The 2011 Bowls and the PTB agenda

[Riddlewire]

****There has been an invisible hand at work in the sport of football for a long time. Constantly pushing things around. Changing the rules. Manipulating the narrative. At the high school level, it exists in the form of the "recruiting industry", which has a blatantly obvious agenda. In the NFL, it all takes place in the high offices of Team Management, in collaboration with their marketing partners in the anti-white media. But in college football, the hand that guides is known as the BCS.

****Bowl games don't decide anything. And the BCS bowls don't represent the ten best teams in the country. But that's how the media sells it to the public. The rankings don't agree with the teams selected for these ten slots. Four of the top ten ranked teams (according to the BCS itself) aren't even playing in these games. Instead, we get the #11, #13, #15, and #23 teams. How did that happen? As the media would no doubt tell you, "It's complicated". But I don't see anything complicated at all about these game matchups. In fact, I see a decided trend about these seemingly arbitrary team selections.

Take a look at these games and tell me if you see anything suspicous (I have included handy color indicators to give you a hint):
((Also pay attention to the media entity which is responsible for bringing us this Kabuki Theater))

BCS Bowls:
BCS Championship
January 9, 2012 New Orleans, LA, 9:00 pm ESPN
LSU vs. Alabama

Discover Orange Bowl
January 4, 2012 Miami Gardens, FL, 8:00 pm ESPN
Clemson vs. West Virginia

Allstate Sugar Bowl
January 3, 2012 New Orleans, LA, 8:30 pm ESPN
Virginia Tech vs. Michigan

Tostitos Fiesta Bowl
January 2, 2012 Glendale, AZ, 8:30 pm ESPN
Oklahoma State vs. Stanford

Rose Bowl Game
January 2, 2012 Pasadena, CA, 5:00 pm ESPN
Wisconsin vs. Oregon

****So which teams don't belong? #11 Virginia Tech, #13 Michigan, #15 Clemson, and #24 West Virginia are all ranked outside the top ten. The #6, #7, #8, and #9 teams all get left out of the bowl system that was supposed to give college football fans the matchups of the best teams in the country. What else do those groupings of teams have in common? The four teams from the top ten that got left out of the system all have white quarterbacks, whereas the four teams from outside the top ten that replaced them in the BCS bowls all have black black quarterbacks.

****Negroes have never proven themselves to be reliable performers at the quarterback position. Not in college and especially not in the NFL. Two of the black quarterbacks in these BCS games have been outperformed by their white backups when the situation has presented itself. As has EPSN's favorite black quarterback Robert Griffin. Clemson's thick-lipped black quarterback managed to guide his team to a three loss season against an incredibly soft schedule, with their only two good wins being against another one of the black quarterbacks in this group. West Virginia played an even softer schedule and, likewise, ended up with three losses on the season. Exactly how are the Mountaineers better than Arkansas, Boise State, and Kansas State, which all finished ahead of them? Tyler Wilson's Arkansas team has a particularly strong case against these matchups. The "Two team per conference" limit doesn't apply when two of the teams from one conference are playing in the championship game. So Arkansas should've gotten the nod over Virginia Tech.

****The caste media had their dream matchup in the "Championship" game last year. The BCS system couldn't deliver for them again this year, as Darron Thomas choked away two games for Oregon and Russell Wilson's horribly underperforming* Wisconsin team was the only other black quarterback squad in the top ten to pair up with LSU in the title game. So the BCS gave them the next best thing. A slate of BCS Bowl games filled with undeserving black quarterbacks. This is the image that the PTB want to sell. They spent many years purging the minds of America of any thoughts that white men could ever play runningback. In the last few years, they've set their sites on the quarterback position. You can expect this pattern to repeat itself in the future, with strange outcomes, rule changes, and curious bowl selections becoming the norm.


------------------------------------------------------
*Even DWFs and negro-loving trolls have no choice but to admit that when a college team has an offensive line that's more massive than the defending Super Bowl champs, there is no excuse for losing even one single game. All you have to do is hand the ball off over and over and occasionally toss a short pass. Wilson lost twice, even with all the time in the world to find an open receiver, and with the #6 scoring defense in the country. This is indefensible.

