Forum: foot
Page 5137
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!!! :)
 
1Promize
      ID: 8857295
      Wed, Sep 03, 2008, 00:10 		I was at the UGA game and I don't blame them for being jumped. Other then Knowshon, Stafford and few of the WR's they were only things that were impressive.

For what is considered to be one of the best defenses in the nation, they did not show it. They were sloppy and did not do fundamentals well at all.

Top defensive lineman is out for the year now also, torn ACL.

With that being said, Georgia did play alot of their backups very early in the game.

One thing that concerned me that I didn't see GA Southern having to much of a problem with was conditioning and the heat. Many of our players went into the locker room with cramps and dehyrdation.


----------------------------------

As for my Mizzou Tigers...
Once again, high power offense and a late quarter tired defense. It is a curse that Mizzou scores so quickly, because the defense must stay on the field forever in a game. 45-60 pts are needed to hold off 4th quarter rallies teams have against them.
 
2Promize@Parents
      ID: 3683076
      Sun, Sep 07, 2008, 11:52 		Well Slizz, your email might be right.. Stafford is looking pretty damn solid this year.

Also, not sure you saw this yesterday. :)

 
3KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 45657107
      Mon, Sep 08, 2008, 09:31 		While there were several interesting games, I'd have to say that none of the results were all that surprising this week. Except, of course, WVU/ECU.

Looks like the only one I missed was UVA saving themselves for another week.

ECU is going to be a force to be reckoned with this year.

And I have to admit that I think the pollsters are finally starting to catch on to the idea that they need to let go of their preseason picks in order to stay legitimate.

WVU from #8 to #25/#24 and ECU from NR to #14/#20. I'm a bit of a Wake Forest fan, but I don't see how the coaches thought Wake (#19) has played better this year against Baylor and Ole Miss than ECU has played against VaTech (#17) and WVU (#8). And USF needed OT to pass UCF. BYU needed luck to get by Washington. I think the AP has it closer to reality than the coaches, so maybe the coaches are still hanging on to the past a bit too much.

The Early Fearless Forecast
- Michigan over ND.
- Wyoming gets embarrassed.
- UGA barely scrapes by.
- UCLA over BYU.
- UConn over UVA (for reals this time).
- USC all over OSU
- Fresno over Wisc.
 
4Slizz
      ID: 21733916
      Thu, Sep 11, 2008, 09:42 		Good Mawnin' Everybaady!

Promize - I wouldnt worry about losing all those players on UGA. The talent level on that team allows them to sustain those types of losses. UGA is going to be the better team about 99x out of 100 every time they step on the field.

Things that have really stood out to me:
-Matthew Stafford. Boy does he have some touch and can rifle it in between defenders. I see a NFL star in the making. Granted it was vs. two cupcake defenses, he still makes the NFL throws effortlessly (Skinny Post b/w safety & DB, 15 yard out, 15 yard dig, etc.) I almost want to tank in one of my leagues to get him :)

-Penn State: Everyone knows I dogged them in the past for being somewhat overrated. They legitimately look good this year. They are a potential BCS team in a weak big ten...

-ECU: But it really wasnt a surprise that they beat a overrated VT team, but to manhandle WVU was something else. If they can stay healthy and play like Hawaii...they could very well be playing in a BCS bowl. I would rather pit them against a Big Ten or ACC team (Wake Forest?) where it would be a great game rather than a SEC @ Large or USC (if they lose) b/c it wont even be close.

The Early Fearless Forecast
- Michigan over ND (As a ND fan I hate to admit it, but they suck and Weis has to go...that piss poor display vs SD State is inexcusable with the amount of talent they have)
- South Florida over Kansas (Love Grothe)
- Duke over Navy (The post-Paul Johnson era is worse than expected)
- UGA big over the Head Ball Coach (Sorry Spurrier, until your offense shows any signs of waking up, you get no love)
- UCLA ends the nations longest win streak (They are this year's storybook team)
- USC by at least 4 TD's over Ohio State (Lets face it, USC is just flat out better.)
 
5steve houpt
      ID: 30072415
      Sat, Sep 13, 2008, 16:26 		KKB - At least the polls 'only' have WF @ #19. I agree, pollsters have to start to ignore their own preseason polls more. You can find me complaining about that years ago.

This BCS computer poll has Wake at #1, GA #22, USC #36.

Colley BCS Rankiings

Link to all BCS Polls

Note: Sagarin [USC #1, GA #10, WF #32] - the first few weeks of the season, the starting ratings have weight
in the process(BAYESIAN). Billingsly must use some weighted system [USC #1, GA #9, WF #24].

And then - Massey has Kentucky #1, USC #4, GA #10, WF #34.

Wolfe and Anderson / Hester are only 'real smart' computer polls. They do not publish first poll until later in season. And Harris also does not publish pre-season or early on.

 
6Promize
      ID: 8857295
      Sat, Sep 13, 2008, 20:19 		Wasn't a pretty game today for UGA... Good test on a good defense though. But in the end a win is a win.. Don't think either Stafford or Knowshon showed Heisman like abilities...

I say the leader in the Heisman right now is Chase Daniels.. As I've said before, I'm originally from Missouri and love my Tigers also.. They probably have the easiest road of the top 10 teams..

 
7Pancho Villa
      ID: 51546319
      Sat, Sep 13, 2008, 20:23 		- UCLA ends the nations longest win streak (They are this year's storybook team)

As Maxwell Smart used to say,

"Missed it by that much."
 
8Perm Dude
      ID: 25857128
      Sat, Sep 13, 2008, 21:27 		OSU shooting themselves in the foot. Continuously. Can't keep getting these many chances against USC to flub them.
 
9KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 186321620
      Sat, Sep 13, 2008, 22:28 		Wow was that a ridiculous game by Auburn/MissSt. 3-2?! They showed the baseball scores from the teams last year and there were a lot more points by the baseball teams compared to the football teams tonight.

I have to think that Auburn will fall in the rankings after this game. Their offense is still searching for some sort of heartbeat. Lots of miscues and way too many O-Line penalties to be a Top 10 team.

Of course, as usual, their defense is top notch and actually had a shutout. Stupid O-Line penalty gave MissSt. the safety.
 
10Promize
      ID: 8857295
      Sat, Sep 13, 2008, 22:31 		I think once again, your Tigers a little bit overrated. Seems every year they get overrated somehow... With this new style offense they have not sure why they got rated so high... Good D I guess.
:) But 3-2 vs Miss State? I know they have approved a little bit this year, but ummm... urrr..

Don't think this spread offense working to well for them.. Maybe good ole smash mouth run the ball they need to go back to...

They haven't had a good passer their since... Ummm.. Have they ever? Always been a strong running school.
 
11KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 186321620
      Sat, Sep 13, 2008, 22:32 		UVA 10 - 45 UConn

Duke should be a win next week, but then it's Maryland (who looked good today) and East Carolina (I'm sure UVA didn't expect ECU to be this good when they signed that contract). They could easily be 2-4 at that point.

Me thinks that even the sign ban at football games won't stop the fans calling for Al Groh's firing.
 
12KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 186321620
      Sat, Sep 13, 2008, 22:44 		RE #10
They're probably getting a little overrated of late because of the 2004 debacle when their early season underrating cost them a legit shot at the National Championship. In fact, that was also the last time they had a good passer: Jason Campbell.

Even with the Spread offense, they haven't abandoned the running game. They had 321 rushing yards against LAMonroe, 132 yards against SoMiss, and 162 yards tonight against MissSt.

The problem was the penalties. I can't even remember how many times Auburn had a first down called back for holding. Or how many times they had 3rd-and-makeable that turned into 3rd-and-forever because of a false start or holding. Heck, it would have been 3-0 without a penalty.

I don't care who you are, 12 penalties for 94 yards is going to kill you. Auburn should just be thankful that their defense did their job.

All that said, Chris Todd is the future of Auburn. Kodi Burns just isn't a Spread offense kind of QB. They need to convert him to defense or WR, especially since Auburn is in need of a WR and some secondary guys. Burns has the speed to play either of those positions.

There will be some growing pains with Todd, but he should get better as the season goes on. I saw him doing a lot of things much better than Brandon Cox did last year. Just looking to different receivers is a HUGE improvement over Cox, who was notorious for staring down his intended target.

With LSU coming to town next week, the defense will have to step up again if Auburn has any hopes of winning. Tennessee, Vandy, and Arkansas should give Todd some more time to grow just in time for the road trip to WVA. After that, there will be another "break" with Ole Miss and UTMartin before the other real tests in UGA and Bama.

Auburn might lose to LSU, but I think they still have a really good shot to be 9-1 or 8-2 (WVA) by the time the go to Athens.
 
13Promize
      ID: 8857295
      Sun, Sep 14, 2008, 01:54 		Well, actually lucky for you, the game is in Auburn this year.. Actually, in the UGA/Auburn series the road team usually has the advantage, so maybe lucky for us instead! Thing is, by the time Auburn plays Georgia we will have gone through a schedule of hell...
 
14Slizz
      ID: 21825715
      Sun, Sep 14, 2008, 10:49 		RE: #7 - LOL. Man I saw that and was hoping someone would give it to me :)RE: #9 - Its like we're watching a college WS qualifier!

RE: #11 - its karma. the university regulates fans, fan signs, etc. They have no homefield advantage and if I'm an AD I'd try hard and schedule a road game at soft Charlottesville. I mean you get a road win vs a BCS conference team. Easy.

As for Auburn, I'm already looking forward to the Iron Bowl!

Biggest surprise was how close SC came to beating UGA. Just goes to show you how much parity there is in the loaded SEC.

I wish USC could play in the SEC b/c there is nobody that is gonna challenge them in the Pac-10.

 
15Slizz
      ID: 21825715
      Sun, Sep 14, 2008, 21:59 		How is Ohio State #13/14?!?!?! They should be ranked low enough where there is no chance of a rematch with USC b/c they are clearly not on the same level with them, or any top notch teams. If you want to argue with me, look at the last big games/games vs top-tier programs they've played (USC, LSU, UF) and its not even close.

I sure hope Penn State beats em b/c if they don't, only Oklahoma going undefeated stands in the way of a rematch...which is downright SAD!

Don't get me wrong, Ohio State is a solid B+/A- football program, but they're only a 8-9 win team, if that, in the SEC.

Now SZ: In the interest of full disclosure, USC is and would be a 10+ win squad in the SEC.

Moreover, I just don't think any of the other teams can go undefeated (besides USC), which means they'll likely be ranked below Ohio State, and its a shame that we'll be subject to a crappy, one-sided rematch.

 
16KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 45657107
      Mon, Sep 15, 2008, 09:02 		I kind of agree with the 13/14 ranking. I honestly think OSU would have a shot against Auburn, Alabama, and several other teams right around where they're ranked. I really think USC is just THAT good.

But I do agree that there shouldn't be a rematch.
 
17Perm Dude
      ID: 45817159
      Mon, Sep 15, 2008, 10:21 		I agree, KKB. There are lots of reasons that OSU lost the game, but almost all of it was self-inflicted.

Put them at home with Wells back and they would be competitive with about everyone in that 12-20 range.

The only way there would be a rematch is if USC falls and they both play in a non-champsionship bowl game.
 
18Slizz
      ID: 21733916
      Mon, Sep 15, 2008, 12:18 		I agree they might give Auburn & Alabama (now...not next year) a game, but they are clearly a notch below the elite programs.

I might not like USC, but if you wanted to beat them, last year was your year b/c they are LOADED this year and next.

We have seen the best Ohio State has to offer, and it just isnt good enough. Even if you put USC in the Horseshoe, the outcome would be the same.

There is no way that the Tigers (Both AU & MU...sorry promize), Crimson Tide, and maybe even UF make it through the season unscaved. Eventually, they are all gonna get ranked below Ohio State which could ultimately lead to OSU as the #2 BCS team.
 
19KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 45657107
      Mon, Sep 15, 2008, 13:01 		Eventually, they are all gonna get ranked below Ohio State which could ultimately lead to OSU as the #2 BCS team.

I don't know if that statement is as true this year as in years past. We saw that a big loss to USC caused OSU to plummet in the standings. In years past, I think they still would have been a Top 5 team with the Good 'Ol Boys saying things like, "Hey, the lost to the #1 team in the nation on the road," "They're a better team than they showed," and countless other lame excuses that would have been nothing more than the pollsters trying to save face for their preseason rankings.

But, this year has been different. Clemson got knocked from #9 to NR with a loss to Alabama. WVU got dropped from #8 to #25 after a loss to ECU. ECU actually got ranked without being forced to get to 8-0 first. Auburn got demoted (in the AP) following a tough win. We even saw preseason love affair Georgia get dropped from the #1 spot without losing. When was the last time that happened?

All in all, I think the pollsters will keep a USC/OSU rematch from happening unless there's a LOT of change in how OSU is playing. But before that even happens, OSU is going to have to get by several ranked teams.
 
20Seattle Zen
      ID: 49112418
      Mon, Sep 15, 2008, 13:05 		I think Ohio State will lose another game. Come on, they barely beat Ohio.
 
21Slizz
      ID: 21733916
      Mon, Sep 15, 2008, 15:54 		Great points by both! I sure hope that is the case...but it looks like only Penn State stands in the way of Ohio State making another BCS bowl. Illinois isnt gonna even come close like last season. They cant stop the run and barely beat LA-Lafayette.

Wisconsin is bound to lose one, and Oklahoma could likely lose to TTU, Texas, or Mizzou (Big 12 Championship). I think Mizzou loses at least one as well. The SEC will beat eachother up and you're left with Ohio State and their cupcake schedule. I think they overlooked Ohio in preparation for USC. Classic trap game.

SZ - I dk about you, but I sure would like to see USC vs Florida.

Also, how about my boy Grothe?

Anybody think he has a shot to make a NFL roster?
 
22TB
      ID: 395122110
      Tue, Sep 16, 2008, 17:28 		http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/

RFS - Saw a title of a post that either got moved or deleted. I never got to read the other thread so wasn't sure what you were looking for, but that is a good site for some college football team data.
 
23J
      Leader
      ID: 049346417
      Thu, Sep 18, 2008, 23:56 		Colorado knocking off #21 West Virginia deserves rushing the field?
 
24TB
      ID: 395122110
      Fri, Sep 19, 2008, 02:26 		J, you are so getting old.

=)
 
25J
      Leader
      ID: 049346417
      Fri, Sep 19, 2008, 08:23 		LMAO...I think you may be right :)
 
26KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 45657107
      Fri, Sep 19, 2008, 09:09 		Some interesting matchups this weekend...

UF @ UTenn: Fulmer's going to have to show something because beating UAB isn't going to cut it. If UTenn loses to UF, playing at Auburn isn't going to be a welcome sight. UTenn would have another break with No.Ill., but then they go to UGA and host MissSt and Alabama. Fulmer could actually get fired midseason... but winning against UF would go a long way towards preventing that.

Utah @ Air Force: Air Force will try to prove that they're for realz. Utah's not quite the kind of team that will make Air Force the buzz of college football, but 4-0 looks a lot better than 3-1.

WF @ FSU: Wow, how the mighty have fallen and the weak have risen. This used to be the equivalent of a 1-AA game for FSU, but now they'll actually have to play, and play well, in order to have a chance. This game could go a long way towards defining the future of the ACC... and Bobby Bowden.

LSU @ Auburn: The question is whether or not Auburn will have an offense. If not, LSU wins. If they do, this could be an epic battle.
 
27Slizz
      ID: 22813187
      Fri, Sep 19, 2008, 09:24 		lol...don't tell me they rushed the field over WVU!?!?!?!

I know they're excited their football team is actually relevant for a change, but c'mon...you save that for top 10 opponents.

KKB - Tennessee is looking at a 2-4 start. The SEC takes no prisoners and while they might start off bad, Fulmer will have a job when the dust settles. Just another Saturday in the SEC...

Nice, underrated, call on Air Force / Utah...good, under-the-radar game. Not to mention Air Force is the 2nd highest elevation in all of collegiate football! IF its close going into the 4th...look for AirForce to end Utah's BCS dreams.

 
28Razor
      ID: 545172413
      Fri, Sep 19, 2008, 09:27 		This is exactly the sort of game where no one picks to Tennessee to win and they somehow pull the upset. Florida is overrated anyway. They went 1-4 against teams that finished ranked last year and somehow every thinks they are destined for amazing things this year.
 
29KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 45657107
      Fri, Sep 19, 2008, 09:56 		Slizz, don't be so sure of Fulmer's employment status. There's a lot of buzz with all the off-the-field troubles his team has had. And the "just another Saturday in the SEC" means you should be winning some of those games. 0-3 to start the conference schedule will not sit well with UT fans. They will expect UT to win at LEAST one of those games, if not two.

I do think UT has a good shot at upsetting UF. UF has looked good against two VERY weak teams and I would be surprised to see UF get caught being a bit too relaxed about this game. It'll be up to Meyer to make sure they have their heads in the game.
 
30Razor
      ID: 545172413
      Fri, Sep 19, 2008, 11:40 		UF looked good against Miami? Seems to me like they got hit in the mouth for three quarters before pulling away after a bogus completion call.
 
31The Beezer
      Dude
      ID: 191202817
      Fri, Sep 19, 2008, 22:04 		Sportspickle says it best: "USC defends putting cupcake Ohio State team on its schedule".
 
32Promize
      ID: 8857295
      Fri, Sep 19, 2008, 22:48 		Ref #30: LOL yah, I thought it was funny the next day when I read the headlines that UF looked good against Miami.. I was like ummm, did I watch a different game? It was a tight game till midway second 3rd quarter... I'm starting to think reporters have a man crush on Teabag.

Ref #23: Ummm no snow and no more sex parties for the Buffalo football team.. Little things now makes that school happy.

Ref #19:

Sucks the Dawgs on at same time AU vs LSU is.. I think I'm going to have to go with LSU though. Once again, Auburn offense kills their chances this year.

I'm picking Tenn over Florida.. 100000 ugly Orange fans might be the factor.

REF 31: Pac 10.. Really... is there anyone even in that league? USC so called 2nd toughest schedule.. #5 Ohio State LOL ok, moving on.. #17 Oregon.. Alright we done..

Let us compare that to Georgia's schedule.. #9 Alabama, #6 LSU, #4 Florida, #10 Auburn and probably 2 other teams that will be in the Top 20 sometime this year..

Better yet, pick just about any SEC team and compare their schedule to USC and it is better..

Once again, it will be a SEC team vs someone BCS championship and another embarrassing moment.
 
33TB
      ID: 395122110
      Sat, Sep 20, 2008, 04:50 		Every season it's the same old thing. Petition the SEC to all add USC to their schedule. I'm guessing they'd each rather keep their Georgia Southerns and Louisiana-Monroes.
 
34Seattle Zen
      ID: 358591721
      Mon, Sep 22, 2008, 15:28 		There are quite a few people here you thought TN had a shot. Boy, y'all were WAY off. Knoxville crowd was crazy, alright, with all the booing and crying into their beers and all...

SZ - I dk about you, but I sure would like to see USC vs Florida.

I haven't watched nearly enough action this year, but what I have gathered is it seems to be a two conference year: SEC and Big 12, with USC. The Trojans are the best team I've seen, and I think Oklahoma is the second best.

Once again, it will be a SEC team vs someone BCS championship and another embarrassing moment.

No chance. I can't envision that at all. I don't think there is a SEC team that is so good that they can go undefeated. There are so many great squads, everyone will loose at least one game. I could see a Big 12 team finish unscathed.

And Promize, I haven't seen any team that would embarrass USC this year. More likely the SEC team would go home humiliated.
 
35Perm Dude
      ID: 49822228
      Mon, Sep 22, 2008, 15:36 		Any USC loss would be humiliating. They are damn good this year.

I agree with Zen about the SEC. A lot of good teams--no one gets out without a loss.
 
36holt
      ID: 29862517
      Thu, Sep 25, 2008, 22:28 		if you aren't watching this game, turn it to ESPN! :D
 
37steve houpt
      ID: 451161019
      Thu, Sep 25, 2008, 23:02 		At first glance [just scores], you'd say no way. Behind the numbers, if Oregon St has no turnovers and few penalties, offensive numbers are not bad. Have no idea where the defense is coming from. Numbers not good there. That has to be USC not performing AT ALL [you have to play the game - you think they'd learn]. With the talent USC has, 21 pts is not very tough for them though.

L 28-36 at STANFORD, 490 total yds, 3 turnovers, one INT rtn'd for TD, 12 penalties 100 yards

L 14-45 at PENN ST, 342 total yds, 2 turnovers, 7 penalties, 76 yards

W 45-7, HAWAII, 485 total yds, no turnovers, 4 penalties, 40 yards

 
38holt
      ID: 29862517
      Thu, Sep 25, 2008, 23:56 		Jaquizz Rogers is only a freshman. he just dominated the first half. I don't know what the time of possession numbers were in the 1st half but they must have been a little lopsided.
 
39Seattle Zen
      ID: 358591721
      Fri, Sep 26, 2008, 00:24 		Wow, what a game. Third year in a row that USC has had a bad loss in conference. How much of that can be blamed on Pete Carroll? Are you not getting these guys ready? Can you not straighten out the ship at halftime?

USC sure didn't look like the best team in the country tonight. I think its safe to say that they will still probably play a game in January, just not on the 14th (or whenever day the Championship Game as migrated to).
 
40Promize
      ID: 24854246
      Fri, Sep 26, 2008, 00:27 		Ohhh, I don't know.. some fun quotes in this thread...

"I wish USC could play in the SEC b/c there is nobody that is gonna challenge them in the Pac-10."

"I just don't think any of the other teams can go undefeated (besides USC)"

"Petition the SEC to all add USC to their schedule"

"And Promize, I haven't seen any team that would embarrass USC this year. More likely the SEC team would go home humiliated."

"Any USC loss would be humiliating. They are damn good this year."
 
41Perm Dude
      ID: 48482515
      Fri, Sep 26, 2008, 00:30 		Hey, mine is still a true statement!

And is it just me, or does Rogers look like a 7th grader out there?
 
42Donkey Hunter
      Leader
      ID: 916288962
      Fri, Sep 26, 2008, 00:34 		Lets have USC and OSU have a Rose bowl rematch. Have the rest of the BCS games as SEC vs Big 12. Oklahoma vs Georgia, Missouri vs Florida, LSU vs Texas, and Alabama vs Texas Tech. We can throw in Auburn vs Kansas in the Citrus Bowl or something too. Im not interested in any teams outside those two conferences now.
 
43angryCHAIR
      ID: 561401810
      Fri, Sep 26, 2008, 00:50 		I am an OSU Alum----please pardon the HUGE ASS grin!!!!
 
44KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 45657107
      Fri, Sep 26, 2008, 08:30 		How do you not stop the run and force Moevao to make even more difficult throws? USC was fingertips away from an interception going into halftime. Why not keep stacking the line to keep those opportunities coming?

45 rushes, 28 pass attempts, 3.9/rush. That's the story of the game.
 
45Nerfherders
      ID: 347242717
      Fri, Sep 26, 2008, 11:36 		The key I thought was that Oregon State did not make any mistakes - turnovers, penalties giving first downs, missed coverages, etc. When you do that and execute the game plan, you can potentially beat anyone.

This sure does make Penn State look good right now. We will see how they do this weekend against a ranked opponent.
 
46holt
      ID: 29862517
      Fri, Sep 26, 2008, 17:20 		Their failure to stop the run? I'd say that had more to do with Rodgers' skill and a good game from the O-line than a problem on USC's part.
 
47Slizz
      ID: 21825715
      Sat, Sep 27, 2008, 16:20 		I'm surprised that Oregon State was able to pull it out given how pathetic their defense has been.

That Jacquizz Rodgers made his best Darren Sproles K-State impersonation...

The bigger question: Who is the new #1 (assuming UGA wins)?

I agree SZ, USC is still a BCS squad. Last season they lost to both Oregon & a 41-pt (don't quote me) dog in Stanford and still made the rose bowl. No reason to think they are out of the National Championship hunt just yet...

Now, if BYU is the only undefeated team left, do they play in the National Championship?

 
48Promize@Parents
      ID: 138432715
      Sat, Sep 27, 2008, 16:44 		LOL Hmmm, guess Florida isn't all that great either.. :)

Dawgs need to take care of business tonight vs Bama of course..
 
49Seattle Zen
      ID: 358591721
      Sat, Sep 27, 2008, 17:04 		Now, if BYU is the only undefeated team left, do they play in the National Championship?

Or Boise State? I have to think the answer is "no".

Congrats, Ole Miss! Making it interesting.
 
50Slizz
      ID: 21825715
      Sat, Sep 27, 2008, 18:18 		Well unlike Boise, BYU looks to be a top 10 team after this week concludes...there's no reason why they cant creep up that high.
 
51Seattle Zen
      ID: 358591721
      Sat, Sep 27, 2008, 20:59 		I hope Promize's parents have hidden all of the sharp objects. 31-0 in the second quarter at home... ouch!
 
52Perm Dude
      ID: 218342720
      Sat, Sep 27, 2008, 21:51 		OK (the only team to get any #1 votes) will move up to #1 if they keep on beating TCU. But it'll be a completely different top 10. BYU will move up. Texas is likely to be 2-3. Penn State will probably crack the top ten as well.
 
53Promize@Parents
      ID: 138432715
      Sun, Sep 28, 2008, 00:09 		LOL **Take foot and insert in mouth**

That was probably the worst half I've seen georgia do in a long time... It was horrid.. The were undisciplined...

They saved face slightly in the second half...

But I can say this, I would rather lose to a #9 team then to an #40-50 unranked team at home...

Was horrible, but again proves the point any given day in the SEC and don't look now... Vandy is leading the SEC Eastern Division lol

 
54Slizz
      ID: 22813187
      Mon, Sep 29, 2008, 10:50 		Who'se surprised how high they ranked USC despite the loss to Oregon State?

While I think the talent has them as a top 10 team, do they deserve to be ranked that high after losing to lowly OSU?

Georgia is all the way down @ #11 and lost to freakin 'Bama!

 
55Promize
      ID: 24854246
      Mon, Sep 29, 2008, 18:42 		Slizz,

LOL typed a long reply but not even worth it... It is the usual politics of the media...

I guess Georgia should start preparing for BYU in a bowl game now... I see Hawaii all over again.
 
56Nerfherders
      ID: 347242717
      Mon, Sep 29, 2008, 20:08 		Penn State up to 6 now. I forsee them getting tripped up by the Buckeyes again - I dont think they have ever won a game at the Horseshoe. If they play up to snuff in the rest of their games they should still get a BCS bowl, which would be something.
 
57Promize
      ID: 24854246
      Sun, Oct 05, 2008, 00:49 		So after this weekends action, my rankings for Top 10 would be.

1 - Oklahoma (beating teams the way #1 team should)
2 - Missouri (beating teams like a #2 team should)
3 - LSU (Idle)
4 - Bama (Based on what happen to Georgia and almost losing to a nonranked team, they should drop. They were not impressive at all this week)
5 - Texas (almost could actually put these guys in 4th)
6 - Penn State (Starting to make me a believer)
7 - Texas Tech (Similiar to Mizzou, they score)
8 - USC (Was finally an impressive win in their weak conference)
9 - BYU (Soon to be the next USF / East Carolina or last years Hawaii)
10 - Georgia (probably pushing this since they were idle and Florida won. Maybe flip this with Florida)


But because the media is so hung up on putting the weak Pac 10 / Big Ten in position for the BCS Title game... I'm sure that it will be some bizzare rankings...

