FanNation - The Republic of Sport

well said, great comparison

You don't think our dawgs got badly screwed this year? When I realized that we would have no chance to play for #1, it really grabbed me by the short hairs.

well it's your fault, if you would of won the games you were supposed to, you would of gotten your shot at us

Ok, we are going to beat UT this year. I cannot wait for that game.

haha puberty, when is the bcs gonna get invited to its first make out party?

heheheh, 84, good question.

hairgut, I had hope that Georgia would sneak into the title game, but I was pretty sure that the poll voters would not put us in after not even winning the the SEC east. I think Vandy or Kentucky should've beat Tennessee. I even posted a note on facebook about how UGA was never going to get in unless Tennessee lost b/c a lot of my friends were complaining about UGA being passed over. I also think when politicians start to get mixed up in the BCS, it makes the state of Georgia look bad.

Never thought of it that way, but hey great blog

Realistically, unless they went for a playoff of 6 plus teams, the format wasn't what killed UGA in 2007. If they were to introduce a 4 team playoff, they are still only going to allow 1 team from each conference max. (nuch like they only allow 2 max in the 10 team BCS format). If that's not a formal rule, it will be a pseudo rule from the pollsters voting in their regional team.

Your best chance of making the BCS is going undefeated - over 90% of the teams that went undefeated in a major conference after 1998 played for the NC. Auburn is the only exception, but lost in time was that every human and computer poll all had Auburn 3rd that year - the teams that played weren't the consensus top 2, but neither human nor machine wanted to see Auburn in the NC game either (in addition if you're going to push forth Auburn, don't try any Strength of Schedule arguments given Auburn's non-conference schedule that year).

Citing 2003 is a bit outdated and about as relevant as citing the great Ohio State backfield of Grant and Sherman literally burning their way thru the SEC - the redone formula virtually guarantees the human polls pick the teams. That's all old news now.

I must confess - I don't get the gripes of UGA. You still had a great year, got invited to 1 of the only 3 open spots in the BCS, had a solid win, finished high in the polls, and will start high in the polls in 2008 giving great start towards making the NC game - not at all bad for a team that didn't win their division, let alone their conference.

Don't hold your breath waiting for a playoff. If you read the quotes losely, not 1 of the conferences - not even the SEC - have the supporting otes to adopt a playoff.

If you want to platy for the title, don't waste your breath complaining - concentrate on beating Tennessee and South Carolina and the likes, because chances are good if you lose to them again you won't play for the NC in 2008.

...and all of this from someone who supports a 4 to 6 team playoff. I am just telling ya straight brother...

Nice blog.

The BCS is a tranny. It needs to lose something before it becomes legit.

I agree Prove It. My last point was saying that the BCS has gotten it right every year except 2003 and 2004. Auburn just had the unfortunate luck of being ranked lower than USC and Oklahoma in the preseason polls; I wouldn't blame the preseason pollsters either b/c 2003 was supposed to be Auburn's year and they choked. The formula was changed since 2003, but the AP poll is gone too. That might be a good thing considering the AP poll was the ones who voted USC the champ even though the did not play in the BCS title game, and the AP people are just trying to sell papers or webspace anyways.

If a team wants to make it, then don't lose any games. Once a team loses a game they also lose control of their own destiny. That doesn't stop coaches from petitionning their team into the title game if the other top teams have lost also. You shouldn't get the gripes of UGA; I don't gripe about UGA being passed over. I was a propenent of a playoff since I've been on here, so my arguement has stayed consistent.

DSS, heheh, I think the tranny is already legit, but everyone knows that is, so it is not as respectable.

*everyone knows that it is a tranny, so...

Posted Tuesday September 11, 2007 (by me of course)
1.LSU
2.USC
3.Oklahoma
4. WVU
Theses are my four that could win the NC (Sam Bradford looks like a good QB). I hope they all go undefeated so that some sort of playoff will happen.
About: Pretenders and Contenders in College Football 10/29

Here's another pro-playoff comment from yesteryear by your's truly:
Posted Tuesday July 17, 2007
I see a slippery slope happening. That fifth team will get screwed out of it, so they'll cry for an 8 team playoff.
Really though, 8 teams will be enough b/c that 9th team crying about not getting in won't mean as much to me as the fifth team whining.
About: New play-in format by 2011?

Naw, your carefully weighed opinions were pretty obvious... I just happened on this blog wheni had a spare 15 minutes (though I have to make a Grant and Sherman jab to a sotherner at least once every 6 months).

Actually, I have changed my opinion of favoring a 4-6 team after reading all the pro-playoff articles and comments - I am not down to a 4 team playoff, and only because of situations like Auburn (guess that wasn't their intent, huh?)

With some fans (not necessarily UGA) I just hate seeing them gripe after their team has a great season. I tend to judge it more by how close a team did with the players they had.

...and did you catch the "Honor" you received in "My Alotted Goof" blog in recognition of your TD record?

The Civil War is still going on down here, didn't you know that?

I'd rather see more UGA fans celebrate the succes of the team as opposed to lament not being in the NC.

I'll go check out my "honor" right now.

U.S. Grant was a drunk and Sherman was bipolar. And the Bogus Championship Scam is here to stay.

...and in all 3 cases, the win still counts...

"Maybe the BCS has gotten it right every year except 2004 (and maybe 2003 when Oklahoma lost the Big 12 championship game)."
As an Oregon Fan, I have to say 2001 was a little questionable. Nebraska, destroyed by Colorado in Big12 Chmp.game, play's and is stomped by Miami in the NC Game. Oregon win's Pac-10 and wastes Colorado in the Feista Bowl. I dont know. if you dont win your Division or your Conference Chmp. how do you play for the N.Chmp.? Oregon would have tested Miami if not upset them. Oh what could have been.

Good piece on the Pac-10, Big 10 vs. +1 Playoff. http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,5143,695274709,00.html

Yeah, I don't mention 2001 as much as I should.

Why doesn't the BCS voters give another team besides USC a share of the title too? It's all messed up.

You know what though? All of our discontent keeps us interested and active.