College Vs. Pro Sports? (fan, quote, talent)

ProggyMan · 07-30-2008, 09:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lucifer_sam

Oh, absolutely. There's ten times more fights in juniors. It's so much more intense because unlike the NHL, players are still trying to get somewhere better and they try so much harder and fights are so much bloodier.

To this day, my only regret is that I never played ice hockey. I played deck hockey and I was damn good, but my family could never afford to let me play ice hockey.

It also means 10-20 fucks control the welfare of an entire league. The bowl system doesn't work, the BCS is corrupt, and they put whatever teams in them that they feel will make for a good show. If every game mattered, then how the fuck did Kansas (11-1) finish eighth, and how did LSU (10-2) finish second? No, it's fucking stupid.

First of all last year was an anomaly, but ignoring that Kansas had a much weaker schedule and lost a key game to Missouri at the end of the year. Compare to LSU...Do you have a better system?

lucifer_sam · 07-30-2008, 10:46 PM

@ LesPaul: You're a Canuck and you've only recently been attracted to hockey? I thought that WAS Canada. I've always loved hockey, ever since the last time the Pens were in the Stanley Cup final ('91-'92, fyi), and it's pretty huge around here. Like a cancer since Crosby arrived, actually.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ProggyMan

First of all last year was an anomaly, but ignoring that Kansas had a much weaker schedule and lost a key game to Missouri at the end of the year. Compare to LSU...Do you have a better system?

It's called playoffs. Or the four-seed playoff set they've been talking about (but not doing anything about) for years. I understand that there are end-of-season rivalry games and that the players are students, but the season isn't nearly strenuous enough (at an average of 12 games) not to merit a three or four round playoff system, and still be done by the same time.

I mean, this is why college basketball is so good: because at the end of the season, virtually all good teams get to compete and everyone has a realistic chance of winning. This year was the first year in history that all four #1 seeds made it to the Final Four.

Laces Out Dan! · 07-30-2008, 11:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lucifer_sam

@ LesPaul: You're a Canuck and you've only recently been attracted to hockey? I thought that WAS Canada. I've always loved hockey, ever since the last time the Pens were in the Stanley Cup final ('91-'92, fyi), and it's pretty huge around here. Like a cancer since Crosby arrived, actually.

How about, 2008 being the last time... haha

ProggyMan · 07-31-2008, 12:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lucifer_sam

It's called playoffs. Or the four-seed playoff set they've been talking about (but not doing anything about) for years. I understand that there are end-of-season rivalry games and that the players are students, but the season isn't nearly strenuous enough (at an average of 12 games) not to merit a three or four round playoff system, and still be done by the same time.

I mean, this is why college basketball is so good: because at the end of the season, virtually all good teams get to compete and everyone has a realistic chance of winning. This year was the first year in history that all four #1 seeds made it to the Final Four.

What exactly is the point of a 4 team playoff system? Considering the great games secondary bowls give us and that with such a system the regular season's value would plummet, I think this would add needless weight to the schedule without actually giving us more excitement. Let the regular season do it's job.

lucifer_sam · 07-31-2008, 12:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LesPaul43

How about, 2008 being the last time... haha

Low blow son. We did kept 80% of our talent over the trade deadline, although the loss of Hossa did hit us pretty hard. I say we're still contenders next year. I don't see the 'nucks pulling it off soon.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ProggyMan

What exactly is the point of a 4 team playoff system? Considering the great games secondary bowls give us and that with such a system the regular season's value would plummet, I think this would add needless weight to the schedule without actually giving us more excitement. Let the regular season do it's job.

I go to a Big Ten school and I can't more heartily disagree. Bowls are an excuse to overpromote end-of-season antics and are rarely enjoyed by the teams' true fans (i.e. the students). Moreover, seasons which end during the third week of November leave three weeks before end-of-semester. And postseason football is one of sports' best joys. Also, I don't much enjoy one or two losses to be season ending.

ProggyMan · 07-31-2008, 12:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lucifer_sam

Low blow son. We did kept 80% of our talent over the trade deadline, although the loss of Hossa did hit us pretty hard. I say we're still contenders next year. I don't see the 'nucks pulling it off soon.

I go to a Big Ten school and I can't more heartily disagree. Bowls are an excuse to overpromote end-of-season antics and are rarely enjoyed by the teams' true fans (i.e. the students). Moreover, seasons which end during the third week of November leave three weeks before end-of-semester. And postseason football is one of sports' best joys. Also, I don't much enjoy one or two losses to be season ending.

So your argument boils down to you not liking bowls? One or two losses aren't season ending, LSU twice won with one or two losses. If there was a playoff we'd lose the mad scramble for those two spots at the end of the season. With a playoff you'd have teams competing for...a chance to play in the quarter final.

Laces Out Dan! · 07-31-2008, 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lucifer_sam

Low blow son. We did kept 80% of our talent over the trade deadline, although the loss of Hossa did hit us pretty hard. I say we're still contenders next year. I don't see the 'nucks pulling it off soon.

We're a team full of young up and coming talent. Regrettably we lost one of our best prospects recently, RIP LB. But we just need some grit, and some leaders. If Sundin decides to keep playing, he'll make a good addition to the team short term.

lucifer_sam · 07-31-2008, 11:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ProggyMan

So your argument boils down to you not liking bowls? One or two losses aren't season ending, LSU twice won with one or two losses. If there was a playoff we'd lose the mad scramble for those two spots at the end of the season. With a playoff you'd have teams competing for...a chance to play in the quarter final.

It's not that I don't like bowls, but that I'll never get a chance to see one because they are overpriced, overproduced and overcommercialized. And they all take place in the south. College football is a mad scramble the entire season, and I'm sure the postseason would only be more exciting. It does get more interesting as the season progresses, especially the last few weeks, which are so crucial (as proven by WVU's backyard brawl loss to Pitt). However, I still think that a postseason is a must, especially with the disparity in schedules between conferences. The picks for #1 and #2 are sometimes subjective (as proven by LSU's inclusion this year), which is utter bullsh!t.

The four-seed playoff has been talked about since the National Championship was created, and they still haven't done anything about it. They should at least initiate that.

WWWP · 08-01-2008, 12:41 AM

I like them all equally, I suppose.

rsb1094 · 08-01-2008, 08:25 PM

college football is better, but really...who sits around all day saturday like they do on sunday's?!

View Poll Results: Which is Better College or Professional Sports
College	2	50.00%
Professional	2	50.00%
I like both equally.	0	0%
Voters: 4. You may not vote on this poll

08-01-2008, 08:25 PM	#30 (permalink)
rsb1094 Groupie Join Date: May 2007 Location: Western New York Posts: 14	college football is better, but really...who sits around all day saturday like they do on sunday's?!