 

[jaxvid]

I agree whole heartedly with your post however I think it should be noted that the Bowl system is NOT a playoff but a private enterprise operation that is set up to make money. Teams are selected depending only partly based on merit, they also want to get people to the games so they try to select teams with a large fan base that will travel or give them good TV ratings.

Unfortunately DWF's love of black quarterbacks is endless and this helps drive the agenda. You can blame it on back room conspiracies but it is hard to tell what comes first the chicken or the egg? Do DWF's love the black quarterbacks because the media/sports industry want them to or does the media/sports industry give us black quarterbacks because the DWF's want them?

 

[icsept]

The bowl system is an absolute joke. Primarily, the PTB has guaranteed another year to perpetuate the myth of SEC superiority. What better way than to have two SEC teams in the finals, a no lose situation. I hope the ratings tank. Only an SEC niche market would give a rat's ass about this game. Why in the hell would anyone want to watch this game? If LSU wins, then they just prove what we already knew. If Alabama wins, then they are 1-1 and need to play a rubber match. It's garbage.

 

[Deadlift]

The system gave "points" to West Virginia because one of their losses was to LSU. They are where they are because Tino Sunseri (PITT) choked in their rivalry game, and quotabacked Cinci lost to Rutgers (20-3) in a game where Cinci's defense played well.. Derek Wolfe, Schaffer and company had big games.

I can't take much issue with Michigan getting a birth, as they were very good this year (10-2), and their loss to Iowa was somewhat controversial. The ACC on the other hand... a JOKE.

--Clemson should lose lots of "points" for their losses to NC STATE and G-Tech. G-Tech finished the season asleep at the wheel.

--V-Tech.. a thoroughly overrated team that played a joke of a non-conference schedule. If they were in the Big 10 or SEC, they would have several losses. In recent years, several of V-Tech's defenders - that got Drafted - have failed to translate to the NFL. That will continue to happen. For whatever reason, V-Tech's defense tends to be undersized at positions like d-line. Their strongpoint has usually been their secondary/special teams.

The ACC being treated with such credibility, particularly V-Tech, is the biggest problem I see. Clemson benefitted from this also, but their non-conference schedule was better than Beamer's V-Tech (South Carolina, Auburn, Troy and Wofford). If the ACC is ensured at least one BCS birth, it would have to go to Clemson and only them.

 

[dwid]

Its amazing how Lee has been totally phased out of the offense the closer LSU has gotten to the end of the season. Here is Jefferson's stat line from the last game 13 attempts, 5 completions for 30 yards, 1 td. Surely he must be an amazing runner then? 6 attempts for -5 yards. They have been winning by defense and special teams. Alabama is going to kill them.

This actually works out great for me. My wife says I watch too much football, I don't have any incentive to watch any of those games except Stanford. I'll record the others and fast forward to guys like Danny Coale making a catch.

Not many outside of sec country are going to care about the national championship. I also don't know many people that care about the other teams.

 

[Leonardfan]

The bowls do provide a chance for non SEC vs SEC matchups. Every time a non SEC beats an SEC school it gives us ammo vs those at BSPN that claim the SEC is some magical conference. The past few years in bowl games the SEC has gone around .500 in Bowl games. I am hoping for a sweep this year in every game except the championship game.

The fact LSU plays Alabama shows the system is broke. Alabama had their chance and could not win on their home field. They are not even the winners of their conference!!! Time to let another team step in and try.

Boise St and TCU were both more deserving of at large bowl berths than Va Tech. I was opposed to all the conference realignment with teams going to conferences that did not make geographic sense but now I don't care...seeing how flawed the system is. If Boise St would go to the Big East they would be the perennial representative if they were in that conference. I hope Petersen stays in Boise, he is white friendly as they get and the lineage of white qbs at that school should continue from Dinwiddie to Zabransky and now Moore.

