BCS vs Playoffs Debate
by BearsNecessity on Jan 4, 2009 1:00 AM PST
Email
PrintStarted this at California Golden Blogs, figured it has crossover appeal everywhere.
Obviously there have been calls everywhere for a system that determines a true national champion, and for what appears to be the sixth or seventh time in nine tries the current system has not produced a satisfactory result. So I've decided to break down the options and let you guys decide on what system you like best.
Current system--BCS #1 vs #2 for the national championship
Pros: Gives you a clearcut title game with the teams that pollsters and computers generally agree are the top two teams in the nation. Sometimes provides a compelling matchup like this season.
Cons: If there are a bunch of teams with the same record, how would you figure out who the best team was? 45-35? Didn't Auburn go 13-0? Nebraska lost their Big 12 title; why are they playing Miami for all the marbles? How is USC's loss to Oregon State worse than Oklahoma's or Florida's losses? How does Ohio State keep getting back in here (and in the BCS)?
And the questions go on, and on...
Who likes this system: Jim Tressel, Rose Bowl fanboys, Monopoly Man, General Grievous, Amitab Bachchan
Old system--whoever's ranked #1 by the pollsters/computers at the end of the bowl season gets the #1 seed.
Pros: Restores the traditional tie-ins. Big 12 champ goes to Cotton, SEC goes to Sugar, Pac-10/Big 10 in the Rose again. Creates classic clashes and revives local hatred, provides continuity to past rivalries and keeps the sports entirely regional. Makes things easier for fans, and puts a lot of their faith in the computers.
Cons: The computers decide the national champion. I'm sure people will be comfortable with this approximately never. Plus the midmajors get excluded. Plus certain conference just will never get the chance to face off against each other. There is no national championship and college football goes back to being a regionalistic sport that no one on the East Coast cares about.
(Of course you could argue for a +1 adaptation, where the top two teams after the bowls gets to go to a MNC, but that'd cause just as much problems, no?)
Who likes this system: Tom Hansen, Wilford Brimley, Yosemite Sam, Ayn Rand, whales, British character actors.
+1 system--a four team playoff, where #1 goes against #4 in some BCS bowl and #2 goes against #3 in some BCS bowl and meet for the title game x weeks later. The additional bowls could be kept for the regular conference champs who don't get in.
Pros: Would end much of the painful lobbying that seems to follow the last two weeks of the season, since most of the grousers would get their chance (i.e. Texas and USC this year, Georgia and USC last year, Michigan the year before, Auburn two years before that, etc.). Would allow for two more compelling matchups of the top 4 teams and would definitely generate high ratings.
Also, the Big 10 commish hates it, so it must be good.
Cons: Great for the teams, but will the fans travel around to TWO sites in two weeks? Even if it was at one site how would they stay occupied for the time they were there? The only other option seems to be that #1 and #2 get a home game and they play it a week after the conclusion of the reg, but you'd have to think that's comically unfair to #3 and #4. Plus some big conferences would protest not being included (hint hint ACC/Big East) because their teams always blow.
Other issues; midmajors would still be excluded from this formula under most circumstances since their SOS barely cracks the Top 12. They would still be left out of the mix even if they ran the table, barring dramatic circumstances. The Utahs and Boise States of the world would be out of the party and calling for their own piece of the pie.
Who likes this system: Pete Carroll, Mack Brown, Bob Stoops--essentially, everyone who's won a BCS title already.
6-8 team tournament--Top teams from each conference compete against each other (plus two at-largers), probably first round would give the higher ranked team home field; maybe an option for top 2 teams to get a first round bye. Basically a +2 format.
Pros: Would allow every conference to get a representative, no one would feel excluded, so every conference would have its strength gauged against every other conference in that certain year;
Cons: OH NO KIDS GOTTA TAKE FINALS OH NO THEY'LL NEVER FIND A WAY TO TAKE THEM OH NO WHAT DO WE DO????
