BCS bowls

[Deleted]

A good argument against the BCS is the bowl lineup they have planned this year:

Title game: Oregon vs. Auburn - sure, that one should be good
Rose Bowl: TCU vs. Wisconsin. Should be mildly interesting but only because TCU is our for-now MWC representative.
Orange Bowl: Stanford vs. Virginia Tech. I don't think VT is in Stanford's league.
Sugar Bowl: Arkansas vs. Ohio State. Just don't care.
Fiesta Bowl: UConn vs. Oklahoma. Wow.

These bowls mostly suck.

[waztec]

Dec 5, 2010 10:05:18 GMT -8 @nielsbohr said:

A good argument against the BCS is the bowl lineup they have planned this year:

Title game: Oregon vs. Auburn - sure, that one should be good
Rose Bowl: TCU vs. Wisconsin. Should be mildly interesting but only because TCU is our for-now MWC representative.
Orange Bowl: Stanford vs. Virginia Tech. I don't think VT is in Stanford's league.
Sugar Bowl: Arkansas vs. Ohio State. Just don't care.
Fiesta Bowl: UConn vs. Oklahoma. Wow.

These bowls mostly suck.

As you said, yawn.

[joshjones1]

UConn, lol. That sucks!! SDSU football would beat them, I am sure of it.

Automatic qualifying can suck my ass.

[jhonka34]

I agree, although there is added intrigue with the Ohio St. prez. talking trash about TCU and Boise. So if they manage to thrash a higher ranked conference mate in the vaunted Rose Bowl it makes him look even worse.

[PowayAztec]

I'm hoping Oklahoma trounces Connecticut just to further emphasize how the Big East doesn't deserve to be AQ.