 

[Freethinker]

Some of these bowl game matchups make no sense. How does #7 Boise St get screwed out of the BCS and then get matched up with Arizona St? The Sun Devils are awful and probably didn't deserve to be in any bowls. Shouldn't Boise face on of the top SEC, ACC or Big 10 teams that missed the BCS as well? Boise could have "proven" something against one of those teams. Now they can't make that statement unless they beat Arizona St by 40 points or something crazy.

 

[FootballDad]

There may be light on the horizon for proponents of a playoff system. This coming offseason, 11 conference commissioners and Notre Dame will discuss the possibility of a "Plus 1" system, which is for all intents and purposes a 4-team playoff. It would preserve the current bowl system, yet at least expand the field for the championship to 4 teams. Here is a really long article that explains the whole thing. If it was in effect this year, here is the way that the Jan. 2 games would look:

Here’s how it would look this season. All the other bowl games would continue as is; nothing would change there. But this would be your Jan. 2 schedule:
1:30 p.m.: Orange, No. 2 Alabama vs. No. 3 Oklahoma State.
4:30 p.m.: Rose, Oregon vs. Wisconsin.
8:30 p.m.: Fiesta, No. 1 LSU vs. No. 4 Stanford.

Is that a day of football you might be interested in?
On Jan. 9, the winners of the Orange and Fiesta then would meet in the Sugar Bowl for the national title.

 

[FootballDad]

I was looking for this article a couple of weeks ago, but just re-found it. The author of the above story, Dan Wetzel, is a strong playoff proponent and an ardent BCS critic. He wrote this well-researched article about the fraud that is the BCS system that backs up Riddlewire's topic head 100%. A snippet:

Understand this, though: No matter what it says, the BCS is not a system designed to choose a championship matchup. It is merely a tool to stave off the inevitable playoff bowl directors fear will cut into their millions in tax-free profits, a casino-style distraction to placate the masses.

 

[Riddlewire]

Hmmm...

Wetzel gets the details right, but misfires on the sum. This is not surprising, since he is not equipped to recognize the caste agenda. While he is of course correct that the bowls (each of which are independent) seek to maximize profits, the BCS system doesn't always do that for them. The monster known as the BCS will "do its best" to put the heavy-traveling and heavy-spending fanbases in the best bowl slots (for local revenue as well as ESPN's ad revenue). But, at the very top, the bowls called the "BCS Bowls", there is a decided agenda that isn't much related to money. Unless you think that Virginia Tech (a poor traveling fanbase) and Michigan (a million miles away) will send more fans to New Orleans than "right next door" Arkansas and Kansas State, which is closer than VaTech and has a large fanbase in Texas. A Razorbacks-Wildcats Sugar Bowl would be a sellout with overflow attendance. But neither the Hogs nor the Fightin' Snyders have a black quarterback, whereas Beamer's Blackies versus the Rich Rod-assembled Wolverines gives the PTB a highly desirable (to them) matchup of Big Name, but comically unskilled, black quarterbacks.

While Wetzel and I aren't making exactly the same point, his article does include information that backs up my claim.

It currently consists of two-thirds human opinion polls that are ripe for political foolishness, full of oft-uneducated voters and subject to groupthink.

The other third features an average of six computer formulas, which quantitative analysts have declared mathematically unsound and their own proprietors admit are not as accurate as they could be. Five of the computer formulas are secret, even kept from the BCS, which means no one, absolutely no one, knows if they are accurate or honest.

This is the same reason I'm adamantly opposed to ESPN's QBR rating system. It's a black box which uses subjective analysis (and keeps the particulars a secret) to determine certain "statistics". Cam Newton had a 4INT day and he rose nine spots in the QBR rankings. The BCS computers are similar. They spit out results that somebody wants. And poll voters are very easy to influence, through either the din of hype (see: Robert Griffin's Heisman campaign waged by all the sports media), or by pressure (see: also Robert Griffin's Heisman campaign. i.e., "if you don't want Griffin for Heisman, you're a racist").

 

[DixieDestroyer]

They have about 10 bowls too many. Teams should win 8 games to qualify. In the end, they (badly) need to implement a playoff system.

