RotoGuru Football Forum

View the Forum Registry

XML Get RSS Feed for this thread


Self-edit this thread


0 Subject: College Football 2008

Posted by: KrazyKoalaBears
- [186321620] Tue, Sep 02, 2008, 19:44

Week One down and already some interesting developments.

USC jumped over Georgia in both polls, thanks to their thrashing of a decimated (and underperforming) UVA team. The pollsters may have dinged UGA a bit for not beating up on Georgia Southern, who had several starters benched. Though I didn't expect UGA to stay #1 for long, I didn't expect it that fast.

Tommy Bowden has to be feeling the heat at Clemson as they got their butts handed to them by 'Bama. As much as I hate to say it, 'Bama did look good. But, I think Clemson helped them look better than they may actually be.

And though I haven't heard anybody 'round these parts calling for Frank Beamer's head yet, VaTech's loss to a good ECU team isn't sitting pretty with the fans.

Toss in upsets by Bowling Green (over Pitt), UCLA (over UTenn), and Utah (over Michigan) and it was a pretty exciting first week.

My fearless predictions for Week 2...
- Vandy over South Carolina
- Miami (OH) give Michigan more than it bargained for
- GaTech tears BC a new one
- ECU gives WVU MUCH more than it bargained for
- UF makes UM look like a high school team
- Richmond over UVA (ugh!)

Add yours and let the 2008 discussion kick into high gear!!! :)
Only the 50 most recent replies are currently shown. Click on this text to display hidden posts as well.
[Lengthy or complex threads may require a slight delay before updating.]
405Seattle Zen
      ID: 58013512
      Mon, Jan 05, 2009, 18:05
being a fan of a MAC team would be even worse

I could think of nothing worse, myself. Though they do have two great mascots in that league - the Zips and the Hot Flashes.
406Building 7
      ID: 3111252013
      Mon, Jan 05, 2009, 18:53
I can think of something worse. Being a fan of Washington or Washington State this year.
407Nerfherders
      ID: 347242717
      Mon, Jan 05, 2009, 19:51
I have a personal stake in FCS as my alma mater is James Madison. In 2004 they ran the table in the playoffs, the first and only team to win all four games on the road to win the national championship. I put that win right up there with the '95 Braves as one the best personal sports moments. For me, it's like the Eagles winning the Super Bowl.

Utah fans, as happy as they are right now, can't be nearly as satisfied, knowing that they have no chance, never did, and never will. I know the playoffs are never going to happen, but I feel fortunate to have a vested interest in a division of the sport that has some real drama at the end that is on the field, not off.
408steve houpt
      ID: 451161019
      Mon, Jan 05, 2009, 20:22
There are six BCS conferences, but that has nothing to do with being ranked #1 and #2 in the BCS. ALl FBS teams are equal - Utah's total schedule did not get them a #1 or #2 ranking in the BCS - for the same reason one loss Penn State, Alabama and USC did not - total schedule strength - Texas has the most 'legitimate gripe' - #2 in computers, #3 in polls - maybe if Utah had replaced Weber State [FCS] and Utah State [#99] as two 'easy' non conference games - they would have had a shot at #1 or #2. But with the MWC schedule [UNLV #80, New Mexico #86, Wyoming #93 & San Diego St #112], Utah needs to stack up on non conference games - WASH and Wash St hurt USC - semi strong conference from top to bottom helps.

And perception with the voters - put OKL in Big 12 championship over Texas, leading them to BCS - Championships can be good or bad - helped OKL and FLA this year - also can knock you out - ALABAMA - I think that had something to do with the way they played in the Sugar Bowl, it was a let down - not to take anything away from Utah.

If I was Utah coach, I'd vote them #1 also. No problem with anyone voting for Utah as #1. In the Colley rankings UTAH would be #1 if the season was over in his computer rankings, but either FLA or OKL will pass them after their game [and Texas if they beat Ohio State].
409KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 421148121
      Mon, Jan 05, 2009, 21:13
steve houpt, Utah may have been hurt by their schedule, but they were also hurt (possibly even more hurt) by starting the season as the #28/29 (if they counted that far) team in the rankings compared to Oklahoma/Florida at #4/5.

From there, they had an uphill battle and little, if any, chance.

Alabama was able to climb because of name recognition; both for the team and the coach.
410Perm Dude
      ID: 10558
      Tue, Jan 06, 2009, 00:34
I tell you, I thought Texas would roll--kicking OSU up and down the field. But that was a great game. No shameful Big 10 loss by OSU this year.
411steve houpt
      ID: 451161019
      Tue, Jan 06, 2009, 00:43
KKB - as far as the voting polls go, I agree. You can find where I have stated, the polls used in the BCS should not vote until week 5 of the season - do away with those particular preseason polls - problem - the preseason polls are a big business. Utah still only finished #5 in the computers [#7 in voter polls].

