Welcome, Guest! Please login or register. - Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: NCAA President Mark Emmert on a 4-team football playoff . . .  (Read 2219 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Law_Hawg

  • Placidly murderous giant
  • King of the Hogs
  • *****
  • Posts: 16803
NCAA President Mark Emmert on a 4-team football playoff . . .
« on: January 13, 2012, 01:42:02 PM »
http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=ap-ncaa-bcsplayoff

Emmert said the following yesterday in his state of the association speech in Indianapolis:

The notion of having a Final Four approach is probably a sound one.  Moving toward a 16-team playoff is highly problematic because I think that’s too much to ask a young man’s body to do. It’s too many games, it intrudes into the school year and, of course, it would probably necessitate a complete end to the bowl system that so many people like now.


Now, currently in FCS, the NCAA asks a young man's body, if that young man's team reaches the national championship game, to play in up to 16 games (that's 11 regular-season games and as many as 5 playoff games in their 20-team playoff field).  In 2011, the semifinals were played on December 16 and 17, which apparently didn't intrude into the school year too badly.  Plus, anything that necessitates a complete end to the bowl system seems, more and more these days, like a good thing.   
Caedite eos! Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius.

Offline Tusk till Dawn

  • King of the Hogs
  • *****
  • Posts: 5196
Re: NCAA President Mark Emmert on a 4-team football playoff . . .
« Reply #1 on: January 13, 2012, 01:54:20 PM »
I've always been a FBS playoff opponent, but that doesn't mean I think the current system is highly effective.

I think a "plus-one" four team playoff would be tittays. It still preserves the importance of regular season, while making CFB's postseason more of a meritocracy.

Plus, anything that necessitates a complete end to the bowl system seems, more and more these days, like a good thing.   

And I couldn't disagree more with this school of thought.
« Last Edit: January 13, 2012, 01:58:09 PM by Tusk till Dawn »
Neither snow nor rain nor heat nor gloom of night keeps TTD from his Hot Damn.

Offline shortstop6

  • Cooled-Out Buddhist Cowboy
  • Administrator
  • Boar
  • *****
  • Posts: 2634
  • Lathed from solid envy, thick with menace.
Re: NCAA President Mark Emmert on a 4-team football playoff . . .
« Reply #2 on: January 13, 2012, 01:59:16 PM »

The notion of having a Final Four approach is probably a sound one.  Moving toward a 16-team playoff is highly problematic because I think that’s too much to ask a young man’s body to do. It’s too many games, it intrudes into the school year and, of course, it would probably necessitate a complete end to the bowl system that so many people like now.


I don't suppose Emmert cared to weigh in on what the current structure of NCAA basketball does to a young man's body?
I'm an outdoorsman.  I like getting drunk on patios.

Online HogofWar

  • Boar
  • ****
  • Posts: 4605
  • Tits Out, Captain.
Re: NCAA President Mark Emmert on a 4-team football playoff . . .
« Reply #3 on: January 13, 2012, 02:17:15 PM »
http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=ap-ncaa-bcsplayoff

Emmert said the following yesterday in his state of the association speech in Indianapolis:

Moving toward a 16-team playoff is highly problematic because I think that’s too much to ask a young man’s body to do. It’s too many games, it intrudes into the school year and, of course, it would probably necessitate a complete end to the bowl system that so many people like now.



No aMm! :suicide:

Offline FayettenamHog

  • wants you to go fuck yourself
  • King of the Hogs
  • *****
  • Posts: 5446
  • Bielemania
Re: NCAA President Mark Emmert on a 4-team football playoff . . .
« Reply #4 on: January 13, 2012, 02:47:17 PM »
http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=ap-ncaa-bcsplayoff

Emmert said the following yesterday in his state of the association speech in Indianapolis:

The notion of having a Final Four approach is probably a sound one.  Moving toward a 16-team playoff is highly problematic because I think that’s too much to ask a young man’s body to do. It’s too many games, it intrudes into the school year and, of course, it would probably necessitate a complete end to the bowl system that so many people like now.


Now, currently in FCS, the NCAA asks a young man's body, if that young man's team reaches the national championship game, to play in up to 16 games (that's 11 regular-season games and as many as 5 playoff games in their 20-team playoff field).  In 2011, the semifinals were played on December 16 and 17, which apparently didn't intrude into the school year too badly.  Plus, anything that necessitates a complete end to the bowl system seems, more and more these days, like a good thing.

