Soxbadger

Fumbling the ball is one thing, losing a ball on a fumble to the other team is a good part luck. IE Saints fumbled the ball 3 times, lost all 3. 49ers fumbled the ball 3 times, lost 1. I assume thats the 4th aspect of the game the 49ers are better at, having the ball bounce their way. Your team won, thats all that counts.

Its hard to tell. If its just pain tolerance, he might as well suit up and see how it feels. If it could get worse or reinjured, probably safest to sit him today.

Alex Smith has not been passing that way they entire season. Yesterday he threw for 299 yards, highest amount this entire season, he had 42 attempts, highest amount this season, 3td tied for highest amount, 24 completions, highest amount. Half of Smith's game this year he didnt even throw for over 200 yards. Now granted if you go back in this thread you will see me defending Smith and saying that he was good enough to win a Super Bowl, but the guy accounted for 4 tds, which I believe may be the first time he has ever done that. Lets be realistic here, if the Saints dont self implode with turnovers, they probably win that game. Which is why I from the start said that the 49ers could win, but that the Saints had the larger margin of error.

Im generally in the anyone but the Patriots camp, but since the fates already handed me a Packers loss, I consider these playoffs to be a success and will just enjoy the game.

I cant really see the Ravens beating the Patriots when they struggled with the Yates lead Texans. I think the Giants are going to be smarter than the Saints and double Davis for most of the game. Thats why I got the Eli-Brady rematch.

Not really, winning or losing a game doesnt mean that the system is any better or worse. Packers lost partially because of the Giants passing game. 49ers were able to beat the Saints because their QB had one of the best games of his career. If the Giants or 49ers didnt throw the ball as well as they did, they likely would have lost. If anything, it would appear that passing defense kind of matters.

If I had to predict, Id say we are going to get Brady v. Eli II.

Think I said something about the Giants beating the Packers a few weeks ago.

FSU destroyed UNC, odd.

? Many of these bowl games arent selling out already, Big10 championship game didnt even sell out because many fans wanted to save money for the trip to Pasadena. If you cant sell out a Championship game that is in driving distance, you arent selling out preliminary games. The other option would be a NCAA style, where they have multiple games in the same stadium and try and attract random people as opposed to just fanbases.

The problem is you just cant keep adding games and keeping the previous games having the same value, not to mention fans arent made of money and most fanbases wont be able to say, travel to Cali for the Rose Bowl and then go to Florida for the NC game. There would have to be games played at home (like the playoffs for FCS), if you want any chance of filling these stadiums. Many schools dont have big enough fanbases to sell out 1 bowl game, let alone 3.

Which is ultimately what I believe happens. No way are the power conferences going to turn football into basketball where they get a pittance from the NCAA.

Anytime Wisconsin loses to a nonranked team at the Kohl Center its an upset. I personally have always thought this would be one of Wisconsin's tougher years as a team, but they had no business losing to Iowa, and really should have beat MSU as well. Against Iowa, Wisconsin shot 35%overall and 10% (3-28) from beyond the arc. Iowa beating Wisconsin at Wisconsin is an upset and will be one at the end of the year as well.

There is no way to not devalue one of their properties. Their are 2 choices, a) no guaranteed bids or b) guaranteed bids. In a no guarantee system, ESPN devalues all of its assets. In a guarantee system, ESPN increases the value of some of its assets and devalues other assets. Im just working with the system thats been suggested, 4 team playoff and currently 5 power conferences. How do you think it would work? Because I just dont see the Big10 agreeing to a new system out of the kindness of its heart, there has to be some tangible advantage.

The game was during winter break so the home court advantage wasnt as great. Nonetheless, I didnt think Iowa would beat another top half Big10 team, so the fact they handled Michigan shows that Iowa was better than I thought.

I like the 49ers, just dont think they will beat the Saints. I think the Saints have more margin for error because they have a far better offense.

ESPN has money tied to all the conferences. Their real fear for ESPN is watching the Big/Pac keep moving things off of ESPN to their own networks and to FOX. The Big12 almost fell apart, they basically have no negotiating power with the other power conferences. Now, if ESPN wants to bankroll the Big12 and was willing to offer Big10 a 50mil guarantee every year, regardless of whether or not a team makes the "final 4", I am sure the Big10 will listen. And I said that likely ACC/Big12 would get to split a spot (both ESPN contracts), thats basically the same representation that they receive in the BCS. Every year SEC/Big have had 2 BCS spots, the ACC/Big12 generally only get 1 spot. So half a spot compared to a full spot, is 1:2 ratio, pretty much what is going on now.

I guess the Wisconsin loss to Iowa isnt so terrible now.

How would it be an epic s*** storm? In the precursor to the BCS (The Bowl Alliance and The Bowl Coalition) the top Big/Pac team played in the Rose Bowl still. The only reason the BCS ever worked was that the Big/Pac were given the Rose Bowl concession and the Rose Bowl was guaranteed that it would at worst only have to take a non-AQ 1 time every 4 years. I just cant see any incentive for the Big10 to agree to any playoff where they are not guaranteed a spot. Can anyone give me a good one? The Big10 has consistently made it clear it only cares about money. In 2012 the Big10 got over $40 mil from their 2 BCS games and another 10mil+ from other bowl games. Thats 50mil, in order for the Big10 to agree to any playoff it would need a guaranteed payout of $50mil annually (similar with the SEC). In a 4 team playoff, that would mean that the contract at minimum would have to be $200mil per year(and thats only if its being split 4 ways). If you were to add in 2 more conferences and non-aqs, now you are talking about 4 games for $350mil plus per year. It sucks for the fans, but right now money is driving this ship.

Style of play in Europe made his stats look not that impressive in Spain.

It depends. If the ACC/Big12 wants the SEC/Big/Pac money they will agree. There is already talk of Big East losing its automatic bid, so if Big12/ACC agree to split a bid thats 4 bids for 4 playoff spots. If they dont agree, I can see Pac/Big/SEC making a deal outside of the BCS, for a 6 team playoff (2 from each conference) with the top 2 seeds getting buys. You could use the Rose Bowl, Coliseum, Jerry World, etc for the games and those 3 conferences would make a killing in money.

Danman, It doesnt matter about how good the conference is, what matters is money. Big10/Pac10 have the most of it and if Delaney is in favor now so you know its only because the Big10 is going to make more money. Right now the Big10 has had 2 BCS teams every single year, it isnt because the Big10 had the best teams, its because the Big10 have a ton of alumni who travel to games. Also Big10/Pac10 just signed a cooperation agreement, and I just cant imagine them agreeing to any deal where they arent guaranteed a spot in the final 4.

Classic "keep the game close" foul.

This is about to be a brutal call, because not only was there no foul, the call came after the quarter ended.

I just dont understand how you can screw this up. All of these guys have run in elections before, they all know you need to follow the rules. Just mind blowing.