The top 6 teams all have 1 loss. Normally if I was a betting man, I'd have said USC holds #1 because they were highest in preseason, but they dropped and others pretty much stayed in line [PRE 4,5,10]. I don't know. Preseason and timing of loss - thought USC's loss was early enough, but Big 12 race and ALA-FLA out shined USC in voters minds [and in computers too].

USA TODAY [& preseason]

1. OKL [4]
2. FLA [5]
3. TEX [10]
4t. USC [2]
4t. ALA [26]
6. PA ST [22]
7. UTAH [28]
8. TTU [14]
9. BOISE [34]
10. OHIO ST [3]

Utah did better in computers. They had OKL, TEX, FLA, TTU, UTAH, ALA, USC.
412KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 361154158
      Tue, Jan 06, 2009, 10:13
Even if they started in Week 5, Utah still would have been screwed. They were the second-lowest ranked 5-0 team in the Top 25 at #15/15 after Week 5. Only UConn (#24/23) got less respect.

Meanwhile, Alabama has shot up to #2/4 at 5-0. PennSt, who was preseason #22/22, was all the way up to #6/6. South Florida, who was preseason #19/21, was up to #10/10.

Also, 1-loss USC (#9/9), Georgia (#11/10), Florida (#12/13), and Auburn (#13/14) were all ranked ahead of Utah.

Even if you started in Week 10, Utah still gets the short end of the stick. They were only getting more respect as an undefeated team at #10/9 than Boise State (#9/10) and Ball State (#16/18).

Still there were 5 1-loss teams ahead of them in both polls.

See, the problem with polls and, inherently, the BCS, is that it's founded on human bias. The AP and the Coaches think they know everything about college football and so they create paper champions. But we all know how well that works out.

Just look at the NFL Preseason Power Rankings. The Patriots didn't make the playoffs. The Colts were nowhere near being the #2 team in the NFL. The Chargers needed a Broncos collapse to make the playoffs. The Cowboys? Ha! The Jaguars were last in their division. And that's just the Top 5. Green Bay, Seattle, and Cleveland at 8-10 makes the Power Rankings look like a monkey picked them. And how about Miami and Atlanta as #31 and #32? I love the snippet for Atlanta: "It's going to take time to add enough talent to make this team a serious contender."

Thankfully, the NFL actually plays their games and ranks based on record, not on some arbitrary voting system with built-in biases. Otherwise, Miami and Atlanta fans wouldn't have been watching playoff games last weekend.

Sure, Utah only made it to #5 in the computers, but what if that were combined with a #1 or #2 ranking (shudder at the thought) in the polls? After all, didn't South Florida make it all the way to #2 a few seasons ago when they were on their run? Why exclude Utah from that even as late as the final polls before the bowl games?

Nerfherders #403 hit the nail on the head. FBS is the only sport where a team can go undefeated and have zero chance at a national championship... because of human bias and, in my opinion, the grasping onto old, antiquated traditions. FBS just hasn't caught up to the current era of college football where teams like Utah, Boise State, and even Ball State can compete, if not win some games, with the likes of Alabama, Oklahoma, and Florida.
413steve houpt
      ID: 451161019
      Tue, Jan 06, 2009, 13:38
Not really. Harvard and Grambling have that chance every year. Harvard was not undefeated [9-1] this year [but were ranked higher than 4 teams in FCS Playoff. Grambling finished 11-2 and played Southern in the Bayou Classic before a full house in the Super Dome on the first weekend of the FCS P-O's. That game more important than P-O's. And FCS would not modify playoffs to accomodate that game Thanksgiving weekend. Then Grambling played in SWAC Championship on third weekendof P-O's. They choose not to participate.

But even if nerfherder is correct - who cares - holiday bowls are better than any playoff.

Rose Bowl did not even participate in BCS in first few years. I bet even if there was a FBS Playoff, the Rose Bowl would not be part of it [it's not just a football game - Rose Bowl is an event]. Just like Sugar Bowl is an event [basketball, 10k race, etc]. I'd love it [and apparently they have threatened enough that a playoff has not happened - and will not soon] if Rose Bowl and PAC 10 and Big 10 did not participate [just the threat appears to be working - BZ Rose Bowl].

Riht now every city [if they want to guarantee the $$] has a chance for one of the 34 bowl games. If there was a playoff, do you think they's let Pasadena, New Orleans, Miami & Glendale always be a site of a playoff [maybe - Omaha gets baseball every year - for now].

Thankfully, the conferences and schools run the NCAA and as long as the Bowl system is good for them, they have no reason to go to a playoff no matter what kind of argument KKB makes or Brent Musberger makes - WON'T HAPPEN - Thank you. And if those same people [or their replacements] decide a playoff is better for them and the sport than the current bowl system - it will not not matter what argument I or anyone else makes against it - it WILL HAPPEN then.

The world [or even the college football sports world] does not revolve around some sports fans having what they consider a 'true' FBS champion. That vase they pass out this THURSDAY is really of little consequence in the big picture. Now fans in Utah can claim they are. Fans in Texas can claim they are. USC fans can claim they are. And the winner Thursday night can claim they are. And I bet there will be a poll somewhere they can point to that has one of those teams as #1.