It's an absolute retard argument to say they can't have a playoff because of what it does to someone's body because, as you point out, every other division has a playoff.

You can have a 8 or 16 team tournament and still have bowl games. Those lower tier bowls are mostly owned by ESPN just so they have games to show. They can continue to make that happen if they want and will get similar ratings as they do now.

Online VegasHog

  • Tush Hog
  • ***
  • Posts: 1864
Re: NCAA President Mark Emmert on a 4-team football playoff . . .
« Reply #5 on: January 13, 2012, 03:08:42 PM »
It's an absolute retard argument to say they can't have a playoff because of what it does to someone's body because, as you point out, every other division has a playoff.

You can have a 8 or 16 team tournament and still have bowl games. Those lower tier bowls are mostly owned by ESPN just so they have games to show. They can continue to make that happen if they want and will get similar ratings as they do now.

Agreed. And four teams is a fricking joke. Part of the reason this is being discussed now is because of the Bama-Lsu rematch.  Assuming they had the 4 team playoff in place this past season, they would more than likely have ended up with that game anyway.

Offline The Satchuation

  • Wild Hog
  • **
  • Posts: 678
Re: NCAA President Mark Emmert on a 4-team football playoff . . .
« Reply #6 on: January 13, 2012, 03:15:25 PM »
The school-year stuff is a big crock of stewed turd  – those games would be happening over the winter break. I don't know if he's noticed, but there's a good month between the conference title games and the BCS championship. And why is it Emmert takes the discussion straight from 4 to 16? How about addressing a 6- or 8-team playoff?

1. LSU - bye
4. Stanford vs. 5. Oregon

3. Ok. St. vs. 6. Arkansas
2. Alabama - bye

Aside from the anomaly of there being the possibility of four regular-season rematches in that scenario, that's tits. I'll accept top four, however. And I'm not good at maths, so I'm still pumping numbers into my TI-Eleventythreve to figure out how the 16-team playoff kills the 70-team bowl system.

How do people buy this bullshit at all?

Offline ArkGuy

  • King of the Hogs
  • *****
  • Posts: 10553
Re: NCAA President Mark Emmert on a 4-team football playoff . . .
« Reply #7 on: January 13, 2012, 03:40:58 PM »
I love bowls and I think the players do, too.

But, the Pinstripe Bpwl in front of (maybe) 20,000 people or the Kraft Hunger Bowl with two teams without a winning record, both played in baseball stadiums, doesn't help the "Let's Save the Bowls at All Costs" argument.

Add the Cotton as a BCS bowl, take the top 10 teams based purely on rankings, seed the Top 4 as semi-finalists that rotate around the BCS venues, go back to playing on New Years, and the two finalists meet a week later.

You'd still have bowls, it'd only extend the season one week for two teams, and it would all be over before 2nd semester starts.  Plus, you could keep conference championship games.
"As the leader of all illegal activities in Casablanca, I am an influential and respected man."

Offline Jostlyn McCocksack

  • Suck my cock I'll murder your family!!!-jacki mhoon
  • King of the Hogs
  • *****
  • Posts: 8796
  • PWNED.
Re: NCAA President Mark Emmert on a 4-team football playoff . . .
« Reply #8 on: January 13, 2012, 03:46:31 PM »
I have never understood how or why anyone ever accepted the reasons the NCAA gave for not having a playoff.

Division 1 AA has a lot of tough academic institutions, and yet they play through December.  Nice it only took the media 10 years to put this in print.
"Coaches who listen to fans often end up sitting with them."
Bobby Knight

Online hogfan58

  • Bret Bielema, cheese curds and frozen custard...you betcha!!
  • Boar
  • ****
  • Posts: 2726
Re: NCAA President Mark Emmert on a 4-team football playoff . . .
« Reply #9 on: January 13, 2012, 04:21:31 PM »
The playoff system with the bowls won't work and here's why....