Some how USC will probably be close to #6 and Ohio State will sneak in at #10, because they both actually beat Top (Lower ranked) 25 teams..

Fun game of the day... Vandy knocking off Auburn... Sorry KKB, love Auburns Defense, but again they are overranked with such a weak offense.
 
58Seattle Zen
      ID: 358591721
      Sun, Oct 05, 2008, 01:26 		I really enjoyed seeing Vandy go 5-0 for the first time since 1943. I was also pulling for Kentucky. USC showed why everyone was so high on them this year.

I'm torn. I'd like to see Missouri in the National Championship game and win as I am a sucker for an underdog, but I would also like to see Missouri miss out and Washington steal away Gary Pinkel, who has been a great coach, and, man, do we need a new coach.
 
59KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 186321620
      Sun, Oct 05, 2008, 08:40 		Sorry KKB, love Auburns Defense, but again they are overranked with such a weak offense.

Actually, they have a great offense. They just have a beyond weak offensive coordinator. Seriously, how do you run all over Vandy in the 1st quarter (except that goal line stand) and then turn to the pass? How do you run so well and then empty the backfield and scream, "HEY, WE'RE NOT RUNNING THE BALL! NO NEED TO RESPECT THE RUN ON THIS PLAY!"?

Auburn should be running first, second, third, fourth, fifth, and then, when the defense decides to step up and stop the run, throw some play action passes. At least make them respect the run when you pass. What's the point of emptying the backfield?! It's not like they have the WRs to do so. They had to have a RB playing as a WR to empty the backfield. To me, that screams of an opportunity to fake the run and THEN pass.

Ugh.

It's tough to watch a boneheaded offensive coordinator waste talent like Tate, Lester, and Davis. Neither Todd nor Burns are able to be a spread offense QB, but Franklin seems too hard-headed to realize that the kind of offense he wants to run won't work without the proper personnel. For the next 2-3 years, he needs to run Auburn's good ol' fashioned offense while recruiting for the spread.

Right now, based on Franklin, they shouldn't be ranked at all or be anywhere near the Top 25. Sad to say, but true. If he ever pulls his head out of his... playbook, then maybe they can do something.
 
60Promize
      ID: 24854246
      Sun, Oct 05, 2008, 11:03 		REF# 58

Man, I heard that and since I know live in Georgia that was hard to hear. Is that news just something the media is trying to start up or has there really been talk about Pinkel going to Washington? He is an amazing coach and would suck to lose him.. Mizzou has changed their philosophy about football since he arrived and had new things built, installed etc just because him... I would think they would offer him a very big check to keep him..

Like I said, that was the first time I heard anything about him possibly leaving Mizzou.
 
61Seattle Zen
      ID: 358591721
      Sun, Oct 05, 2008, 12:49 		I would think they would offer him a very big check to keep him..

Certainly, and if they win the whole enchilada, there is no way they would let him leave.

Pinkel did interview for the Husky job back in the Nineties when the Huskies unfortunately hired Rick Neuheisel. He was an assistant to Don James and he really wanted the job. And it goes without saying that Seattle beats the pants off Columbia.

So, no, I wouldn't say that it is simply a media created rumor.
 
62Perm Dude
      ID: 54947510
      Sun, Oct 05, 2008, 12:59 		I think OSU might sneak up to #10, after beating #18 Wisconsin on the raad. Their double threat backfield looks pretty good.

I agree with Zen on Vandy. Great to see an old program turn it around.
 
63Slizz
      ID: 22813187
      Mon, Oct 06, 2008, 09:51 		I agree SZ that Seattle beats the heck out of Columbia (only driven through Columbia though...). Instead of Pinklel, what are your thoughts on Lane Kiffin at the helm for the Huskies?

On another note, from my man Peter Schrager over at Fox Sports with another OSU / USC rant(I cant write nearly as good as him):

Ohio State-Wisconsin doesn't have quite same oomph to it this week as we thought it would have around 6 p.m. ET last weekend. Yes, after leading 19-0 in Ann Arbor on Saturday, the Badgers suffered an all-time collapse and pretty much knocked themselves out of the BCS title hunt with a devastating 27-25 loss to Rich Rodriguez's team of no-names. Meanwhile, Ohio State did what it does on Saturday — knocking off Minnesota at home in workmanlike fashion.

Which raises a horrifying hypothetical situation that the boys at CFN kinda sorta alluded to last weekend. A hypothetical that keeps me awake long hours at night. A hypothetical that might rock the sports world like it's never been rocked before.

Bear with me, here. Say the SEC continues to beat up on each other, as they did last year, and as they seem to have already begun doing with last week's upsets. Notch two losses for 'Bama, LSU, Florida, Auburn, Vandy, and Georgia — meaning the SEC champion comes out of the conference championship game in Atlanta with two defeats on its résumé.

Now, take a look at the Big 12. Say Texas knocks off Oklahoma in the Red River Shootout. And say Kansas beats Missouri, Missouri beats Texas, Oklahoma beats Texas Tech, and Texas Tech beats Kansas. Oklahoma State loses at least one somewhere along the way and Colorado and Kansas State contribute one of their annual big upsets, as well. Essentially, say that all of these teams have at least one loss entering the Big 12 championship game, with most of them having two.

Assume South Florida and UConn lose a game or two along the way, TCU beats BYU at home, and BYU beats Utah in the final weekend of the season.

Still with me?

Now, say Ohio State beats Wisconsin in Madison this weekend. And now assume Ohio State tops Penn State in Columbus on Oct. 25, and takes care of Illinois and Michigan in its final two games.

And assume USC wins out and takes home the Pac-10 title with ease from here on out.

Where would that take us?

A one-loss Ohio State team that's gone unbeaten in the Big 10, won on the road in Madison and Champaign, and lost its only game of the season on the road without its star running back.

Oh, and a one-loss USC team that's beaten Arizona, Arizona State, Notre Dame, Oregon and Cal teams that could all be ranked by December, as well as the Big 10 champions in convincing fashion.

The end result?

Well, there's a chance — and oh, it kills me to say it — that we'll see an Ohio State-USC BCS Championship Game in January.

If Wisconsin can knock off Ohio State this weekend, we won't have to deal with that potential scenario.

So, for everyone's sake and sanity: Go Badgers.

God help us if Penn State doesn't get the job done.

 
64Razor
      ID: 545172413
      Mon, Oct 06, 2008, 10:17 		Neither USC nor OSU deserves to play for the title unless EVERYONE else melts down. I am confident two other teams will emerge. OU looks pretty good to me.
 
65Perm Dude
      ID: 5791469
      Mon, Oct 06, 2008, 10:22 		Well, they are currently #8 & #12 so you are probably right. But USC has no other (now) ranked teams ahead on the schedule (OSU has 2), so it seems likely that USC will sneak back up the rankings just based upon piling up win after win.

..a one-loss USC team that's beaten Arizona, Arizona State, Notre Dame, Oregon and Cal teams that could all be ranked by December, as well as the Big 10 champions in convincing fashion.

Maybe. The voters seem very sophisticated this year, so I don't think they will give USC extra bonus points for beating teams before they are ranked. And losing the USC will make it harder, not easier, to get ranked.
 
66Razor
      ID: 545172413
      Mon, Oct 06, 2008, 10:32 		USC could not run the table in the Pac-10, a conference which has gone 1-6 against the Mountain West. And OSU lost to that same USC team, albeit without its star player.
 
67Perm Dude
      ID: 5791469
      Mon, Oct 06, 2008, 10:40 		I'm not sure what you are saying, Razor. The Pac-10 sucks against the Mountain West, so they couldn't suck against USC?

@ Arizona will be the test, I think. But even at home against the Golden Bears later I think USC is in a very good position.
 
68Seattle Zen
      ID: 358591721
      Mon, Oct 06, 2008, 10:52 		what are your thoughts on Lane Kiffin at the helm for the Huskies?

I think it would be more likely that Jim Mora Jr. would end up with the job than Kiffen. It was his comments about the position that cost him his gig with Atlanta and ushered in the Bobby Petrino era.
 
69Razor
      ID: 545172413
      Mon, Oct 06, 2008, 10:53 		I am saying the Pac-10 sucks this year, and that a team that wants to play for the title should not lose to lower tier teams from aforementioned crappy conference. We keep lowering the bar for national title contention. LSU lost to two unranked teams last year and now we're talking about USC potentially going to the title game after beating a bunch of mediocre teams and losing to one bad team. You'd be hard pressed to find a title team back in the 90's that lost to such a poor team. I remember in 1996 when #1 Florida losing to #2 Florida State was thought to be devastating to their national title hopes.
 
70Nerfherders
      ID: 347242717
      Mon, Oct 06, 2008, 11:16 		I'm really worried for Penn State's chances. I just cannot see them beating both Wisconsin and Ohio State on the road. One maybe. both, probably not. I dont think they have ever won at either venue. Penn State's one-loss seasons all seem to come when they get Ohio State at home. Now they would help themselves more to lose to Wisconsin and beat Ohio State - they would at least have a chance to win the conference then. I guess I am still not sold on Penn State being *that* good. It hasnt happened in 14 years.
 
71KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 45657107
      Mon, Oct 06, 2008, 13:07 		We keep lowering the bar for national title contention.

Absolutely true and you can thank the BCS for that. The BCS has forced the Powers That Be to create a championship, instead of letting them play it out on the field.
 
72Donkey Hunter
      ID: 176121816
      Mon, Oct 06, 2008, 13:41 		Have we lowered the bar or is there just so much greater parity in college football? Even if there were no BCS someone would have been named national champion last year.
 
73J
      Leader
      ID: 049346417
      Mon, Oct 06, 2008, 13:45 		I thought Jim Mora Jr. was taking over the Seahawks in '09?

And I definitely think it's parity. They reduced scholarships pretty significantly within the last few years and I think that's helped spread talent around quite a bit.
 
74Razor
      ID: 545172413
      Mon, Oct 06, 2008, 13:56 		The last scholarship reduction was over 15 years ago.

There is greater parity now, but not so much so that we should excuse to losing to very mediocre teams or getting thrashed by 30+ points.

Last year was a bad fluke, and LSU has the distinction of being the worst, most unqualified national champion of my lifetime.
 
75steve houpt
      ID: 451161019
      Mon, Oct 06, 2008, 15:45 		FWIW - Do you think it took time for the limit of 85 scholarships to have any effect? Even today, every program has walk ons [they have to].

When they started limiting scholarships in 1977 [The number of scholarships was set at 95 from 1977-91; at 92 in 1992; and 88 in 1993. It has been at 85 since 1994 - from ESPN], do you think many of the top prospects still went to the 'top programs' even if they had to do it as 'walk ons' hoping to eventually get a scholarship? That was also where they got the 'national exposure'.

Back then, the top programs were the games on TV. You saw USC - Notre Dame, Ohio State - Michigan, Texas - Arkansas, Florida - Georgia, etc and then regional games thrown in. That was where they got exposure [game of the week - what were there, 1-2 college football games on TV a Saturday?] You would never see South Florida game, a Boise State game [may have been I-AA any way]. Now on Saturday you have 20 games between ABC, CBS, NBC, ESPN, ESPN-2, ESPN Classic, ESPN-U, FOX Sports regional, Versus Channel, etc. Let alone TUE, WED, THU & FRI games. Players know there is a chance they will get exposure no matter where go.

Do you think the added TV exposure of these other programs has had as much of an impact on where players decide to go?

Just a thought - 85 scholarships is still a lot of scholarships.

 
76Seattle Zen
      ID: 358591721
      Mon, Oct 06, 2008, 20:52 		I thought Jim Mora Jr. was taking over the Seahawks in '09?

Oh, yeah, I forgot about that. I still don't want Lane Kiffin as I remember what the last ex-Raider coach did to the once proud Nebraska program.
 
77Slizz
      ID: 22813187
      Tue, Oct 07, 2008, 09:12 		Last year was a bad fluke, and LSU has the distinction of being the worst, most unqualified national champion of my lifetime.

OK - who should be the National Champion in your eyes?

Also, what is your definition of unqualified?

Their 1st loss, came on the road to a UK team (who was top 10 at the time)...IN TRIPLE OVERTIME!!!!!

Their other, came to a hot Arkansas team in triple overtime as well. They won the SEC, which is an accomplishment within itself, and easily beatdown the overmatched Buckeyes.

SZ - it is a shame what has happened to the Washington program. I remember growing up and the Huskies were almost always a top 10 program. I hope they make the right hire

I like Ty Willingham and feel he got a bad deal at ND, but at the same time nobody rewards a guy because he's nice and carries himself with class. You gotta deliver the results on the field and I just don't think Willingham can do that.

What do you think about the current BYU head coach, or even Pederson from Boise State?

 
78Promize
      ID: 24854246
      Wed, Oct 08, 2008, 20:58 		Got your wish KKB

Auburn Fires Offensive Cordinator
 
79KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 186321620
      Wed, Oct 08, 2008, 21:20 		Yeah, it's been all over my newsreader since this afternoon. I'm just glad somebody at Auburn has woken up and realized that they're not a passing offense.

If I were Arkansas, and future opponents, I'd actually be scared of this firing. It means Auburn's going to get back to what's always worked for them: run, run, and run some more.

How sweet it would be for Alabama to be undefeated going into the Iron Bowl and for Auburn to knock them off with a smash-mouth running game and defense. :)
 
80smallwhirled
      ID: 25336116
      Thu, Oct 09, 2008, 09:23 		I feel bad for Franklin. 6 games?

The bowl game last year wasn't that long ago, Auburn was looking damn good on offense his first game there.

5 OCs in 10 years, that's just amazing.

What can you do though? With Alabama getting off to this kind of start, they needed to change things quickly.

The season's not entirely over for them though, they've got some tough games, but they were a power running team only less than a year ago. They've still got some horses, and they should be able to get back to that.
 
81KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 45657107
      Thu, Oct 09, 2008, 10:35 		smallwhirled, the biggest problem was Franklin bringing in Chris Todd at QB. Franklin came from Troy and so did Todd. That stirred up an (unnecessary) QB competition.

Brandon Cox was the QB at last year's bowl game and he was capable of running a spread offense. Cox's worst trait was that he would stare down receivers. Some games he did (and Auburn typically lost) and some games he didn't (and Auburn typically won). As I recall, the bowl game was one where he didn't stare down his receivers.

Kodi Burns got some snaps at QB during that bowl game and was slated to be #1 this year. But, he's not a spread offense QB. He's more of an option kind of guy and with all the RB talent at Auburn, and lack of WR talent, an option style offense works much better than a spread.

But, Franklin wanted a spread and brought in a guy he recruited (Todd) to try to make that happen. With plenty of RBs and not enough WRs, the results were to be expected while Franklin kept trying to make the proverbial square peg fit in the round hole. Meanwhile, the true talent that fits (Burns) is sitting on the sidelines.

I'm hoping that Todd is out at QB along with Franklin being out as OC. Todd may do well in the Sun Belt, but the SEC's defenses don't allow mistakes or soft passes.

Burns in the spread is awful. Burns in a run-first, -second, and -third type offense could be great. He should be #1 as he was supposed to be coming into this year.
 
82smallwhirled
      ID: 25336116
      Thu, Oct 09, 2008, 11:28 		Thanks for the clarity, I don't know all of the ins and outs of the Auburn program.

I always wondered why it wasn't Kodi Burns, now I know why.

They do have a stable, and I mean a stable of RBs. Auburn's personnel fits their old style, so it must be comforting to see them try and go back to what was successful for them.
 
83smallwhirled
      ID: 25336116
      Fri, Oct 10, 2008, 12:43 		It looks like Tommy Bowden is now a lame duck coach at Clemson. I mean you have to assume that considering that performance last night. Clemson alums are getting fed up with Tommy.
 
84Slizz
      ID: 22813187
      Fri, Oct 10, 2008, 13:26 		i honestly thought we were looking at another ranked team going down on Thursday night...but its typical Tommy Bowden. Its only when the spotlight is off the Tigers that they dominate.
 
85beastiemiked
      ID: 51913818
      Fri, Oct 10, 2008, 13:37 		Zen, I'd be absolutely shocked if he left to go to Washington. Mizzou has a ton of money and boosters that are willing to pay Pinkel a lot to stay. Their football program has gone from a 0 to a 100 during his era. The only way he leaves is if he really wants to go back to Washington. Even then, Columbia is a way better college football town then Seattle. Seattle is obviously a better city but for a college football coach Columbia >>>> Seattle.
 
86Seattle Zen
      ID: 49112418
      Fri, Oct 10, 2008, 13:57 		Even then, Columbia is a way better college football town then Seattle.

You are out of your mind. Columbia has never been a college football town, ever. You said it yourself, the program went from a 0.

Seattle, on the other hand, has an entire navy show up for its home games and it's stadiums used to be the loudest college football venue on Earth. Haven't had much reason to yell of late.

The school has been rounding up legislators to fund a $300 million dollar expansion of Husky Stadium. The University of Washington is one of the richest public schools in the country, far more money than Missou. With it's alumni club arriving to the games in six and seven figure yachts, there is a LOT more money to entice Pinkel to UW than Missou would be able to procure.

If it comes down to money, Pinkel would go to UW. If it's loyalty or desire to continue to build an empire, he might stay in Columbia.
 
87Razor
      ID: 545172413
      Fri, Oct 10, 2008, 15:01 		UW had the loudest college football stadium in the country?

I can't stand the Gators, but there is no chance, zero, that Husky Stadium is louder than Ben Hill Griffin. Or Death Valley. Or the other Death Valley. Or Neyland. Or...
 
88Seattle Zen
      ID: 49112418
      Fri, Oct 10, 2008, 15:16 		It's not my claim, that was the word from many national announcers. Look at the stadium design, the roofs reflect the noise down onto the field.

I don't know why I am responding as this is a debate that will never be answered definitively.
 
89Promize@Parents
      ID: 19939117
      Sat, Oct 11, 2008, 08:39 		So the Columbia discussion....

Although not a huge football school in the past, and just recently put into the limelight, I can say that Columbia is a solid strong college town. The town lands dead middle of two major cities... Kansas City and St. Louis (2 hours east and west), so don't get confused on that it is just some middle of the road college town.

For many years the college was mainly supported by the basketball team... Norm Stewart unfortunately retired and the program sort of went to hell... Pinkel then arrived to the football program and changed everything around so now the focus is on football. Recently the built a new basketball stadium, workout facilities that rival Nebraska’s facilities and I believe expanded the stadium some as well.

Anyways, winning brings money into the program... and with two cities to pull from that money probably won't be a problem.
 
90TB
      ID: 094599
      Sat, Oct 11, 2008, 11:33 		There are also lots of KU and KSU alum and fans in Kansas City. Hell, lots of Nebraska fans as well.
 
91Seattle Zen
      ID: 358591721
      Sat, Oct 11, 2008, 14:42 		Yeah, I lived in Kansas City briefly, I know about Columbia.

As for today, I sure hope Oklahoma pulls this out. It sure seems like they are playing two teams, Texas and the Stripes. There have been numerous bad calls and they are seem to be against the Sooners.
 
92Seattle Zen
      ID: 358591721
      Sat, Oct 11, 2008, 14:48 		Of course, as soon as I post that, the OK punter pulls a futbol stunt, as Herbstreet so accurately called.

All in all, a great game.
 
93Seattle Zen
      ID: 358591721
      Sat, Oct 11, 2008, 15:49 		Wow, Texas was as dominant in the second half as the Sooners were in the first.

This is why college football kicks ass, games like today make next week's Texas v. Missouri game so huge. Each week there are at least a few great games. Can't say that this time of year in the NFL.
 
94holt
      ID: 591380
      Sat, Oct 11, 2008, 16:38 		The overturn of the INT and the 2 penalties on the Texas sideline (where the DB was actually trying to hold McCoy up) were all terrible calls. All three of those kept drives alive and led to scores for Texas (if I'm not mistaken).
 
95threespleens
      Leader
      ID: 00795541
      Sat, Oct 11, 2008, 21:41 		as did the okla kicker taking a dive to fake a roughing the kicker that set up their last score. there were some calls both ways.
 
96Seattle Zen
      ID: 358591721
      Sun, Oct 12, 2008, 00:18 		And, of course, Oklahoma State has to take some of the luster off the Longhorn/Tiger matchup.

Okay, Pinkel, get your agent on the phone with Seattle.
 
97Nerfherders
      ID: 64532914
      Sun, Oct 12, 2008, 03:47 		Penn State came to play against Wisconsin! Looks like they will be top 3 with Texas and Alabama.
 
98KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 45657107
      Mon, Oct 13, 2008, 14:53 		Tommy Bowden Out at Clemson

Not a terribly big surprise. I've always felt his teams underachieved to some extent. They always managed to have one or two BIG wins to save his job, but it left you wondering what happened in the games they lost.
 
99Slizz
      ID: 22813187
      Mon, Oct 13, 2008, 15:22 		Holy Crap! I just saw that headline and immediately had to come here...I totally agree with you KKB. I wonder who Clemson is gonna try and entice to replace him. I keep thinking Kiffin, but something tells me they're gonna get a QB coach or someone from the NFL.

Next up, Fulmer?

I used to think that extension they gave him would carry some weight, but UT at the bottom is downright unacceptable by SEC standards.

 
100smallwhirled
      ID: 25336116
      Mon, Oct 13, 2008, 16:17 		Not a surprise at all.

Another opening if Lane Kiffin wants to come back to college I guess.

Clemson is pretty attractive.
 
101Slizz
      ID: 179121220
      Mon, Oct 13, 2008, 18:46 		From Collegefootballtalk.com:

Here’s some cold water thrown on the idea that Gary Pinkel would leave Missouri for Washington.

 
102Seattle Zen
      ID: 49112418
      Mon, Oct 13, 2008, 19:39 		That sure sounds like an alumnus who is praying the Huskies don't snatch away their first and only successful coach.
 
103Da Bomb
      Donor
      ID: 487112814
      Sat, Oct 25, 2008, 19:44 		Navy becomes the first major college team in 11 years to not attempt a pass.
 
104Nerfherders
      ID: 64532914
      Sun, Oct 26, 2008, 03:20 		Well Penn State proved me wrong. They should cruise to the Big Ten title and hopefully Texas or Bama gets a loss along the way that will get Penn State into the National Championship.
 
105Promize
      ID: 24854246
      Sun, Oct 26, 2008, 06:01 		Was a great day of football I thought ... some really amazing matchups...

Texas is definitely proving they deserve the #1 Alabama, is way overrated...
Penn State I think is a strong #2
Oklahoma a good #4
USC still way overrated in a weak division.
OK State merely benefited by beating Mizzou and the right time to get in Top 10.
Georgia wins out, wanna hear the excuse why they are not in the championship game.
Texas Tech, amazing offense, no defense.
Ohio State, good game last night, but got saved from being embarrassed again in any BCS.
Florida, looking strong also.

My AP Rankings at this point, if I was voting.
Texas #1
Penn State #2
Alabama #3
Oklahoma #4
Texas Tech #5
Florida #6
Georgia #7
USC #8
Utah #9
Boise State #10
 
106Promize
      ID: 24854246
      Sun, Oct 26, 2008, 18:25 		Miracle... USC wins and they go down in the polls.. maybe they finally realizing how bad the Pac 10 is ..
 
107Seattle Zen
      ID: 358591721
      Mon, Oct 27, 2008, 00:38 		Texas is definitely proving they deserve the #1 Alabama, is way overrated...
Penn State I think is a strong #2

Nah, Penn State had its first good win of the season Saturday. They have a cupcake schedule, they managed to avoid two of the toughest Big Ten teams this year, Minnesota and Northwestern, and even they aren't that good. For all the bellyaching about the PAC-10, it's head and shoulders better than the Big-10. Seriously, Oregon State is the second best team Penn State has met so far.

How can you say Bama is overrated when they waxed your Dawgs and further dig yourself in a hole by saying, Georgia wins out, wanna hear the excuse why they are not in the championship game.

I'm all for the SEC champ meeting the Big-12 champ in the Big Game, within reason. Never again should a two loss team get in, and the SEC champ could be a two loss team. If Georgia wins out, I would rather see them than Penn State, but the argument "Penn State is undefeated and Georgia lost to Bama" is a pretty good excuse.

How ridiculous is the Big-12 South? It's tragic that three of those stud teams will have to stay home and watch their representative play Missouri or Nebraska! What would be wrong with a Texas-Oklahoma Big-12 Title rematch?

I'd like to turn the "bowl season" into a football version of the ACC-Big-10 challenge with the the top 8 SEC teams slugging it out with the Big-12.
 
108boikin
      ID: 532592112
      Mon, Oct 27, 2008, 17:03 		For all the bellyaching about the PAC-10, it's head and shoulders better than the Big-10. Seriously, Oregon State is the second best team Penn State has met so far. really? i do not usually support the big-10 but have you looked at pac-10, WSU second to last nationally in scoring defensively and offensively? UW not much better.

I'd like to turn the "bowl season" into a football version of the ACC-Big-10 challenge with the the top 8 SEC teams slugging it out with the Big-12. as much as love the SEC i do not see much in them after florida, UGA, and bama. so maybe a slug fest of top 3 schools.

national title game big 12 champ vs PSU, bama will not win out losing to florida in the SEC title game and USC thinking why does pete carrol allways lose atleast one stupid game a year for our team.
 
109Seattle Zen
      ID: 49112418
      Mon, Oct 27, 2008, 17:41 		You are asking me if I have noticed how bad UW and WSU are? Seriously, you think I might not have noticed? Maybe you measure conferences by their cellar dwellers, I tend to ignore them. I happen to think that USC is better than Penn State and Ohio State, but the Buckeyes are better than Oregon. It's teams 3-7 that make the PAC-10 better in my opinion.

USC thinking why does pete carrol allways lose atleast one stupid game a year for our team.

WORD.
 
110Slizz
      ID: 33951713
      Tue, Oct 28, 2008, 16:09 		I agree SZ. I think the Big Ten is very top heavy.

As for the National Championship...I think Alabama wins out but loses to UF in the SEC Championship (which means I'm going the Gaturds over the 'Dawgs this weekend).

I think Texas Tech is gonna beat Texas and lose to Oklahoma State.

Penn State coasts along and will meet up with USC in the National Championship.

 
111Peter N.
      ID: 499310
      Tue, Oct 28, 2008, 23:26 		Yeah, its going to be a wild weekend in Lubbock. I'm making the trip back to West Texas just for this event. It's going to be awesome having College Gameday there too. I can't wait! Wreck Em Tech!!!
 
112Promize
      ID: 24854246
      Wed, Oct 29, 2008, 19:20 		Should be a good time Peter...

I myself sort of doing the same, but heading south for the "Worlds Biggest Cocktail Party" :) Gators and Dawgs... With an added bonus of Halloween... Should be... interesting to say the least.

Party has already started down there, unfortunately I can't go till Friday :(
 
113Peter N.
      ID: 499310
      Wed, Oct 29, 2008, 20:13 		Haha same here Promise, I'd be in Lubbock now if I could...freakin work getting in the way. ;-)
 
114Razor
      ID: 529382710
      Wed, Oct 29, 2008, 21:00 		I hope Richt runs the entire team on the field this year after their first score. And the cheerleaders. And the band.

Go anyone but stinkin' Florida.
 
115Promize
      ID: 24854246
      Thu, Oct 30, 2008, 06:47 		Hey Razor,

Rumors flying all over that both teams Seniors have something in store.. Not sure what yet... but expect Fireworks before the game I'm sure... Probably won't be pretty.
 
