the league wouldnt have had to change the rules regarding bowl selection based on UM getting passed consistently in pecking order if they traveled better than most teams in the b10. The final straw was the 06-07 season when a 6-6 iowa team was chosen ahead of an 8 or 9 win hmichigan team to match up with a 9-3 texas. There is no way that happens unless the bowl game knows for a fact iowa is going to bring more fans and thats not the only time it happened. Its no big deal an we are arguing semantics because the 5th or 6th best traveling base in the b10 is still probably a top 20 fanbase

Yes, in 2006-2007 Iowa at 6-6 played Texas at 9-3 in the Alamo Bowl and got steam rolled. WTF does that have to do with anything?

What does that have to do with Michigan who was ranked number 2 at 11-0 and lost by 3 to number 1 Ohio State at the horseshoe? 1 loss Florida ended up getting to play Ohio State for the national championship and ended up winning. Michigan ended up playing USC in the Rose Bowl.

Are you saying that if Michigan traveled better, they would have played Ohio State AGAIN for the National Championship instead of playing in the Rose Bowl? Florida had won like 8 in a row and deserved it. It matters when you lose. And even if you say they only picked Florida over Michigan because of "how bad Michigan travels", it still fits right into my point that Florida travels really well! But the real reason Florida went was because a) they won a bunch in a row and their only loss was close to 10-2 Auburn, and 2) got to play an extra game in the SEC championship and beat a 10-2 Arkansas team to gain better computer rankings. A third reason that I kinda agree with is they didn't want to see a rematch back to back games so some people didn't vote Michigan 2nd. But it had nothing to do with how the teams traveled. Florida showed how good they were by winning 41-14.

The Big Ten added the Championship game indeed because it sucks when other conferences gets an extra game and can advance up on a Big Ten team. Had nothing to do with Michigan and how they travel.

 

[rmilia1]

Thinking of the year before. My bad. 7-5 iowa ahead of michigan to outback bowl. Either way the point remains that um was being passed over consistenly by teams for bowls ( btw that 6-6 iowa team actually platyed texas quite well and led most of the game before losing at the end , not pertinent to the topic but thought id tell you anyway ) lol

 

[pumpkinhead33793]

Sorry, just messing with you with Iowa.

Anyway, I wanted to see Michigan's bowls to see what you are saying.

2002: 11th in BCS (9-3) played in Outback Bowl (New Years Day game)
2003: 4th in BCS (10-2; won Big Ten) played in Rose Bowl (BCS Game)
2004: 13th in BCS (9-2; won Big Ten) played in Rose Bowl (BCS Game)
2005: 20th in BCS (9-3) played in Alamo Bowl
2006: 3rd in BCS (11-1) played in Rose Bowl (BCS Game)
2007: NR in BCS (8-4) played in Capitol One Bowl (New Years Day game)
2008: NR in BCS (3-9) missed bowling
2009: NR in BCS (5-7) missed bowling
2010: NR in BCS (7-5) played in Gator Bowl (New Years Day game)
2011: 13th in BCS (10-2) played in Sugar Bowl (BCS Bowl)
2012: 18th in BCS (8-4) played in Outback Bowl (New Years Day game)

You are right about 2005, that was an anomaly that Iowa who was 9-3 also got a New Years Day game over Michigan. But that is the only year I see that Michigan got passed up on or slighted. I see New Years Day games in years they had 4, 4, and 5 losses where they got in better games over teams ranked above them in the BCS. 2002 they never could have gone to a BCS bowl with only 8 teams then. 4th ranked USC and 5th ranked Iowa got the 2 atlarges. I already discussed 2006.

I will give you 2005 though.

 

[pumpkinhead33793]

Also, they were ranked 8th in 1999 and got an atlarge to the Orange Bowl.

1998, 2000, and 2001 they had 3 regular season losses in each of those years. Each year they played in a New Years Day bowl. Seems normal there too.

That takes us through every year of the BCS.

 

[michaeljordan_fan]

More than likely right but not always. See 2002 when iowa was chosen. The orange doesnt have to take an acc team just like the sugar doesnt have to take an sec team or the rose doesnt have to take a p12 team. They normally do but its not a given.

Your history is flawed. The ACC tie-in to the Orange wasn't until 2007.

 

[BigAppleBadger]

Bleacher Report?