Lets take the scenario given below:

1. LSU - bye
4. Stanford vs. 5. Oregon

3. Ok. St. vs. 6. Arkansas
2. Alabama - bye

4v5 play in Orange Bowl; 3v6 in Fiesta, then LSU plays 1/5 winner in Rose and Bama plays 3/6 winner Sugar with winners playing in BCS game. If your a Oregon/Stanford/OSU/Ark fan, can you afford to go to 3 games? If not, do you risk skipping the 1st one, hoping you win so you make the 2nd one? What about airfare?At such short notice, the fares will be thru the roof. Car rentals? Hotels? And the bowls/cities themselves will have to pick up the slack to fill the seats...what does Miami care about Stanford or Oregon? The stadium will be just as empty as it was for Clemson-WV.

That's one of the reasons the lower divisions play on campus until the championship games...to ensure crowds.
I'm asking you as fans, don't give up on those players, don't give up on us, it's our program, it's the state of Alabama program...it's not one individuals program, so hang in there...

Online PorkRyan

  • King of the Hogs
  • *****
  • Posts: 22538
  • Stirke First, Strike Hard, Show No Mercy
Re: NCAA President Mark Emmert on a 4-team football playoff . . .
« Reply #10 on: January 13, 2012, 04:26:43 PM »
The playoff system with the bowls won't work and here's why....

Lets take the scenario given below:

1. LSU - bye
4. Stanford vs. 5. Oregon

3. Ok. St. vs. 6. Arkansas
2. Alabama - bye

4v5 play in Orange Bowl; 3v6 in Fiesta, then LSU plays 1/5 winner in Rose and Bama plays 3/6 winner Sugar with winners playing in BCS game. If your a Oregon/Stanford/OSU/Ark fan, can you afford to go to 3 games? If not do, you risk skipping the 1st one, hoping you win so you make the 2nd one? What about airfare?At such short notice, the fares will be thru the roof. Car rentals? Hotels? And the bowls/cities themselves will have to pick up the slack to fill the seats...what does Miami care about Stanford or Oregon? The stadium will be just as empty as it was for Clemson-WV.

That's one of the reasons the lower divisions play on campus until the championship games...to ensure crowds.

Yeah, it will not work on campus.  One thing I would love, but it would never happen, is to have an 8 team playoff with round 1 played at one site.  Could you imagine a weekend of Bama vs Oregon, Ark vs OU, USC vs LSU, and Texas vs Ohio St all played in Dallas on a Saturday/Sunday?
I got the glory, got the fame, the money, the jewels, the cash, the denali, getting drunk on the reg. fricking good times on the reg, yachts on the reg, sex on the reg, basically all the aMm men fantasize about.

Offline Law_Hawg

  • Placidly murderous giant
  • King of the Hogs
  • *****
  • Posts: 16803
Re: NCAA President Mark Emmert on a 4-team football playoff . . .
« Reply #11 on: January 13, 2012, 04:31:35 PM »
Yeah, it will not work on campus.  One thing I would love, but it would never happen, is to have an 8 team playoff with round 1 played at one site.  Could you imagine a weekend of Bama vs Oregon, Ark vs OU, USC vs LSU, and Texas vs Ohio St all played in Dallas on a Saturday/Sunday?


I don't see why it wouldn't work on campus, with higher seeds hosting games, and then a championship game at a neutral site . . . again, a la the current structure in FCS. 

I agree with the general proposition that multiple playoff games at neutral venues would be much too expensive for many reasons.  Even the NFL doesn't do this. 
Caedite eos! Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius.

Online hogfan58

  • Bret Bielema, cheese curds and frozen custard...you betcha!!
  • Boar
  • ****
  • Posts: 2726
Re: NCAA President Mark Emmert on a 4-team football playoff . . .
« Reply #12 on: January 13, 2012, 04:40:01 PM »

I don't see why it wouldn't work on campus, with higher seeds hosting games, and then a championship game at a neutral site . . . again, a la the current structure in FCS. 

I agree with the general proposition that multiple playoff games at neutral venues would be much too expensive for many reasons.  Even the NFL doesn't do this.

That would work...but not with the current bowl structure. That is the problem. It's like trying to fit a square peg in a round hole.

A decision will have to be made...keep the bowls or have a playoff... won't be able to have both.
I'm asking you as fans, don't give up on those players, don't give up on us, it's our program, it's the state of Alabama program...it's not one individuals program, so hang in there...