116boikin
      ID: 532592112
      Thu, Oct 30, 2008, 16:49 		Rumors flying all over that both teams Seniors have something in store.. Not sure what yet... but expect Fireworks before the game I'm sure... Probably won't be pretty.

where did you hear this?
 
117Promize
      ID: 24854246
      Thu, Oct 30, 2008, 19:52 		Word of mouth in Georgia... Athens... of course could just be hype.. :) But the seniors claim they have something... Who knows.. Final say is Richt..
 
118steve houpt
      ID: 451161019
      Sun, Nov 02, 2008, 00:00 		I guess what FLA had in 'store' was 49 points.

The four game streak vs Oklahoma ['neutral site'], home against Mizzoua and Oklahoma State and @ Texas Tech was too much for Texas in 22 days.

But Texas Tech streak is just starting. The have Oklahoma St and @ Oklahoma up next, but have a week off before Oklahoma.

Oklahoma St still has @ Texas Tech and Oklahoma [11/29].

And of course Oklahoma has Texas Tech and @ Oklahoma State back to back weeks.

It is possible that OKL or OKL ST could be an 'odd team out' - i.e. - go 0-3 in 4 team round robin of the 4 top teams in the BIG 12 South, with the other 3 being 2-1 [and 7-1 overall] for a three way tie. What is 3 way tie breaker in Big 12 - points?

The TEX, TEX TECH, OKL, OKL ST mini conference standings are:

Tex Tech ___ 1-0
Texas _____ 2-1 [done]
Oklahoma ___ 0-1
OKL ST ____ 0-1

Well, this should give the sports pundits plenty to talk about. How high does Texas Tech rise? Can the even make it through Big 12 South to championship game. Can Alabama make it through SEC and SEC championship against Florida? If Florida wins SEC, what about them?? Where does this put USC? Texas could still win a tie breaker un Big 12 South - heck Texas Tech could lose to OKL & OKL State and Texas would win outright. Who knows.

And can Penn State float thru rest of shedule as one of the top two BCS teams.
 
119Seattle Zen
      ID: 358591721
      Sun, Nov 02, 2008, 00:03 		What a game! Wow, Peter N., did you have tickets? Did you storm the field? Congratulations, Red Raiders, your first win against a number one team ever. If I had a vote, I'd vote Red Raiders number one. You've got two really tough games coming up, win both and you are definitely the best team in the nation.

Sorry, Promise, ouch. Were you at the game as well? Leave early? Florida looked great.

In between those two games, there was a car wreck; USC ran over and dragged the Huskies a quarter mile. I'm saddened by this thought and humiliated at the same time, but basically, Ty Willingham is to college football programs what methamphetamine is to teeth. This year's Apple Cup will be so ugly, I'm sure there will be high school state championship games with more talent.
 
120Building 7
      ID: 1103028
      Sun, Nov 02, 2008, 09:35 		Washington should try to get the Texas Tech coach....Leach.
 
121Slizz
      ID: 13104129
      Sun, Nov 02, 2008, 10:50 		poor Ty Willingham. U-Dub looks HELPLESS. I would consider the guy from Tulsa and Gus Malzahn. Someone to put some life into that offense.

As for Texas Tech. wow! I believe Peter N. did have tickets. Did you rush the field with the rest of the student body?

As for the polls. It should be:

#1 Bama#2 Texas Tech#3 Penn State#4 Florida#5 USC#6 Texas

TTU still has to go through Oklahoma State, Oklahoma, Baylor, and likely Mizzou (assuming they win out) in the big 12 championship. They do that, there is no way in hell that you can rank Penn State and their weak schedule above them.

Shoot, if Florida wins out (as I expect them to), it will likely be either UF or Texas Tech vs Penn State in the National Championship. Assuming TTU & UF win out, I think they, not Penn State should play for the championship by way of scheduling.

Thoughts?

 
122Challenger
      Sustainer
      ID: 481126818
      Sun, Nov 02, 2008, 11:52 		What is 3 way tie breaker in Big 12 - points? If head to head cannot settle it, then their BCS ranking will be the determining factor.
 
123steve houpt
      ID: 451161019
      Sun, Nov 02, 2008, 12:14 		Thanks Challenger. It would come down to #4 from what I can see, because #1-#3 would not break the three way tie that is possible. Here is 'official breakdown' from Big 12 web site.

Divisional Tiebreakers: The following procedure will determine the representative from each division in the event of a tie:

a. If two teams are tied, the winner of the game between the two tied teams shall be the representative

b. If three or more teams are tied, steps 1 through 7 will be followed until a determination is made. If only two teams remain tied after any step, the winner of the game between the two tied teams shall be the representative.


1. The records of the three teams will be compared against each other

2. The records of the three teams will be compared within their division
The records of the three teams will be compared against the next highest placed teams in their division in order of fi nish (4, 5 and 6)

3. The records of the three teams will be compared against all common conference opponents;

4. The highest ranked team in the first Bowl Championship Series Poll following the completion of Big 12 regular season conference play shall be the representative

5. The team with the best overall winning percentage [excluding exempted games] shall be the representative

6. The representative will be chosen by draw.


BIG 12 Tie Breakers
 
124Razor
      ID: 529382710
      Sun, Nov 02, 2008, 12:18 		No way on Earth Texas should drop behind USC, much less Florida. Texas lost on the road at the last second to a top 3 team after beating 3 ranked teams in a row. Florida lost at home to Ole Miss. USC lost on the road to Oregon State. My top ten would be:

1) Penn State
2) Texas Tech
3) Alabama
4) Texas
5) Florida
6) Oklahoma
7) Oklahoma State
8) USC
9) Ohio State
10) Utah

For all the hype about Alabama, who have they really played? They smoked the most overrated team in the ACC and the most overrated team in the SEC. And they are about to go play the second most overrated team in the SEC next weekend. We won't know about Alabama until the SEC Championship Game, when they played their first top 10 opponent. Neither Georgia nor LSU are top 10 teams, or even top 15 in my book.
 
125Razor
      ID: 529382710
      Sun, Nov 02, 2008, 12:21 		Assuming TTU & UF win out, I think they, not Penn State should play for the championship by way of scheduling.

Wow, it's already started.

No, a two 1-loss teams should not play for the title when there is an undefeated team from a BCS conference.

And you can forget Texas Tech and Florida both running the table. They will probably both lose. I think the most likely team to make it to the title game as a 1-loss team is Texas.
 
126steve houpt
      ID: 451161019
      Sun, Nov 02, 2008, 12:23 		And with the 'power' of the two voting polls, that would be who the pollsters would like to see in the Big 12 Championship game IMHO. But then again, I'm not sure even I how I would pick between TEXAS, TEXAS TECH, OKLAHOMA if all were 11-1 and split 1-1 against each other.

I guess I'd root for Texas to get in the Big 12 title game to have a chance in the BCS championship against Penn State. That would give Joe Paterno a chance to get back at Texas for 1969 when Nixon declared Texas national champs.

Even though FLA might be the best team in the country. How did they lose to Ole MISS?
 
127Seattle Zen
      ID: 358591721
      Sun, Nov 02, 2008, 12:25 		How in the world is Penn State number one? For all the mocking of Alabama, they have played a couple of decent teams. All Penn State has done is beat Ohio State. Are we not all tired of watching a seriously overmatched Big Ten team getting its ass handed to it in January?

I'd say:
1. Texas Tech
2. Alabama
3. Florida
4. Oklahoma
5. USC
6. Texas
7. OK State
8. Utah
9. Boise State
10. Missouri

Relegate the Big Ten to the Playoff Division.
 
128steve houpt
      ID: 451161019
      Sun, Nov 02, 2008, 12:29 		Razor, I agree - I don't think TTU will run table [or even make it to Big 12 championship - three way tie, I think Texas wins BCS tie breaker - just MHO - thewn wins Big 12 Championship - and goes to BCS against Penn State]

But I do think Florida can run the table [but lose out on BCS - just because their loss was to Ole Miss - you have to pay the price for losing a game to an lower team - Ole Miss].

FLA - @ Vandy, South Carolina [against Spurrier] and Citadel in the 'Swamp', @ FLA State and Alabama in SEC Championship
 
129Mötley Crüe
      ID: 279253113
      Sun, Nov 02, 2008, 12:39 		1. Alabama
2. Penn State
3. Texas Tech
4. Florida
5. Texas

Razor, remind me again who it is you like. By the way you diss Alabama in your rankings and Florida constantly, I'm thinking you're an Auburn Tiger.
 
130steve houpt
      ID: 451161019
      Sun, Nov 02, 2008, 12:48 		Penn State beat Oregon State 45-14.

But you can easily make the case against them. Just look at Jeff Sagarin's rankings.

Sagarin ELO Chess, Penn State #3, predictor, Penn State #4. Combination, Penn State #1 - why, the other teams a so scattered depending on which way you look at them.


Combined [ELO Chess = BCS ---- & ---- Predictor = uses points, Home, away etc]

1 Penn State ___ [4, 3] __ 94.23 __ 9 - 0
2 Texas ______ [3, 4] __ 93.88 __ 8 - 1
3 Florida _____ [7, 2] __ 92.65 __ 7 - 1
4 Alabama ____ [2, 6] __ 92.49 __ 9 - 0
5 Texas Tech __ [1, 7] __ 91.63 __ 9 - 0
6 USC _______ [ 11, 1] _ 91.12 __ 7 - 1
7 Oklahoma ___ [6, 5] __ 90.19 __ 8 - 1
8 Oklahoma St _ [10, 8] _ 87.34 __ 8 - 1
 
131steve houpt
      ID: 451161019
      Sun, Nov 02, 2008, 12:56 		Motley Crew has AP [not a BCS poll].

The USA Today Coaches Poll [a BCS poll]. I cannot believe they dropped Texas to #7.

Texas Tech defeats Texas, Texas has defeated Oklahoma, TTU #3, OKL #4, Texas #7 ????????????????

1. Alabama (40)
2. Penn State (14)
3. Texas Tech (6)
4. Oklahoma (1)
5. Florida
6. USC
7. Texas


At theas the AP makes "some sense". They still have TEX ahead of OKL.

1. Alabama (46)
2. Texas Tech (12)
3. Penn State (6)
4. Florida (1)
5. Texas 8-1
6. Oklahoma 8-1
7. USC

 
132Razor
      ID: 529382710
      Sun, Nov 02, 2008, 13:13 		There is really no justifiable case why Texas should not be the top 1-loss team. They have beaten Oklahoma, Mizzou and Oklahoma State while losing on a last second play on the road to one of the three remaining undefeated teams. And did all of this in a row.

Florida blew out an overrated Georgia team and USC is trouncing bad Pac-10 teams. Who cares? Florida and USC not only do not have the quality wins Texas has, but they have much, much worse losses.

Penn State has whipped every team they've played except Ohio State, who they merely just beat in their own house.

Didn't the 3rd best team in the Big 10 beat Florida last year? Just because Ohio State has a tendency to get smoked when playing teams outside the Big 10 does not mean it's a problem endemic to the Big 10.
 
133Razor
      ID: 529382710
      Sun, Nov 02, 2008, 13:17 		Give Urban Meyer credit. He seems to be able to convince voters that Florida is always deserving of a better ranking than they have earned.
 
134C1-NRB
      ID: 596573021
      Sun, Nov 02, 2008, 15:15 		I think the most likely team to make it to the title game as a 1-loss team is Texas.
Mark it: Texas is not done losing.
 
135KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 186321620
      Sun, Nov 02, 2008, 16:13 		Razor, remind me again who it is you like. By the way you diss Alabama in your rankings and Florida constantly, I'm thinking you're an Auburn Tiger.

Even an Auburn Tiger fan wouldn't do that. Alabama has had a tough time closing out some games and UF losing to Ole Miss was weak, but both deserve to be where they are, or pretty darn close to it, IMHO... as an Auburn fan.
 
136Razor
      ID: 529382710
      Sun, Nov 02, 2008, 16:22 		Alabama has the worst best win out of the top 3 teams. Look at their schedule now. Clemson is average at best and UGA just got whipped again. They beat UGA in their house, but I still think Texas Tech's win over Texas and Penn State's win at the Horseshoe were better. The perception of LSU and UGA as very good teams is only based on the fact that they were ranked high to begin with. Neither has done anything to deserve to be ranked in the top 10. How many teams in the country could win 6 games against bad to mediocre teams and get blown out by Alabama and Florida? Plenty.

Florida deserves to be ranked behind all the undefeated teams and Texas. Who is the guy who ranked Florida #1? Why is Texas ranked #7 in one poll after losing on a last second play on the road to a top 3 team?
 
137Seattle Zen
      ID: 358591721
      Sun, Nov 02, 2008, 18:05 		Alabama has the worst best win out of the top 3 teams.

Your "best win" argument is transparently thin. You have to look at the whole schedule. What's Penn State's second best win? Or third? Winning at the Horseshoe is great, but in my mind, you have to run a gauntlet of tough match ups in order to go the the Championship game and Penn State cannot say that at all, not even close. Come December, if Utah and Penn State are still undefeated, I'd say Utah had the tougher schedule.

Furthermore, Alabama's toughest game is yet to come. Hell, the rivalry game against Auburn is as tough, in my mind, as Michigan State.

C1-NRB: Mark it: Texas is not done losing.

You can't seriously think the Longhorns are going to lose to the firestarters, do you? HA!
 
138Slizz
      ID: 261010217
      Sun, Nov 02, 2008, 18:11 		Razor - RE: BAMA they not only beat, but BLEW OUT UGA in a primetime game. Ditto for preseason ACC darling in Clemson. Alabama is rightfully ranked. Florida lost to a Ole Miss team which could easily be 7-2 (last second losses to Wake & Vandy).

As a SEC-biased Auburn leaning fan I don't like Alabama one bit, but they deserve their spot in the rankings.

just about everybody in the top 5 is better than Penn State and like SZ's well penned post 127, we deserve better than to watch a overmatched Big Ten team in the national championship.

While I dont think its likely that Texas Tech runs the table...if they do they should be your #1 team and Harrell or Crabtree should get the Heisman.

After reading the posts, I have came to my senses and agree that Texas should be the highest 1-loss team. IMHO, the only compelling argument can be made for UF. Like Razor and others have said, how are they ranked so low when their only loss is to a undefeated TTU team in the waining seconds?

As for your last post Razor, the same can be said about Penn State. They needed all four quarters (@home) in a primetime game to beat the "mighty" 5-4 Illini, barely squeaked by a Ohio State team which needed nearly an entire game to beat crappy Ohio @ home, got BLEW OUT by USC, and their only signature win is vs over an average michigan state team (which took forever to break into the top 25.) Tell me how that is a better win than UGA and LSU (who'se only losses are to two top 5 teams) and have at least shown dominance in just about all their games...
 
139Razor
      ID: 529382710
      Sun, Nov 02, 2008, 18:35 		You would be hard pressed to find dominance anywhere on UGA or LSU's schedule. Well, except UGA's dominance of LSU.

I am no Big 10 defender. I think the conference stinks this year outside of Penn State and Ohio State. I think Ohio State is a lot better than their blowout loss to USC. Not a lot of teams would look good without their best player. But Penn State deserves to be ranked very highly. The only team who has played them within 2 TD's was Ohio State. Alabama struggled with Mississippi and Kentucky. They didn't look great against Tulane either. Give Alabama credit for being 8-0 and give them credit for crushing Georgia in Athens, but don't give them too much credit. That is Alabama's only good win so far, which looks not as great now that Georgia has gotten blown out twice now.

Alabama is going to play one elite team this year, and it won't be until December. I suppose that's better than Penn State, but YTD, I don't see a big difference in their schedules so far. Ohio State getting blown out in the title game the last year has nothing to do with Penn State's legitimacy this year. If we're going to use last year's results to make justifications, how about something more direct? Alabama stunk last year and all of a sudden is a title contender?
 
140Building 7
      ID: 1103028
      Sun, Nov 02, 2008, 19:10 		just about everybody in the top 5 is better than Penn State and like SZ's well penned post 127, we deserve better than to watch a overmatched Big Ten team in the national championship.

SZ's rankings do not even have Penn State in the top 10. How is that credible? And he has 3 one loss teams ahead of Texas. And Texas beat 3 of the teams in his top 10 and barely lost only to his #1 team. Florida, Oklahoma, and USC have beat none of them. That makes no sense.

When the Big 10 plays a bowl game it is never at home like LSU was last year. Let's play one in Columbus ans see what happens. It is also rediculous that they have to wait 6 weeks before their bowl game. No other sport has such a long layoff in between games. Except the world series of poker main event and that is not much of a sport.
 
141Seattle Zen
      ID: 358591721
      Sun, Nov 02, 2008, 20:52 		SZ's rankings do not even have Penn State in the top 10.

Because with the wave of my hand, I relegated the entire Big Ten to Division I-AA where they belong.
 
142C1-NRB
      ID: 596573021
      Sun, Nov 02, 2008, 22:01 		What a game! Wow, Peter N., did you have tickets? Did you storm the field?
I hope he has better football sense than to do that, especially the first two times.

You can't seriously think the Longhorns are going to lose to the firestarters, do you? HA!
They have the last two years and this year they've lost to the horse killers.
 
143beastiemiked
      ID: 51913818
      Sun, Nov 02, 2008, 23:55 		Maybe this year the NCAA will finally realize a playoff system would be mucho dollars. Just kidding, they are idiots and will continue going with the stupid BCS. An 8 team playoff would be super sick.
 
144Slizz
      ID: 33951713
      Mon, Nov 03, 2008, 09:13 		RE: 140 - thats exactly my point :)
 
145Slizz
      ID: 33951713
      Mon, Nov 03, 2008, 11:35 		Good call, KKB. Fulmer is done slightly after mid-season!

Now there is an awesome college job...definitely the most attractive one considering their athletic budget, history, etc.

Any suggestions?

 
146Myboyjack
      Dude
      ID: 014826271
      Mon, Nov 03, 2008, 12:37 		Any suggestions?

I'll nominate Brian Kelly from UC
 
147C1-NRB
      ID: 588421510
      Mon, Nov 03, 2008, 13:15 		Any suggestions?

I'll nominate Mike Leach from TT University. Take your tricked-up, gimic offense and go away.
 
148KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 45657107
      Mon, Nov 03, 2008, 13:33 		Another Tommy could be on his way out next. If Tommy Tuberville doesn't do something FANTASTIC against Georgia and Alabama, he won't be back next year.

In fact, if Auburn loses to Georgia, I wouldn't be surprised for Auburn to get rid of Tuberville BEFORE the Alabama game.
 
149Slizz
      ID: 33951713
      Mon, Nov 03, 2008, 14:50 		Love the Leach call...Imagine what Leach could do with 5 star recruits as opposed to 2 and 3 stars!?!?

Everyone saw what what happened when a legit recruit like Crabtree comes to his school...wow.

Brian Kelly from UC is a solid coach, but my guess is that UT wants a big name. Do you think Spurrier would do the unthinkable?

Also, what about Butch Davis at North Carolina?

Mack Brown left UNC b/c the AD refused to make the commitment to make football bigger than the basketball program...@UT they wont have that problem.

KKB - as for Auburn, what a sad state of affairs. I don't think Franklin got a fair shake, but to fire him that early on shows the immense pressure Tuberville must be facing from Lowder & Co. You can't expect to just overhaul an offense and make it work in a season (see Michigan). I dont think they stand a chance vs UGA. Richt won't let the 'Dawgs lose 2 in a row. I'll be happy if they can take the Iron Bowl, at least that would be a moral victory for the season.

 
150Razor
      ID: 141049220
      Mon, Nov 03, 2008, 15:03 		No way Tuberville gets fired before the one game Auburn fans care about the most. He can very well save his job by beating an undefeated Alabama team and ruining their national championship hopes. Maybe Auburn would be dumb enough to fire him before the Iron Bowl, but I wouldn't can a coach who has won 6 straight against Alabama right before he plays Alabama.
 
151steve houpt
      ID: 451161019
      Mon, Nov 03, 2008, 15:31 		They almost fired Tuperville once before. The only thing worse than some prima donna athletes may be some of the University 'Booster Clubs' and how quick they sour on coaches. But for what head coaches get paid ................... and what the alums donate ............... oh well, I guess. But it gets old. Not just a game any more, is it.

It's not what you've done, it's what are you doing NOW.

From 2003 > 2007, Auburn was 31-9 in SEC [but only one [1-0] SEC Championship - almost impossible to run away with SEC East or West year after year]

Best record was LSU at 32-8 [2-1 SEC Champ]
ARK 20-20 [0-1] SEC Champ]
ALA 17-23
Ole MISS 13-27
MS ST 9-31

In the East:
GA was 28-12 [1-1 SEC Champ]
FLA 27-13 [1-0 SEC Champ]
TENN 27-13 [0-2 SEC Champ]
SC 17-23
KY 11-29
VANDY 8-32
 
152steve houpt
      ID: 451161019
      Mon, Nov 03, 2008, 15:34 		An add on: It might be justifiable to fire Tuberville just for bring in [?? mind blank - guy from Troy] an offensive coordinator to run an offense not around the talent, but just to run it with the talent you had.

I can see recruiting to a type offense, but to run it just to run it ...... no.
 
153KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 45657107
      Mon, Nov 03, 2008, 16:01 		No way Tuberville gets fired before the one game Auburn fans care about the most. He can very well save his job by beating an undefeated Alabama team and ruining their national championship hopes. Maybe Auburn would be dumb enough to fire him before the Iron Bowl, but I wouldn't can a coach who has won 6 straight against Alabama right before he plays Alabama.

The other side of that is that Auburn boosters will see Alabama as a sure defeat and bring in some newb so that Auburn doesn't get beat putting their "best" team on the field.

Seriously, it's weird the way these people think.
 
154Peter N.
      ID: 499310
      Mon, Nov 03, 2008, 19:11 		RAIDER POWER!!!!

WOW, I am still in shock. Yes, I did have tickets to the game. No, I did not rush the field. I left that to the current students even though I've only been an alum for 5 months. :-)

I have never been to a more emotional game. At the end, there were both Texas and Texas Tech fans crying(each for different reasons of course). That game took me on a wild ride of emotion and was well-worth the price of admission. It was, by far, the most enjoyable and memorable game I've ever been to.

Big game this weekend. It will be interesting to see how we handle the prosperity. OK State will prove to be just as big of a challenge as UT was. I'll have to watch that one on TV though. Lubbock literally didn't sleep that night. We were up partying till the early morning. LOL, that made for a rough Sunday and I was still recovering this morning at work.

WRECK EM TECH!!!!
 
155Promize
      ID: 24854246
      Mon, Nov 03, 2008, 20:11 		Wow, people finally doing a little talking about College football...

rep #119: Yah was tough to watch, luckily had good eye candy beside me at the game so talked with her most of it :) Nah, I stayed till the end, but isn't like everyone left to go home.. they just went to the parking lot and drank more.. We just turned in the Direct TV and watched a few other games as well.

I can definitely say Georgia was overranked... I'm starting to think Richt doesn't know how to motivate for big games.. Tennessee last year... Alabama this year... Florida this year...
 
156Promize
      ID: 24854246
      Mon, Nov 03, 2008, 20:16 		As for my post on Alabama being overrated, I still stand beside it.. Even though they ran all over Georgia first half, Dawgs basically did the reverse to them second half... Since then who have they beaten? Who have they beaten soundly? Actually, come to think about it, who have they beaten other then Georgia this year? You can't count Clemson game 1 for sure.

My guess at this point and the remaining schedules it will definitely be Florida vs a Big 12 team in the BCS championship.

I don't think Mizzou defense can do it and Daniels seems to choke a bit in big games.. But would be nice to see Mizzou knock off whoever the potential BSC contender is in the Big 12 Championship.
 
157Slizz
      ID: 33951713
      Tue, Nov 04, 2008, 09:58 		Spurrier on Fulmer stepping down:

“I’d like to congratulate him on hitting that lottery ticket. That’s a big ticket he got,” Spurrier said of Fulmer’s contract, which guarantees him a $6 million payoff upon his termination. “I don’t know whether to feel sorry for coach or congratulate him on the biggest buyout in the history of college football. He got the best deal ever, I think. Nobody’s got any better deal than that. He won some games last year and got a good deal.”

love the ol' ball coach. If South Carolina could only get a decent QB...

 
158KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 45657107
      Tue, Nov 04, 2008, 15:19 		Duke's David Cutliffe Ensures He's Next Tennessee Coach

...by completely denying any interest in the job.
 
159KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 186321620
      Wed, Nov 05, 2008, 19:11 		Price out at K-State after season is over. Another early vacancy.
 
160Building 7
      ID: 471052128
      Thu, Nov 06, 2008, 13:38 		Here are my college football rankings, including the teams at the bottom of the list:

1. Alabama
2. Texas Tech
3. Penn State
4. Texas
5. Oklahoma
...
...
...
209. Any high school team
210. Wellesley Women's College
211. Any Pop Warner team
213. School for the Blind
214. Washington State
215. Washington

Those last two will play in a big Pac 10 matchup later this season.
 
161Promize
      ID: 24854246
      Thu, Nov 06, 2008, 17:32 		And those two are why USC shouldn't be included in the Top 10 at all.
 
162steve houpt
      ID: 451161019
      Thu, Nov 06, 2008, 23:16 		Those two teams are not much worse than:

Alabama's Tulane & Western KY
Penn State's Coastal Carolina, Temple or even Syracuse
Texas Tech's Eastern WASH, U MASS or S.M.U.
Even Texas has FLA Atlantic and UTEP

USC's non conf games have been against VA and Ohio St [to compensate for weak PAC 10]

But WASH & WASH ST are the only two teams from 'major' conferences in my 'BOTTOM 15'.

1 _ North Texas [worse] __ Sun Belt
2 _ Idaho __ WAC
3 _ S.M.U. __ CUSA
4 _ San Diego St __ Mtn West
5 _ Western KY __ I-A Ind
6 _ Kent St __ MAC
7 _ U.A.B. __ CUSA
8 _ Miami, OH __ MAC
9 _ Eastern MICH __ MAC
10 _ LA Monroe __ Sun Belt
11 _ Washington St __ PAC 10
12 _ Tulane __ CUSA
13 _ Ohio U __ MAC
14 _ Washington __ PAC 10
15 _ Army __ I-A Ind
 
163Seattle Zen
      ID: 358591721
      Sat, Nov 08, 2008, 18:47 		Thank you, thank you, THANK YOU, Iowa!
 
164steve houpt
      ID: 451161019
      Sat, Nov 08, 2008, 23:15 		Back to my #126. I see a real possiblity of a three way tie in BIG 12 SOUTH - i.e. - Texas Tech losing in Norman, OK. They've looked great last two weeks AT HOME. And oh well for Penn State - Texas match.

And I do not see Alabama beating Florida in the SEC Championship.

I see whatever team the BCS 'picks' as BIG 12 South Champ [the tie breaker and winning the BIG 12 Championship] vs Florida in BCS Championship.

 
165Peter N.
      ID: 499310
      Sun, Nov 09, 2008, 11:36 		Wreck Em Tech!!!

I'm making another road trip. This time its to Norman, Oklahomo for the biggest game ever in Texas Tech history. Should be fun! :-)
 
166Seattle Zen
      ID: 358591721
      Sun, Nov 09, 2008, 12:32 		That's awesome, Peter, congrats on landing tickets. I'm unabashedly jumping on the Tech bandwagon, you've got to love the underdog.

I'm with Steve, I would like to see the winner of the game in Norman play Florida in the BCS final as I think Florida will beat Bama easily.