Well, more importantly, the more games you add on, the less likely fans will travel along; and because it's a college event, it's not likely to attract the huge sponsors and $10,000 boosters that will put their fannies in the seats like the Super Bowl does. In other words, the National Championship could take place in a half-empty stadium.
Who likes this system: Italian Spiderman, Cesar Milan, Mark Wahlberg, postmodernists, and the Geico Gecko.
Crazy ideas: Anything above 8 teams in a tournament. The Pirate suggested that the team with the best academic GPA should win tiebreakers (something that'd favor Texas Tech in the Big 12), which would be great because a Harvard-Yale title game would enthrall everyone at MENSA. Phil Steele wants a 64 team playoff, which I'm sure will be approved by the year 2509. The college football season would probably end around February 28.
My personal preference in terms of the 'looney train' is to have a playoff system implemented overseas in Europe. BCS winners get a free study abroad program in Europe in the springtime, and they could play football games every week with random soccer stadiums. They could fill the stadium with rabid English soccer hooligans and studying abroad college students. Whenever they throw an incompletion fans could start throwing flares on the field, and then Rey Maulauga would run into the stands and start breaking them with his bare hands.
Pete Carroll would totally set up a pad in Amsterdam and start wearing a beret, Tim Tebow and the Pope could have a 'philosophical' discussion, Mack Brown and Bob Stoops could start learning how to lobby for votes in different tongues, and ABC could dedicate plenty of reality show time to it to encourage Americans to travel overseas. I believe Barack Obama should approve this plan immediately.
Who likes crazy ideas: Phil Steele, Mike Leach, Stephen Colbert, the cast of Monty Python, and Charles Bronson.
If you have alternatives, provide your proposals. And vote and debate--which system do you like best?
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of SB Nation or the Addicted To Quack Moderators. FanPost opinions are valued expressions of opinion by passionate and knowledgeable Oregon fans.
48 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Something new would be nice.
I would love to see a change made to the current system. One thing that I would like to see play a part is SOS. Something like, in order to get into the playoff, your team SOS needed to be 90 and below or 80 and below. Just some way to keep the teams with triple digit SOS from beating bad teams and talking national championship afterward. Teams that play and/or beat other good teams should be rewarded more than the team that plays the 107th ranked schedule and goes undefeated.
I bleed grellow. Maybe I should get that checked out.
Problem is that it would exclude programs like Utah (101) and Boise (107), and they probably deserve their fair shot as much as anyone else.
(Less so Ball State (119) and Tulsa (120), who I agree should never be considered)
by BearsNecessity on Jan 4, 2009 11:33 AM PST up reply actions
Yeah...
BSU is 1-4 in bowls their last 5 seasons. Utah won their game this year, and at least they also won a BCS game a few years back. I like to see good games with good teams. I was really saying that If a playoff were installed, I would not want to see teams scheduling cupcakes in order to up their win total and thus their seed. If SOS were rewarded(“home” field?) that might encourage teams to schedule a little tougher. Had BSU scheduled better teams in their OOC this year, they would have never even been in any BCS talk. If they couldnt beat TCU, how would they ever beat Penn State? I’m just hatin’ on teams that play soft schedules…thats all.
I bleed grellow. Maybe I should get that checked out.
How about using NON-CONFERENCE strength of schedule. Nobody can control their conference schedule, or the strength of it. What we are trying to avoid is people scheduling cupcakes. Using non-conf SOS would stop teams from scheduling too many cupcakes. That being said, the schedules are made so far in advance there’s no way to know whether, say, Purdue, will be good 4 years after you schedule a home-and-home with them.
"When Bellotti attempted to shake the hand of Oklahoma State quarterback Zac Robinson after the game, Robinson offered his left hand. His right was swollen and battered from the Ducks' defense."
by MarineCorpsDuck on Jan 4, 2009 4:46 PM PST up reply actions
Now were talkin'...
You are on to something. Even with Purdue, they may not be a stellar team…but they are at least a team in a BCS conference. There are a good amount of “mid majors” that only schedule one non-conference game with a BCS school and mix the rest up with 1AA and non-BCS schools. This might encourage them to schedule a little more agressively and earn their BCS talk.