It's great. If there was a playoff, I could talk with my barber about who we think is really the best team. What a boring January waiting for the Super Bowl and March madness.

And we'd lose 300 posts every year in the college football thread.

I heard UNC lost a basketball game the other night - does it matter? No - just a practice game getting ready for the Conference playoffs and March madness.
414KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 186321620
      Tue, Jan 06, 2009, 20:03
Rose Bowl did not even participate in BCS in first few years. I bet even if there was a FBS Playoff, the Rose Bowl would not be part of it [it's not just a football game - Rose Bowl is an event].

Funny how the Rose Bowl finally came around, though, eh? It's amazing what money can do. If a playoff were put in place, the Rose Bowl might pack up their toys and go home, but I suspect the money involved would make them reconsider soon enough. Tradition only lasts until the money becomes too good to pass up... which is why the Rose Bowl is now part of the BCS.

It's great. If there was a playoff, I could talk with my barber about who we think is really the best team. What a boring January waiting for the Super Bowl and March madness.

The irony in this statement is quite hilarious. The result of a playoff results in boredom until you wait for the results of two playoffs? Okay.

I heard UNC lost a basketball game the other night - does it matter? No - just a practice game getting ready for the Conference playoffs and March madness.

I always hear this argument and I can't quite figure out why intelligent people use it so often. Is it not obvious that if the season were only 12 games long that a single loss in basketball WOULD matter? Am I missing something?

If football teams played 35+ games, then 1 loss wouldn't matter either. Nor would 2 or 3 or even 4 losses.

I suppose you could make the argument that it's just as tough to go 12-0 as 36-0, but I'm pretty sure I'd lose all respect for you. :)

In the end, I don't REALLY care. As you alluded to, the sun will still rise in the morning, regardless of the results this Thursday night. But, I happen to feel that the current way the NCAA crowns a 1-A champion is about the dumbest thing in place in sports right now.
415steve houpt
      ID: 451161019
      Tue, Jan 06, 2009, 23:35
I heard UNC lost a basketball game the other night - does it matter? No - just a practice game getting ready for the Conference playoffs and March madness.

I always hear this argument and I can't quite figure out why intelligent people use it so often.


I understand, it's pretty obvious from this thread, you are the inelligent one, all the 'correct' ideas. Guess it's hard for you to imagine someone just likeing the bowls - They could do away with the BCS format and it'd still be OK with me - I think the BCS format fits in well with the bowl games - which I tihnk is why the schools agreed to it [and no more] - and even the plus one the way it is now - an extra 'BCS' game is OK, but not an extra game for two teams.

I glad the NCAA has the right to crown there champion anyway they want. It's fine with me. And if they decide doing away with the Rose Bowl, Sugar Bowl, Orange Bowl, etc week long plus events at some point is the way to go, I'm sure the college big boys will be well paid for agreeing. Til then ........


If there was a playoff - OK - 8 teams - only confernce champs - make season mean something - the way NCAA Basketball used to be - only conference champs - what ever major conferences NCAA determines and at large to fill it up - but not from a conference that already has an auto bid. [not all FCS conferences get auto bids - but they have diluted tournament by letting 3-4&5 teams from one conference - it was origionally a 4 team event]:

----- conferences without a championship game should have to play a complete round robin to determine true champ - and something other than BCS for tie breaker[s] - Big 10 can still have two unbeaten teams the way there schedule is.

----- conferences with split divisions, have a sure tie breaker for conference ties [no BCS].


=========

Back to #412 - if there had been NO preseason polls, maybe Utah would not have been ranked where they were in voter polls - that's my point - they fight where they start - by week 6, Utah had beat MICH & ORE ST. In first BCS [wk #8 I think that is - BCS was #12 in both voter polls and #8 in computers - voters were always behind IMHO because of preseason] - where a team like LSU was still #11 in both polls [preseason bias], but #19 in the computers.

After week #5, Utah was ahead of zero loss Boise St, Vandy, OKL St, U Conn - only one loss teams ahead of them were USC, GA, Ohio St, FLA, Auburn [all teams living on 'preseason' - a few proved it was not all hype]. Sure there are 'bias' - just like there would be bias picking the 4 playoff teams, then 8 teams, then 12 teams, then 16 teams, etc as it expanded for $$$$.
416KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 361154158
      Wed, Jan 07, 2009, 12:12
I absolutely have no problems imagining someone liking the Bowl System. I completely understand that. It just doesn't make sense to me to label it a National Championship given the system.

And I fully understand there would be bias with a playoff system, but at least the bias has worked its way out some, as with Utah finally making it into BCS Land. From there, let them determine the championship on the field.