Wyoming is a SEC killer! They are 3-1 against those bums under coach Glenn.

Man, Minnesota had every reason to believe this was the year they could hoist the Little Brown Jug as Michigan sucks. Bottom line is, the whole Big 10 is a joke.

There may very well be a compelling BCS final game, but I don't consider the BCS a success because three of the conferences are awful and one is just mediocre. Seriously, who cares who wins the Big East or the ACC? Penn State, thankfully, will not be in the final, and they can show up in Pasadena in order to have their ass handed to them. The rest of the Big 10 is forgettable. Same can be said of the Pac 10 after USC.

With the BCS only allowing a conference one at-large, there are going to be at least two Big 12 teams screwed out of a top bowl game. At minimum, the Cotton Bowl ought to be a great game this year, probably better than either the Sugar or Orange.
 
167KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 186321620
      Sun, Nov 09, 2008, 12:43 		Wyoming is a SEC killer! They are 3-1 against those bums under coach Glenn.

Let's see Glenn beat LSU, Georgia, Florida, or (damn, I hate saying this) Alabama before calling him an SEC killer.

I would have said even Auburn during any other year than this one... ugh.
 
168Seattle Zen
      ID: 358591721
      Sun, Nov 09, 2008, 13:48 		Hey let's see LSU, Georgia, Florida, or the SEC flavor of the month Alabama go to Wyoming. It's not easy getting there, as you need to arrive via horseback. I'd recommend flying to Norman and borrowing the Sooner Schooner to bring in the equipment then talking to Anheiser Busch to borrow some Clydesdales for the linemen.

You really have nothing to fear. There are more people in cars on the Atlanta beltway at 8:00am Monday than there are men, women and children in Wyoming. The University of Wyoming isn't the only Division One school in the state, it's the only 4 year college in the state. There are hundreds of high school football leagues that draw from populations larger than Wyoming.

So, in the name of Fennis Dembo, quit ducking the Cowboys, SEC KILLERS!
 
169steve houpt
      ID: 451161019
      Sun, Nov 09, 2008, 13:53 		SZ - the one at large for a conference screws the Big 12. Yes, but heck, you may have three of the top four teams in the counry in ONE DIVISION in the Big 12 South. And two of them will watch the other one pick up bonus points in BCS by playing Mizzou in Big 12 Championship.

Hard to believe Big 12 South tie breaker may come down to BCS rankings week after Big 12 regular season ends. But I guess Big 12 rules makers figured [and may have never thought it would come down to rule 5-6], the higher BCS team then has better chance of making the BIG BCS GAME.
 
170Slizz
      ID: 33951713
      Tue, Nov 11, 2008, 13:58 		SZ - from the "Forde Yard Dash":

"Thank you, Hawkeyes, for saving college football from a third straight season of sending an overmatched, overrated and outdated Big Ten champion to the BCS National Championship game."

Almost echoes your thoughts exactly.

Wyoming...lol. Poor Philip Fulmer. At least Iowa did the unthinkable and knocked off Penn State.

Assuming Texas Tech loses @ Norman in two weeks, Texas would be the Big 12 South representative in the championship game due to BCS Ranking Tiebreaker and Oklahoma would be above them in the ranking thus securing an "at large bid". Fair? no. Nevertheless, more of a case for a playoff.

Tech would than get jobbed by the BCS and end up playing Georgia in the SBC Cotton Bowl.

National Championship - Florida vs. TexasRose Bowl - USC vs Penn State Fiesta Bowl - Oklahoma vs Boise State (rematch!)Sugar Bowl - Alabama vs CincinnatiOrange Bowl - North Carolina vs Ohio State

Its shaping up to be a pretty crappy set of BCS Bowls sans the National Championship. I'd love to see USC / Alabama but you know that isnt gonna happen.

The Big East & the ACC are TERRIBLE and you know they arent giving both Utah & Boise State bids.

I do hope Oregon State wins out so at least Ohio State wont get the last "at large" bid.

 
171J
      Leader
      ID: 049346417
      Tue, Nov 11, 2008, 14:05 		I've gotta defend the ACC at least a little. It's definitely not TERRIBLE! There are just no dominant teams right now. But there are also absolutely no doormats. Even Duke is still alive for a bowl game!!!!
 
172KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 45657107
      Tue, Nov 11, 2008, 14:57 		But there are also absolutely no doormats. Even Duke is still alive for a bowl game!

You forgot the "...because they play in the ACC."

If Duke played in any other conference, they'd be the Duke we all used to know and love. But, now that the ACC has gotten weaker, Duke has a chance.

If you're a team in the Top 25, which ACC team are you legitimately scared of? Which team are you dreading on your schedule?

I can't think of a single one. UNC (#17) certainly isn't scared of anyone and with losses to UVA and VaTech, I can't imagine why any team is actually scared of them.

FSU (#19/20) isn't scared of anyone and with no real knockout wins except against 1-AA teams, I don't know who's scared of them.

I think a lot of ACC teams are going to make it to Bowl Games this year and unless they're facing weak talent, the ACC is going to get their butts handed to them.

The ACC was 2-6 in bowl games last year, tied with the WAC (1-3) with a .250 win pct. The conferences that did worse than them? Independents (0-1) and the MAC (0-3).

The ACC may do well playing amongst themselves, but they're increasingly having a difficult time playing outside of their conference.
 
173steve houpt
      ID: 451161019
      Tue, Nov 11, 2008, 18:09 		I have to agree with 'J'. [and I'm a big SEC fan, LSU - lived there and Auburn - thru tuition]

The top ACC teams are like a bunch of University of South Carolina's [still can't get used to seeing USC around here and not thinking Southern Cal ....]. So CAR is ranked #23 & #24 in USA & Harris polls and #25 in BCS.

But Florida is a 22 point favorite this weekend.

There is a big drop off from teams to be scared of and 'good' teams that in todays football are 'top 25'. There is no FLA, ALA, TEX, TTU or USC in the ACC. But a lot of So Car's, NEB's & CAL's.

UNC [BCS #16], FSU [BCS #19], WF [BCS #24], VA Tech and GA Tech are 'good' teams.

The good - WF beat Ole MISS [who beat FLA].
-------- WF beat Baylor as good as the Big 12 teams did.
-------- GA Tech beat MISS State as good as rest of SEC.
-------- FSU beat COL as good as rest of Big 12.
-------- VA Tech beat Nebraska - one of the mid Big 12 teams.
-------- UNC beat U CONN [wait, maybe that's good in woman's B-Ball]
-------- UNC & BC beat Notre Dame [it sounds good]
-------- MD beat CAL [blame it on time zone fatigue]

The bad - VA Tech lost to East CAR.
------- WF lost to Navy
------- VA looked like most of the PAC 10 against the real USC, beat bad.


Duke beat James Madison [#1 in DIV I-AA - like an Appalachian State team that beat Michigan], beat Navy, not a 'bad' team, lost by only 4 to Northwestern and beat Vanderbilt.

Most ranking systems have all but N.C. State in the top 60 of the 120 Div I-A teams. Can't say that for the PAC 10 [6 of 10], Big 12 [7 of 12] or SEC [9 of 12].

CF Ranking Comparison

Here is how Jeff Safgarin of MIT and USA Today rates conferences over all strength. ACC 2 or 3.

[1st] CENTRAL MEAN ___ [2nd] SIMPLE AVERAGE

1_ B-12 __ = 78.70 ______ 78.93 ( 1)
2_ ACC ___ = 77.46 ______ 77.22 ( 3)
3_ SEC ___ = 77.01 ______ 77.45 ( 2)
4_ B-10 ____ = 75.97 ____ 76.04 ( 4)
5_ B-EAST __ = 74.32 ____ 73.47 ( 5)
6_ PAC-10 __ = 73.18 ____ 72.48 ( 6)


There are two group ratings, the "central mean" and the "simple average" (also known as the "arithmetic mean") The "central mean" gives the most weight to the middle team(s) in the group and progressively less weight to teams as you go away from the middle in either direction, up or down.

This tends to smooth out the effect of anomalous teams that are rated much higher and lower than the middle team(s) in the group. The "simple average" ("arithmetic mean") weights each team equally no matter where they are relative to the middle.

 
174KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 186321620
      Tue, Nov 11, 2008, 19:20 		"WF beat Ole MISS [who beat FLA]."
On a last-minute drive for a FG. They also lost to Navy, got blown out by Maryland, and lost to this-a'int-the-80s-anymore Miami.

"WF beat Baylor as good as the Big 12 teams did."
Beating a 3-7 team is just expected. I don't see what point spread matters.

"GA Tech beat MISS State as good as rest of SEC."
Again, beating a 3-6 team is just expected. They sure didn't beat Gardner-Webb (3) by as much as say Tennessee Tech (16) or Sam Houston State (16). If point spread matters, that's beyond weak.

"FSU beat COL as good as rest of Big 12."
What about Miami? The team that Florida beat by 23 points?

"VA Tech beat Nebraska - one of the mid Big 12 teams."
And they also lost to East Carolina, who's not quite the darling they were at the start of the season after losing to the likes of UVA and Houston.

"UNC beat U CONN [wait, maybe that's good in woman's B-Ball]"
Exactly! :) UConn has lost to any team that has any measurable amount of talent. They were 5-0 as a result of UVA being horrible.

"UNC & BC beat Notre Dame [it sounds good]"
That would have been good in the 90s, but not anymore.

"MD beat CAL [blame it on time zone fatigue]"
One of the few quality wins in the entire conference.

---

Look, I'm not saying that the ACC is just a bunch of walkovers, but I think every team in the conference would be middle of the pack or worse in the Big 12, SEC, or Pac-10.

Regardless of what Sagarin says, I would be VERY surprised if the ACC did better than they did last year in their bowl games.

I've watched the SEC for 15 years now and living in the heart of ACC Country is painful. It's like watching high school football most weeks. There have been some good teams in the past, but I just don't see them this year.

As the saying goes, even a blind squirrel finds a nut every now and again. That's how I view any thing "significant" the ACC has done this year.

There's a reason most people around here look forward to basketball season...
 
175beastiemiked
      ID: 5310301021
      Tue, Nov 11, 2008, 19:51 		Go Wyoming! I had a buddy play for them in a few years back. When they played Florida I was in the 3rd row of the Wyoming section. Awesome time and they won me some money by beating the spread.
 
176steve houpt
      ID: 451161019
      Tue, Nov 11, 2008, 22:17 		KKB - I agree - Like I said, the ACC teams are like SO CAR, NEB, CAL. In the middle. But that's not bad.

This year is unusual. ACC is normally from top to bottom the number 5 or 6 of those conferences if you check Sagarin archives.

This year [a year the SEC seems to be severely lacking in QB experience / talent] the ACC has a bunch of 'good' teams while more than a normal number of SEC and PAC 10 teams are having off [ACC] team type years.
 
177boikin
      ID: 532592112
      Wed, Nov 12, 2008, 10:33 		Allot of this will be settled in the coming weeks, with several sec/acc matchups. UGA-GT, FSU-UF, clemson-USC. the sec should win all those matchups but i think the computers are right this year ACC looks bad because they lose to each other but that is because the teams a fairly evenly matched. out side of big 12 and the SEC. i think that there are several ACC teams that could compete for the big 10, big east and pac 10 titles.
 
178Razor
      ID: 181051618
      Wed, Nov 12, 2008, 15:32 		The ACC is so much deeper than than the SEC this year. The problem is at the top, where no ACC team is elite and the SEC has at least two. But after the top 4 teams in the SEC, the conference is weak. The ACC has the problem of having 8 or so pretty good to good teams.

Anyway, this will be settled during the last week of the season when UGA plays Tech, FSU plays UF, Vandy plays Wake and South Carolina plays Clemson. I predict a split at worst for the ACC.
 
179smallwhirled
      ID: 3692247
      Wed, Nov 12, 2008, 16:07 		"FSU beat COL as good as rest of Big 12."
What about Miami? The team that Florida beat by 23 points?

KKB, did you watch that game?

Look here

You're comparing FSU's win @Miami to UF's win vs. Miami in the Swanp (both rivalry games). That comparison doesn't look bad at all for the ACC in this case.

Miami is Travis Benjamin away from losing that game by 3 touchdowns.
 
180Razor
      ID: 181051618
      Wed, Nov 12, 2008, 16:39 		FSU dominated the Miami game. The elements played a factor in the game being close as FSU turned over the ball four times.
 
181Slizz
      ID: 33951713
      Wed, Nov 12, 2008, 17:41 		Wow. We've struck a nerve amongst ACC Nation.

Face it, the conference is meteoker and come bowl time, I think we'll be looking at another 2-6 type record.

It will still be better than the crap the Big East is throwing out there...

 
182steve houpt
      ID: 451161019
      Wed, Nov 12, 2008, 17:43 		I'm an SEC fan, but facts are facts this year.
 
183smallwhirled
      ID: 3692247
      Wed, Nov 12, 2008, 22:32 		Heh, yea you did my buddy Slizz....

All facts point to the ACC being at worst a strong 3 in the conference argument this year. Pick any criteria too.

It's hard to look at the thing objectively because of how bad they've been lately.
 
184boikin
      ID: 532592112
      Thu, Nov 13, 2008, 13:16 		All facts point to the ACC being at worst a strong 3 in the conference argument this year.

That is good year for the ACC and i do not think there are that many in the ACC nation.
 
185Slizz
      ID: 33951713
      Thu, Nov 13, 2008, 14:59 		Either way, you are going to see a very average ACC team in a BCS game. It still will likely be better than what the Big East is gonna offer, but nevertheless average.

Like Steve, i'm a SEC fan as well...but I gotta admit this year the Big 12 is the class of all conferences. They have 5 legit top 25 teams in Texas, Oklahoma, Texas Tech, Missouri, and Boone Picken's Oklahoma State. Nebraska is even on the up.

 
186Promize
      ID: 24854246
      Thu, Nov 13, 2008, 21:16 		Little something for you KKB for this weekend :)

IMPORTANT QUESTIONS
-------------------------------------------------

Q. How do you keep an Auburn Tiger out of your yard?
A. Put up goal post.

Q. Where do you go in Auburn in case of a tornado?
A. To Jordan-Hare Stadium--there's not much chance of getting a touchdown there!

Q. What do you call an Auburn Tiger with a National championship ring?
A. A thief.

Q. What's the difference between the Auburn Tigers and a dollar bill?
A. You can still get four quarters out of a dollar bill.

Q. How many Auburn Tigers does it take to win a National Championship?
A. Nobody knows and we may never find out!

Q. What do the Auburn Tigers and a possums have in common?
A. Both play dead at home and get killed on the road!
 
187Slizz
      ID: 551055922
      Thu, Nov 13, 2008, 22:27 		hahahaha. good 1 promize.
 
188KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 45657107
      Fri, Nov 14, 2008, 08:48 		Nice!

But don't get too cocky. If Auburn, for some unknown reason, decides to run the ball like they should have been since Week 1, The Dawgs could be in for a big surprise.
 
189boikin
      ID: 532592112
      Fri, Nov 14, 2008, 09:40 		I think Auburn has a shot against UGA, with UGA D playing the way they are even there O has chance of scoreing and tuberville has a way to coach his best in the big games or maybe he is saving that for bama.

I wonder if they would fire him if he beats bama 7 straight times?
 
190Promize
      ID: 24854246
      Fri, Nov 14, 2008, 16:22 		I still like Auburns D... but lack of any offense hurts... Incentive for sure though after last years "Blackout" embarassment... Always a good game between the Dawgs and Tigers... whens last time this game as a 12:30 game though?
 
191boikin
      ID: 532592112
      Fri, Nov 14, 2008, 16:39 		whens last time this game as a 12:30 game auburn/UGA has been reduced to Raycom game or what ever company is doing them now...sad sad sad
 
192KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 186321620
      Sat, Nov 15, 2008, 10:53 		They don't have a lack of offense, they have a lack of a plan on offense. With a stacked backfield like Auburn has, there's no reason they can't move the ball down the field. They just seem stuck on trying to be something they're not.

Like I said, if they decide to run all day, UGA will be in for a surprise.
 
193Slizz
      ID: 551055922
      Sat, Nov 15, 2008, 11:52 		Raycom...HA! well they did televise the upset of Ole Miss @ UF!
 
194Promize@Parents
      ID: 410441514
      Sat, Nov 15, 2008, 15:45 		That was embarrassing... We don't deserve the win... I stress again we are not a Top 10 BCS team at all.. And I have a feeling will end up playing USC somewhere if we beat GA Tech last game.. And probably will be pounded...
 
195KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 186321620
      Sat, Nov 15, 2008, 19:23 		If only Auburn had a decent QB option... geez. Congrats on the win, Promize. A win's a win.
 
196Slizz
      ID: 4710371415
      Mon, Nov 17, 2008, 09:20 		Promize, you don't have to worry....its gonna be UGA vs TTU in the Cotton Bowl. Stoops is like 71-2 (or some ridiculous # like that) at Norman and you know its gonna be a'rockin come Saturday night. Big 12 tiebreaker in a 3-way tie is by BCS ranking and TTU is gonna drop below OU & Texas, which than makes them the odd man (like Mizzou).

Bama & UF are the SEC representatives. Sure would be the 2nd most attractive bowl on the schedule, if not the best b/c UF is gonna blow out Texas or whoever they play in the National Championship (if its not USC).

 
197boikin
      ID: 532592112
      Mon, Nov 17, 2008, 10:08 		Don't let the scores fool you, UF is very beatable as long as you do not turn the ball over.
 
198Promize
      ID: 24854246
      Mon, Nov 17, 2008, 14:33 		Actually, it looks like UGA is going to Capital One bowl vs Ohio State/Michigan State... according to our local paper...

Hopefully it is Ohio State then we can have the game everyone wanted last year. :)

Looks like Cotton Bowl is LSU vs Tech Tech...
 
199Promize
      ID: 24854246
      Mon, Nov 17, 2008, 14:35 		well unless your saying that Georgia is going to lose to GA Tech last game of the year?
 
200Donkey Hunter
      Leader
      ID: 916288962
      Mon, Nov 17, 2008, 15:33 		Re 197 Aren't most teams pretty beatable if you do not turn the ball over?
 
201Slizz
      ID: 4710371415
      Mon, Nov 17, 2008, 15:36 		I'm sorry, I blindly assumed that the Cotton Bowl had the highest non-BCS payout and I was wrong. You're right Promize, its gonna be UGA / OSU or PSU.

Capital One Bowl payout is about $4.25mCotton Bowl payout is about $3.0m

Obviously, UGA would goto the Capital One and LSU to the Cotton Bowl.

Back to the ACC...The "U" is playing some damn good football. Outside of the UF game, they were in every game until the waining seconds (losses to FSU & UNC). A couple good bounces (i.e. endzone catch vs UNC and a couple more minutes vs FSU and they'd be a top 10 team).

KKB - no way Auburn fires Tuberville this season. If they did they'd be silly as what they have to offer is not nearly as good as Tennessee or Clemson. I do think he's gonna be a lame duck going into the 2009 season though...

 
202boikin
      ID: 532592112
      Mon, Nov 17, 2008, 16:08 		LSU vs Tech Tech... i hope not... hopefully TT will stun OU.

Aren't most teams pretty beatable if you do not turn the ball over? i am just saying that key turnovers have been leading to blow outs of UF. If you limit your turnovers and eighter but pressuer on the them by scoring like ole miss or keep the ball away from them like UM(even though the score was not that close this game was close till the UM D became to worn out to make up for UM's vanilla offense) you can beat them.
 
203J
      Leader
      ID: 049346417
      Mon, Nov 17, 2008, 16:11 		Big 12 tiebreaker in a 3-way tie is by BCS ranking and TTU is gonna drop below OU & Texas, which than makes them the odd man (like Mizzou).

That's correct, BUT I think you're applying it wrong. That determines the automatic bid. Whoever finishes 2nd or 3rd doesn't matter, the BCS can still pick TT over OU or UT if they want to. The 2nd place finisher in ANY conference is not an automatic bid.

With that said, I think if OU beats TT this weekend (I hope not), I think it'll be OU & UT in the BCS if Missouri loses the title game. Imagine if Mizzou wins!!! 2 deserving Big 12 teams then get screwed!
 
204Promize
      ID: 24854246
      Mon, Nov 17, 2008, 16:49 		Well, like the Big 12, but it would be a great way to tell the BCS to shove it for what they did to Mizzou last year and putting Kansas in the BCS instead of Mizzou... So even though I'm bias because I love my Mizzou Tigers also... I would love to see the big shocker and Mizzou knock off whoever...

This will basically be a home field advantage game for the Tigers as it is in KC this year.

As for the Dawgs, I do hope they win, just so I can travel to the bowl game... Cotton bowl just a bit to far to go this year for me :(
 
205Slizz
      ID: 4710371415
      Mon, Nov 17, 2008, 17:19 		RE: 203 - If OU does beat TTU, I think you have to put them in the BCS...plus they get ratings and travel well...and they wont even have to play in the Big 12 Championship!!!

Of course you are 100% right that they could choose TTU over OU regardless of that game's outcome (kind of like Kansas losing to Mizzou, but still getting the at large).

Believe me, I hope TTU wins b/c I think its great that Leach is doing all this with the leftovers and rejects from UT, OU, A&M, etc. Imagine what he could do with a team full of Crabtrees!!!!

Dawgs offense is looking pretty sluggish...but Richt did a heck of a job considering the losses they sustained via injury.

 
206Peter N.
      ID: 499310
      Mon, Nov 17, 2008, 18:15 		Does anybody besides Tech faithful think they have a legit shot? I know Tech is a touchdown underdog. I didn't expect it to be quite that high. Oh well, just more juice for me. :-) I have confidence in the Red Raiders, but I know I'm biased so there you go.

Wreck Em Tech!
 
207Slizz
      ID: 4710371415
      Wed, Nov 19, 2008, 11:04 		Pretty cool article on the top coaching vacancies from the Forde Yard Dash:

You're trying to hire the best coach imaginable at one of the six highest-profile openings. (For now. Wait a week and there could be a half-dozen more.) How do you sell your school? What do you say, and what do you avoid? The Dash supplies the answers:

Clemson. The pitch: We'll pay you SEC money ($2 million, no problem). You'll have SEC fan support (stadium capacity: 80,301). You'll have SEC facilities (you name it, we'll build it). And guess what? You're not in the SEC. No trying to beat Nick Saban, Urban Meyer, Mark Richt and Les Miles on an annual basis. Just beat a bunch of basketball schools and the powers formerly known as Florida State and Miami and you're king. Heck, we even kept Tommy Bowden for 9½ years.

What they won't tell you: You still have to live in Clemson, S.C.

Tennessee: The pitch: We've got tradition dating back to General Neyland and money dating back to Jack Daniel. Nobody else in the SEC will put 110,000 fans in the stands and offer unchallenged statewide support. Our fans are so good, they've even embraced basketball -- women's and men's. And what better place to challenge yourself against the best than the SEC East?

What they won't tell you: You've got to go out-of-state to recruit most of your guys, and the old raiding spots of Alabama, North Carolina, Georgia and Florida are now controlled by guys named Saban, Davis, Richt and Meyer.

Washington: Come skip stones on Puget Sound. Park your sailboat outside the stadium. Watch 72,500 fans fill the stands -- the best fan base on the West Coast, except when USC is trendy-wendy. Outside of the Trojans, who in this league is there to be afraid of on an annual basis? And if you don't think living in Seattle is better than Clemson, Knoxville, Manhattan, Kan., or Syracuse, you haven't been paying attention.

What they won't tell you: If you haven't seen us churn through three coaches in 10 years, you haven't been paying attention. They still expect to win a national title here every four years, with or without talent.

Syracuse: What's the easiest path to a BCS bid? Through a Big East that no longer includes Bobby Petrino or Rich Rodriguez in the coaching ranks. Syracuse has won big before and can win big again with the right guy getting the right recruits from back East and down South. And if you win, say, two Big East games a year, you'll look better than the last guy. Talk about walking in while expectations are down.

What they won't tell you: The Carrier Dome doesn't dazzle recruits anymore. Neither do the six-foot snow drifts.

Thoughts?

 
208beastiemiked
      ID: 5310301021
      Wed, Nov 19, 2008, 15:51 		Peter, Oklahoma is the pick all the "experts" are picking so everyone else is following suit. They are pretty evenly matched so even if someone is the favorite it can't be by much. The favorite probably has no more than a 55-60% chance of winning so anything can happen.
 
209Seattle Zen
      ID: 49112418
      Wed, Nov 19, 2008, 16:48 		Washington: Come skip stones on Puget Sound.

Well, the stadium and campus is on Lake Washington, but that's a minor point.

They still expect to win a national title here every four years, with or without talent.

I don't agree. I'd say that "they" expect to go to the Rose Bowl every fourth year, with the occasional three straight year streak, but "we" are not expecting national championships twice a decade. Right now, only Ohio St. and Oklahoma fans could possible be in that stratosphere of smugness.

Things I would borrow from the other write ups: UW will certainly pay SEC money. What they won't tell you is that you have to recruit tons of out-of-state guys, mostly from CA. Of the top 3 football recruits in the state of Washington the past four or five years, only Jake Locker has stayed. Jonathan Stewart went to Oregon (ugh!) and Travis Mays is currently destroying the PAC-10 in USC's defensive backfield. That certainly needs to end. However, even the best players from WA will need to be augmented with studs from CA, that's how it was done by the Dawgfather, Don James.
 
210boikin
      ID: 532592112
      Thu, Nov 20, 2008, 09:40 		I don't agree. I'd say that "they" expect to go to the Rose Bowl every fourth year, with the occasional three straight year streak, but "we" are not expecting national championships twice a decade. Right now, only Ohio St. and Oklahoma fans could possible be in that stratosphere of smugness. you forgot about a third of SEC.
 
211Slizz
      ID: 4710371415
      Fri, Nov 21, 2008, 08:44 		RE: #146 - Looks like MBJ was right, Brian Kelly is one of the top candidates for UT's vacancy.

I think its amazing what he's doing in Cincy with the hodgepodge situation he has at QB.

I'd be interested to see how he holds up with the big boys down south though.

 
212Seattle Zen
      ID: 49112418
      Fri, Nov 21, 2008, 15:43 		Missouri, Pinkel agree on extension that will give him big raise

Congrats, Tiger fans, it looks like you will keep Pinkel.
 
213Promize
      ID: 24854246
      Fri, Nov 21, 2008, 17:57 		Well that is good news... I thought it would be awfully odd to let him go with all he has built there at Mizzou.. Team, buildings, workout facilities, etc...
 
214Promize
      ID: 24854246
      Sat, Nov 22, 2008, 18:23 		Who'd of thought, the most exciting day game today was between two Division III teams from Washington.. :) lol

Was a fun game to watch actually, even if they both were winless versus BCS teams this year. Felt bad for the Wash U kicker..

My question though, why the hell is Washinton State fans doing the Florida Gator Chop???
 
215Seattle Zen
      ID: 358591721
      Sat, Nov 22, 2008, 21:52 		Poor Peter N., it's ugly out there in Norman, a slaughter. Oklahoma is the best team I've seen this year and this is just another example.
 
216steve houpt
      ID: 451161019
      Sat, Nov 22, 2008, 22:13 		If I didn't know any better, you'd think OKL was playing one of those DIV III schools.

Impressive. But I think it still shows how strong the Big 12 is. Texas beat OKL. They put up 45 points against OKL. And Texas Tech stayed right with Texas and beat them [by an inch from going out of bounds]. But it must be something to play in Norman [and it looks like it got to TTU quick]. Stoops only has two losses in Norman?