I bleed grellow. Maybe I should get that checked out.
Yep. If you are a NON-BCS team and you want to get in, you better schedule BCS teams in the non-conference. If not, you can still go to the lower bowl games. It’s not unreasonable to expect them to play BCS teams in the non-conference if they want to be included since they play non-BCS teams during the conference season.
"When Bellotti attempted to shake the hand of Oklahoma State quarterback Zac Robinson after the game, Robinson offered his left hand. His right was swollen and battered from the Ducks' defense."
by MarineCorpsDuck on Jan 4, 2009 8:32 PM PST up reply actions
Here's me being a madman:
Scrap all the bowls. No one gives a crap about Louisiana Tech playing Northern Illinois, or Nebraska playing Clemson.
24 team playoff: top 8 get first-round byes, bottom 16 play the first round the week after conference championship week. Games are held at minor bowl sites based on proximity to the higher seed. Here’s how it would shape up next year(using this year’s BCS standings):
First Round, to be held Dec 10-12
#9 vs. #24 (Boise St. vs. Boston College) @ University Stadium, Albuquerque
#10 vs. #23 (Ohio St. vs. Northwestern) @ Ford Field, Detroit
#11 vs. #22 (TCU vs. Ball St.) @ Amon G. Carter Stadium, Fort Worth
#12 vs. #21 (Cincinnati vs. Missouri) @ Rogers Centre, Toronto
#13 vs. #20 (Oklahoma St. vs. Pitt) @ Liberty Bowl, Memphis
#14 vs. #19 (Georgia Tech vs. Virginia Tech) @ Legion Field, Birmingham
#15 vs. #18 (Georgia vs. Michigan St.) @ Bank of America Stadium, Charlotte
#16 vs. #17 (BYU vs. Oregon) @ Sam Boyd Stadium, Las Vegas
Second Round, to be held Dec 17-19
#1 (Oklahoma) vs. 16-17 winner @ Alamodome, San Antonio
#2 (Florida) vs. 15-18 winner @ Citrus Bowl, Orlando
#3 (Texas) vs. 14-19 winner @ Cotton Bowl, Dallas
#4 (Alabama) vs. 13-20 winner @ Raymond James Stadium, Tampa
#5 (USC) vs. 12-21 winner @ Sun Devil Stadium, Tempe
#6 (Utah) vs. 11-22 winner @ AT&T Park, San Francisco
#7 (Texas Tech) vs. 10-23 winner @ Sun Bowl, El Paso
#8 (Penn St.) vs. 9-24 winner @ RFK Stadium, Washington DC
Elite 8, to be held Dec. 24-26. Teams will be reordered based on seed, best team left is the number 1 seed, and so on…
1-8 @ Texas Stadium, Irving
2-7 @ Georgia Dome, Atlanta
3-6 @ Qualcomm Stadium, San Diego
4-5 @ Superdome, New Orleans
Final Four, held on Jan. 1. Teams again reseeded.
1-4 @ University of Phoenix Stadium, Glendale
2-3 @ Dolphin Stadium, Miami
Championship Game, held on Jan 7 at the Rose Bowl in Pasadena
Pros:
Cons:
It's spelled "M-A-R-C-H-I-N-G-B-A-N-D."
I support inroywetrust in his support of The VD Special in his support of me supporting Roger Kieschnick in his quest to becoming the best Kieschnick ever to play professional baseball.
by Takimoto on Jan 4, 2009 11:51 AM PST reply actions 1 recs
Heh, you think team fans are going to travel to four neutral sites to seat 40-60k stadiums in four weeks during Christmas?
by BearsNecessity on Jan 4, 2009 12:30 PM PST up reply actions
that's why it's a madman proposition
a way to make it more feasible is to pick less neutral sites and sell tickets as a package, like March Madness.
there’s holes in every system, it comes down to a matter of opinion. should the holes in the system be getting the national champion correct or selling tickets? This is just a radical proposal of the “I wanna get the National Champ right” camp.