And, personally, I'd love to determine it with bowls. I don't see why the bowl system has to die with an 8 team playoff. You can still have all the bowls currently being played and either add the 3 bowls necessary to make it a playoff or just use 3 of the bowls currently being used. To keep as many teams involved as possible, just add 3 bowls. Surely 3 extra bowls featuring the cream of the crop would produce cash, no?
417Perm Dude
      ID: 5002712
      Wed, Jan 07, 2009, 15:00
I think there should be a playoff, then the bowls (with the champion having the option of bowing out).
418art's in the hall
      ID: 16021510
      Wed, Jan 07, 2009, 20:04
Utah non-conference schedule- Utah State has sucked for years, but they have been on Utah's schedule forever. It would be similar to having Colorado not play Colorado State. It is just not going to happen. Weber State was a FCS in-state game with Utah history since the coach at Weber was the coach at Utah before Urban. Plenty of other schools play FCS teams on their schedule. The biggest thing is Utah cannot get home and home schedules with Big 12 or Big 10 teams. Utah has been to Michigan twice, Michigan will not come to Utah. I don't undertand why they can't get Colorado or Nebraska on the scheudle. They can get Pac-10 school but USC will not get them a home and home schedule. This was also true with hoops in Utah's glory basketball days with Keith Van Horn and Andre Miller they couldn't even get teams to come play them. I can understand why, the other schools have no reason too. If they beat a MWC team they were suppossed too, if they lose it looks bad, so why play a MWC team. It is still the haves and the havenots.

Kyle still not getting the love that Urban got. yes Urban put bowling green on the map a little, but keeping the same level as Urban at a bigger school would seem to be a bigger deal to me. I hope I am not disrespecting Bowling Green too much.
No one really gave Utah a chance against bama. We just don't really know who is the best college football team. What was the finally score of bama gators game? I know every game is different, but we will never know if Utah could hang or beat Florida or OK or USC or Texas.
I posed the question in a previous post how many other teams can claim TWO BS wins in the last five years? who knows the answer? Very select company for Utah.
I hear some people talk about Utah changing conference of joining the big 10 or the pac 10. I just don't think that will ever happen. Utah just doesn't have population to add much to pac 10. the problem with joining the big 10 is location it is just too far. At one time I had hope about getting invited to the pac 10, but I just don't see it happening.
Other pieces of small history in article http://sports.espn.go.com/espnmag/story?id=3815656 they mention Gordie Gee president of Ohio State and former pres of Vandy. Guess where he went to school? Utah We still can't get any love because the BS schools want the money for themselves they don't want to have share it like they do with hoops. When Urban left Utah for Florida he was not only recruited by the AD but the President of Florida who had just left being the President at Utah 1 year prior. I don't blame the BS conferences for not wanting to share the money and give everybody a chance they would all lose a big chunk of change if they had to share with more schools. It would be great if non BS conferences wouldn't play BS conferences anymore and just have their own thing, so we would have even more garbage at the end of the season. This will never happen because the non bs conferences want the money they get for playing the bs conferences.
Help me understand why teams that are always at the bottom of the bs conference continue to stay in the confernce is beyond me. What does Baylor bring to the table?
I am still on cloud 9 it was a big win for Utah and will stay that way for along time. I remember I was excited when they beat Arizona back in 93 in the Independence bowl. Now i don't get so excited when the beat a pac 10 team.
419Building 7
      ID: 3111252013
      Wed, Jan 07, 2009, 22:33
Help me understand why teams that are always at the bottom of the bs conference continue to stay in the confernce is beyond me. What does Baylor bring to the table?

There are other sports than football. Baylor was National Champion in woman's basketball a few years ago. They have been good in baseball lately. They have track people. As long as their players aren't shooting each other, they can be decent in men's basketball, etc. Hell, they beat us in footbll, and lost at Tech 35-28 in the last game.
420steve houpt
      ID: 451161019
      Wed, Jan 07, 2009, 23:27
KKB - it's fine with me, I understand it's not really a Championship - not sure if even the networks and NCAA 'truly' think it's "THE National Championship".

Who won the National Championship in 2003 [2004 BCS Bowl Game]? LSU beat Oklahoma. But USC was voted #1 in the AP Poll [only USA Today Coaches Poll is "required" to vote BCS Game as #1 [and even three of those voted USC #1]

And when USC was going for National Championship in 2005 season [2006 BCS NCG] against Texas, all you heard was USC was going for their 3rd straight championship [replay of that game is on ESPN Classic right now - no telling how many times I've heard it]. OK ???? So even the people bringing you the BCS NCG only use it's results when it pleases them - I'm sure you talk to any USC fan and they won the National Championship in 2003 - and that's fine with me - LSU thinks they won it [and have some piece of crystal to back it up, but ........ AP said USC].

It's still 'mythical' to me - game tomorrow does not prove a whole lot - except it will draw a heck of an audience [me included - maybe even more than if those two teams were the result of some playoff] - lots of TV ad revenue - and be great for recruiting [I guess].

Hope it's an exciting game!
421art's in the hall
      ID: 16021510
      Thu, Jan 08, 2009, 11:04
Building 7- good points there are other other sports played in the big 12. All of the selfish money is really in Football, why does the Baylor football team get to be part of the BCS? Not even sure how bad Baylor's team is just picked them as an example. We could pick on Washington or Washington St. but they are typically not as bad as they were this year.