Does OKL have a lifetime contract to play TEXAS in Dallas? Texas better hope it's binding.

OKL beat [#19 BCS] Cincinnati 56-28 [Big East Champ if they beat Syracuse].

OKL beat [#16 BCS] T.C.U. 35-10. TCU lost 13-10 to [#7 BCS] Utah for their only other loss.

I'd still vote Alabama #1 until they lose.

But actual strength [betting money], I'd say OKL is best team with TEXAS, TEXAS TECH & FLA all a close second and ALA next.
 
217Promize
      ID: 24854246
      Sat, Nov 22, 2008, 23:57 		I'm pretty sure that Florida is going to end up pounding Alabama in the SEC Championship... I don't like either team that much, but Florida is moving on all cylinders right now.. Alabama has not shown a strong offense all year long, unless you count the one half against Georgia this year.

Both teams though have two remaining huge rivarly games..

At this point as a Missouri fan, I think we would rather play Texas...

I know for sure not the Sooners... after last years losses to them and similiar style as Tech... Obviously Sooners have a good game plan against teams like Tech/Missouri...

 
218Razor
      ID: 181051618
      Sun, Nov 23, 2008, 12:28 		Let the debating begin.

Personally, I take Texas. Texas' lone loss was a last second loss on the road. Oklahoma lost to Texas on a neutral site. I can dismiss head to head if its a home game for someone and it's close, but a neutral site game?
 
219Seattle Zen
      ID: 358591721
      Sun, Nov 23, 2008, 13:35 		And I take Oklahoma. I watched the OK-TX game. OK owned the first half even though they were repeatedly hosed by poor officiating. Had the refs not been a factor, they would have had a larger lead. Texas owned the second half and won because of it. That said, do you really think Texas would win a best-of-seven series? I mean, if this were the NBA Finals, does the team that won the first game automatically win the whole thing? Of course not, and that's what makes college football unique, humans vote and humans who pay attention to these things can see which team is the best.

I think Oklahoma is about to vault over Texas in the polls, if they beat OK State, they will win the Big 12 South and if they beat Missou, they will land in the BCS Championship, where I think they belong.
 
220Perm Dude
      ID: 531027238
      Sun, Nov 23, 2008, 14:00 		I agree. OK has got it going on all cylinders. The tore TT apart yesterday with their (until now) overlooked defense.

I also saw Ole Miss (!) beat up LSU, but the display by the backup QB for LSU was inspiring.

Got bored watching PSU and OSU roll over teams that should have been better. But I think most of the country can take solace in OSU's beatdown of Michigan to finish them off this season. You're welcome.
 
221Promize
      ID: 24854246
      Sun, Nov 23, 2008, 16:25 		AP is out

Bama
Florida
OK
Texas
USC
Penn State
TT
 
222Razor
      ID: 181051618
      Sun, Nov 23, 2008, 17:09 		Florida at #2 is a complete farce. How many top 25 teams have they beaten compared to the teams behind them? Their margin of victory is slightly better than OU's and Texas' despite the fact that each of those two teams have played much tougher schedules.
 
223steve houpt
      ID: 451161019
      Sun, Nov 23, 2008, 19:36 		How about a TEXAS - OKLAHOMA rematch for the BCS NCG.

Just need Florida to lose to FLA State [game is in Tallahassee - guessing line is 10-14], then beat Alabama ?? I'd say FSU has about a 10% chance of winning [about same as Ole MISS did].

OKL wins BIG 12 South based on BCS, but Texas would probably be ranked #2 in BCS. Nothing in BCS says Championship game can't be teams from same conference [from what I see].

BCS Selection
 
224Razor
      ID: 181051618
      Sun, Nov 23, 2008, 19:47 		I am on the fence with that scenario. On the one hand, Texas and Oklahoma both have clearly superior resumes to the other one-loss teams. On the other hand, other conference champions can make the case that the Big 12 is overrated and that they are deserving of a shot.
 
225Promize
      ID: 24854246
      Sun, Nov 23, 2008, 20:16 		So ESPN has this out as a sneak peak at the BCS Top 10

1. Alabama
2. Texas
3. Oklahoma
4. Florida
5. USC
6. Utah
7. Texas Tech
8. Penn State
9. Boise State
10. Ohio State
 
226steve houpt
      ID: 451161019
      Sun, Nov 23, 2008, 20:55 		Here is BCS showing adjusted rank.

i.e --- 1.0000 = a perfect #1
.9600 = #2
.9200 = #3 etc

Texas and Oklahoma 'almost' tied, with Florida almost a 'whole' ranking back.

1 __ [ 1.32 ] __ Alabama
2 __ [ 2.98 ] __ Texas
3 __ [ 3.19 ] __ Oklahoma
4 __ [ 4.11 ] __ Florida
5 __ [ 6.07 ] __ Southern Cal
6 __ [ 6.36 ] __ Utah
7 __ [ 6.53 ] __ Texas Tech
8 __ [ 7.20 ] __ Penn State
9 __ [ 9.55 ] __ Boise State
10 __ [ 10.48 ] __ Ohio State
11 __ [ 10.95 ] __ Georgia
12 __ [ 11.74 ] __ Oklahoma St
13 __ [ 12.03 ] __ Missouri
14 __ [ 14.25 ] __ T.C.U.
15 __ [ 15.05 ] __ Ball State
16 __ [ 16.07 ] __ Cincinnati
17 __ [ 18.17 ] __ Oregon St
18 __ [ 19.44 ] __ B.Y.U.
19 __ [ 20.71 ] __ Michigan St
20 __ [ 21.30 ] __ Florida State
21 __ [ 21.35 ] __ Boston College
22 __ [ 21.47 ] __ Georgia Tech
23 __ [ 22.12 ] __ Oregon
24 __ [ 23.18 ] __ Northwestern
25 __ [ 24.97 ] __ Pittsburgh
 
227Razor
      ID: 181051618
      Sun, Nov 23, 2008, 21:54 		Wins over BCS top 25 teams:

Alabama - #11 Georgia
Texas - #3 Oklahoma, #12 Oklahoma State, #13 Missouri
Oklahoma - #2 Texas, #14 Ball State, #16 Cincinnati
Florida - #11 Georgia
USC - #10 Ohio State, #23 Oregon
Utah - #14 TCU, #17 Oregon State, #18 BYU
Texas Tech - #2 Texas, #12 Oklahoma State
Penn State - #10 Ohio State, #19 Michigan State

I realize that the relative rankings of the teams beaten were used to order the teams at the top, but as it stands now, I see no reason to object to anyone's ranking. If anything, Utah should be higher, but that's it.
 
228steve houpt
      ID: 451161019
      Sun, Nov 23, 2008, 23:04 		Slight correction to #227.

>OKL beat #7 Texas Tech, #14 TCU & #16 Cincinnati.
>PENN ST add #17 Oregon State.

I have to agree. You can argue, but there is nothing glaring to argue about with BCS rankings.

FWIW - UTAH - they are ranked #5 in the computers, behind ALA, TEX, OKL, TEXAS TECH and ahead of FLA [#6]. I had forgot about Utah's win over Oregon State.
 
229Slizz
      ID: 4710371415
      Mon, Nov 24, 2008, 09:58 		I agree. Not too much to argue. Winner of UF / Alabama (Florida, big) will decide who plays the Big 12 representative. Obviously, there's a chance that the Big 12 might not even be there at all. In an unlikely scenario, we'd be looking at Florida / USC if Oklahoma loses in the Bedlam game, and Mizzou upsets Texas in Big 12 championship.The thing that worries me about ranking Oklahoma so high is how "blah" they are away from Norman. If you scheduled USC @ Oklahoma early in the season, USC would even get steamrolled. Stoops is 17-0 vs ranked teams at home and 61-2 overall. (#'s off the top of my head).

Now if Alabama somehow bungles the Iron Bowl...talk about a total shakeup! I don't see it as the following Q&A best describes Auburn's offense.

Q. How do you keep an Auburn Tiger out of your yard?

A. Put up goal post.

Any guesses on the score KKB?

I'm going Bama 27-9. Auburn's defense will play well enough to keep it close, but their offense is so damn bad.

 
230J
      Leader
      ID: 049346417
      Mon, Nov 24, 2008, 10:55 		I don't understand why everyone thinks the Turds are gonna roll over Bama?

Florida is an impressive(?) 0-1 in games decided by 22pts or less. They've managed to play NO ONE. Georgia is the only ranked team they've played and they've seriously struggled since the Bama game. I can't STAND them. All they do is blow out garbage teams. Urban Crier even said he'd be disappointed if they didn't put up 60 points on the citadel. Hello? How about resting your starters instead of demolishing everyone a-hole. I can't wait until he goes to Notre Dame!!!

With Texas being ranked ahead of Oklahoma, and with Texas beating Oklahoma, I don't think OU deserves to jump over them unless Texas stumbles.

 
231Donkey Hunter
      Leader
      ID: 916288962
      Mon, Nov 24, 2008, 10:57 		lol First off he did rest the starters. For example Tebow only played the first 3 minutes of the second quarter. 2nd off he already had a chance to go to Notra Dame and came to Florida instead. The job openings were at the same time. 3rd dont they and Bama play basically the same schedule? SO if they play noone and win by 30 isnt that better than playing noone and winning by 7?
 
232J
      Leader
      ID: 049346417
      Mon, Nov 24, 2008, 11:10 		Ok, fine, it was mainly a rant.

Crier went to UF instead of ND more because of his family. His dream job IS Notre Dame.

They did play pretty much the same schedule. The difference - Bama didn't lose!!!!! Alabama was beating Ole Miss 24-3 before it really became a game, while the Turds lost to them...at HOME!!
 
233holt
      ID: 25923117
      Mon, Nov 24, 2008, 13:19 		I hear a lot of talk about Texas deserving to be ranked higher than OU due to the head to head loss. So, why not rank Tech ahead of Texas then? They both have one loss, and Tech beat Texas.

My answer would be, because pollsters are able to use their brain to form an opinion of which team is better than another.

OU is ahead of Texas in the Coaches poll, Harris, USA Today, AP, CBS, and whatever other non-BCS poll there is. The only place I see Texas ahead of OU is in the BCS computer rankings. I would guess that is due to beating the highly rated OU. So, a big piece of Texas' BCS ranking is directly related to the perception of how good OU is. Now, if Tech were rated a little higher than Texas, then OU could probably squeeze out enough computer points to pass Texas.

I guess we'll see what happens when/if Oklahoma beats Ok. State this weekend. Maybe that would be enough to push em ahead of of Texas. ? This stuff just gets too convoluted...
 
234Slizz
      ID: 4710371415
      Mon, Nov 24, 2008, 13:19 		Those 12:30 raycom starts will getcha! I saw a statistic that Herbstriet pointed out that games vs Ole Miss during an early afternoon start are decided by one possession or less @ oxford or the swamp. Ole Miss is a quality squad and if you take away the two bad bounces (Wake Forest & Vandy), they are 9-2 and a top 15 team with two losses by a combined 11 points.

J - I am willing to make a friendly wager that Bama will lose to the Gaturds (they've earned the name with all the off-field issues they have) in the amount of a small donation to Rotoguru (you pick the Denomination...as long as its under $20 :D) in your name.

'Turds win, you pay on my behalf. Tide Rolls...I pay on your behalf. Whattya say?

The case for 'Bama, they resemble the 2003 Patriots. Boxscore might indicate that it was close, but you knew all along they'd win. Feature a punishing running game and a scary-good defense.

Case against: To be curt, not enough playmakers to keep up with Florida.

Basically, if they don't get on 'em early like they did with UGA...they're toast.

 
235Seattle Zen
      ID: 49112418
      Mon, Nov 24, 2008, 13:26 		OU is ahead of Texas in the Coaches poll, Harris, USA Today, AP, CBS, and whatever other non-BCS poll there is. The only place I see Texas ahead of OU is in the BCS computer rankings. I would guess that is due to beating the highly rated OU. So, a big piece of Texas' BCS ranking is directly related to the perception of how good OU is. Now, if Tech were rated a little higher than Texas, then OU could probably squeeze out enough computer points to pass Texas.

holt, we don't agree on much, but with this we are Tweedle Dum & Tweedle Dee (of course, I'm Dee :)
 
236Myboyjack
      Dude
      ID: 014826271
      Mon, Nov 24, 2008, 13:27 		Alabama's offense isn't good enought to stay on the field- that'll give UF's offense too many possessions and with their playmakers they'll eventually put up all the points they need to win. If 'Bama's offense could put together some sustained drives they'd have a chance - I don't see it happening though.
 
237J
      Leader
      ID: 049346417
      Mon, Nov 24, 2008, 15:04 		Slizz, I would, but ANYTIME I make any kind of bet, I lose, so I don't want to guaruntee a Turds victory :)

Texas lost Texas Tech on the road on the last play of the game right after they dropped a sure-thing interception

Texas beat OU by 10 on a neutral field

Texas deserves to go over OU in my mind
 
238Slizz
      ID: 4710371415
      Mon, Nov 24, 2008, 17:06 		Potential controversy in the rankings, courtesy of collegefootballtalk.com:

And that’s where it gets interesting. The coaches’ poll is one-third of the BCS standings. Brown has a vote. Oklahoma coach Bob Stoops doesn’t. The coaches’ poll (with the exception of the final poll of the season) is a secret ballot. Brown could vote the Longhorns No. 1 and leave the Sooners off his ballot entirely if he really wants to. Or, if he doesn’t want to go quite that far, he could, say, have his own team No. 2 and Oklahoma No. 10 — certainly not what most people think, but not so far off that he couldn’t find a way to justify it.

How will Mack Brown Vote?

Thoughts?

 
239J
      Leader
      ID: 049346417
      Mon, Nov 24, 2008, 17:24 		Yeah but that final vote of the season is what the final BCS is based on, right?

I'm sure he'd lose his voting rights if he pulled a stunt like that.

I want to know who the people who are voting OU or UF number 1 over Alabama.
 
240holt
      ID: 25923117
      Mon, Nov 24, 2008, 17:30 		Did you watch the Texas-OU game J? OU was up 35-30 with about 7 minutes left to play. They were up 21-10 at one point. It's not like Texas had control of the game.

I wish I had youtube video of the play where the OU DB tried to help hold Colt McCoy up as they went out of bounds on third down. A ref slapped a penalty on him which kept the drive going and led to a TD. I believe there were 3 really bad calls against OU which led to Texas scores.

I understand you have to play well in spite of questionable officiating (which is the norm it seems), and OU was outscored that day. I really don't accept that they are an inferior team to Texas though.

Not that I don't think that Texas hasn't also earned a shot at the title. As always, there are more than 2 teams that deserve a chance to settle this on the field. Why some still prefer to let computer ranking formulas handle it I just can't understand.

I don't think it's possible, but an OU Texas rematch for the national title would be something I would drool over.
 
241J
      Leader
      ID: 049346417
      Mon, Nov 24, 2008, 17:36 		I did watch the game, and I do remember 2 bad calls going Texas' way, but I also remember at least one going the other way.

I'm not saying Texas dominated OU, it was one of the best, most competitive games of the year. I too, wouldn't mind a rematch, but I think Texas deserves the nod over OU.

C'mon Obama, forget this politics crap, get us some playoffs!!!!
 
242steve houpt
      ID: 451161019
      Mon, Nov 24, 2008, 17:44 		J - right now Texas just needs to get to Big 12 Championship. The next BCS standings [this Sunday] picks BIG 12 South Champ and then an extra win over a #13 Mizzou by Texas has to help in computers for National Championship.

Another FWIW - in the BCS ranking, the computers [out of only six], they throw away the best and the worse ranking.

Always thought they should throw out the best and worse ranking in each of the voting polls - would take two conspirators then - you have 65 voters, only 63 'actual count' - would still leave Oklahoma four #1's in the coaches poll this week - just a thought.


------ and as an additional plus, it would keep some of the teams being listed in the "also recieving votes" just because ONE voter wanted to see them mentioned.
 
243steve houpt
      ID: 451161019
      Mon, Nov 24, 2008, 18:02 		We'd have a rematch if FSU beats FLA and FLA beats ALA. Crazier things have happened. Look at last year. LSU lost Thanksgiving weekend to ARKANSAS, 'knocking them out' of the BCS Championship Game [down to #7 in Coaches Poll].

Coaches Poll 25 NOV 2007

1. West Virginia (37) 10-1 1467
2. Missouri (17) 11-1 1454
3. Ohio State (6) 11-1 1383
4. Georgia 10-2 1232
5. Kansas 11-1 1161
5. Virginia Tech 10-2 1161
7. LSU 10-2 1134 [dropped from #1 week before]
8. Oklahoma 10-2 1126
9. USC 9-2 1073
10. Hawaii 11-0 958

1. West VA lost to PITT
2. Mizzou lost to OKL in Big 12 Championship
4. GA was not in SEC Championship [TENN was]
5. KAN was not in Big 12 Championship game [Mizzou was]
5. VA tech beat BC in ACC Champ [but had lost to LSU 48-7 earlyin season]
7. LSU beat TENN
8. OKL beat Mizzou


Coaches Poll 02 DEC 2007

1. Ohio State (46) 11-1 1469 3
2. LSU (11) 11-2 1418 7
3. Oklahoma (2) 11-2 1331 8
4. Georgia 10-2 1277 4
5. Virginia Tech 11-2 1242 5
6. USC 10-2 1227 9
7. Missouri 11-2 1104 2
8. Kansas 11-1 1099 5
9. West Virginia 10-2 1010 1
 
244Slizz
      ID: 551055922
      Mon, Nov 24, 2008, 19:35 		I think Texas is fairly ranked. But all their key games (sans OU) were at home and they played a non-conference schedule softer than Kim Kardashian's a$$ :)

While Texas is a solid squad and should they win the Big 12, I'd have no problems watching them in the National Championship. I still think Alabama, Florida, or USC would beat them on a neutral site.

Colt McCoy's zone-read and scramble if the 1st option isn't open wont work vs playmaking defenses like USC, 'Bama, or Florida.

Oklahoma might be the best team at home (similar to USC), but neither is as dominant away from their "palaces".

As for TTU, Leach has done a remarkable job in maximizing the talent he has to work with and probably has taken them as far as they can go. He's working with everyone's leftovers in the midwest (Texas, Oklahoma, Nebraska, T. Boone Pickcen's OKST, A&M, etc.) and I think could compete for a National Championship if he had more horses on defense.

J - no problem. We'll see how it all shakes down this weekend for each squad.

I'm feeling another ACC team (i.e. FSU) is gonna get blown out in a nonconference game.

 
245Peter N.
      ID: 1510502117
      Tue, Nov 25, 2008, 22:05 		Brutal game to not only watch, but to watch in person. Not really much to say other than that. We got our asses kicked on national TV. I am still proud of this team though. We have shocked alot of people and it's not over yet.

Sh!t is really gonna hit the fan if OSU beats OU. That would put Texas Tech in the Big 12 championship. What would happen then if Tech beat Mizzou in the championship? I have a feeling this is only the beginning of the crazyness. We will likely never see a playoff system. Main reason being all the madness and discussion the BCS creates.
 
246Razor
      ID: 5310182522
      Tue, Nov 25, 2008, 23:22 		But all their key games (sans OU) were at home

You mean sans OU and Texas Tech? Ya, they had it really easy this year having to play two top 10 teams, neither of which they got to play at home. How many other teams can say that? In the top ten, none.
 
247Slizz
      ID: 551055922
      Tue, Nov 25, 2008, 23:58 		correction: key wins :)
 
248Promize@Parents
      ID: 45100297
      Sat, Nov 29, 2008, 08:02 		I really do enjoy that Mizzou is getting just completely overlooked in the Big 12 Championship game.. Takes the pressure completely off Daniels and the team...
 
249Promize@Parents
      ID: 45100297
      Sat, Nov 29, 2008, 16:09 		About 40 ulcers... sore throat... and heartburn after watching Mizzou and Georgia today... freakin horrible defensive performances..
 
250steve houpt
      ID: 451161019
      Sun, Nov 30, 2008, 12:20 		Looks like the only thing that help Texas is the 'voters'.

Sagarin rankings are only BCS rankings out and just substituting those in BCS formula, it moves OKL to #2.

1. OKL [was #4]
2. TEXAS [was #1]
3. TEX TECH [was #2]
4. ALA [was #3]
5. UTAH [was #5]
6. FLA [was #7]


Using WEEK #14 Sagarin, WEEK #13, the rest.

PRELIM BCS

1_ ALA___ 0.9839 - chg = (0.0033)
2_ OKL___ 0.9225 - chg = 0.0100
3_ TEXAS_ 0.9175 - chg = (0.0033)


 
251steve houpt
      ID: 451161019
      Sun, Nov 30, 2008, 13:23 		USA Today Coaches voters helped.

OKL - still #2 [15 less votes] = 1397
TEX - up to #3 [plus 26 votes] = 1396
FLA - down to #4 [16 less votes = 1385

NOW using WEEK #14 Sagarin & USA Today Coaches Poll and WEEK #13 for the rest.

PRELIM BCS

1_ ALA___ 0.9839 - chg from wk #13 = (0.0027)
2_ TEXAS_ 0.9232 - chg from wk #13 = +0.0023
3_ OKL___ 0.9192 - chg from wk #13 = +0.0067

 
252holt
      ID: 4410182818
      Sun, Nov 30, 2008, 16:29 		Apparently Texas, (beat the unbelievably bad A&M) has passed Oklahoma (beat #12 rival, on the rival's home field) in the AP rankings. Disturbing. For those who prefer voters over playoff systems, WHY? You don't get enough political campaign BS in other parts of your life? Settle it on the damn field.

What explanation is there for Texas' jump in this poll? How can you even know that some votes weren't paid for? I mean we know players get paid. Why not voters too?
 
253steve houpt
      ID: 451161019
      Sun, Nov 30, 2008, 17:12 		holt - my explanation is a 'human' correction for the over reaction of 'human' voters in the last few weeks when they put Oklahoma ahead of Texas even before Oklahoma beat Texas Tech after Texas lost to Texas Tech, and even after wards, almost forgetting Texas had beat Oklahoma [short memory]. I' say the polls are closer to 'correct' now than they were last few weeks, i.e., OKL, TEX, FLA almost tied, .

But don't worry, the computers put OKLAHOMA up to #2 [0.9351 = rank of 2.62], TEXAS #3 [0.9223 = rank of 2.94]. There were no other changes in the BCS Top 10.

Here is a 'BCS' combo of just Harris & USA Today Poll's [i.e. 26 - BCS% x 25]

ALA _ 1.08 __[equiv rank]
FLA _ 3.06
TEXAS _ 3.16
OKL _ 3.18
USC _ 4.84
PENN ST _ 6.73
UTAH _ 7.21
TX TECH _ 7.60
BOISE _ 8.87
OHIO ST _ 9.60
 
254holt@fugazi's
      ID: 46750221
      Sun, Nov 30, 2008, 19:57 		Pretty surprised OU went ahead of Texas. The computer rankings are more volatile that I thought. Even so, I have to remain just as disgusted with the BCS system as I was before. Texas fans must be burning.

There are several teams that deserve a shot to play this out. Alabama, Florida (if they beat Alabama), OU, Texas, USC, Boise State, Penn State, maybe Texas Tech or even Ball State. Would love to see those games.

http://msn.foxsports.com/cfb/poll?poll=BCS
 
255holt@fugazi's
      ID: 46750221
      Sun, Nov 30, 2008, 19:58 		Ah, forgot the undefeated Utes of Utah.
 
256Slizz
      ID: 13104129
      Sun, Nov 30, 2008, 20:06 		Ugh...the fact that Virginia Tech is gonna crash the party makes me sick. Talk about a crappy, overrated squad that is gonna be the ACC representative (yea i know they play BC still) despite having a worse overall record than Georgia Tech and same conference record. Talk about a crock of $h1t.

Anyhow, this is the best thing that could have happened to college football. It's just one more step in having a reason to pursue a playoff. While I might have knocked Texas in the past, they do deserve a shot to play for the big 12 championship via their H2H victory over OU.

Either way, the Gaturds are gonna throttle Alabama and face what looks to be Oklahoma in the National Championship.

What would be great is if they ranked USC above Texas so we can see UF / USC in the National Championship only if Oklahoma loses.

 
257holt
      ID: 4410182818
      Mon, Dec 01, 2008, 01:33 		"they do deserve a shot to play for the big 12 championship via their H2H victory over OU."

Well again, Tech only has one loss, and they beat Texas, so why not Tech? The answer is because the rankings have Texas ahead of Tech (and they have OU ahead of Texas). You can't use the H2H argument against OU unless you apply the same argument against Texas.

If the rankings that put Texas ahead of Tech are so easily accepted, then why aren't the same rankings that put OU ahead of Texas easily accepted? My gut answer is that it's because OU is the more hated of the two schools nation-wide. I could be wrong. It could also be that Tech lost more recently than Texas did, so people think of Tech as big losers (even though they have 1 total loss this year). I guess that 65-21 massacre might have something to do with that? I don't buy into the H2H thing in any way at all. If you follow the logic-trail far enough it holds no water. I mean how is it logical that OU's crushing defeat of Tech means that Texas is the best of the 3 teams? That's essentially the argument that the H2H proponents are pushing.
 
258Razor
      ID: 181051618
      Mon, Dec 01, 2008, 02:03 		It's not a very hard argument to follow.

Texas Tech is obviously not in consideration as no team that loses by 40 should ever play for the title. Texas beat Oklahoma by 10 on a neutral field, while losing to Texas Tech by the slimmest of margins in what was hyped as the biggest game ever played in Lubbock. Texas has the best win of the three (over OU by 10 on a neutral field) and the least bad loss (by 6 on a last second play on the road).
 
259Building 7
      ID: 471052128
      Mon, Dec 01, 2008, 10:41 		Also, on the little 3 team round robin, here are the home vs away stats:

OU...1 home, 1 neutral
TT....1 home, 1 away
t.u....1 away, 1 neutral

Clear home field advantage to Oklahoma.





 
260J
      Leader
      ID: 049346417
      Mon, Dec 01, 2008, 11:46 		Also add into the discussion that Tech almost just lost to Baylor at home. All the other conferences use the BCS to eliminate the worst to team before using the H2H tiebreaker. Too bad it's come to this.

For now I'm rooting for full 100% controversy. I'm hoping OU wins barely and Texas somehow leaps back over them. Wouldn't that be fun?

Anything but an OU-UF title game please!!!!!
 
261DWetzel at work
      ID: 49962710
      Mon, Dec 01, 2008, 12:07 		How about...

Florida barely squeaks by Alabama in an ugly game where Tebow gets hurt, and Oklahoma destroys Missouri? OK-Texas for the title...
 
262J
      Leader
      ID: 049346417
      Tue, Dec 02, 2008, 12:06 		One of the great traditions in college football is about to be restored this weekend - the cardinal of USC versus the the blue of UCLA.

USC Coach Pete Carroll:

"It's something we’ve been thinking about for a while. From talking to coaches at UCLA over the years and seeing the teams wear their home jerseys growing up, it's something we’re going to start up again this weekend.

"This has always been a colorful matchup, and we hope everyone enjoys this recognition of both the past and the present state of the rivalry."

Prior to 1982, all the USC-UCLA games were played with both teams wearing their home uniforms. But that all ended when the NCAA stepped in to mandate away teams to wear white uniforms or face penalties. Under the current NCAA rules, if the away team does not wear white uniforms then they are to be penalized one timeout per half.

