I mean come on, they lost to Oklahoma twice, but they beat Kansas who got a BCS birth? Where is the logic?
2007-12-04 15:26:05 · 20 answers · asked by Schawkeye57 1 in Sports ➔ Football (American)
I'll agree that Missouri should have been awarded a BCS spot over Kansas but this type of thing happens from time to time. The team that loses in the conference title game often gets #3 status and a team that didn't participate in the game gets #2. That even happened with Georgia. UGA goes to the Sugar, while Tennessee, the runner-up goes to a non-BCS bowl. Not saying that it's right, but that's the politics of the bowl system.
We need a playoff. And with enough BCS train wrecks, we'll get it. But in the meantime we just have to deal with it. I understand when it drives people away from the college game. But myself - I love college football way too much to walk away. So I just choose to deal with the system.
2007-12-04 15:34:18 · answer #1 · answered by SoulDawg 4 UGA 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
2 reasons:
1. 2 losses against one loss.
2. Money. If they have to make a choice, the bowls are going to pick the team they think will bring the most fans and the most money with them. Teams like Kansas that have new success after being so bad for so long tend to have strong followings, and they'll take a lot of money with them. If the perception is Kansas fans will send more people and spend more money than Missouri fans, Kansas will get the invite 10 times out of 10
2007-12-04 23:32:06 · answer #2 · answered by beakerbum 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
There's no logic in the BCS system, it's a flawed system, get rid of it, i can't stand it any longer. How can a Mizzou team that beat KU 2 week ago and now KU got the BCS berth over a team that just beat them and ranked higher in the BCS system, Mizzou is ranked #6 and KU # 8 in the BCS system. Also, 3 computer ranked Mizzou higher than OU in their final ranking, a team that beat them 2 time this year. Screw the BCS, if the NCAA don't have a playoff, go back to their old system, where you have voters determine the #1 team.
2007-12-04 23:41:54 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
They had two chances to be a legitimate Oklahoma team. Both times they blew it. That is why they are not in the BCS. If they were worthy they would have one at least one of those games, if not two. We all want a playoff instead of the BCS, and if this year had one, Mizzu would be out with a loss to Oklahoma.
2007-12-05 03:03:56 · answer #4 · answered by just some guy 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Exactly my thoughts. Kansas is in a BCS bowl... Ranked 8th.... Missouri Ranks 6th.... and is in the Cotton Bowl.... I don't care if Missouri lost twice to Oklahoma. The voters are stupid. Missouri is the only top ten team not in a BCS bowl.... THere is no logic.
2007-12-04 23:35:16 · answer #5 · answered by Not Sayin... Just Sayin! 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I am a Missouri Tigers fan, but the truth is, they blew it when it counted the most. They lost to Oklahoma twice. Missouri has come a long way. They should be proud of their season, as should Kansas.
2007-12-04 23:35:37 · answer #6 · answered by KG 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The logic is that Missouri was blown out by Oklahoma twice and Kansas lost ONLY ONCE and that was relatively close one to Missouri.
2007-12-04 23:42:37 · answer #7 · answered by Cutting Edge 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No more than 2 teams per conference in the BCS bowls. Mizz had 2 losses, Kansas had 1. BCS decided Kansas was the better team. Why are you baffled?
2007-12-04 23:32:06 · answer #8 · answered by GoPies 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
they had a chance for a BCS game. they lost remember. Missouri can complain all they want but the Bowl people who picked Kansas that was their right. They didnt need logic. They picked who they wanted to play in that game. Had Missouri won their conference they would have had an automatic bid. no offense but dont cry for your team when they had a chance for a BCS national championship bid and let it go.
2007-12-04 23:30:09 · answer #9 · answered by originalitybygeorge 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Hmmm... I suppose getting all cocky before the championship game and then getting humiliated on national TV kind of left a negative perception in voter's minds.
I think they are still going to the Viagra Bowl or the Cheese-Whiz Bowl, or something.
2007-12-05 00:14:42 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