You mention the other sports, but in all of the other sports they all have a chance to win a national championship.

Go gators 2nite by the way.
422Nerfherders
      ID: 347242717
      Thu, Jan 08, 2009, 11:53
There are some perennially atrocious football teams in BCS conferences - Duke, Washington State, Iowa State, Indiana, Vanderbilt. And yet, if any of them get hot or have that one magical season they can win a national championship. And yet teams like Utah, Boise State, BYU (Ironically, they have won at least one NC in the past) who win consistently will never again have a chance unless something changes.

I know I've said this before but it's worth repeating.

But the more I think about it, it seems to me that breaking up the old WAC was a mistake because it diluted the strength of schedule too much. Sure, they added some teams from the old southern conference, but they also brought up some teams from 1-AA and I think they hurt the perceptions of those two conferences, if nothing else. It's possible that the WAC as it was might have been invited to the BCS eventually.
423Pancho Villa
      ID: 51546319
      Thu, Jan 08, 2009, 15:37
When I was general manger at KOVO Sports 960 radio in Provo in 2001, the first big controversy with the BCS system reared its head.

BYU was 11-0 with one regular season game left at Hawaii. Prior to the game, the BCS announced that BYU would not be in a BCS bowl regardless of the result of the Hawaii game.

Our militant bunch of hosts did an amazing job of getting guests from all over the country to weigh in on the subject.

One official from a BCS conference related that when the BCS system was set up, there was one reason and one reason only why they set up the system to allow for a non-BCS team to crash the party - Notre Dame. They never had any intention to allow a non-BCS conference team into one of their bowls.

There were talks of lawsuits, violation of Sherman anti-trust laws etc. The ball was rolling.

BYU proceeded to get creamed at Hawaii and later by Louisville at the Liberty Bowl, and the subject died on the vine....until Utah had a perfect regular season in 2004 and talk of lawsuits, collusion and boycotts again raised their head and the BCS relented under the pressure.
424Seattle Zen
      ID: 22041812
      Thu, Jan 08, 2009, 23:51
Congrats, Florida

The first half of this game reminded me of the OU - Texas game where OU was superior yet the score was tied at half (well, 21-20). OU looked terrible its two times on the goaline tonight.

Florida was the better team. The speed of their receivers and backs is astounding. Their defensive backs played great, as well.

Now, Slizz, PAY UP!
425Fairplay
      ID: 35040522
      Fri, Jan 09, 2009, 01:00
UTAH WINS THE NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP!

.....at least in my book! Florida played well but not well enough. Give Utah the title they have earned!
426 Slizz
      ID: 4710371415
      Fri, Jan 09, 2009, 08:51
hahaha SZ...I was hoping Tebow would break one towards the end so that I could cover our wager!

While I knew Florida was the superior team, I gotta take my hat off to the Oklahoma defense. Brent Venables drew up one heck of a plan for a team not known for dominating defense...he forced Tebow into his first career 2-INT game and had constant pressure on a loaded Florida team all night. If there is one assistant coach that big time programs should consider, he should be atop that list...Are you listening BC?

I am getting nervous that if Bradford comes out Jerry Angelo will draft him!

It terrifies me that the second coming of Jason White could get drafted by my beloved Bears. He has some serious David Carr potential and if it wasn't for those YAC yards by Gresham / Brown, he'd probably be around 5 yards/attempt, which is damn scary...not to mention that his two INT's (going off the top of my head) when he was operating under center.

SZ, shoot me an email with your info so that I make sure you get credit for it! :)

427J
      Leader
      ID: 049346417
      Fri, Jan 09, 2009, 09:20
The Bears??? Isn't Bradford projected to go FIRST????? To the Lions...it'd be pretty fitting.

I can't explain how much I dislike Teblow. Is there any cockier, more obnoxious football player in the country? And all the announcers with their Tebowners during the games make me sick.

Oklahoma blew the game in the first half when they didn't score on the goal line, then Bradford with a terrible pass right before halftime. Even if the OU WR caught it, he wasn't going to score and time was gonna run out. Why did they use their 3rd timeout with 10 seconds left after an out of bounds play????

I really feel for Utah, Texas and USC and hope the voters at least pick one of those schools for the AP.
428Donkey Hunter
      Leader
      ID: 916288962
      Fri, Jan 09, 2009, 09:25
No such luck J. Florida 1 Utah 2
429Perm Dude
      ID: 21020822
      Fri, Jan 09, 2009, 09:38
Wow, closer than I thought it would be. And two Big Ten teams in the top 10!

It is cool that the coaches are grumbling about the voting too, particularly since they are mandated to vote for the winner of the BCS Championship game as their #1.
430KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 361154158
      Fri, Jan 09, 2009, 10:17
I can't explain how much I dislike Teblow. Is there any cockier, more obnoxious football player in the country?