It's spelled "M-A-R-C-H-I-N-G-B-A-N-D."
I support inroywetrust in his support of The VD Special in his support of me supporting Roger Kieschnick in his quest to becoming the best Kieschnick ever to play professional baseball.
Just for one example
Boise fans would have to travel to New Mexico. Then if they won, they’d have to book tickets to DC. Then if they won that, they’d have to swing back to the South somewhere, then hook around to Glendale or Miami, then back to Pasadena. That’s about 15,000 miles.
The better option might be for homefield advantage through the first four rounds, no?
by BearsNecessity on Jan 4, 2009 12:38 PM PST up reply actions
probably is a better scenario, i was trying to find middle ground with keeping the majority of the bowl sites. And the BCS fucks the small conferences anyway. It’s just four weeks of fucking instead of just one.
It's spelled "M-A-R-C-H-I-N-G-B-A-N-D."
I support inroywetrust in his support of The VD Special in his support of me supporting Roger Kieschnick in his quest to becoming the best Kieschnick ever to play professional baseball.
Mad? Yeah, maybe.
Mad? Yeah maybe. But only for two reasons: Too many teams and trying to coordinate with all those non-collegiate stadiums. What I do like is that you used the current BCS system to determine seeds. That’s a solid place to start.
I’d prefer to go the more traditional 16-team route used by other college football divisions. No one gets a bye. And I would play the first two rounds at the home stadium of the higher seed. That guarantees full stadiums and limits the travel logistics for the student athletes and fans for half the teams. That is until the semis and the finals, which I would play at large neutral sites, three games a year rotating between the four traditional sites.
First, a few ground rules.
No one plays more than 12 regular season games, period. Teams playing in a conference title game play a 13th. Season starts the last weekend in August and must be completed no later than the weekend following Thanksgiving. That’s ample weeks to give everyone a bye at some point.
For example sake, I’m taking 2008 BCS results and applying the bracket to the 2009 calendar. Rather than assume all the higher seeds win I’m going to throw in some relatively random upsets to illustrate how the pairings change as the tournament progresses.
Fri., Dec. 4, 2009
#9 Boise St @ #8 Penn St
#12 Cincinnati @ #5 USC
Sat., Dec. 5, 2009
#16 BYU @ #1 Oklahoma
#15 Georgia @ #2 Florida
#14 Georgia Tech @ #3 Texas
#13 Oklahoma St. @ #4 Alabama
#11 TCU @ #6 Utah
#10 Ohio St. @ #7 Texas Tech
Sat., Dec. 12, 2009
#8 Penn St @ #1 Oklahoma
#10 Ohio St. @ #2 Florida
#6 Utah @ #3 Texas
#13 Oklahoma St. @ #5 USC
Sat., Dec. 19, 2009
#5 USC @ #1 Oklahoma – Sun Devil Stadium (Fiesta Bowl)
#6 Utah @ #2 Florida – Superdome (Sugar Bowl)
Fri., Jan. 1, 2010
#5 USC @ #2 Florida – Rose Bowl
Only six teams from this list of 16 have to be replaced in non-playoff bowl games. For example, Oklahoma State is in the tourney, so Oregon faces Missouri in the Holiday Bowl. Maybe a couple bowl games go away. Big deal. There’s usually some attrition among low-tier bowl games anyways.
Pros – We get a true champ like every other sport and every other division. Students being away from their campus is minimized. There will not be half-full stadiums. TV ratings will be huge and will drive sponsorship millions and broadcast rights fees which would be filtered proportionally to participating conferences. And, don’t forget increased stadium gate revenue (yes, they’ll rightfully jack up ticket prices) and increased merchandise sales for each university. Office bracket pools explode nationally and Rick Neuheisel just can’t help himself. New Years Day once again becomes the pinnacle of every college football season.
Cons – Some traditional major bowl tie-ins would be broken. Ultimately current dollars available to the major conferences have to be there or the notion of a playoff – as sensible as it may be – will never fly. We’ll have less to argue about in our precious blogsphere.
