From: kevin@traffic.den.mmc.com (Kevin Rodgers)
Subject: Re: Bowl alliance a crock!
Organization: Martin Marietta Western Internal Systems, Technical Operations
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 19:23:45 GMT

In article <92275.071556KRB104@psuvm.psu.edu> <KRB104@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
>  Let me begin by stating my absolute contempt for Penn State football.  I
>go to graduate school in State College, but my alliances are not with the
>Nittany Lions.  I say this to say that it must be robbery if I am writing
>something in support of PSU football.  The bowl alliance is a crock of sh**.

What a disclaimer!

>In yesterday's USA Today, it was reported that the bowl alliance has said
>that if Penn State is undefeated, they will not send a Washington
>or a Florida State to the Blockbuster bowl to crown a true National Champion.
>First of all it is the alliance's fault for not having PSU as a part of it
>this season anyway, thus PSU had to make the unprecedented committment to the
>Video people in the summer.  To rip off the fans of a true national champion-
>ship game in the first year of the alliance is horrible.  I want to see #1
>vs #2 if at all possible!!!!

According to Mark Mitchell's Most Excellent Summary of New Bowl
Arrangements:

|The Bowl Coalition I (BCI) pool is composed of Notre Dame (provided
|they win 7 games), the ACC champ, the Big East champ, and the two
|highest ranked runners-up from the ACC, Big East, Big 8, PAC-10 and
|SWC.  The Bowl Coalition II (BCII) pool is composed of the remaining
|three conference runners-up.

...

|Blockbuster Bowl:   BCII #2 vs. At Large                       (1)
...
|(1)  1992 Blockbuster At-Large selection: Penn State
...
|In either case, the BCII teams are chosen by the BCII bowls in the
|following order: Gator, Blockbuster, and Hancock.

So the alliance has _not_ issued an ad hoc ruling concerning the
Blockbuster pairing, assuming that the BCII #2 team is not Washington
nor FSU (or whomever you have in mind).  You are are outraged that
a #1 vs. #2 match-up has been prevented, but:

(1) The bowl alliance has never claimed to guarantee a #1-#2 matchup,
    just that it increases the chances that it could happen;

(2) If Washington/FSU/Other finishes #1 or #2, they either would win
    their conference and participate in the bowl to which it is
    committed (Pac 10 => Rose, ACC => BCI, etc.), or possibly finish as
    runner-up (e.g. Washington if tied with UCLA) and be committed to a
    BCI pool bowl by virtue of their high ranking.

[Mark: I still don't understand whether a team can refuse a bowl
invitation determined by the bowl alliance, or what the repercussions
would be if they did.]

>   Well now that that information is off my chest, I don't think PSU will be
>undefeated anyway, I have tickets to the Miami game and I will be cheering
>hard for Miami, in the PSU student section (yes, my life insurance is paid
>up).  Also, I think that the Fightin' Irish will beat them also!  But I am
>dismayed at the possiblity that we will not have a true national championship
>game.  I hope everyone is becoming UCLA fans, because Washington will not
>lose with their relatively weak schedule.

Your aformentioned contempt for Penn State football has exposed your
inability to comprehend and appreciate everything that is good in this
life :-) I hope your fellow students treat you humanely, though none
would want to claim you as such.  Enjoy the Nittany Lions' victories
over the Canes and Irish!  (And who cares who Michigan beats in the Rose
Bowl, anyway?)
-- 
Kevin Rodgers				kevin@traffic.den.mmc.com
Martin Marietta MS A16401		(303) 790-3971
116 Inverness Dr. East
Englewood CO 80112 USA			GO BUFFS!
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college