Offline Law_Hawg

  • Placidly murderous giant
  • King of the Hogs
  • *****
  • Posts: 16803
Re: NCAA President Mark Emmert on a 4-team football playoff . . .
« Reply #13 on: January 13, 2012, 04:43:18 PM »
That would work...but not with the current bowl structure. That is the problem. It's like trying to fit a square peg in a round hole.

A decision will have to be made...keep the bowls or have a playoff... won't be able to have both.


I think, if you wanted to keep bowls, keep some of them as sort of a participation reward for teams that had decent years, but who didn't make the playoffs.  You could play them during the week in December, with the real games (the playoffs) on the weekend. 


Caedite eos! Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius.

Online PorkRyan

  • King of the Hogs
  • *****
  • Posts: 22538
  • Stirke First, Strike Hard, Show No Mercy
Re: NCAA President Mark Emmert on a 4-team football playoff . . .
« Reply #14 on: January 13, 2012, 04:51:38 PM »

I don't see why it wouldn't work on campus, with higher seeds hosting games, and then a championship game at a neutral site . . . again, a la the current structure in FCS. 

I agree with the general proposition that multiple playoff games at neutral venues would be much too expensive for many reasons.  Even the NFL doesn't do this.

I typed the wrong thing.  I meant it won't work in the bowl systems.  It would have to be held on campus to work.
I got the glory, got the fame, the money, the jewels, the cash, the denali, getting drunk on the reg. fricking good times on the reg, yachts on the reg, sex on the reg, basically all the aMm men fantasize about.

Offline Satch

  • brings nothing to the discussion.
  • Boar
  • ****
  • Posts: 2480
  • I'm crazy for these cupcakes, cousin !
    • The good guys always win... even in the 80's!
Re: NCAA President Mark Emmert on a 4-team football playoff . . .
« Reply #15 on: January 13, 2012, 05:06:31 PM »
It's an absolute retard argument to say they can't have a playoff because of what it does to someone's body because, as you point out, every other division has a playoff.

You can have a 8 or 16 team tournament and still have bowl games. Those lower tier bowls are mostly owned by ESPN just so they have games to show. They can continue to make that happen if they want and will get similar ratings as they do now.
so conferences adding a championship game was never really seen as damaging to the athlete as far as I can remember, but ask him to play an extra game or two after Christmas break and its a danger?  I can see that.
Keep Calm, and get Fired Up!

Online Aporkalypse_Now

  • King of the Hogs
  • *****
  • Posts: 18629
  • That's the way baseball go
Re: NCAA President Mark Emmert on a 4-team football playoff . . .
« Reply #16 on: January 13, 2012, 05:18:58 PM »
I like the final four approach.

If you can't make that top 4 cut, I'm pretty sure you don't deserve it.

We finished 6th this season and were 5th after the bowls.  We didn't deserve a shot at the NC by virtue of our losses to Bama and LSU.

I think that allowing 4 ensures that 3rd team like AU the year they were undefeated doesn't get cheated.

I don't really want to see a 8-3 team getting lucky and winning out a NC over a team that went undefeated in the regular season.  I don't want to see a 10-0 team sitting its players for its final game, or worse, the SECCG becoming meaningless so star players sitting for it.  If you do things this way you'll have 12-1 or 13-1 teams that lost a playoff game claiming NCs based on the post-playoff polls.

Offline ArkGuy

  • King of the Hogs
  • *****
  • Posts: 10553
Re: NCAA President Mark Emmert on a 4-team football playoff . . .
« Reply #17 on: January 13, 2012, 05:47:58 PM »
I like the final four approach.

If you can't make that top 4 cut, I'm pretty sure you don't deserve it.

We finished 6th this season and were 5th after the bowls.  We didn't deserve a shot at the NC by virtue of our losses to Bama and LSU.

I think that allowing 4 ensures that 3rd team like AU the year they were undefeated doesn't get cheated.

I don't really want to see a 8-3 team getting lucky and winning out a NC over a team that went undefeated in the regular season.  I don't want to see a 10-0 team sitting its players for its final game, or worse, the SECCG becoming meaningless so star players sitting for it.  If you do things this way you'll have 12-1 or 13-1 teams that lost a playoff game claiming NCs based on the post-playoff polls.