 

[jaxvid]

There are also people (like me) who don't give a rat's ass about a National Championship. I think it violates the spirit of college football to have one team as the winner take all champion. There are over a hundred teams that play vastly different schedules against vastly different teams and it is too much to expect that the best teams will always be matched together. For example, in the pro game a team that frequently loses a bunch of games wins the Super Bowl, that can't happen in the college game because you can't hardly make the cut with one loss.

The whole National Championship thing is driven by corporate amerika which wants to sell ever more products and advertising to more and more sheeple so they create the buzz for a game (in this case Alabama vs LSU) that traditionally would create very little interest in the rest of the country. I really don't care about that game, and won't watch it just like I have not watched the last few games. It was also one thing to have all the big games on Jan 1 so watching could be a family experience, but now the games are stretched so far out from New Year Day that it's a joke.

Also the comment above about local fans (Arkansas or Kansas State) sending more fans to the game then Michigan (a million miles a way) is bull sh1t, not only does Michigan sell it's full alotment of tickets but people who travel to the game spend money at the bowl site on hotels and dinners and entertainment. I once went to a bowl game in Orlando where Michigan played Alabama. The Michigan people traveled there a week before and spent money at hotels and resteraunts, the Alabama fans drove down that day and left after the game. Now which group do you think the locals wanted more???

 

[sport historian]

There are also people (like me) who don't give a rat's ass about a National Championship. I think it violates the spirit of college football to have one team as the winner take all champion. There are over a hundred teams that play vastly different schedules against vastly different teams and it is too much to expect that the best teams will always be matched together. For example, in the pro game a team that frequently loses a bunch of games wins the Super Bowl, that can't happen in the college game because you can't hardly make the cut with one loss.

The whole National Championship thing is driven by corporate amerika which wants to sell ever more products and advertising to more and more sheeple so they create the buzz for a game (in this case Alabama vs LSU) that traditionally would create very little interest in the rest of the country. I really don't care about that game, and won't watch it just like I have not watched the last few games. It was also one thing to have all the big games on Jan 1 so watching could be a family experience, but now the games are stretched so far out from New Year Day that it's a joke.

Also the comment above about local fans (Arkansas or Kansas State) sending more fans to the game then Michigan (a million miles a way) is bull sh1t, not only does Michigan sell it's full alotment of tickets but people who travel to the game spend money at the bowl site on hotels and dinners and entertainment. I once went to a bowl game in Orlando where Michigan played Alabama. The Michigan people traveled there a week before and spent money at hotels and resteraunts, the Alabama fans drove down that day and left after the game. Now which group do you think the locals wanted more???

I think I've posted this before but back in the 60s it was said that an Auburn fan arrived at a bowl game on the day of the game in a pickup truck and brought his lunch.

 

[Colonel_Reb]

The playoffs have worked for every other level of college football and it would be no different for the biggest teams. It isn't enough to be a "plus one" scenario, except as a short term transition away from the mess we have now, and a transition that would end up with a playoff that includes 20 teams like the FCS currently does, or 24 as D-II does, or 32 like D-III does, or 16 like the NAIA does.

Plus one is a good first step, but it can't stop there. The arguments against a playoff are bogus, even attendance. With so many meaningless bowls with 6-6 or even 6-7 teams in them (UCLA), there will be plenty of empty seats in many of the 35 bowls this year. When you dilute the product, as the FBS has continued to do, you'll have less and less interest.

 

[Highlander]

BSPN has a poll on their college football page that says "Aside from the National Championship Game, which BCS Bowl matchup are you most excited to watch?"

Classic BSPN, making the assumption that the viewer event wants to watch Coal Bowl II.

Anyway, 55% selected Stanford vs. Oklahoma St (first place), while the Black Bowl (WV vs. Clemson) was in last place, receiving just 6% of the vote, and didn't even carry the state of South Carolina...they went with Stanford vs. Oklahoma St. as well.