Even as an Auburn fan I couldn't come anywhere close to agreeing with that statement. By all accounts, Tebow is a stand-up guy off the field. What happens on the field is what it is. I don't seem him celebrating any more than most players and I actually enjoy his enthusiasm for the game. There are a lot of players out there who can only dream of being that enthusiastic.

Let's not forget that this is a guy who was so upset with himself after the Ole Miss game that he vowed to take the team on his shoulders the rest of the way... and did. When was the last time you heard any college football player stand up and take responsibility like that and then actually do what he claimed he would on the field?

I sure didn't hear or see any Auburn players do that this year. Nor did I hear or see any FSU players do that this year. Nor any other team.

Just because he's more talented than any player FSU (or Auburn or most teams) has had in the last decade doesn't mean he's cocky or obnoxious. It just means he's good. Take off those garnet-and-gold-colored glasses every once in a while and realize when you're watching one of the best that's ever played.

I'm sure if Tebow had gone to FSU you wouldn't feel the same way. I know if he'd gone to Auburn, I'd have a "Tebown." Instead, I just have a lot of respect for what he can do.

And, Utah did get some respect from the AP voters: Utah, the only team in major college football to go undefeated this season, got 16 first-place votes and 1,519 points. Not enough, but maybe enough to create some more turmoil for the BCS... I hope.
431boikin
      ID: 532592112
      Fri, Jan 09, 2009, 10:36
I can't explain how much I dislike Teblow. Is there any cockier, more obnoxious football player in the country?

I sorta agree and for some reason his 850 SAT score never gets mentioned when they talk about how great an all around person he is. Though the thing that bothers me most about him is not something he does it how people love him when others are doing the work. 20 years from now people will think he was starting QB of 06 title team and Percy Harvin deserved the MVP last night. I am going to go out on a limb with this but dare i say it if he was not white; his jumping around and pumping his fist all time would not be seen in the same light.

On a side note i have sat next to him on a couple of occasions and his back muscles are ungodly huge.

It terrifies me that the second coming of Jason White could get drafted by my beloved Bears.

I was impressed with bradford for the most part he made a allot of hard throws and his two Ints were not his fault, with that said he seems like lacks the arm strength to make a great pro.

I wish i had gotten to see USC/UF instead and with any luck UF would have rolled.
432Slizz
      ID: 4710371415
      Fri, Jan 09, 2009, 10:38
J - So was Aaron Rodgers. There is no way he goes first. Outside of Matthew Stafford, there is no great pro-QB prospect in this draft (unless Sanchez comes out). Sure there are a couple developmental players...but I am not sold on Bradford at all.

He plays in that gimmicky spread-ish offense and was only a 3 star QB recruit coming out of HS. Typically the 1st round (and Lottery) QB's are at least 4-5 star recruits out of High School and he wasn't even that. I think he is a fine college QB, but will need at least 3-4 years in the NFL holding a clipboard or he'll end up like Alex Smith IMHO.

KKB - Awesome post. Couldn't agree more. Its always debatable who is the best ever, but you have to mention Tebow in that conversation.

433Razor
      ID: 181051618
      Fri, Jan 09, 2009, 10:45
The best player ever should at least be the best player on his own team. Tebow is a great player, but I don't know why grown men constantly resort to overkill when talking about him. How can he make a case as the best player ever when he has 5 losses as a starter? Just off the top of my head, that's worse than Vince Young, Matt Leinart, Charlie Ward, Tommie Frazier and Ken Dorsey.
434J
      Leader
      ID: 049346417
      Fri, Jan 09, 2009, 10:50
I won't lie, as an FSU fan, I hate all turds, no matter how good a person they are...I even found it in me to hate Wuerffel :)
435Razor
      ID: 181051618
      Fri, Jan 09, 2009, 11:01
Wuerrfel is my least favorite player of all-time in any sport.
436Perm Dude
      ID: 21020822
      Fri, Jan 09, 2009, 11:32
Who said Tebow was the best player ever?
437KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 361154158
      Fri, Jan 09, 2009, 11:58
How can he make a case as the best player ever when he has 5 losses as a starter?

I don't think he's THE best player ever, but I certainly think he's ONE of the best ever. The others you listed were great as well... except for Frazier and Dorsey, who had superior talent surrounding them... much more than Tebow.
438boikin
      ID: 532592112
      Fri, Jan 09, 2009, 12:13
Why are you guys only talking about QBs?
439Razor
      ID: 181051618
      Fri, Jan 09, 2009, 13:17
I could give you Dorsey, but Tommie Frazier was an incredible football player. Three-time National Championship Game MVP and a 33-3 record as a starter.

I can't understand how or why people deny how good everyone else on Florida's offense is. Harvin is the best player for starters, and they have as fast a RB and WR unit as any team in recent memory. There isn't a lot of top tier NFL talent like the Nebraska and Miami teams had, but if we are going to go by that standard, than Tebow himself isn't that good since he does not project as an NFL QB.
440boikin
      ID: 532592112
      Fri, Jan 09, 2009, 13:25
Tommie Frazier was an incredible football player. If anyone doubts that go look at tape of 96 fiesta bowl and him dragging around UF players like rag dolls even tebow lovers would be impressed.