Agreed.  I mean, the last team out will always complain (like an 18-12 Houston bitching about beling left out the basketball tourney), but an argument about who should have been #4 and who should have been #5 is better than one about who ought to be #2 and #3.  Most years, a #5 has two losses or is generally perceived as having played a weak schedule with one loss.  They had their shot.
"As the leader of all illegal activities in Casablanca, I am an influential and respected man."

Offline Tusk till Dawn

  • King of the Hogs
  • *****
  • Posts: 5196
Re: NCAA President Mark Emmert on a 4-team football playoff . . .
« Reply #18 on: January 13, 2012, 07:22:51 PM »
I like the final four approach.

If you can't make that top 4 cut, I'm pretty sure you don't deserve it.

We finished 6th this season and were 5th after the bowls.  We didn't deserve a shot at the NC by virtue of our losses to Bama and LSU.

I think that allowing 4 ensures that 3rd team like AU the year they were undefeated doesn't get cheated.

I don't really want to see a 8-3 team getting lucky and winning out a NC over a team that went undefeated in the regular season.  I don't want to see a 10-0 team sitting its players for its final game, or worse, the SECCG becoming meaningless so star players sitting for it.  If you do things this way you'll have 12-1 or 13-1 teams that lost a playoff game claiming NCs based on the post-playoff polls.

Well said.
Neither snow nor rain nor heat nor gloom of night keeps TTD from his Hot Damn.

Offline Big Sausage Pizza

  • Bow Chicka Wow Wow
  • A Shoat
  • *
  • Posts: 291
  • b00bs > n00bs
Re: NCAA President Mark Emmert on a 4-team football playoff . . .
« Reply #19 on: January 13, 2012, 08:58:01 PM »
Does Emmert opinion even matter, any more than any of ours?  It really is the the Conference heads that are driving this.  I think we have settled for so long that a plus 1 so great, but the reality is that while it would be better, a playoff is the long term solution.  And as far as the bowls games and conflicts, Starkville, 80% of the bowls are unwatchable.   

Offline cooter

  • Boar
  • ****
  • Posts: 2233
Re: NCAA President Mark Emmert on a 4-team football playoff . . .
« Reply #20 on: January 13, 2012, 09:10:41 PM »
I like the final four approach.

If you can't make that top 4 cut, I'm pretty sure you don't deserve it.

We finished 6th this season and were 5th after the bowls.  We didn't deserve a shot at the NC by virtue of our losses to Bama and LSU.

I think that allowing 4 ensures that 3rd team like AU the year they were undefeated doesn't get cheated.

I don't really want to see a 8-3 team getting lucky and winning out a NC over a team that went undefeated in the regular season.  I don't want to see a 10-0 team sitting its players for its final game, or worse, the SECCG becoming meaningless so star players sitting for it.  If you do things this way you'll have 12-1 or 13-1 teams that lost a playoff game claiming NCs based on the post-playoff polls.

I think this pretty much sums it up. Anything more than a plus 1 basically renders the season pointless and I don't want to see a Cinderella Boise State or TCU win a National Championship.  And I don't care who does it, 16 games is too fricking much on a football player in college.  If you can't make it in the final 4, tough aMm.  We can get the best from 4.

Offline uagrad89

  • Boar
  • ****
  • Posts: 3430
Re: NCAA President Mark Emmert on a 4-team football playoff . . .
« Reply #21 on: January 13, 2012, 10:35:05 PM »

I think, if you wanted to keep bowls, keep some of them as sort of a participation reward for teams that had decent years, but who didn't make the playoffs.  You could play them during the week in December, with the real games (the playoffs) on the weekend.

There's no reason for a team playing in the GoDaddy.com bowl to wait until the second week of January to play.  I agree, put all the bowl games starting the 2nd week of December (2 weeks after the end of the regular season would probably lead to better games, anyway), then let the big boys start playing the playoff.  They can have as many freakin' bowls as they want but the top 10 in the BCS should get the chance to play for all the marbles.

Early round games have to be on campus with maybe the semifinals and finals at neutral sites.  The semifinals at one location over a weekend would be a HUGE draw, as would a final game with a 3rd place game played before it.