Discuss…
The ATQer formerly known as Seattle Quacker...oh yeah, I hate the wings.
I like the concept of this but the teams that play in the National Title game will end up playing 4 extra games. In cases of conferences with a championship game, you are looking at 17 total games through the entire season/post-season. Even if you moved the games out so that they didn’t interfere with finals week (like your schedules have), I think you would have a tough time getting University presidents to buy-in from an academic standpoint
--Dominic
Autzen Stadium is where great teams go to die." - J. Brady McCullough, The Michigan Daily.
you could put a 12 game cap on the regular season, with 11 being preferred. it’d get rid of one less non-conference game but would we really have missed Utah State this year?
It's spelled "M-A-R-C-H-I-N-G-B-A-N-D."
I support inroywetrust in his support of The VD Special in his support of me supporting Roger Kieschnick in his quest to becoming the best Kieschnick ever to play professional baseball.
Yeah, long season for a few teams.
Conceptually, I don’t think it’s hard to get past. Final Four hoops teams play 5 to 6 extra games, that after usually playing 2 or 3 conference championship games. Physically, however, it is a long season of wear and tear on the body.
There will have to be some kind of sacrifice. I guess this is one I’m willing to make.
The ATQer formerly known as Seattle Quacker...oh yeah, I hate the wings.
Extra Games
I dare you to go ask Pete Carrol or Mack Brown or Kyle Whittingham if they’d play a few more games right now. I bet you those coaches, along with their teams, would do play all the way through January if it meant getting a shot a clear-cut title.
I just cannot believe all the arguments against a playoff. I’ll never get it. Not only does every other legitimate sport have a playoff, EVERY OTHER DIVISION OF THIS SPORT HAS A PLAYOFF!!!
"When Bellotti attempted to shake the hand of Oklahoma State quarterback Zac Robinson after the game, Robinson offered his left hand. His right was swollen and battered from the Ducks' defense."
by MarineCorpsDuck on Jan 4, 2009 8:37 PM PST up reply actions
Think of the Children?
There will have to be some kind of sacrifice. I guess this is one I’m willing to make.
I guess this is where I start to draw the line personally about how far we can go with the system to make it fair. I completely agree that something must be done and am certainly anti-BCS to a large regard but these are just kids in the end. At some point, there is just more to life than football and even though the system isn’t perceived as “fair” by the fans (and potentially even those participating in it), there has to be some consideration in for schooling. These are student athletes after all. At some point, you have to let them take finals, concentrate on studies and actually graduate. Graduation levels for athletes is already fairly poor (but getting better). Increasing their commitments to a potential of 4 games goes beyond the breaking point. I’m not an education guru but I believe it when people much smarter than me have argued that point.
I don’t think that football can really be comparable to basketball in terms of a few extra games. A single game in football can take a lot out of you. Basketball just doesn’t have the same rigors that football does. I don’t think they are comparable 1 for 1 or even 1 for 2.
--Dominic
Autzen Stadium is where great teams go to die." - J. Brady McCullough, The Michigan Daily.
all good points. the reasonable option is a plus 1 or a 4 team situation. but i’m a dreamer.
It's spelled "M-A-R-C-H-I-N-G-B-A-N-D."
I support inroywetrust in his support of The VD Special in his support of me supporting Roger Kieschnick in his quest to becoming the best Kieschnick ever to play professional baseball.
I’d have to say at most there could only be an 8 team tournament, with a +1 the likely compromise until we can get to that level. 3 games might be too much.
by BearsNecessity on Jan 4, 2009 11:16 PM PST up reply actions
If there was a plus 1 this year, who would be in it? The winner of Florida/Oklahoma and who? Texas (assuming a win), USC, and Utah all deserve a shot IMO.
"When Bellotti attempted to shake the hand of Oklahoma State quarterback Zac Robinson after the game, Robinson offered his left hand. His right was swollen and battered from the Ducks' defense."
by MarineCorpsDuck on Jan 5, 2009 2:42 PM PST up reply actions
Exactly.