 

[Deadlift]

If Michigan got a better Bowl game than they deserved, the same thing would have to be said about Nebraska. 3-losses, routed by Wisconsin and Michigan and a home-loss to Northwestern.

But, as it stands now, they have been given a shot to take down a 2-loss South Carolina team. If Martinez doesn't step up, it will be very difficult to do, but they've been given "the stage" (him and Burkhead).. that's the key here. Why is Burkhead being "allowed" to be on a good stage? It's because it has more to do with money..

And, Michigan getting a birth can't be all about race when they have a Whiter defense than both Arkansas and South Carolina! On the surface, the job of the BCS is to look at Michigan's body of work, not to nitpick Denard's week-to-week performances. Afterall, Taylor Martinez could be nitpicked too.

And, why is a 3-loss Baylor playing a 5-loss Washington in a bowl? Baylor -vs- Nebraska really would have been a perfect bowl, pairing teams that had a couple of ugly losses a piece. Of course, if Baylor were to win, the System would have the opportunity to shower them with "even more prestige." So, why didn't they set a game like that up?

 

[qj]

Most of starters and back-ups on FBS teams are just a bunch of poorly compensated hacks. They don't play for their school; they play for the off chance that they will make it to the NFL. The vast majority never make it to the next level. The players also do not really represent the big schools they play for, and the money junkies in these schools are more than happy to exploit these poorly compensated "student" athletes for a few years and then turn them out into the streets without a degree or an education. Big college football is just a bad joke, for the fans, the students and the renta players.

Take Arizona State. Look at the make-up of its (renta) team. Mostly thugs who don't belong in school and do not look or act like the other, real students. I'm at the point to where I have a great deal of difficulty rooting for them, even the Kalispell Kid. Just learned a few days ago that they've been invited to a bowl game and have been matched up with Boise State. ASU doesn't deserve to go to the ANY bowl, and Boise State deserves a much better opponent. But hey, this is major college football, big money we're talking here. What a joke!

On Friday night, I'm getting home early to watch the Griz play in the semifinal game of the FCS playoffs against Sam Houston State. Once again, the FCS playoffs have been fun to watch, and we'll know who the best team is, unlike the f--BS--division. The FCS has its problems too. Five CAA teams were let in unfairly because they're the "SEC" of the FCS--another joke. All five were gone by the semis and Portland State should have been invited, but wasn't, because it's a West Coast team. However, the FCS playoff system is much better than the dysfunctional FBS.

Look, the FBS is all about keeping the system the way it is, maintaining the CASTE system and making sure the current big dogs stay the big dogs. That's the only reason there isn't a playoff system. The big guys like the big money and no way in hell are they gonna let some upstart mess with their gravy train. Nope, noway.

When I was a kid, I used to love watching all the bowl games and it was alot of fun. It wasn't about the number 1 team for me; it was about the great games that were played. But, I was young, and the popularity contest was probably in full swing even in the '70's. However, without a playoff system, no team should be crowned or be able to claim they are the champions with a straight face. We know from the FCS playoffs that the popular (#1 ranked team) often does not make all the way through to win the championship, so I imagine the same would be true for the FBS as well.

In retrospect, I wish Mike Hass would've taken a scholarship to play for the Griz instead of having to walk-on at Oregon State. Yes, he would not have won a Freddy B. award, but he probably would've competed multiple times for a national championship title with the Griz, and still could have been drafted like he was at OSU. After all, Marc Mariani managed to get drafted and he's playing on Sundays, unlike Hass who got shafted big-time because he won that damn Freddy B award. I bet many OSU fans do not even remember who the hell Hass is today whereas he would've ALWAYS been remembered as a great Griz player--you can be assured of that. I noticed that few OSU fans defended Hass in message boards as he struggled to find a place on an NFL team. In the end, Mariani will always be remembered by the Griz fans while Hass, history shows us, was just another guy who played in some meaningless B.S. Bowl games for OSU. Whoopee.

Well, here we are again in December, and the big boys will be raking in millions with their plug-n-play laborers in the various B.S. Bowl Games for the next few weeks before the cycle begins anew next Spring.