Offline Big Sausage Pizza

  • Bow Chicka Wow Wow
  • A Shoat
  • *
  • Posts: 291
  • b00bs > n00bs
Re: NCAA President Mark Emmert on a 4-team football playoff . . .
« Reply #22 on: January 13, 2012, 10:45:49 PM »
I think this pretty much sums it up. Anything more than a plus 1 basically renders the season pointless and I don't want to see a Cinderella Boise State or TCU win a National Championship.  And I don't care who does it, 16 games is too fricking much on a football player in college.  If you can't make it in the final 4, tough aMm.  We can get the best from 4.

I just don't understand the season is pointless arguement.  And with the plus 1 format, wouldn't it be possible for a team to play 15 games.  Is 1 game more really too frickin' much?

Offline Tanny Bogus

  • Haunting Wickes since the mid-50's
  • Boar
  • ****
  • Posts: 3515
  • Longtime Fan of Randolph Mantooth
Re: NCAA President Mark Emmert on a 4-team football playoff . . .
« Reply #23 on: January 14, 2012, 06:55:12 AM »
80% of the bowls are unwatchable.
What about the Visine Dogshit Dilbert Bowl?

Offline BASS

  • The Philosophical Woopigga
  • Boar
  • ****
  • Posts: 2447
Re: NCAA President Mark Emmert on a 4-team football playoff . . .
« Reply #24 on: January 14, 2012, 05:59:55 PM »
PSA: dumbass going on college football playoff rant

this year there was a bunch of whining about one team possibly getting screwed by the system and not having a chance to play for the title even though they *cough* deserved it *clear throat*.  no one talked about any team being screwed by the system outside of okie lite.  anyone arguing that going to a 4, 8, or 16 team playoff will eliminate the arguing and belly aching over who got left out has their head up their ass. 

they let 64 teams into the basketball tournament and espn has half of their college basketball coverage during the months of february and march devoted to arguing over who the last 4 in and out are which is fricking ridiculous because none of those teams will ever win a title, i can't get why anyone really gives a aMm.  if we go to 4 teams in college football everyone will be debating if 5 and 6 are better or more deserving than 3 and 4, if we go to 8, etc.  the more teams you allow into the playoff based off of a bunch of dipshit's subjectivity, the more bitching there is.

anyone proposing an 8 or 16 team playoff isn't paying attention.  the division formerly known as I-A has much less parity than the division formerly known as I-AA, or division II, or division III.  in formerly known as I-A football there has always been and will likely always be a big dropoff from the top 2 or 3 teams to the next group.  i can't think of there ever being a #6 or #7 team (at the end of the season) that I thought was as good as the top 2 teams in college football. 

going to 8 or 16 teams just gives us a bigger chance for an upset to eliminate a deserving team from playing for the title.  I'd rather not see a crappy underdog team play for the title because of some fluke plays or turnovers and I'm guessing no one else does either based on the ratings of last year's final four game between virginia commonwealth and butler.  i fuckin hate cinderella; watching duke lose to them in the basketball tourney is fun, but no one gives a aMm about their next game and in the end the championship is diluted because the best teams didn't get to play for the title.  keep that aMm out of the football championship please.

also, if we are actually going to move toward a playoff, lets do it right and not frick it up. 

step 1. change the bcs formula.  eliminate a coach's (or their sid's, or 8 yr old kid's) vote from having any bearing on anything.  eliminate the fuckstick agenda-driven media from having any bearing on anything.  elimination any other processes that can be influenced by espn from having any bearing on anything.  do all computer rankings for all I care, but I would rather see them use the Vegas betting lines.  of all the polls that come out, only vegas has any real accountability for their voting system and they do more research than all of the other dumbfucks put together.

step 2.  have 4 teams seeded, play 1 vs 4 and 2 vs 3 in the semifinals and have these be home games at the #1 and #2 teams.  college fans aren't going to spend the money to travel to neutral site games well enough to sell out 2 weeks in a row, well maybe if the top 4 teams are from the sec.

step 3.  have semifinal games played the week after the conference championship games.  have the championship game played the next week.  watching every offense in every game suck ass for 2 and a half quarters because they have had 6 weeks off has made the majority of the bowl games shitty television.

step 4. the rest of the bowl games, who gives a frick.  they were originally exhibition games created for tourism dollars for the host city and for 50 years the teams playing in them didn't care if they won or lost and some teams refused to play in them.  they can go back to being irrelevant scrimmages for all I care.

 

WOOPIG.NET   © 2014  Jackson Technologies

Page created in 0.386 seconds with 20 queries.