A +1 would rarely solve anything.
If 16 teams is too many – though it’s not for other divisions – then I’d certainly be happy with an 8-team tournament. Still far better than the current system and I will admit the odds of a #9 through #16 seed winning out are minimal. We probably consider it a travesty that USC, Utah, Texas or Alabama isn’t getting a shot more so than than Boise State or Ohio State. 8-team would ultimately get the job done.
The ATQer formerly known as Seattle Quacker...oh yeah, I hate the wings.
If it was an 8 team playoff...
less than 7% of the teams would make the playoff. That would be perfect. Each BCS champion could get in, plus a couple extra, determined by a SELECTION COMMITTEE.
Also, it could hopefully put more emphasis on conference games, and because so few teams get in, the regular season would still be very, very important.
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog
First thing, delay poll results
until 6 games into the season. Even better, don’t even take them until then.
And then take the computer polls out of the equation. If voters want to look at them, fine, but they shouldn’t be used in an official capacity. All they do is provide a false sense of scientific accuracy because they’re presented in spreadsheets, and most people see a spreadsheet, glance at all the numbers and think, “I don’t want to read this whole thing. But it’s an Excel document with lots of numbers, so it must be right, otherwise there’d be cells with "#####” in them."
But if people really want to keep computers involved, use Xbox simulations. They’re just as valid.
As long as we’re at it, kill off the “Coaches’” poll. Everybody knows that most of the time it’s the “Coaches’ Secretary or Teenage Daughter or Staff Intern’s Poll”. And even when a head coach actually casts his own vote, does he really have a good grasp of the quality of teams around the nation? Where does he find the time? And if he does have the time to familiarize himself with the pros and cons of some team he’ll never play, shouldn’t he be using it to coach his team?
So I guess I’m saying let the AP choose the national champion. At least we know who the voters are and how they vote.
Because no matter what the system is it will still be broken by a bad polling system.
it’s ridiculous that a sport that a definite win/loss system is roped into the same category as figure skating and gymnastics in that the champion is essentially determined by judging.
It's spelled "M-A-R-C-H-I-N-G-B-A-N-D."
I support inroywetrust in his support of The VD Special in his support of me supporting Roger Kieschnick in his quest to becoming the best Kieschnick ever to play professional baseball.
The football champion should be chosen
the same way as the Bowls, Band Dork Style champion is.
How is the Bowls, Band Dork Style Champion chosen, anyway?
i chose all the bowls, i’m just lazy as shit and never posted the january bowls. my picks are in the AtQ bowl mania though.
It's spelled "M-A-R-C-H-I-N-G-B-A-N-D."
I support inroywetrust in his support of The VD Special in his support of me supporting Roger Kieschnick in his quest to becoming the best Kieschnick ever to play professional baseball.
Poll delay.
Good notion. Six week delay on any polls feels about right. I’m okay with computer polls. The overall BCS formula is complicated, but done by some seriously smart folks. The key tweak needed seems to be strength of schedule. I definitely would like to see the coaches poll killed. Way too many conflicts of interest.
The ATQer formerly known as Seattle Quacker...oh yeah, I hate the wings.
BCS
I’ve long said that I think the BCS formula should be used as a tiebreaker only when the human polls can’t agree. If both human polls have the same top 2, they should play.
"When Bellotti attempted to shake the hand of Oklahoma State quarterback Zac Robinson after the game, Robinson offered his left hand. His right was swollen and battered from the Ducks' defense."
by MarineCorpsDuck on Jan 4, 2009 8:38 PM PST up reply actions
Should the mainstream media be deciding who our national champion is? We might just end up with a steady stream of “SEC champ, USC, Oklahoma/Texas, Notre Dame or Ohio State” champions.
by BearsNecessity on Jan 4, 2009 11:17 PM PST up reply actions
Well, they pretty much already do, anyway
All the polls basically provide cover for each other. It’s not like there are huge differences between the AP, Coaches and computer polls.
Go with one poll, like the AP, and at least you get rid of all the bullshit.