In other words, for honoring the tradition of USC-UCLA, the Trojans will have only two timeouts per half.
 
263Slizz
      ID: 4710371415
      Tue, Dec 02, 2008, 14:44 		Gators are gonna smoke 'Bama and whoever they play in the National Championship.

Hey SZ - did you see the latest rumors coming out of Seattle?

Jim Mora to coach U-Dub?

What's your thoughts on that?

 
264J
      Leader
      ID: 049346417
      Tue, Dec 02, 2008, 15:06 		In less relevant bowl game talk, supposedly the Gator Bowl is gonna be Clemscum vs. Nebraska.

WTF????? How the FU^&*( can they give Clemscum the #3 ACC tie-in???? I think you can argue that even NC State would make a better fit than Clemscum.

Oh I'm so pissed off right now!!!!!!
 
265Slizz
      ID: 4710371415
      Tue, Dec 02, 2008, 15:28 		J - you get no argument from me there!

For as much as I rag the ACC, you have to tip your hat to O'Brien. It looks like he has the Wolfpack headed in the right direction with that Freshman QB.

 
266Seattle Zen
      ID: 49112418
      Tue, Dec 02, 2008, 19:25 		You really think the Gators would "smoke" Oklahoma in the Championship game? I don't see that happening. beat them, maybe.

I'm all for Jim Mora Jr. becoming the Huskies head coach. No one else seems interested in the job and that is an embarrassing problem. Furthermore, I'm not a Seahawks fan and don't care who is their next head coach.

J - ESPN seems to think that the Gator Bowl will be GT v. Nebraska.

Regardless, I don't think I'll be watching that.
 
267Da Bomb
      Donor
      ID: 487112814
      Tue, Dec 02, 2008, 23:24 		For the record the ACC went 3-1 against the SEC this past weekend.
 
268Slizz
      ID: 551055922
      Tue, Dec 02, 2008, 23:35 		a little option nostalgia going on in the Gator Bowl.

SZ - I'm pretty confident that UF would "smoke" Oklahoma as well. It wouldn't surprise me to see them as a 9-11 point favorite (like they are vs Alabama)

Assume that Florida beats Alabama and play Oklahoma in the National Championship. Would you be willing to wager a small Rotoguru donation (in each others name, of course) that Florida would win by at least 2 TD's (13.5 points)?

 
269Seattle Zen
      ID: 358591721
      Wed, Dec 03, 2008, 00:42 		Would you be willing to wager a small Rotoguru donation (in each others name, of course) that Florida would win by at least 2 TD's (13.5 points)?

Certainly.
 
270Perm Dude
      ID: 291115120
      Wed, Dec 03, 2008, 02:35 		Easy money there, Zen! Especially with Florida's running threat questionable with his ankle injury.
 
271holt
      ID: 4410182818
      Wed, Dec 03, 2008, 02:46 		What I want to know is when will the NFL start forcing it's worst team to play the national champ in college football? After watching the lions play on thanksgiving... well, normally I'd say the crap NFL team obliterates the college team but I'm starting to wonder. :D
 
272Slizz
      ID: 4710371415
      Wed, Dec 03, 2008, 08:00 		Ok - we'll cross that bridge after Saturday :)

PD - Harvin has had a bum ankle his his entire playing career. In his place will be Jeff Demps, who is arguably the fastest man in college football. There won't be too much of a dropoff there.

 
273boikin
      ID: 532592112
      Wed, Dec 03, 2008, 09:21 		For the record the ACC went 3-1 against the SEC this past weekend. i am surprised this was not mentioned sooner.


PD - Harvin has had a bum ankle his his entire playing career. In his place will be Jeff Demps, who is arguably the fastest man in college football. There won't be too much of a dropoff there. the place he will be missed is in the passing games, he is the gators leading receiver and teabows favorite target. Demps maybe faster, but harvin probably has the best field speed in the nation and is more illusive in open space. With that said he will play on saturday, in his own words he has not been fully healthy since his sophomore year of highschool.
 
274Slizz
      ID: 4710371415
      Wed, Dec 03, 2008, 09:40 		ACC Homers...lol. Dabo's boys put up a good # on that South Carolina defense. I actually found myself pulling for GT to beat UGA. I was amazed how they couldn't stop the run! Did anyone actually think Vandy was going to beat Wake?

Tebow will be fine. While Harvin might be his favorite target, they have plenty of playmakers @ wideout with 4.3 speed to make up for his absence. Run game will experience zero dropoff. You will see why he should be the Heisman Trophy winner after Saturday.

 
275boikin
      ID: 532592112
      Wed, Dec 03, 2008, 12:59 		Tebow will be fine. While Harvin might be his favorite target, they have plenty of playmakers @ wideout with 4.3 speed to make up for his absence. Run game will experience zero dropoff. You will see why he should be the Heisman Trophy winner after Saturday.

name one? And do not say lewis murphy he can't catch.
 
276Slizz
      ID: 4710371415
      Wed, Dec 03, 2008, 13:29 		Gators on offense currently running in the 4.3's for the 40:

-Jeff Demps;-Chris Rainey;-Deonte Thompson;-Brandon James;-Riley Cooper;

-Percy Harvin & Louis Murphy (not counting him, as requested)

 
277Perm Dude
      ID: 49112139
      Wed, Dec 03, 2008, 14:04 		The faster they are, the better the sound when they run into the defenders.

Look, I'm all for fast guys. But if Demps was that good he'd already be starting. So Florida has the choice of going with the very good second stringer or a hobbled Harvin (whose ankle is worse, not better, than at the start of the year, by all accounts).

Should be a good game, I think. But to believe that Florida will roll all over Alabama is just silly.

BTW, this caught my eye in the game preview:

Saturday will be the 40th time the AP’s top two teams have met, with No. 1 holding a 23-15-1 edge. This is the first 1-2 matchup in a conference championship game.

To say this, of course, they have to discount when #1 Ohio State met #2 Michigan in 2006. Weak sauce. The winner of that game (the final one for both teams in the 2006 regular season) was the Big 10 Champion, even if it wasn't called a "championship game."
 
278Slizz
      ID: 4710371415
      Wed, Dec 03, 2008, 14:35 		PD - thats like knocking Ronnie Brown b/c he was backup to Cadillac Williams at Auburn. Shoot, Brandon Jacobs was 3rd string to both of them and transferred!

Harvin was the #1 overall recruit back in 2005 (like Terelle Pryor this year) and Demps is just a freshman. Barring any drastic injury, Harvin will be the starter.

I can't wait till the game. Should be a good 1!

 
279boikin
      ID: 532592112
      Wed, Dec 03, 2008, 16:48 		demps, rainey, and james are RBs or that is position they play not WRs I don't think cooper runs 4.3, thompson does not play. either way these guys do not replace harvin in the passing game.

demps will play more when harvin is gone, rainy is only good in strait lines, and fumbles, then again so does harvin.

with all that said I think bama is going to get killed, the only way they can win/keep it close if 3 names does not throw ints and get some plays behind the corners who dispite all there ints will gamble and get beat quite a bit, they just do not get exploited.
 
280Razor
      ID: 181051618
      Wed, Dec 03, 2008, 17:23 		Bama has a terrific ball control offense and the best defensive mind in college football. Bama will definitely have a chance.

Demps and Rainey do not run anywhere near a 4.3 in pads. Both got caught from behind against FSU. They are fast, very fast, but not 4.3. Harvin is probably the fastest player in college football with the ball in his hands. They are not him.
 
283Slizz
      ID: 4710371415
      Wed, Dec 03, 2008, 18:15 		Boikin = Cooper runs a 4.35 per scout.com I love the "3 Names" comment about JPW. ha ha!

Florida's athletes create killer mismatches when they line up against the #3 & #4 defensive backs on the other squads. Just about all of the schools would be at a severe disadvantage minus USC.

While I like Alabama's style. I just don't think they have the horses yet to keep up with Florida. They are averaging a 37 point margin of victory vs SEC opponents which is absolutely ridiculous.

Off Topic - KKB, Auburn just canned Tuberville. Thoughts?

Do you think they go after Leach?

 
284Peter N.
      ID: 4910362617
      Wed, Dec 03, 2008, 18:44 		Don't touch Leach! LOL

I think Bama is gonna give Florida a game. It's about damn time Florida gets tested.
 
285KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 186321620
      Wed, Dec 03, 2008, 18:58 		Kind of mixed emotions. I figured Tuberville would be out after the season was over. The whole pre-1994 debacle exposed Auburn's true colors about him. As long as he was winning big, they'd look stupid getting rid of him. This year was different, so it opened the door for them.

Honestly, I think it was the right time. I liked Tuberville; a lot. But, you look at what Saban's done at 'Bama and you have to realize that Auburn's going to need a much better coach to challenge for a title in the SEC on a consistent basis.

That said, I think it's stupid that they're looking at Petrino. He jumps from Louisville to (almost Auburn, then) the Atlanta Falcons, then Arkansas. Saban did a similar thing and I don't care much for him either.

I think Leach is the guy most on their radar. Leach will look to cash in given this year's success and Auburn will likely offer a lot more than TTech. The only question will be if he can live up to the expectations, which will be much higher in the SEC.
 
286boikin
      ID: 532592112
      Thu, Dec 04, 2008, 10:13 		I like tuberville and it probably would be mistake to fire him, though i am sure there will be several other schools that will jump at the chance to hire him, but the prospect of leach coming to the SEC is really exciting seeing what he can do with talent at every position, with that said it I am not sure that Auburn can attract the players he needs or at least they have not been able to in the past few years.
 
287J
      Leader
      ID: 049346417
      Thu, Dec 04, 2008, 11:05 		I don't think Leach is a good fit at Auburn. What got Tubberville into trouble this year is trying to change to the spread offense. Auburn just needs to keep doing what they've been doing. Scrap this year and get back to just running the ball.
 
288Slizz
      ID: 4710371415
      Thu, Dec 04, 2008, 11:06 		Well if they're looking for a coach who had to do alot with a little...Leach is their guy. Its not to knock Texas Tech, but they just cant attract the recruits that Texas, Oklahoma, etc. can attract.

Auburn, despite their name, is likely to experience similar recruiting problems that Leach now faces at TTU with Saban dominating all things Bama. Right now, Saban is the "hotter" coach, can offer better facilities, and history (Bear Bryant). They are already getting the "sloppy" fifths to Florida, Alabama, Georgia, LSU, Tennessee, and now maybe even Arkansas with Petrino (the rat).

Not to mention the coach who goes there next is going to have to deal with the bureaucracy of the boosters controlling the direction of the team. I tell you its not a position that seems desirable to me.

If there is one coach who could succeed there, it would be Leach. He's been doing more with less for the past couple of seasons than anyone.

 
289smallwhirled
      ID: 281072411
      Thu, Dec 04, 2008, 13:35 		Just saw a post about Riley Cooper running a 4.35? No way, I saw him play at Clearwater Central Catholic in high school.
 
290KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 186321620
      Thu, Dec 04, 2008, 19:51 		J's got it right. It's fine to lack in the recruiting department when you're simply looking for depth at RB and LB/CB. Auburn has always relied on those positions the most and they got away from that this year, for some unknown reason. Personally, I hope they get back to it. Leach could actually do that, but I don't know if he would.
 
291Seattle Zen
      ID: 358591721
      Thu, Dec 04, 2008, 23:38 		USC offensive coordinator Sarkisian gets Washington job

Well, I'm glad they gave the job to a young guy. There has been a serious glut of Armenian coaches ever since Tark the Shark put down the towel.

Here's to a nice 25 year tenure!
 
292Slizz
      ID: 551055922
      Fri, Dec 05, 2008, 07:49 		Sark has learned under the rolls royce of coaches in college football for the past couple of seasons. Hopefully, he's able to bring U-Dub back to respectability.
 
293boikin
      ID: 532592112
      Fri, Dec 05, 2008, 09:57 		I am not sure what people see in the USC coaching staff. The team has no signature wins in the past couple years just signature losses. This run of USC underlings is probably not going to end well for tennessee or UW...On the bright side Auburn still has chance at leach, who i think would have been a better fit at UT, which would have lead to amazingly entertaining coaching combination of pearl and leach.
 
294Slizz
      ID: 4710371415
      Fri, Dec 05, 2008, 10:19 		Regardless of how weak the Pac-10 is or whether USC's prominence is all smoke and mirrors...Sark "the Shark" got to see what the top recruits look for when choosing a football program as Carrol's right hand man. It's all about the reps!

Do I honestly think he will succeed?

Probably not. Its going to be very very tough to turn the University of Washington into a perennial powerhouse as the Dogfather, Don James, did. James relied on out of state recruiting (i.e. California and even Oregon) for his talent...and he's going to be playing second fiddle to USC, Oregon and the Nike $$$, Cal, and possibly UCLA.

While Washington might have history, an awesome gameday atmosphere, and one of the stronger fan bases in college football...its going to be awfully tough to win there considering their place in the pecking order. If I had to compare...he'll be like Dan Hawkins at Colorado.

As for Kiffin at Tennessee...I think he could get them to a 8-3 type-team on an annual basis. IMHO, they have the facilities and could have more success than Sark in attracting the top recruits. Plus if (when) UT officially gets Monte Kiffin it would be a huge for recruiting...he'd be able to sell top-recruits the fact they are gonna learn from a super bowl winning and arguably the best defensive mind in the NFL over the past decade. Hell, Charlie Weis has had success with that angle for the past 5 years...lol. Unfortunately he couldn't translate it to the field.

hahaha boikin you are right on with the whole Leach/Pearl angle.

 
295boikin
      ID: 532592112
      Fri, Dec 05, 2008, 11:44 		I hope monte does not leave the bucs....
 
296boikin
      ID: 532592112
      Fri, Dec 05, 2008, 11:51 		I hope monte does not leave the bucs....
 
297TB
      ID: 330252313
      Fri, Dec 05, 2008, 18:48 		Could you define signature wins and maybe give an example of a signature loss. I'm not sure I understand that term. The only losses I see from USC are close losses in conference games. If that is a signature loss, I'm guessing signature losses are normal for every team.
 
298Peter N.
      ID: 4910362617
      Fri, Dec 05, 2008, 21:12 		Crabtree to return next year?

Not likely, but I hope so!

I also hope Gerald Myers and Co. get Leach locked up before Auburn comes in with a truckload of money. I'm not sure why Leach would want to go there other than money. I will support Leach though in whatever decision he makes. He has been an incredible asset to the Tech Program and the city of Lubbock. The ole Pirate will always have my respect.

Who would want to live in Auburn, Alabama? ;-) Don't go Mike!
 
299Seattle Zen
      ID: 358591721
      Fri, Dec 05, 2008, 21:43 		When you live in Lubbock, Texas, I think just about ANYWHERE is an improvement. And I'm including most neighborhoods outside the Green Zone in Baghdad!
 
300C1-NRB
      ID: 31050820
      Fri, Dec 05, 2008, 21:51 		When you live in Lubbock, Texas, I think just about ANYWHERE is an improvement. And I'm including most neighborhoods outside the Green Zone in Baghdad!

Amen.
 
301KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 186321620
      Fri, Dec 05, 2008, 23:29 		Seems a lot of coaches might be sending Thank You cards to Auburn in the coming weeks. Houston Nutt gets mentioned as being in talks with Auburn and apparently gets a nice pay raise from Ole Miss. Mike Leach gets mentioned as being in talks with Auburn and apparently is also in talks with TTech about a pay raise.
 
302Peter N.
      ID: 4910362617
      Sat, Dec 06, 2008, 09:35 		LOL, I agree about Lubbock. It was a great place to go to college, but living there 24/7 would be hard. They say it's a nice place to raise a family though. I'd still take Texas over Alabama anyday! :-)
 
303Perm Dude
      ID: 151157612
      Sat, Dec 06, 2008, 20:12 		Caught about half the game--wish I'd seen the end. Congrats to the Gators.
 
304steve houpt
      ID: 451161019
      Sat, Dec 06, 2008, 21:00 		Congrats to the Gators. If I was a Gator fan, I might be worried about the Gators picking up enough ground in the COMPUTERS.

They are already #2 in the Harris poll [will pass ALA]. Should pick up ground in USA Today, but start out at #4, 11 votes behind Texas, and 12 votes behind Oklahoma.

Florida was #6 in the computers @ 0.820.
OKL was #1 @ 0.980
TEX was #2 @ 0.940

In the BCS COlley poll where you can add games [added FLA > ALA, USC > UCLA, OKL > MIZZOU]:

OKL #2 > #1
TEX #1 > #2
FLA #4 > #3
UTAH #5 > #4
ALA #3 > #5

FLA is #7 in Wolfe and looking at rankings, they will probably pass Boise St and Alabama to #5. Oklahoma is #1, Texas #2, TTU #3. Should stay the same.

FLA is #6 in Sagarin BCS and looking at rankings, they will pass ALA, and might pass Utah. OKL, TEX, TTU are 1,2,3.

FLA is #6 in Massey MCS and looking at rankings, will pass #5 ALA and maybe #4 Utah. OKL, TTU and TEX are 1,2,3.

Billingsley had #1 ALA, #2 OKL, #3 FLA, #4 TEX. My guess, #1 FLA, #2 OKL, ALA #4 or 5, TEX #3 .

Seattle Times / Anderson & Hester had ALA #1, UTAH #2, TEXAS #3, OKL #4, TEX TECH #5, FLA #6. Looking at rankings, as close as the numbers are, UTAH, OKL or FLA [or Texas] could be any combo of 1 thru 3/4. And not sure how far FLA drops. Not sure FLA can get past #3 in this one.

If in the voting polls, 2, 3, 4 move up ""exactly"" to 1, 2, 3, [which would equal +0.0400 in each poll and a drop of 0.1200 for ALA]

.......... my final BCS would be ......

1. OKL ___ 0.9651
2. TEX ___ 0.9490
3. FLA ___ 0.9384

But I think FLA will move up more than the equivalent of 'one spot' [0.0400] in the voting polls.

So here is my prediction after they boost FLA more than 'one spot'. I think FLA will be #1 in both the Harris and USA Today polls [if not in the USA Today, a very close #2]

WHICH makes my FINAL GUESS:

1. OKL __ 0.9651
2. FLA __ 0.9498
3. TEX __ 0.9376


 
305slizz blackberry
      ID: 521142623
      Sun, Dec 07, 2008, 00:42 		Good post steve. I hope that is the final standings so my man SZ can make a donation on my behalf :)

Did you see tebow?!?! He's hungry and oklahoma is in trouble!

www.timtebowfacts.com - great site.
 
306KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 186321620
      Sun, Dec 07, 2008, 09:14 		I'm hoping against hope that UF gets left out so that the controversy rages.

There's too many teams that "deserve" a shot at the championship for this to come down to 2 teams.

And I thought the commissioner of the Big 12 sounded pretty ignorant last night. All this talk of the athletes being okay with the BCS system and the fans wanting the "regular season" to matter is complete crap.

You know that the athletes of the 1-loss teams left on the outside aren't okay with the BCS system. And it's funny how having playoffs hasn't hurt the NFL regular season at all. And what about 1-AA?

The excuses are still lame. Every other level of football has playoffs; even high school! And yet the proponents of the BCS think they have somehow created something better? If so, then why is nobody complaining about the champions of all the other levels and there's a controversy over the BCS seemingly every year?

I would LOVE to see the BCS spit out ALA/TEX. Now THAT would be classic!
 
307J
      Leader
      ID: 049346417
      Sun, Dec 07, 2008, 11:59 		No kidding KB! I want full on controversy. Oh, and I also want anyone but UF in the title game, just out of hatred though :)
 
308Seattle Zen
      ID: 358591721
      Sun, Dec 07, 2008, 14:31 		the fans wanting the "regular season" to matter is complete crap.

That's not true.

And it's funny how having playoffs hasn't hurt the NFL regular season at all.

Wow, maybe you haven't been paying attention. If you really think that the NFL regular season is just as exciting as college football, you aren't a college football fan, period. Just go back through this thread and look at the number of Saturdays that had three or four awesome matchups, games that are do-or-die for the teams involved. There are no do-or-die games ALL SEASON for most NFL teams. You've got to wait until around week 14 for the playoff picture to become clear and even then, only a few teams absolutely have to win their game. Other than the undefeated Patriots story last year, you could hibernate through the NFL regular season, wake up in time for the playoffs and not miss any games that really matter.

College football is a 13 week playoff.

Hey, I don't think that college football as it is set up right now is perfect, but I think most people who are clamoring for an eight team playoff really haven't thought through all of its ramifications.
 
309holt
      ID: 4410182818
      Sun, Dec 07, 2008, 14:55 		how many do or die games do you lose by using an 8 team playoff? the playoff would mostly consist of teams with zero or one loss.
 
310steve houpt
      ID: 451161019
      Sun, Dec 07, 2008, 15:54 		Yes, yes, yes Seattle Zen. My long lost posts on why football should not go to a playopff are long gone [many of consequences not thought thru], and I'm not going to recreate them, but I agree - College Football is a 14 week playoff right now - and you can get knocked out any week - it may not be perfect - but I love it.

Look at DIV I-AA [or FCS]. James Madison had beaten Villanova already in CAA conference play - meant nothing and almost lost to Villanova yesterday.

Weber State had beat Montana in the Big Sky earlier and were co-champs and the auto bid because of tie breaker. But lost in playoffs to Montana. And for some reason had to play AT MONTANA [Montana as an at-large had a higher seed - that's real fair].

Appalachian State beat Wofford 70-24. Wofford still made the playoffs as an atlarge and almost knocked off #1 seed James Madison. Games don't matter as much in the regular season in DIV I-AA.

The IVY League does not participate in FCS Tourney. Nor does the SWAC [Southern U plays Grambling in the Superdome during the playoffs on Thanksgiving weekend - big bucks - and it packs New Orleans - and the SWAC Championship is this weekend in Birmingham - Grambling vs Jackson St].

Also, the city of Miami, Pasadena, New Orleans [and many of the other bowls] have one to two week events around those bowls. 10K races, basketball [HS and College] tourneys, kids events, etc. All the bowls are run as private organizations [sanctioned by NCAA] that might dry up if you go to a playoff controlled by the NCAA and TV [TV revenue already controls the schedule to much]. I already hate the ONE WEEK delay for the BCS game. Make it the 2nd of JAN and be done with it [can't because two games in same city with added game] and there already is one of the BCS games on the 2nd.

Would the SEC Championship meany anything if there was a Playoff? I'm sure both ALA and FLA would be part of an 8 teamplayoff. Would OKL v TEX, OKL v TTU, TEX v TTU have really meant anything if there was a playoff? How about USC - Ohio State? WOuld be abpout like those preseason basketball tounaments going on right now - who cares who wins. But those games were mini playoffs in a way. Is it fair TEXAS is out, USC is out, Penn State is out, Alabama is out - no - but it's a heck of a lot more interresting the way it is IMHO. I love College Football. Pro football, I just follow until the playoffs [or about week #14].

Just my 2 cents [again].


Here is USA Today: My PRED ___ ACTUAL.

FLA [1] 0.9646 ___ 0.9711 [2]
OAK [2] 0.9561 ___ 0.9718 [1]
TEX [3] 0.9390 ___ 0.9233 [3]
ALA [4] 0.8774 ___ 0.8584 [4-T]

SAGARIN was as predicted. Appears the rest [at least Computers] are 'keeping' it a 'secret' until the BCS Bowl show tonight. Harris is usually late Sunday afternoon.

Changes my final prediction to:

1._ OKL __0.9704 [fm 0.9651]
2._ FLA __0.9520 [fm 0.9498]
3._ TEX __0.9324 [fm 0.9376]
 
311KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 186321620
      Sun, Dec 07, 2008, 16:12 		"College football is a 13 week playoff."

Really? Every playoff I've ever watched results in a clear-cut champion. That seems to be a rarity with the BCS. In fact, has anybody noticed that we're all talking about 1-loss teams and have completely ignored the two undefeated teams?

I think college football may be the only sport where a team can have an undefeated season and no shot at competing for the championship.

So much for "do or die," huh? They did and they still have no shot. By your "do or die" scenario, we'd have a Boise St. vs. Utah championship.

And what are the ramifications to an 8-team playoff? An actual champion? I see no real downside to it. Do you think teams in 1-AA look at their games every week and think, "Hmm, we can afford to lose this one. Let's just play soft."

Of course not. The fact is that if you lose 1 game, you could be on the outside looking in. But, if you go undefeated, you're guaranteed a shot to play for the championship.

I'd much rather see Boise St, Utah and then 6 of the 1-loss teams, as determined by the computers and a committee, like with the basketball tournament, than some farce that's supposed to mean something but that usually results in more questions than answers. And this year will be no different.
 
312KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 186321620
      Sun, Dec 07, 2008, 16:26 		"Games don't matter as much in the regular season in DIV I-AA."

I just really have a hard time believing this. Just because of a few anomalies, it doesn't mean the regular season doesn't matter. Without the regular season, those teams wouldn't even be in the playoffs.

Besides, one just has to look to 2006-2007's BCS championship where an undefeated Ohio State lost to 1-loss UF. If the "regular season" really matters and it's all a 13-week playoff, why wasn't Ohio State crowned the champion at 12-0? Because they still had one more non-regular season game to play? Kind of like a playoff? Hardly seems fair that they were asked to play one more game when they had already completed their "regular season" schedule undefeated.

That's the funny thing about BCS proponents. They want the "regular season" to matter, but it often doesn't. It's still just a way to try to create a 2-team playoff.

So which is it: Did Ohio State's 2006 regular season schedule matter (so that they could get into the championship) or did it not matter (because they ultimately lost one game and the "championship" was given to another 1-loss team)?

And how does the regular season matter if there will be two 1-loss teams in this year's championship and six other 1-loss teams that aren't? Does that mean that only certain teams' regular seasons matter?

Looking at the top 8 in the BCS, I don't see how anybody could say the regular season didn't matter if they were all put into a playoff. They'd still have to play to get there, just as they do with the farce 2-team playoff currently in place.
 
313steve houpt
      ID: 451161019
      Sun, Dec 07, 2008, 16:48 		KKB - have not read anything in #311 or #312 that addresses the importance of the Holiday Bowls [and I don't buy you can incorporate them into YOUR playoff system to meet your needs]. And IMHO a playoff would eliminate any non major bowls.

Despite your try and to counter what I say is the importance of the regular season with your anomolies [UTAH & BOISE ST - join the PAC 10 if the want a guarantee into a BCS Bowl - take WASHINGTON and WASH ST's places], Ohio State undefeated and losing to one loss teams, I don't buy the regular season would be as important. My two cents.

A playoff does away with the Bowl System as we know it. I like the Bowl system. I think it's great for kids from some school to get to go to what would be referred to as 'nothing bowls'. Great for the schools, great for the kids. Even if you and I don't watch them.

EagleBank Bowl
ACC vs. Navy Washington, D.C.
RFK Stadium Dec. 20, 11 a.m. ESPN

New Mexico
Mountain West vs. Fresno State Albuquerque
University Stadium Dec. 20, 2:30 p.m. ESPN

magicJack St. Petersburg
Big East vs. C-USA St. Petersburg. Fla.
Tropicana Field Dec. 20, 4:30 p.m. ESPN2

and all those in between ...


Insight
Kansas vs. Big Ten Tempe, Ariz.
Sun Devil Stadium Dec. 31, 5:30 p.m. NFL Network

Chick-fil-A
SEC vs. Georgia Tech Atlanta
Georgia Dome Dec. 31, 7:30 p.m. ESPN

And everyone of those cities has events around those bowls, but having a champion for KKB is more important. Well, it's not to me. Fine the way it is. The history of the bowls during the holidays is more important than having a playoff to please my ego and have a football 'champ' that is sanctioned by a playoff.


