So its week eight, and you've seen the initial BCS standings. If you're an SEC honk, its good times. If you're undefeated Iowa you're wondering why one loss USC is breathing down your neck. If you're USC, well, Pete Carroll's already had his say. But what about the rest of us? And does it matter since the only time it really matters is in the final standings once the entire regular season has played out?As the character in the old Mike Myers Saturday Night Live skit would say ... discuss. Please join us in our usual midweek college football chat, starting at 2 PM Eastern. Chat application after the jump.
Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Welcome to the New Negro Leagues:
As I pan the football pages each day on aol, I see the persistent fawning of BCS Conference teams, many with 2 and 3 losses and the complete absence of anything on the twp no-BCS conference teams in the top 10: Boise State and TCU. Except for the Hawaii debacle a few years ago, each team from the MWC or the WAC has take down its BCS conference opponent in its BCS bowl. Even with good teams that have consistently beaten the cream of the BCS (remember BYU-OU), the MWC and WAC cannot crack the BCS cartel. Kept back, brushed aside, ignored, the MWC and WAC have become the "Invisible Man" of NCAA football. Even when they win, pundits and the press skip over them when addressing the BCS ranking, focusing on the teams below them and asking why they are ranked where they are.
In the 30s and 40s, the Negro Leagues played in the shadows - usually on Sundays. Many of those teams would have won a lot of pennants of they played the White Leagues. I believe today, head to head against any BCS conference, the MWC and WAC would get more wins up and down the conference teams. Certainly for the ACC and Big East (TCU knocked off both Clemson and Virginia from the ACC), and could give the SEC, Pac 10, Big 10 and Big 12 a run for it's money. Utah's shellacking of Alabama last year proved that even with Barry Switzer's "nobody on the Utah team would have even been recruited by Alabama" comment. He got his hat handed to him at halftime. So we in the Negro Leagues plod on, waiting for a chance to show the some higher power that they deserve to play on the same field. How many more times does a TCU ('05), a Boise State ('07), or a BYU ('09) have to beat Oklahoma to prove they are at least the equal of the other conference members and deserve a seat at the table? The "5th BCS bowl" was supposed to be the token offering of the "separate but equal" chance for a Negro League team to play a big bowl, but the BCS saw it as just another slot for one or two of their teams to play a consolation game with a second division BSC team and maybe a Negro League team. But here we are, still, separate-but 'equal' as long as we are more equal that other BCS teams. Today with 2 Negro League teams in the top 10 of the BCS, there will be some new ruling or interpretation that would only admit one of the two even though teams below them at the end of the year got automatic bids.
Welcome to the New Negro Leagues
I really get tired of hearing about the color think. White and black alike need to get over it. It's 2009. It's in the past. It seems like something is always being brought up. It's like there is a big message behind all of this. What I have to say is we are all Americans. Not afro americans, not white americans, not hispanic americans, we are americans, period. Please drop all of this different crap. The statement you are trying to make is honestly very bigoted to me and I don't want to hear it. Period!