I can't understand how or why people deny how good everyone else on Florida's offense is. Harvin is the best player for starters, and they have as fast a RB and WR unit as any team in recent memory.

I second that, i swear Harvin has grease on his jersey that guy is amazing.
441KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 361154158
      Fri, Jan 09, 2009, 13:40
I can't understand how or why people deny how good everyone else on Florida's offense is.

I don't. I just don't think they'd be where they are right now without Tebow. A good WR is only as good as his QB. See: Moss, Randy.

Yes, Harvin is great. No doubt about it. But if he had me throwing him the ball, he'd be a wasted talent. That I can guarantee. ;)

And I also don't care much for judging college-level players based on how they'll do in the NFL. The NFL is a completely different beast.

I might be great a trigonometry and horrible at calculus (pretty much the next level after trig). Does that mean that I'm not worthy of being considered great at trig?
442Razor
      ID: 181051618
      Fri, Jan 09, 2009, 13:45
That argument about a good WR only being as good as his QB is absurd considering how Harvin gets most of his touches - on handoffs out of the backfield and on 5 yard crossing patterns. Tebow does not deserve credit for Harvin being able to turn 5 yard plays into 50 yard plays.
443Slizz
      ID: 4710371415
      Fri, Jan 09, 2009, 16:26
Nothing beats a Tommie Frazier executed option play. It can bring a tear to a glass eye...

All of the players you listed Razor are legends...I think sometime down the road and reflect on the best, Tim Tebow will be in that conversation.

Shoot, you gotta mention Eric Crouch too...while a majority of these players peaked in college (Crouch, Wuerrfel, Frazier, Dorsey, Charlie Ward, etc.) and busted in the NFL, they were among the best of the best in college during their time, and nobody can take that away from them.

444KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 186321620
      Sun, Jan 11, 2009, 20:57
With the current state of the NFL Playoffs, I'd been thinking about my #412 a bit more. More specifically, I'd been thinking about what the NFL would look like if it were run by the BCS.

Looking at ESPN.com's final NFL Power Rankings for this season, it seems obvious to have the Tennessee Titans play the New York Giants for the NFL Championship. But what about the rest of the teams and bowls?

If we use a system of 6 automatic berths and 2 at-large berths, we need to figure out where the automatic berths come from.

Based on a Harris Interactive Poll, we can see that the AFC South has a very low fan base with the lowest 2 teams in the NFL and 3 in the bottom 7. The NFC South also seems to have a low fan base with New Orleans, Tampa Bay, and Atlanta in the bottom 12 and Carolina coming in the middle of the pack.

So, let's say that both South conferences need at-large bids. The automatic berths would be as follows:

NFC East: NY Giants
NFC North: Minnesota
NFC West: Arizona
AFC East: Miami
AFC North: Pittsburgh
AFC West: San Diego

Based on the ESPN Power Rankings, the Giants are in the Super Bowl, so second place in the NFC East takes their place in one of the other bowls. That's the Philadelphia Eagles. The Titans are also in the Super Bowl, so there's two more at-large bid needed. That works out to be the Carolina Panthers (from the NFC South) and Indianapolis Colts (from the AFC South; well represented this year!).

For regional purposes, let's say that each bowl game matches up by geographical area as much as possible. That gives us:

Super Bowl: New York Giants vs. Tennessee Titans
Bowl #1: Carolina Panthers vs. Miami Dolphins
Bowl #2: Philadelphia Eagles vs. Pittsburgh Steelers
Bowl #3: Arizona Cardinals vs. San Diego Chargers
Bowl #4: Minnesota Vikings vs. Indianapolis Colts

While I admit those are some very intriguing matchups -- particularly the Pennsylvania Rivalry -- I'm thinking after this weekend that the Ravens (who would have been completely left out), Steelers, Cardinals, and Eagles are all glad they still have a shot at the Super Bowl Championship and weren't relegated to having no shot.
445Slizz
      ID: 4208421
      Sun, Jan 11, 2009, 23:32
If it was that format, Philly wouldn't even get a bid...it would go to New England instead, geography or not :)

Boston = Bigger fan base. They're just like Ohio State. There was no case you could make for OSU over Boise State other than the fact they bring BCS dollars...just like Notre Dame. So basically, Philly/Baltimore = Boise State.

But thats what makes pro football great...they settle it on the field. Sure the division formula isn't exactly perfect...ex: AFC East scheduling. They had 8 games vs the AFC West & NFC West (ACC). Thats almost like shooting fish in a barrel...or being in the Big Ten!!! As opposed to the SEC (AFC North) who were treated with the NFC East & AFC South. But come playoff time, it all goes out the window...and the NFL knows it has a quality product.