Who says we need a 'champion' you can sanction? Or ESPN? Or the networks? My anomalies are my reasons, your Ohio State facts are anomalies to me.

If you want to crown Utah and Boise State national champs, have at it. I'll watch OKL play FLA and just enjoy the game. With the rest of the bowl games.

 
314Razor
      ID: 181051618
      Sun, Dec 07, 2008, 16:58 		You're going to have a hard time convincing an Auburn fan that the BCS works.

Here's hoping to a Red River Rematch in the title game. Go Texas and Oklahoma!
 
315holt
      ID: 4410182818
      Sun, Dec 07, 2008, 17:01 		you can have bowl games and playoff games together. a 4 team playoff only requires 1 extra game than exists now. an 8 team playoff requires 3 extra games, total. how would those games make all the bowl games meaningless? all but one of em are pretty much meaningless atm anyway. how does a playoff change the level of "meaning" in all those random bowl games?

how much meaning do all of Boise State's regular season games have? you won all your games boys, great. the bad news is you're not allowed to be champs. the good news is, it's tradition.
 
316TB
      ID: 9116716
      Sun, Dec 07, 2008, 17:24 		I'm curious what 8 teams get into the playoffs this season if it was a playoff system. Most of you won't agree which 8 teams should be there.

Florida 12-1
Alabama 12-1
Oklahoma 12-1
Texas 11-1
Texas Tech 11-1
Penn State 11-1
USC 11-1
Boise State 12-0
Utah 12-0

That's nine right there and doesn't include the Big East or ACC champ.
Cincy 11-2
VT 9-4.

Maybe the only way to have a playoff is to make every conference have a championship game and have a 12 team playoff with one of those slots being open for a 12th team. But even then, who would get slot 12 this season? Texas, TT, or Alabama?
 
317KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 186321620
      Sun, Dec 07, 2008, 18:39 		have not read anything in #311 or #312 that addresses the importance of the Holiday Bowls [and I don't buy you can incorporate them into YOUR playoff system to meet your needs].

You seem to be set on the idea that a playoff can't incorporate existing bowl games, but that's exactly what they did to make the BCS happen. The BCS currently uses 4 bowl games. You'd only need another 3 for an 8-team playoff. If we can use 4 bowl games, why not 7?

And you can even keep all the other bowl games. I don't know anybody who is advocating scraping all the bowl games in favor of a playoff. Everything I've heard/read, and what I'd favor, says to keep the bowl system as is, but add in another 3 bowl games to the BCS and make it an 8-team playoff. Sure, you have a handful more 6-win teams that don't have a bowl game, but I'd rather be fair to those at the top at the expense of a few 6-6 teams.

And if there's a problem with that, then it just shows that the regular season would still matter. After all, if those 6-6 teams had won just one more game, they'd be in a bowl game.

If you want to crown Utah and Boise State national champs, have at it. I'll watch OKL play FLA and just enjoy the game. With the rest of the bowl games.

I don't want to crown anybody a champion. I just want them to have the opportunity to actually PLAY for a championship. I don't understand the concept of a team sport that tells the only two undefeated teams remaining that they have ZERO chance at a championship. What sense does that make? It certainly doesn't make sense under the "regular season matters" concept.

And again, nobody says you need to get rid of the bowl games. Imagine a December full of all the December bowl games with three-weekend playoff at the end of December and beginning of January. Sounds like college football bliss, if you ask me.

It doesn't have to be one or the other.
 
318J
      Leader
      ID: 049346417
      Sun, Dec 07, 2008, 20:18 		this system is royally f&*ked. I'm not even talking about the Florida/Texas debate. But why wouldn't they at least let #3 Texas play #4 Alabama?

Don't they want the best possible games? All of these matchups don't make much sense to me.

#10 Ohio State vs. #3 Texas
#6 Utah vs. #4 Alabama

brilliant.
 
319Slizz
      ID: 331128719
      Sun, Dec 07, 2008, 20:30 		Ugh...Ohio State again. They are just brutal to watch.

Its a shame that Boise State didn't get an invite, but like Notre Dame, its all about the $$$ and the Buckeyes are more of a draw.

 
320Mötley Crüe
      Dude
      ID: 439372011
      Sun, Dec 07, 2008, 21:20 		I get this vibe from Razor that his ex-girlfriend was a UF grad and she just brutally dumped him or something.

The pure spite contained in your posts in this thread is such a treat, dude. Nobody actually wants to see a Texas-Oklahoma rematch for the National Championship. I'm sure even you don't actually want to watch that game again.

If Florida loses to Oklahoma you'll surely preen and gloat and your spirits will be lifted all the next day. What a great day it would be for you.

I'll keep my comments on the game narrow for now so no Sooners or Big 12 people feel dissed. The Gators are a very good team, and I'll be confidently watching them on the January 8th. I expect a good game.
 
321Seattle Zen
      ID: 358591721
      Sun, Dec 07, 2008, 23:52 		I get this vibe from Razor that his ex-girlfriend was a UF grad and she just brutally dumped him or something.

Yeah, you would swear that Barry Bonds was a Gator!
 
322J
      Leader
      ID: 049346417
      Mon, Dec 08, 2008, 09:26 		Nobody actually wants to see a Texas-Oklahoma rematch for the National Championship

Totally disagree with this. The Texas-Oklahoma game was probably the best game of the year, and I would love a rematch. Although, Oklahoma-Florida I'm sure will be just as good, I just don't like rooting for either team.

In Razor's defense, like me, he's also an FSU fan, which leads the UF hatred :)
 
323Razor
      ID: 181051618
      Mon, Dec 08, 2008, 10:32 		Maybe the only way to have a playoff is to make every conference have a championship game and have a 12 team playoff with one of those slots being open for a 12th team. But even then, who would get slot 12 this season? Texas, TT, or Alabama?

Or we can stop trying to include everyone who might possibly maybe kinda deserve it in a playoff scenario. 12 is way too many and 8 is likely too many. The playoffs, if instituted, should be a major reward for teams who had excellent seasons, and not just some end of the year tourney that teams can back into despite just pretty good regular seasons. Who would want to see Ohio State have a shot at the title? Or Cincinnati? Or Virginia Tech? Or Boise State? What a tremendous waste of time. Let's use the BCS to do what it is supposed to do, which is to make determinations on who had the better year based on a variety of factors. Reward teams who play tough OOC schedules and have strong regular seasons by granting them a coveted spot in a 4-team playoff. And if you don't happen to make the field, shut your yap about it because there is a reason you didn't make it. Don't lose a game to the Iowas and Oregon States of the world and play respectable OOC schedules and you'll have a better argument.
 
324Pancho Villa
      ID: 51546319
      Mon, Dec 08, 2008, 10:36 		It's ridiculous that Cincinnati and Va Tech are in a BCS Bowl and Texas Tech and Boise State aren't.

Automatic berths for the Big East and even the ACC, which puts a 4 loss Va Tech into a BCS Bowl, are ludicrous. Which is the better 4 loss team, Va Tech or Ole Miss? This year, with the exception of USC, the PAC 10 was horrible.

The Mountain West Conference, at least this year, was on par with the PAC 10, and superior to both the Big East and ACC. The WAC consistently has 3 teams( Boise, Fresno and Hawaii) that are comparable to the top Big East teams. Who would be favored in a Cincy/Boise or VaTech/TCU matchup?

The Poinsettia Bowl, featuring unbeaten Boise and 2 loss TCU (to Oklahoma and Utah-barely) is more deserving of the Orange Bowl than Cincy/Va Tech.
And Texas Tech, way more deserving than Cincy or Va Tech, is probably more deserving than Ohio State of a BCS bid.

The SEC, Big 12, PAC 10 and Big 10 winners deserve BCS slots. Either ditch the Big East and ACC or add the Mtn West and WAC. My vote is for the former - 4 top conference champs and 6 at large.
 
325boikin
      ID: 532592112
      Mon, Dec 08, 2008, 10:52 		this system is royally f&*ked. I'm not even talking about the Florida/Texas debate. But why wouldn't they at least let #3 Texas play #4 Alabama?

I just do not understand?
 
326Razor
      ID: 181051618
      Mon, Dec 08, 2008, 11:03 		The ACC would smoke the Mountain West. The ACC has 10 teams going to bowls and owns winning records against the mighty Big 12 and SEC. Where the ACC lacks badly is at the top, but no conference in the country is deeper, which is why it's impossible to compare W-L records of ACC teams to MWC teams because there are way more free victories in the MWC than there are in the ACC. I doubt any MWC team would be ranked in the top 15 if they had to play 8 ACC teams.
 
327Razor
      ID: 181051618
      Mon, Dec 08, 2008, 11:18 		J, the Bama-Texas matchup didn't happen because of SEC and Big 12 tie-ins to the Sugar and Fiesta Bowl, but primarily because they did not want to have a cluster%&@* after the season when the Bama-Texas winner tries to stake their claim to the championship. I mean, why not? Alabama and Oklahoma both lost one game this year on a neutral surface, and yet Oklahoma has a legit claim to the title and Bama doesn't? Even if Bama were to beat Texas? And how does Texas get shutout over OU or Florida if they were to end up blowing out Bama?
 
328Frick
      ID: 3410551012
      Mon, Dec 08, 2008, 11:31 		this system is royally f&*ked. I'm not even talking about the Florida/Texas debate. But why wouldn't they at least let #3 Texas play #4 Alabama?

I just do not understand?

The BCS only matches the top 2 teams, after that the traditional bowl alliances are kept as much as possible. The Rose Bowl is going to pick Pac10 and Big10 teams for the game over more deserving teams if they can.

Last year if the BCS hadn't existed Ohio State would have played USC in the Rose Bowl, while LSU would have played in the Sugar against Kansas/Oklahoma.
 
329J
      Leader
      ID: 049346417
      Mon, Dec 08, 2008, 11:52 		My point is...F-Tradition! Get the best GAMES.
 
330Pancho Villa
      ID: 51546319
      Mon, Dec 08, 2008, 14:52 		The ACC would smoke the Mountain West.

It's a better league throughout, and ACC teams kept knocking each other off, which hurt their records

But Utah, TCU and BYU are right up there with op ACC teams this year; UNLV had wins over PAC 10 and Big 12 teams, New Mexico had a win over bowl bound Arizona, and even lowly Wyoming beat SEC's Tennessee in Tennessee. Air Force and Colo. St. are headed to bowls, though whether they deserve these bids is debatable.

But the bottom line is why should the ACC, and to an even larger extent the Big East, get an automatic BCS bid(this year with a 4 loss team) and not the Mtn. West?
 
331C1-NRB
      ID: 31050820
      Mon, Dec 08, 2008, 23:57 		But the bottom line is why should the ACC, and to an even larger extent the Big East, get an automatic BCS bid(this year with a 4 loss team) and not the Mtn. West?

Because Florida State and Miami are in the ACC and, uh, well, Miami was in the Big East when the BCS started and, uh, West Virginia still is and, uh, they played for a national title twice, most recently 15 years ago.

And one day when the NCAA grows a pair and puts a playoff system in place Notre Dume will be forced to play a conference schedule to qualify for the playoffs. Since they're in the Big East for everything else, they'll get their playoff berth like everybody else- by winning a conference instead of having a "special exception" clause.
 
332Pancho Villa
      ID: 51546319
      Tue, Dec 09, 2008, 08:07 		Reward teams who play tough OOC schedules and have strong regular seasons by granting them a coveted spot in a 4-team playoff. And if you don't happen to make the field, shut your yap about it because there is a reason you didn't make it. Don't lose a game to the Iowas and Oregon States of the world and play respectable OOC schedules and you'll have a better argument.

Utah did have a tough OOC schedule. When they scheduled Michigan in Ann Arbor, how were they to know the Wolverines would be having a down year? Additionally, the Utes win in the Big House was diminished by Michigan losing to unheralded Appalachian State in 2007, something completely beyond the scope of schedule makers to forsee. Oregon State only needed to beat in-state rival Oregon, and it would have been the Beavers, not the Trojans, in the Rose Bowl.

There's only one way for a Utah or Boise St to make a BCS Bowl, and that is to go undefeated. And, as we see this year with Boise St, even that is no guarantee.

Yet here's Va Tech, opening their season with a loss to East Carolina(which would have immediately disqualified a non-BCS conference school like Utah)playing in a BCS bowl with Cincinnati, proud owner of a 24 point loss to perennial powerhouse UConn. Kudos to Cincy for scheduling Oklahoma and holding them to a mere 52 points in a 26 point loss, but does that make them BCS worthy?
 
333Slizz
      ID: 4710371415
      Tue, Dec 09, 2008, 08:36 		Its all about the money. Despite the fact that D2 (or the FCS) already has the framework in place for it, the BCS bowls are worth $500m or some ridiculous # like that (whatever ESPN/ABC paid to broadcast them) to the networks, which is why the only hope we would have is a +1 game.

Even if we instituted a +1 game, you'd have the fans/alumnuses of the #5 team (USC) whining, and justifiably so, about "how come we didn't get a shot, etc!?!" There is no perfect system...and like SZ, it would undermine the the regular season slightly...

Let me throw this scenario out there...Say there was a playoff and it was Alabama vs Oklahoma and Texas vs Florida. Both SEC teams advance, as would be expected by Vegas...we'd all be in uproar how its stupid to see a rematch, etc.

I'm perfectly comfortable with a OU / UF National Championship as I think given their overall body of work, at least both showed they were the best.

Texas played that cream puff out of conference schedule and I think it had to hurt them somewhat (steve h. - could you confirm that?)

 
334J
      Leader
      ID: 049346417
      Tue, Dec 09, 2008, 09:09 		Obviously there's no perfect system, but there's sure gotta be a BETTER one! A 4 team playoff, where the #5 team is pissed is much better than this 2 team playoff with the #3 team pissed.
 
335Pancho Villa
      ID: 51546319
      Tue, Dec 09, 2008, 09:20 		Its all about the money.

For point of reference, the Poinsettia Bowl payout, featuring undefeated Boise and twice defeated TCU(both losses to top 10 teams)is $750,000.

The Orange Bowl payout, featuring 6 losses between Va Tech and Cincy, is $17 million.

That's a hell of a discrepancy.
 
336KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 45657107
      Tue, Dec 09, 2008, 10:19 		There is no perfect system...and like SZ, it would undermine the the regular season slightly...

I still don't buy this. At all. Let's take the top 4 teams and toss them in a playoff. How, exactly, does that undermine the regular season?

Oklahoma is already in the Championship game, despite a loss to Texas. Thus, being in a 4-team playoff hasn't changed the impact of their regular season at all. Zero.

UF is already in the Championship game, despite a loss to Mississippi. Thus, being in a 4-team playoff hasn't changed the impact of their regular season at all. Zero.

Texas is on the outside looking in thanks to the Big 12's stupid use of the BCS to determine their conference championship. In fact, they beat the team currently in the Championship and only lost to the #6 team in the nation. By way of pure luck, they're not in. They could just as easily be in Oklahoma's spot, so I don't see any regular season diminishing here. The computers made this happen, not their loss to Texas Tech.

And Alabama had an undefeated regular season. Plain and simple. They lost in the SEC Championship to a team that lost in the regular season. And they didn't lose big, like Mizzou. In fact, if we played Alabama/UF again, I wouldn't be surprised to have a different result. Not in the least bit.

And let's not forget that several 1-loss teams and 2 undefeated teams would still be on the outside looking in. And somehow the regular season is diminished?

Say there was a playoff and it was Alabama vs Oklahoma and Texas vs Florida. Both SEC teams advance, as would be expected by Vegas...we'd all be in uproar how its stupid to see a rematch, etc.

Actually, I think that's the best game we'll see out of all the BCS bowls and all the conference championships. Time will tell.

All I want to see is the best play the best. If that happens to be two teams from the same conference, so be it. And if both teams have worked hard enough and won the right games to make it to the Championship, then that's the game I want to see.

Funny how we don't worry too much about that with the basketball championship.
 
337KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 45657107
      Tue, Dec 09, 2008, 10:28 		Texas played that cream puff out of conference schedule and I think it had to hurt them somewhat

Yeah! You tell 'em! Oklahoma beating Chattanooga and Cincinnati and Washington is what it's all about! And Florida ripping Hawaii and Cittadel and beating Miami shows who the real deal is!

Every team plays some cream puffs out of conference. It's that in-conference schedule that makes the difference.

Sagarin has Oklahoma with a 74.86 schedule rating, good enough for #8. He has Texas with a 74.58, good enough for #12 and ahead of Florida (73.85, #18).

I'd be interested if anybody has an example of a team with no cream puffs at all. I honestly haven't looked.
 
338Slizz
      ID: 4710371415
      Tue, Dec 09, 2008, 10:56 		You are forgetting TCU from that list :) Bottom line, everyone has their stinker "Tune Up" games. Oklahoma at least scheduled a team in the BCS (Cincy), and a team that is in the top 15 (TCU). I dont think Texas did that. The point of my statement was that it could have had an outcome with the computers to why Texas didn't get in the the National Championship/had a chance to play for the Big 12 championship and OU did..thats all.

I wholeheartedly agree that the best game we'll see out of all the BCS bowls and conference championships. Bama really surprised me with how close they kept it all game.

If I wanted to see the best play the best, I'd want UF / USC :)

 
339C1-NRB
      ID: 17101168
      Tue, Dec 09, 2008, 10:57 		Too many places to quote all the examples, but OOC games are scheduled years in advance. It's not Oklahoma's fault Washington is bad this year. It's not Florida's fault Hawai'i was "down", either.

t.u. has UCLA for a H&H in 2010 and 2011. I bet they hope the Bruins have mustered more than 4 wins per season between now and then. And for what it's worth, t.u. backed out of an @Hawai'i game Mack Brown's first year (when Hawai'i was "up") because the "travel would be too intense." Pfft. Mack didn't want to get smacked. (The alumni were pissed. Many had already made hotel and airline arrangements.)

Oklahomo has Notre Dume for a H&H in 2012 & 2013. How long has it been said that ND "will be back?" Then Tennessee in 2014 & 2015.

And that's only two schools. You can't put too much stock in OOC, except when it comes to scheduling I-AA schools or perenial creampuffs (Sunbelt and, to some extent, MAC).
 
340Pancho Villa
      ID: 51546319
      Tue, Dec 09, 2008, 11:11 		I'd be interested if anybody has an example of a team with no cream puffs at all.

You probably could have made a case for Notre Dame not long ago, but opening the season with Mtn West doormat San Diego St, who they barely beat, is as big a cream puff as you'll find.

But look at the Irish's 2004 schedule:

BYU(at Provo)
Michigan
Mich St
Washington
Purdue
Stanford
Navy
Boston College
Tennessee
Pittsburgh
USC

2005 - same teams except replace BC with Syracuse

2006 - started season with Ga Tech and Penn St, but added cream puff Army to schedule.

Penn State, when they were independent, used to have a tough schedule. But who do they open up with this year? Coastal Carolina. C'mon.
 
341boikin
      ID: 532592112
      Tue, Dec 09, 2008, 13:47 		Obviously there's no perfect system, but there's sure gotta be a BETTER one! A 4 team playoff, where the #5 team is pissed is much better than this 2 team playoff with the #3 team pissed.

this would be true expect this year the possible #2 team would be pissed, USC so really you are no better off.
 
342steve houpt
      ID: 451161019
      Tue, Dec 09, 2008, 19:46 		#338 Slizz - . The point of my statement was that it could have had an outcome with the computers to why Texas didn't get in the the National Championship/had a chance to play for the Big 12 championship and OU did..thats all.

The could say the voting polls kept Texas out of Big 12 and BCS. Texas is #2 [and was last week also] in the computers @ 0.940. Florida was #3 @ 0.890. Problem in Big 12 week, Oklahoma was #1 in computers, Texas #2. The 'human' vote kind of kept Texas out.

The who won big last 'phenom'. If the schedule was reversed, and OKL beat TTU, TTU beat TEX and TEX beat OKL, Oklahoma would have been #3 in the voter polls, Texas #2 going into Big 12 and Texas would have played in Big 12 Championship and also in BCS Title Game.


Anyone surprised Florida is a 3 point favorite [at least in this mornings paper] over Oklahoma? The over-under was 72.

Here is my rank of the bowl games.

1 _ Florida vs Oklahoma __ Fed Ex BCS N-C-G
2 _ Alabama vs Utah __ All State Sugar
3 _ Southern Cal vs Penn State __ Rose Bowl by Citi
4 _ Texas vs Ohio State __ Tostitos Fiesta
5 _ Boise State vs T.C.U. __ San Diego Cty Credit Union
6 _ Cincinnati vs VA Tech __ Fed Ex Orange
7 _ Oklahoma St vs Oregon __ Pacific Life Holiday
8 _ Georgia vs Michigan St __ Capital One
9 _ Texas Tech vs Ole MISS __ AT&T Cotton
10 _ Oregon St vs Pittsburgh __ Brut Sun
11 _ Missouri vs Northwestern __ Valero Alamo
12 _ Nebraska vs Clemson __ Konica Minolta Gator
13 _ Georgia Tech vs L.S.U. __ Chick-fil-A
14 _ North Carolina vs West Virginia __ Meineke Car Care
15 _ California vs Miami, FL __ Emerald
16 _ Iowa vs South Carolina __ Outback
17 _ Ball State vs Tulsa __ GMAC
18 _ Florida State vs Wisconsin __ Champs Sports
19 _ Arizona vs B.Y.U. __ Pioneer
20 _ Boston College vs Vanderbilt __ Gaylord Hotels Music City
21 _ Rice vs Western MICH __ Texas
22 _ Wake Forest vs Navy __ Eagle Bank
23 _ Rutgers vs N.C. State __ Papajohns.com
24 _ Kansas vs Minnesota __ Insight
25 _ Nevada vs Maryland __ Roady's Humanitarian
26 _ U. CONN vs Buffalo __ International
27 _ Eastern CAR vs Kentucky __ Auto Zone Liberty
28 _ Houston vs Air Force __ Bell Helicopter Armed Forces
29 _ Hawaii vs Notre Dame __ Sheraton Hawaii
30 _ Fresno State vs Colorado St __ New Mexico
31 _ Troy vs Southern MISS __ R+L Carriers
32 _ Central MICH vs FLA Atlantic __ Motor City
33 _ South FLA vs Memphis __ magic Jack
34 _ Northern ILL vs LA Tech __ Independence
 
343Slizz
      ID: 331128719
      Wed, Dec 10, 2008, 22:44 		Great post Steve!

I came across this article on Rivals.com that you'd probably appreciate:

Bowl Game by Game Preview

As for Florida vs Oklahoma, I think Florida is gonna beat them by at least 2 TD's.

SZ - does $10 or $20 sound good?

 
344Donkey Hunter
      ID: 508401922
      Wed, Dec 10, 2008, 23:26 		I think you have the Sugar bowl and Orange bowl way too high.

Also the Cotton bowl and Chic-Fil-A way too low.

And you somehow have the Motor City bowl too high.

I like the under on the over/under but I get the feeling it might be as high as 75 by gametime.
 
345steve houpt
      ID: 451161019
      Thu, Dec 11, 2008, 00:18 		Thanks slizz - can agree with rivals.com on most [Donkey Hunter - they had Chic-fil-A & Cotton Bowl ranked same as I did] - personally I'm looking forward to the LSU - GA Tech game, but when you look at their two ranks and seasons, ...... 13 is where they ended on my list.

Orange Bowl - RC has it #15, I have it #6 - may not be 'best' matchup for BCS Orange Bowl, but both are top 20 teams in the polls - but they are not happy about Big East - ACC getting the bid, thus low ranking.

Wake Forest - Navy - RC #29, me #22 - a rematch, true.

Rice - Western MI - RC #14, me #21 - do not see it - they say lots of points - OK - two 35-50 ranked teams.

AZ - BYU - RC #12, me #19 - they like it because Mtn West - PAC 10 matchup and BYU ranking.

Ball St - Tulsa - RC #10, me #17 - two down teams coming in IMHO.

Mizzou - N'western - RC #18, me #11 - this has to be better than Ball St - Tulsa.

Here is rank, just based on MY interest.

1 _ Florida vs Oklahoma __ Fed Ex BCS N-C-G __ SEC and BCS N-C-G
2 _ Alabama vs Utah __ All State Sugar __ daughters live in Alabama, Nichk Saban coached LSU, SE C team, 1 loss between two teams
3 _ Southern Cal vs Penn State __ Rose Bowl by Citi __ sister and nephew Penn State grads, born and raise in PA
4 _ Georgia Tech vs L.S.U. __ Chick-fil-A __ lived in LA for 20 years
4 _ Boise State vs T.C.U. __ San Diego Cty Credit Union __ Boise St - unbeaten - TCU - good team
6 _ Georgia vs Michigan St __ Capital One __ SEC, neice graduated MICH ST
7 _ Texas Tech vs Ole MISS __ AT&T Cotton __ SEC and watch Texas Tech offense vs SEC [Ole Miss 4 losses by a total of 19 points - lost by 4 to ALA]
8 _ Texas vs Ohio State __ Tostitos Fiesta __ can Ohio State make up for the last two years of disappointment ends
9 _ Nebraska vs Clemson __ Konica Minolta Gator __ live in SC, have to at least 'watch'
10 _ Iowa vs South Carolina __ Outback __ live in SC, what the heck
11 _ Florida State vs Wisconsin __ Champs Sports __ watch because of Bowden
12 _ Wake Forest vs Navy __ Eagle Bank __ will watch - 26 years in Navy, I don't care if it's a rematch
13 _ Hawaii vs Notre Dame __ Sheraton Hawaii __ just to see some shots of the beach in Hawaii
14 _ Houston vs Air Force __ Bell Helicopter Armed Forces __ Armed Forces Bowl



 
346Seattle Zen
      ID: 358591721
      Thu, Dec 11, 2008, 00:51 		does $10 or $20 sound good?

I'm poor, which really won't matter as you will be paying, but let's make it $10.

 
347Slizz
      ID: 4710371415
      Thu, Dec 11, 2008, 08:09 		Sounds good. Florida wins by 14, Donation of $10 in my name. Oklahoma keeps it under 14/wins...Donation by $10 in yours :)

Good luck!

 
348Pancho Villa
      ID: 51546319
      Thu, Dec 11, 2008, 10:35 		I think you have the Sugar bowl and Orange bowl way too high.

Obviously, given my previous posts, I aree about the Orange and disagree about the Sugar.

For those of us who have been intimately involved with BCS busting(I managed a sports radio station in Provo in '01 and '02) the Sugar Bowl is the defining moment in non-BCS conference teams gaining national credibility.

Some of us thought that happened with the Boise State win over Oklahoma(one of the most entertaining games in college football history), but Hawaii's blowout at the hands of Georgia last year was a devastating setback, even though it was the first loss(out of three) of non-BCS teams in BCS bowl games.

So the pressure on Utah is immense. If the Utes get blown out, as I suspect the reason Donkey Hunter downplays the game, it will set back non-BCS conference teams for years.
If Bama wins by the spread(10 1/2), nothing will change. Non-BCS conference schools will still need to go undefeated to join the party.

But, if the game goes down to the wire, or if Utah wins, the entire structure of BCS conferences vs non-BCS conferences will be called into question. Actually, it will be exposed as the politically fraudulent system it is.