The AP seems the least qualified to do so
I’d give it to non BCS coaches (how stupid is the Coaches Poll?), the computers, and maybe Sagarian or Football Outsiders. Stat people who know what they’re talking about.
by BearsNecessity on Jan 5, 2009 12:15 PM PST up reply actions
let’s get the blog poll involved.
It's spelled "M-A-R-C-H-I-N-G-B-A-N-D."
I support inroywetrust in his support of The VD Special in his support of me supporting Roger Kieschnick in his quest to becoming the best Kieschnick ever to play professional baseball.
I love the blog poll, but a lot of them only do it because it has no influence on a mythical championship. I would be willing to bet if you just replaced the coaches poll with it, you’d get a lot of people to drop out of the blog poll. (Brian from MGOBlog included)
It's spelled ""S-H-U-Y-O-U-V-E-D-O-N-E-S-O-M-E-N-I-C-E-T-H-I-N-G-S-W-I-T-H-T-H-E-P-L-A-C-E"
I’m one of the people who complains about the current system but is too lazy to come up with a plan that works. On the bright side, Takimoto’s plan looked fun
My HDTV is a JustinTV streamer who doesn't just use a webcam :(
doesnt it? i realize it’s completely illogical but it just looked like a lot of fun.
It's spelled "M-A-R-C-H-I-N-G-B-A-N-D."
I support inroywetrust in his support of The VD Special in his support of me supporting Roger Kieschnick in his quest to becoming the best Kieschnick ever to play professional baseball.
Why isn't there a poll option for "anything but the current BCS system"?
Jerryd Bayless has two emotions: Kill and Win.
"I want to put points on your face."
-Rudy to Pau Gasol
NorrisHopper30: "someone injure pubert jones"
There are five options for anything but the current BCS system!
by BearsNecessity on Jan 6, 2009 3:01 PM PST up reply actions
How do I vote for all of them?
I don’t care what system we have, just so long as it changes. Any of those are better than what we have now.
Jerryd Bayless has two emotions: Kill and Win.
"I want to put points on your face."
-Rudy to Pau Gasol
NorrisHopper30: "someone injure pubert jones"
by rockingharder on Jan 8, 2009 8:24 PM PST up reply actions
There is too much reading here.
Can I get a summary with bullet points and/or a graph?
:-)
It's spelled ""S-H-U-Y-O-U-V-E-D-O-N-E-S-O-M-E-N-I-C-E-T-H-I-N-G-S-W-I-T-H-T-H-E-P-L-A-C-E"
Sure
Is a mancrush on LeGarrette Blount considered beastiality?
Addicted To Quack [dot] com; Where the Shufelts, butthols, and like half of the population of Chicago roam...
Want to call me that again in front of my trusty Big Daddy?
Is a mancrush on LeGarrette Blount considered beastiality?
Addicted To Quack [dot] com; Where the Shufelts, butthols, and like half of the population of Chicago roam...
Wouldn’t that make you a little sister?
Creeeeepy…
It's spelled ""S-H-U-Y-O-U-V-E-D-O-N-E-S-O-M-E-N-I-C-E-T-H-I-N-G-S-W-I-T-H-T-H-E-P-L-A-C-E"
If I'm a little sister, would that make you Tenenbaum?
:O
Is a mancrush on LeGarrette Blount considered beastiality?
Addicted To Quack [dot] com; Where the Shufelts, butthols, and like half of the population of Chicago roam...
That’s with the assumption I care about you.
I like to view myself more like Atlas…
OH SNAP!
It's spelled ""S-H-U-Y-O-U-V-E-D-O-N-E-S-O-M-E-N-I-C-E-T-H-I-N-G-S-W-I-T-H-T-H-E-P-L-A-C-E"
mwahahahaha
Is a mancrush on LeGarrette Blount considered beastiality?
Addicted To Quack [dot] com; Where the Shufelts, butthols, and like half of the population of Chicago roam...
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Addicted To Quack
Related FanShots on Addicted To Quack
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
