Or they tried, were denied...and signed it anyway.

As far as I know the deal is signed. The SEC has good football teams but they obviously don't have that kind of pull. Otherwise they would have made it a requirement.

Texa$$$$$$$ silly

ROFLROFLROFLROFLROFLROFLROFL everything in that post is epic fail. You outdid yourself this time. Brilliant.

I'd be bitter if my team was 0-3 in the BCS as well. But lets move on, there's football coming.

I'm sorry that you don't agree with the way things are?

And yes, its been reported the Big12 needs to get a championship game soon for this Bowl. I think they might let it slide a few years though.

History awaits!

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-dVoIRqnlcH...rowd.LMJ-2.jpg

(I assume this is before halftime - after that, it really gets empty)

I don't remember what the vote was, but I remember reading this year that there was a vote for something. Texas had one vote, the other nine voted for the other option. Sooo what you're saying doesn't hold much water... its just a bs conspiracy theory .

Yeah because my response spoke of bitterness. :spock:

History is um.......here?

http://media.columbiamissourian.com/..._w600_h600.jpg

Everything I posted was 100% true. You called it a fail. Sounds pretty bitter if you ask me.

I'll pull for you though. Winning in the BCS feels ****ing great. I want all of you guys to experience it at some point.

Really? Your retort is a shot from a crappy bowl game dumped on us by Bevo in Louisiana the day after Christmas?

Damn. LMAO

Heh...most of them are K-State fans.

When all your bowl games are crappy I can't blame people for not showing up.

No shit. Big 12 bowls suck in general. 10-2 in 2010 = Insight Bowl

You can't be serious. Nothing you posted is true.

Well, some schools mastered chugging Bevo's cock, and some refused.

Bowls don't generally pick generic teams that don't have a national following.

The goal is to make money after all.

So Texas is the reason why dozens of your fans made the trip to support your team?

No wonder your coach drinks.

KU football has a national following? :eek: You are on a roll tonight.

The bowls were really pulling for KU to become eligible so they could get a team with a national following. Tough break.

It was a crappy bowl, dumped on us out of spite. A nice parting shot.

But again, you're trying to change the subject. Couldn't find an empty shot of Faurot, I guess. Darn.

BTW, how'd your bowl last year turn out? I can't recall.

When did I say that?

KU's? They destroyed a Big 10 team in the Insight Bowl. I recall it well.

I believe MU was embarrassed when they were there a few years ago.

He wouldn't know. He was too busy boycotting KU football in protest of Gill. That and focusing on KU basketball and reaming of the day KU becomes a football power once again.

Texas A&M has a national following? Good, more people that saw them get their ass handed to them at home by us that year, only to get picked for the Cotton Bowl over us.

Post #4498. You love to brag about how KU went to the Orange Bowl, so based off of that post one can only assume KU was selected because of their national following.

KU destroyed a Big 10 team in the Insight Bowl last year? I musta missed that.

What a shame those days are over. I'll really miss them. :crybaby:

Keep hanging on to those memories from 4 seasons ago, it'll probably be a while before KU is back to one.

Well, I mean compared to MU of course KU has more of a national following.

But no, compared to the heavyweights of CFB KU does not have a national following.

oh, misread that one. KU wasn't in a bowl last year. They were too busy going to another Final Four. (small school, limited resources)

Nah, it won't be too long.

:LOL: Stop, just stop. You are making yourself look even more ridiculous than normal right now.

Perhaps they should worry more about winning a single conference game. How long has it been since that happened?

Baby steps.

Way to deflect. So if and that is a big if KU goes to a bowl game does that mean they are not focused on a Final Four?

At least they'll have their celebration choreographed for that joyous occasion.

Keep pinning your hopes on the failure that is Weis.

Well I guess they could have picked MU to go to the Orange Bowl instead. So I'm not sure how to make it more clear to you.

Wickedson is in deep.. one lucky buyout (Which is the key game that got the BCS destroyed) and that was it for football.

No they can do both at once. But those are really special years.

I just realized something. Kansas has a legitimate shot of winning more Big XII games than Mizzou this year. That would be a major achievement for Kansas seeing as they've never done that before.

After managing to tie Nebraska and Colorado last year, maybe they can build off of that momentum.

The BCS is destroyed?

And I doubt KU's Orange Bowl victory had much to do with any of the recent developments as far as a playoff goes. I mean...had they had lost the game then you could have a point. If 74,000+ hadn't shown up you could have a point.

If anything has destroyed anything it's last years NC game which was the lowest rated game ever being that it unfairly pitted two teams from the same conference together. A conference that has a lower median income than the rest of the country and a lower population (smaller tv markets)... what a disaster last year was. It can't happen again.

Maybe. Neither Mizzou or KU is ranked in Phil Steele's preseason top 50 so who knows. Looks like a toss up to some. Interested to see what KU can do when it has something besides a high school coach running things. Funny though. After 10 years Turner Gill and Gary Pinkle still have just the same thing...1 MAC Championship.

Except when they don't and then the excuse is that they were focused on getting to a Final Four.

We get to lie? I didn't know we got to lie to make points.