446TB
      ID: 9116716
      Sun, Jan 11, 2009, 23:42
The NFL schedule is set up pretty good, with every team in the conference having almost identical games but two.
Your comparison for the SEC was backwards. An NFL team would have to play against semi-pro teams rather than other NFL teams to be closer to the typical SEC out of conference schedule.
447KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 361154158
      Mon, Jan 12, 2009, 08:52
Slizz, but this year NWE didn't win their "conference." It would be the equivalent of Northwestern somehow winning the Big Ten and OSU is left on the outside looking in.
448Slizz
      ID: 4710371415
      Mon, Jan 12, 2009, 09:09
Neither did the eagles...the Giants did. Therefore the Eagles would have to qualify for an "at-large" bid.
449KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 361154158
      Mon, Jan 12, 2009, 11:26
Actually, the Eagles qualified as second-place in the "conference" that had a team go to the Super Bowl.

It's like Alabama going to the Sugar Bowl in place of Florida. That's also how Texas ended up at Fiesta Bowl, in place of Oklahoma.
450steve houpt
      ID: 451161019
      Tue, Jan 13, 2009, 01:57
444 - PRETTY LAME EXAMPLE / COMPARISON IMHO - might make sense if NCAA / BCS was running a BCS system and there was only 32 schools competing in an east / west conference with 4 divisions in each conference and a schedule similar to the current NFL [just eliminate the home / away in division and you have a 13 game schedule] and was still having 10 - 12 holiday bowl games, with #1 and #2 determined by some voter / computer polls and four other 'major' Bowls for New Years Day based on some historic concept.

Now if the NCAA eliminated 88 schools from the current DIV IA and had a Super Division IA of 32 teams like the NFL and a comparitive controlled schedule [no games against teams outside Super IA], maybe you could make comparisons to the NFL if NCAA still refused to have a playoff [only Super BCS Bowls for the Super IA], then go ahead and post #444. It would be relavant then. Now it's not even comparing apples to oranges.
451Slizz
      ID: 4710371415
      Tue, Jan 13, 2009, 07:58
KKB - So you're telling me that a second place team in a BCS conference, no matter what their record is, would goto a BCS game if the 1st place team advances to a national championship?

Using the Big East as an example...say University of Cincinnati ran the table and played for the National Championship. You're telling me that a 4-5 loss team (Pitt/Rutgers/WVU) would get a BCS bid just because Cincy advanced?

Seems ridiculous to me. I always thought you had to be in the top BCS Top 8 (i.e. Alabama/Texas) to secure an automatic like that...

452KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 361154158
      Tue, Jan 13, 2009, 09:07
#450. So wait, we can compare College Football to College Basketball when making the argument that the regular season matters or doesn't, but we can't compare College Football to the NFL? If College Football to the NFL isn't apples to oranges, then College Football to College Basketball isn't even apples to outer space.

#451. Actually, I'm incorrect on that one. But it's also not as easy as one would think.

So, with that, Baltimore would have made it in instead of Philly (based on Power Rankings)... unless the committee decided otherwise.

And, realistically, with the popularity of the Patriots and Eagles, they likely would have been selected over the low-popularity Ravens.
453steve houpt
      ID: 451161019
      Tue, Jan 13, 2009, 23:36
452 - I have no idea what you are trying to say now. ???? Not sure if you are trying to compare an "A" while comparing it to "B" which you were comparing to a "C" which was compared to "D" which means if "A" does this, that's what "D" would look like if "B" was like this. If you understand it, good.

You don't like BCS - I'd leave it at that. That makes sense.

In fact BCS looks good compared to what we might get from the NFL - not sure what they are playing for on the field? Not much pride anymore. Mostly individuals who probably have to look at their helmut see remember what team they play for this year. I mean - an ARZ vs BAL possibility - Whatever they are doing on the field, sure does not look like they are trying to 'really' earn their money - and quite a few of them figure - why bother - money's there whether I go 100% or not - someone will offer me big bucks next year too - even PAC MAN Jones got some money this year. And unless he's suspended, someone else will pay him next year.
454Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Thu, Jan 15, 2009, 17:00
Confirmation : I received the settlement of the bet in 346/347 from Slizz in the name of Seattle Zen.

Thanks.
Rate this thread:
5 (top notch)
4 (even better)
3 (good stuff)
2 (lightweight)
1 (no value)
If you wish, you may rate this thread on scale of 1-5. Ratings should indicate how valuable or interesting you believe this thread would be to other users of this forum. A '5' means that this thread is a 'must read'. A '1' means that this is a complete waste of time.

If you have previously rated this thread, rating it again will delete your previous rating.

If you do not want to rate this thread, but want to see how others have rated it, then click the button without entering a rating, or else click here.

RotoGuru Football Forum

View the Forum Registry

XML Get RSS Feed for this thread


Self-edit this thread




Post a reply to this message: (But first, how about checking out this sponsor?)

Name:
Email:
Message:
Click here to create and insert a link
Click here to insert a block of hidden (spoiler) text
Click here to insert a random spelling of Roethlisberger
Ignore line feeds? no (typical)   yes (for HTML table input)


Viewing statistics for this thread
Period# Views# Users
Last hour11
Last 24 hours11
Last 7 days22
Last 30 days66
Since Mar 1, 200781851229