:spock:

FTR, the two lowest rated BCS title games ever each featured a Big XII team getting their shit pushed in by teams from outside the SEC.

The LSU Alabama NC game was the second most watched television program in the history of cable television behind only the Auburn/Oregon game. I guess those must be two heavily populated states with high incomes.

Incorrect. The lowest rated BCS title game ever was last season featuring LSU and Alabama.

From what everyone can tell this game was the catalyst for a 4 team playoff format that has now been put into motion.

Never again will we have the disaster of two teams from a conference that thinks way too much of themselves when in fact they have much less influence than they think.

Weird. Sports Illustrated and CNN don't know what they're talking about, but Wickedson does.

NEW ORLEANS (AP) -- A field goal-filled shutout couldn't compete with a thrilling finish for television viewers.

TV ratings dipped for this year's BCS title game, Alabama's 21-0 win in a rematch against Southeastern Conference rival LSU. The Crimson Tide went up 15-0 late in the third quarter on five field goals while the Tigers' offense struggled to even cross midfield.

A year ago, Auburn drove for a winning field goal on the final play to beat Oregon 22-19.

Monday's game on ESPN earned a 14.0 rating, down 8 percent from last year. It's the third-lowest rating of the 14 BCS title games, beating only a 13.9 for Miami-Nebraska in 2002 and a 13.7 for Southern California-Oklahoma in 2005.

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...#ixzz22GRifk00

Yeah, nice spin:

http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2...lowest_tv.html

...that Mike Slive dictated?

This is why the system is changing...

http://content.usatoday.com/communit...1#.UBirXkI8jbU

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/spor...ings-ever.html

http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/e...56338/34308344

This shit never gets old, does it? :D

Nice spin what? He said it was the least watched, and it wasn't. It was also only the second NC game on cable television. Of course ratings are going to be lower on cable versus network television. One is free, and the other isn't.

That's what I meant. You used that bit of trivia to make the game sound like it was more of a success than it was. That's spin.

We were all willing to give it a chance. Oh how wrong we were...

It was the least watched. Sorry if "alabama.com" doesn't trump the LAtimes and CBS, lol

Actually, Hypocritson used that bit of trivia to make the games sound less successful than it actually was....that is spin.

Top 3 all time BCS Games.

1. Rose Bowl 2006 Texas-USC 21.7 *
2. Orange Bowl 2001 Florida State-Oklahoma 17.8 *
3. Sugar Bowl 2000 Florida State-Virginia Tech 17.5 *

And this proves what exactly? This does not refute the fact that Saul Good has flat out proved you incorrect.

You're right. The game was so successful they're changing the entire postseason system.

I have multiple links from credible news sources citing my facts. He has one from a site from which one of the teams plays in.

I think we're okay with who is right and who is not.

So the Alabama/LSU game was the reason the postseason system was changed?

What a stunning revelation.

Please. The BCS has been broken for YEARS. At least these two teams actually BEAT SOMEBODY GOOD to earn their spots.

As we are all aware, that has often not been the case.

The SEC brand of football is hard to watch for most of the country. You're never going to see that atrocity again.

Fixed your post.

I think the sooner people realize that CFB will never be the NFL we can all move on much easier. You guys just need a damn BCS bowl so you can get over it already.

I'd say off the top of my head the BCS has done a pretty good job pitting the best two teams in the NC over the last few years. But in the history of CFB the National Championship really isn't all that important. Just look at how many different teams have claimed it over the years.

Last year was a fluke. Oklahoma State probably would have run either of them off the field. But OSU isn't in the club so you were never going to find out.

ok, that's pretty good

Except for the years that the BCS gave us a shitty matchup....like when Nebraska lost by three touchdowns. For every good BCS NC matchup, there is an awful one it seems.

There's so much fail in this post, I don't even know where to start. ROFL

Unless the 4 team playoff isn't limited to only conference champs like Mike Slive is advocating. I guess we'll see how much pull the SEC has when those details are hammered out.

The sport is inherently unfair. Teams don't play balanced schedules, there's no "player draft" of any kind, players are bought left and right, all the teams have different level of resources and spending...

You have to take CFB for what it is. Fun on Saturday afternoons with beer and sun. You can't look at it like real competition. If you do you'll be caught up in a constant hamster wheel of trying to figure out a system that is "fair".

Personally I think with this whole 4 team playoff thing that is getting introduced things just got that much more complicated and that many more teams at the end are going to be left angry. But if they get all bent out of shape about it it's their own fault. It's not worth getting all upset about.

I heard Gary Pinkle ranked Oklahoma State like 6th or something in his final poll. ROFL

What a butthurt tool your coach is.

Mike Slive is not the only one advocating that setup.

Good try though..

Sorry, I'm still trying to wrap my mind around your "National Championship really isn't all that important" bit.

I can only process so much utter, abject ****ing stupidity at once.

Who won the National Championship in 1973?

That's your ****ing argument? Really?

I'm sorry, I was 8 in 1973. I don't remember who won anything in 1973. I could be like you and look it up and then lie and claim I remembered, but what's the point?

Sometimes you're so ****ing lame I border on pitying you.

It never lasts, though.