That's my reason why this game deserves to be seeded #2 behind the national championship game. Maybe you have to live in the Salt Lake metro to fully understand the frustration generated by the lack of respect and fairness extended to non-BCS conference schools.

Go Utes!

 
349Slizz
      ID: 4710371415
      Thu, Dec 11, 2008, 10:53 		Rutgers / NC State is shaping up to be a great game!

Rutgers is playing as good a brand of football as anyone right now and NC State has really came on the 2nd half of the season with their impressive freshman QB.

 
350KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 186321620
      Sat, Dec 13, 2008, 20:55 		Florida is almost guaranteed the championship. Sam Bradford won the Heisman.
 
351Slizz
      ID: 13104129
      Sun, Dec 14, 2008, 12:47 		shades of jason white :)
 
352KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 186321620
      Sun, Dec 14, 2008, 22:06 		Shades of most past Heisman winners. You won't find many Heisman winners who have gone on to win a National Championship in the same year. Surprisingly rare... at least as far back as I looked.
 
353Slizz
      ID: 411441421
      Mon, Dec 15, 2008, 00:48 		What do you think of Gene Chizik as Auburn's new head coach?
 
354Razor
      ID: 181051618
      Mon, Dec 15, 2008, 01:00 		Not often you see a program so clearly downgrade in a matter of weeks. How do you go from a top 10 coach nationally to a guy who has done nothing but lose at Iowa State?
 
355Slizz
      ID: 4710371415
      Mon, Dec 15, 2008, 08:58 		I'm still in awe of the fact they ran out a guy who won 70% of his games to replace him with Gene Chizik.

It still makes me chuckle!

 
356KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 361154158
      Mon, Dec 15, 2008, 10:11 		The jury is going to be out on Chizik for a while... at least for me. A lot of Auburn fans have been screaming at the top of their lungs over the hire, but I think there could actually be some positives here.

First, Tuberville was a great coach and I wouldn't mind still having him, but he never really kept Auburn consistently competing. I was fine with Auburn being a Top 10-20 team every year, but in the SEC, that usually means you're a Top 1-5 team. So, if Auburn wants someone to compete for championships every year, they needed to replace Tuberville.

Second, I don't know many coaches that would compete at Iowa State. The last coach with a winning record there was Earle Bruce (1973-1978, 36-32). And before him you have to go all the way back to Charles Mayser (1915-1919, 21-11) to find another winning coach. Suffice to say that winning is not a tradition for Iowa State football, making it very difficult to do much of anything there.

Third, Chizik knows defense. He coached Auburn's 2004 perfect season defense and then went to Texas for their 2005 national championship. Auburn's never had a problem with defense, but it was rarely as good as it was under Chizik. If you have problems scoring on offense, one thing you can do is tighten up your defense and that's one thing that will be certain to happen.

Auburn scored just 17.3 points per game, but they gave up 18.0. If that had been the NCAA-leading 11.2 it was in 2004 (over a point better than USC's 12.5 at #2), they likely would have won at least 2-3 more games. In fact, that difference of 7 points on defense would have been enough to beat LSU (21-26), Vandy (13-14), Arkansas (22-25), and Georgia (13-17). That turns a 5-7 season into a 9-3 season. And with the confidence that could build, possibly even a 10-2 season.

And what of the offense? Since Chizik really is an Auburn kind of guy, he's going to run the ball. No more (hopefully) debacles like Vandy where Auburn ran up and down the field in the first half only to turn to the "spread" offense in the second half with zero results. Why you score 13 points in the first quarter and then abandon that game plan is anybody's guess, but I would be surprised if Chizik did that.

Put it this way, despite not having the talent that Auburn has at RB and despite having huge deficits to overcome, Iowa State still rushed 403 times this season compared to Auburn's 469. With the kind of players Auburn has, they should have been WELL over 500 and approaching 600. I think they'll do that with Chizik.

Sure, it would have been exciting to get a big name on the level of Saban or Meyer or such, but Auburn doesn't need another big name. What they need is a coach that will coach Auburn Football and I think they got that.

Auburn will likely never compete in recruiting for the QBs and WRs in SEC Land, so they'll need to stick to RBs, LBs, and CBs. The LBs and CBs play right into Chizik's specialty and if you have RB talent, it's not too difficult to line up your 11 guys and shove the ball down the opponent's throat. Auburn's done it with success in the past and they can certainly do it again.

We'll see...

By the way, here's what some former Auburn players said about Chizik:

Carlos Rogers, Washington Redskins, Former Auburn All-American, 2004 Thorpe Award Winner
"This was the best decision Auburn could have made. Coach Chizik was like a dad to me. From a player and student point of view he's exactly what Auburn needs in a head coach."

Carnell Williams, Tampa Bay Buccaneers, Former Auburn All-American Running Back
"Coach Chizik is a players' coach. Even though he was on the defensive side of the ball, he taught all of us the importance of hard work. He's the kind of coach recruits hope to get to play for, and I think this is a great hire. I'm excited for Auburn."

Dontarrious Thomas, Minnesota Vikings, Former Auburn linebacker
"Gene Chizik will make a great addition for Auburn. He knows the game of football and knows how to motivate and relate to young athletes. He knows how to motivate them to be successful not only on the field but in the classroom and in the game of life. He will be a blessing for the players and for Auburn University."

As I said in one of the Auburn "forums," who am I to disagree with those three guys? :)
 
357boikin
      ID: 532592112
      Mon, Dec 15, 2008, 11:40 		I think auburn might have just hired, ron zook or larry coker...not going to end well for him. I think the players said all the same things about both those guys too.
 
358Perm Dude
      ID: 91157169
      Tue, Dec 16, 2008, 11:03 		Barkley, or course, is an idiot. But this hire stinks, IMO.

Chizik might not suck it up (though his record indicates he will). But he wasn't the best coach they could have gotten.

Third, Chizik knows defense.

We can all play the numbers game and cherry pick, but Iowa State was producing record offensive numbers this season, and yet they lost ten in a row. Sure, 4 years ago he might have been a defensive wizard, but at 5-19 he didn't deserve to take the chance away from coaches who showed they have the ability to turn around a program.
 
359Razor
      ID: 181051618
      Tue, Dec 16, 2008, 11:23 		I have heard that both Tuberville and Gill were told that they did not have complete control over their staff, which is why neither of them is there right now. Pretty decent source.
 
360KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 361154158
      Tue, Dec 16, 2008, 14:39 		PD, actually it was actually just 2 years ago that he coached Texas' defense as a defensive wizard.

His most recent PPGs:
2006: 17.8 (Thorpe award winner)
2005: 14.6 (Thorpe award winner)
2004: 11.2 (Thorpe award winner)
2003: 16.5

I'm not drinking the Kool-Aid yet, but it's laughable that people ignore what he's done at teams with REAL players and simply point to what happened at Iowa State. Put Bob Stoops or Urban Meyer at Iowa State and see if they can win a championship. Yeah, right.

I showed you the only two coaches with a winning record at Iowa State in the last century and people still talk like all they need is a good coach. Ha! If Turner Gill takes the job (he's being mentioned for the job), it'll be the death of his career. He's better off staying with Buffalo in the MAC.

Razor, not sure what your comment means. Are you saying they were told they wouldn't have control over who to hire as coordinators/assistants? Wouldn't surprise me with Auburn, but would be interested in clarification.
 
361Razor
      ID: 181051618
      Tue, Dec 16, 2008, 14:41 		That's exactly it. I heard that Tuberville was told that his assistants would not be his decision, so he left. Then Gill all but had the gig, but refused it once he learned that Auburn was going to make him pick from a list of coordinators.
 
362KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 186321620
      Tue, Dec 16, 2008, 18:32 		As I said, that sort of thing really wouldn't surprise me with Auburn, particularly with the debacle Tuberville had with the OC this year.

I just read that Gill signed an extension with Buffalo and I think that's a good move for him. Realistically, his record wasn't spectacular this year and he'll have another year to make something happen. If he does, he should get some good offers. If not, he'll likely just stay in the MAC.
 
363Slizz
      ID: 4710371415
      Wed, Dec 17, 2008, 09:35 		If your a top notch recruit and you have to choose b/w Saban and Chizik...the decision is easy.

Auburn set themselves back at least 4 years with this hire as college football is a "what have you done for me lately?" game.

 
364KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 361154158
      Wed, Dec 17, 2008, 12:20 		If your a top notch recruit and you have to choose b/w Saban and Chizik...the decision is easy.

Unfortunately for Alabama, and every other program, there are still limits as to how many recruits you can get and how many coaching visits you can make. If there's one thing we've seen in college football over the past decade or so it's that there is more and more talent to go around.

I'm not saying Auburn will get a lot of the top talent (at least not initially), but I don't think they've been getting it anyhow. Auburn is always picking up the scraps from bigger national names like Alabama, Florida, Georgia, and Tennessee just in its own conference.

That's why they'll have to stick to particular positions and also offer opportunities to play.

Another way to to look at your statement is: If your a top notch recruit and Saban's assistant says you're #2 on the depth chart and Chizik says you're #1...

And if this decision puts Auburn back 4 years, that's right at 2004. I'm okay with that. :)
 
365KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 361154158
      Wed, Dec 17, 2008, 15:02 		Auburn gets first signee of Chizik regime.

"[Defensive lineman Nick] Fairley was one of Auburn's top recruits when he signed in 2007 out of Williamson High School in Mobile."

"Fairley said other schools tried to get him to change his mind during Auburn's coaching change, but he held firm."

"Another top player -- tight end Philip Lutzenkirchen -- [...] considered one of the top tight ends in the country, said he's still committed to Auburn."
 
366Perm Dude
      ID: 151121178
      Wed, Dec 17, 2008, 15:05 		So he didn't back out of his committment. I wouldn't put this as a plus for Chizik, necessarily. Though maybe he just hasn't yet read the comments from players, administrators, and coaches at Iowa State.
 
367KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 361154158
      Wed, Dec 17, 2008, 16:36 		When people are saying "the decision is easy" with regards to Alabama vs. Auburn for recruits, I think it's worth noting that two top recruits have stuck with Auburn and Chizik.

And Iowa State is just full of sour grapes, as any program would be, Auburn (and myself) included, if their coach left for a higher profile position. It's what happens.
 
368Perm Dude
      ID: 151121178
      Wed, Dec 17, 2008, 16:44 		It may be some sour grapes there. But Chizik told his boss there two days before that he was definately not taking the Auburn job. And he never told his players--he just packed up and left.

I'd say their reaction is pretty reasonable.

And (again): A recruit not backing out of his committment is different from a coach who gets the committment in the first place. Fairley didn't commit to Chizik (whether at Auburn or Iowa State).
 
369KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 186321620
      Wed, Dec 17, 2008, 19:08 		I didn't say their reaction wasn't reasonable. As I said, I'd probably have the same reaction. But, we've heard it all before with coaches. Honestly, I would have preferred him to be more upfront with Iowa State, but that's the way it goes sometimes. And if they thought he was such a bad coach, then why do they care?

And you're right that it's different in regards to the commits, but it's still pretty significant.
 
370steve houpt
      ID: 451161019
      Fri, Dec 19, 2008, 23:05 		Congrats to the un-seeded Richmond Spiders [but ranked #6 in the FCS Coaches Poll & #7 in the Sports Network Poll]], third place finishers at 6-2 [behind James Madison and Villanova - lost to both in regular season] in the Colonial Athletic Association [CAA] 'Southern' Division who are now FCS [I-AA] football champs after beating the Montana Grizzlies, 24-7, the Big Sky Conference runnerup [technically co-champs - but lost to co-champ Weber State in regular season - beat Weber State in the FCS playoff - week 3].

Richmond beat Texas State, defending three-peat champ Appalachian State [#2 seed], Northern Iowa [#3 seed] before beating Montana [#4 seed] tonight.

#1 seed James Madison [and CAA Champ] lost to Montana last week. Villanova [#2 in CAA] had lost to James Madison the week before.

Richmond finishes the season at 13-3 [other loss was to I-A Virginia 16-0 of the ACC]. They finished with a nine game win streak after starting 4-3.
 
371KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 2011382010
      Sat, Dec 20, 2008, 11:41 		Hilarious. Auburn's Paul Rhoads, last year's DC, will replace new Auburn HC Gene Chizik at Iowa State..

And congrats, indeed, to Richmond! I was actually hoping for an all-Virginia final with JMU. Richmond actually had a GREAT chance of knocking off U.Va. when they played. That 16-0 loss was a BIG scare for U.Va.
 
372steve houpt
      ID: 451161019
      Sat, Dec 20, 2008, 12:04 		KKB - as you know, JMU lost to Montana because they lost their outstanding 'rushing' QB Rodney Landers [a Walter Payton finalist] and they lost three fumbles [two on KO returns - all part of the game - you fumble and lose it, probably lose the game]. Montana's average five TD drives was 47 yards. JMU never punted in the game and outgained Montana 419 to 289.

Did not surprise me that Richmond beat them. They did not turn the ball over once.

Richmond was like the Texas Tech of the CAA. But THEY end up champs after finishing 3rd in CAA South Division. CAA also had New Hampshire and Maine in the FCS Tournament. Tough conference.

Villanova's only FCS losses this year were twice to JMU [by 4 points each game].
 
373C1-NRB
      ID: 31050820
      Sat, Dec 20, 2008, 13:10 		Congrats to the un-seeded Richmond Spiders [but ranked #6 in the FCS Coaches Poll & #7 in the Sports Network Poll]], third place finishers at 6-2 [behind James Madison and Villanova - lost to both in regular season] in the Colonial Athletic Association [CAA] 'Southern' Division who are now FCS [I-AA] football champs after beating the Montana Grizzlies, 24-7, the Big Sky Conference runnerup [technically co-champs - but lost to co-champ Weber State in regular season - beat Weber State in the FCS playoff - week 3].

Richmond beat Texas State, defending three-peat champ Appalachian State [#2 seed], Northern Iowa [#3 seed] before beating Montana [#4 seed] tonight.

#1 seed James Madison [and CAA Champ] lost to Montana last week. Villanova [#2 in CAA] had lost to James Madison the week before.

Richmond finishes the season at 13-3 [other loss was to I-A Virginia 16-0 of the ACC]. They finished with a nine game win streak after starting 4-3.

What a bunch of bunk. I scoff at the F"C"S and their mythical champion. When will they get with the times and crown a champion the right way? Everyone knows you can't have a playoff in college football to determine a champion. This is a sham championship and I refuse to recognize it.

The only true and accurate way to determine and name a national champion is to have James Madison face Appalacian State after the first of the year when they've both had ample time to prepare.

Congratulations, Richmond. You've made a mockery of college football. I hope you and the rest of your D-AA buddies are happy.
 
375Seattle Zen
      ID: 5411323112
      Wed, Dec 31, 2008, 17:27 		Awfully quiet from the Big 12 supporters. I could have sworn I just saw Oregon from the lowly PAC-10 beat one of your Fab Four, one of your "stud" teams you (well, I did it, too) trot out in arguments for Big 12 supremacy.

Just sayin'...
 
376Seattle Zen
      ID: 5411323112
      Wed, Dec 31, 2008, 17:28 		If you took the 'under' in today's Sun Bowl, you may now begin to gloat, I think you're safe.
 
377steve houpt
      ID: 451161019
      Wed, Dec 31, 2008, 22:49 		SZ - I would not get too excited over Oregon [2nd ranked team in the PAC 10 behind USC, 17th in BCS] beating OKL State [only the 4th ranked team in the Big 12 behind OKL, TEX, TTU, 13th in BCS].

The PAC 10 was pretty lowly after USC, OSE, OSU & CAL.

Just like the Big 12 was 'lowly' after OKL, TEX, TTU, OSU, MO, NEB & KAN.

==========

I do take back any of the good I said about the ACC.

BC upset by Vandy
UNC upset by West VA
Miami lost to CAL
....... and GA Tech upset and destroyed by LSU [where was Jordan Jefferson [I know, a true freshman from Destrehan, led HS to Class 5A State Championship in 2007 - but where was he all year - in the last 3 weeks LSU turned him into the real deal]

Jordan Jefferson
 
378KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 186321620
      Thu, Jan 01, 2009, 01:12 		ACC showing their true colors. They got WAY overrated this year.
 
379Seattle Zen
      ID: 43028112
      Thu, Jan 01, 2009, 18:55 		I love "the Granddaddy of them All" and this year USC is whippin' up on Penn State.

Is it just me getting old, or am I the only who cannot STAND the annoying, insipid ticker along the bottom?! This is the ONLY game in the world right now. There is no reason to sully the image of this great game with crap that is just not news. I do not want to hear Tomas Jones' opinion about Brett Favre. Save it for Entertainment Tonight. I am seriously disappointed that ABC has done this.
 
380steve houpt
      ID: 451161019
      Thu, Jan 01, 2009, 22:26 		SZ - that [the bottom] and some games the text msg's running across the top with some really idiotic comments. YES, bugs me [the top more than the bottom - tend to look up there for the time left, etc. It may be an old thing [along with others I mention below that bug me.

The 'constant' hype of some type of playoff - Like USC just became 'the team'? 'We' need to see them play the winner of OKL-FLA. I put it on mute for a while. Last I checked Texas & Alabama were still ranked ahead of USC if there even was a one plus playoff.

And while I'm at it - the other thing [it may be an old thing AND a male chauvinist thing] - what is with all the stories the female reporters have to tell from the sidelines during the game? Watch Ophrah for those stories - or tell them from the booth. What are those three guys up there for if they can't pass those boring tidbits on - maybe they don't want to?

And they should pass a law against asking coaches stupid questions on the way to the locker room at half time. Missed it, but did they ask anybody from Penn State a question going to half with Paterno up stairs?
 
381Razor
      ID: 181051618
      Thu, Jan 01, 2009, 22:56 		ACC showing their true colors. They got WAY overrated this year.

How is the ACC overrated when no one gave them any credit?

The ACC's bowl record sucks this year, but the conference is better than it appears:

- BC was playing its second string QB against a Vandy team (who has already lost to Duke and Wake) playing in its hometown. They were a much better team with Crane.

- NC State looked like they were going to win going away but Russell Wilson, the best QB in the ACC, went down with an injury during the 2nd quarter.

- Miami lost to a Cal team playing in its home town.

- UNC was not favored against WVU and was very narrowly beaten.

- Clemson just got straight up beaten, but they should have never been in that game in the first place. The Gator Bowl took Clemson over FSU because they wanted to fill more hotel rooms for the city. If FSU is in that game like they were supposed to be and Clemson plays Wisconsin in the Champs Sports Bowl, then perhaps the ACC goes 2-0 in those two games. As it was, FSU clearly overmatched the opponent it drew after being bumped down to a lesser bowl.

- The only really huge disappointment was GaTech who looked absolutely awful against LSU. Puzzling that they can go into Athens and beat Georgia and then turn around and get crushed in Atlanta to an inferior LSU team. GT cannot play from behind, which is exactly what LSU made them do and it got ugly because they have a horrible passing attack.

When it's all said and done, the SEC and ACC split the 12 games they played against each other this year. The SEC is definitely better at the top, but the ACC was much deeper. A few bad crummy performances and a couple of bad breaks during the bowl games should not ruin any otherwise solid year for the ACC. The conference that really surprised me was the Pac-10. They were awful OOC this year up until the bowl season.
 
382Seattle Zen
      ID: 43028112
      Thu, Jan 01, 2009, 23:06 		Sorry, Razor, it was not a solid year for the ACC no matter how hard you try to spin it.

The PAC-10 went 5-0 and thus should end up ranked third behind the Big-12 and the SEC, whose order is yet to be determined.

Oh, I agree with Musburger and Herb, USC should play the OK-FLA winner regardless of what Alabama does, unless Texas waxes Ohio State 63-0. USC finished very strong.
 
383Razor
      ID: 181051618
      Thu, Jan 01, 2009, 23:35 		Pac-10 went 2-6 against the MWC on the year. It's debatable which conference is better between the Pac-10 and ACC. There is no USC in the ACC, but there are no Washington or Washington State's either. At the end of the day, the ACC was just filled with solid to pretty good teams, but no really good or great teams.
 
384steve houpt
      ID: 451161019
      Fri, Jan 02, 2009, 01:20 		SZ - You agree with Musberger - another reason for no playoff 'as determined' by the networks [and they telecasts appear to have a great influence on the way the voting polls vote - MHO].

The other 5 BCS conferences and IND's [ND] went 11-11 against the PAC EIGHT [leaving WASH and WSU out - they went 5-0 against them]

Conference Comparison [easy to read and copy]

ACC [1-1]
1. MARYLAND 35 ___ CALIFORNIA 27
1. VIRGINIA 7 ___ SOUTHERN CAL 52


MWC [5-1]
1. UNLV 23 ___ ARIZONA ST 20
2. BRIGHAM YOUNG 59 ___ UCLA 0
3. NEW MEXICO 36 ___ ARIZONA 28
4. TCU 31 ___ STANFORD 14
5. UTAH 31 ___ OREGON ST 28
1. COLORADO ST 7 ___ CALIFORNIA 42


[SEC [1-1]
1. GEORGIA 27 ___ ARIZONA ST 10
1. TENNESSEE 24 ___ UCLA 27


Big 10 [1-3]
1. PENN STATE 45 ___ OREGON ST 14
1. MICHIGAN ST 31 ___ CALIFORNIA 38
2. PURDUE 26 ___ OREGON 32
3. OHIO STATE 3 ___ SOUTHERN CAL 35


WAC [2-4]
1. BOISE ST 37 ___ OREGON 32
2. FRESNO ST 36 ___ UCLA 31
1. IDAHO 0 ___ ARIZONA 70
2. UTAH ST 24 ___ OREGON 66
3. HAWAI`I 7 ___ OREGON ST 45
4. SAN JOSE ST 10 ___ STANFORD 23


IND [1-1]
1. NOTRE DAME 3 ___ SOUTHERN CAL 38
1. NOTRE DAME 28 ___ STANFORD 21


========

Here is the average Standard Deviation of the 6 BCS computer rankings, conference rankings.

Ranking [x,x,x,x,x,x] in order is Billingsley, Sagarin, Wolfe, Massey, Anderson & Hester, Colley]. If you did all of this as the PAC 8, instead of the PAC 10 and counted WASH & WSU as just two Sun Belt non conference games, PAC 10 would jump. But, they are in the PAC 10.

1__Big 12 __ 1.29 __ [1,2,1,2,2,1]
2__ACC __ 1.03 __ [5,1,3,1,1,2]
3__SEC __ 0.87 __ [2,3,4,3,4,3]
4__Big East __ 0.64 __ [7,5,1,4,3,4]
5__Big 10 __ 0.57 __ [3,4,5,6,5,5]
6__MWC __ 0.30 __ [6,7,6,5,7,6]
7__PAC 10 __ 0.08 __ [4,6,7,7,6,7]
8__WAC __ (0.69) __ [8,8,8,8,8,8]
9__MAC __ (1.12)
10__C-USA __ (1.22)
11__Sun Belt __ (1.74)


==========

USC is one of the top teams in the country this year. No doubt about it. Something I'm working on [have to wait for bowl games to end] is a last 6 year run of each teams rankings and records, and USC leaves the rest of the country in the dust. I use STD DEV of each year's rating to account for superior seasons [i.e. USC #2 in 2005 is better than LSU #1 in 2003 or 2007] In fact for the last 5 years, I have USC's #2 finish in 2005 as the 3 rd best season in last 5 years].

Going into the Bowls [last 6 years].

1_So Cal __[70-7] __ [27.06 point rating]
2_Texas ___[65-11] __ [21.92]
3_Oklahoma_ [63-14] __ [21.61]
4_Ohio St __[62-13] __ [19.19]
5_LSU ______[63-15] __ [18.83]
6_Florida___[58-19] __ [17.85]
 
385KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 186321620
      Fri, Jan 02, 2009, 08:27 		USC showed it's time for a real playoff. We already have "mini-playoffs" in the form of Conference Championships. That whole the-regular-season-won't-matter argument already exists. Didn't Alabama go undefeated in the regular season? Are they playing for the National Championship?

Time to stop faking it and make it real.
 
386Toral
      ID: 575542418
      Fri, Jan 02, 2009, 18:09 		The Ole Miss band is still playing "Dixie"? Would have thought something would have been done about that by now....

Reminds me of a few decades ago when I was watching a bit of game involving a Mississippi team (probably Ole Miss) with someone not a big sports fan and the camera found in the crowd a bunch of black fans enthusiastically waving the Stars and Bars. "Did I just see what I thought I saw?", he said.

I remember back in the late 90s the Administration of a Mississippi school wanted to stop the Stars and Bars being waved at football games. They feared a freedom-of-speech issue (so it may have been a state school; they may have actually banned the flag and them been challenged in court) so they banned, not flags, but the sticks people used to wave them. Health and safety issue, you see -- might poke out an eye or be used as a weapon
 
387steve houpt
      ID: 451161019
      Fri, Jan 02, 2009, 18:40 		KKB - for who and for what. Real champ? Who cares and why? Does the sports world end if you don't know who the national champ is? The bowls are great. Screw ruining the Holiday Bowl system for the the cities that host them and the New Years Day / weekend anymore than they already have [by stretching the BCS bowls out over three days].

What would a playoff really prove - that USC can lose games when not playing at home [or the Rose Bowl]? USC winning the Rise Bowl proved nothing that they can beat the Big 10 in California very regularly.

Alabama chooses to play in a confernce that has a conference championship [last I checked those games are part of the regular season before the bowl games - so Alabama did not go undefeated - lost to Florida - so give up on the regular season does not matter - ask USC - they had a national championship game wrapped up except for that "regular season" loss to ORE ST - I bet USC thinks the regular season matters - they lost and were at the will of the voters - oh well - same with Texas - lost to Texas Tech late and were at the will of those evil voting polls].

And realistically, you can WANT all you want, it's not going to happen any time in the near future - the school presidents like the bowl money, like the 12 game schedule [cut which 80,000 gate to make room for a playoff], the CONF championship game, the bowl money.

This article in the LA Times says it best.

Obama will have North and South Korea over for tea before he gets a playoff in college football - maybe he shold try and mandate his IVY League participate in the FCS one before he tackles the FBS.

BCS has Strong Lobby

Take out a quill -- the kind Thomas Jefferson used to pen the Declaration of Independence -- and declare this:

President-elect Barack Obama will solve the Middle East crisis before he solves the Bowl Championship Series.

[cont] ………. Theodore Roosevelt, who walked softly but had more weight to throw around than Obama, was disturbed at the brutal violence that had overtaken college football.

In 1905, 18 football deaths and 149 serious injuries prompted Roosevelt to convene representatives from Harvard, Yale and Princeton to the White House. This would lead, in 1906, to the formation of the National Collegiate Athletic Assn., which would reform the sport and later reap billions from CBS for its NCAA basketball tournament.

Unlike Teddy R., though, Obama doesn't have a dog in the BCS hunt.

The troubling part about the "60 Minutes" interview was how much Obama knew about world matters and how little he knew about college politics.

Obama sounded like the guy at the corner bar who talked a good game but didn't have all his facts.

Where were his advisors?

Obama should have called down to Tallahassee and consulted with his Chief Osceola of Staff.

With a Google search, Obama could have learned the playoff debate was decided last spring outside Fort Lauderdale.

With most university presidents adamantly opposing a playoff, BCS commissioners met to consider a modest proposal by SEC Commissioner Mike Slive, whose Auburn team in 2004 went undefeated but was left out of the national title game.

Forget about an eight-team playoff, Slive was talking about only a skirt alteration.

Slive's "Plus One" model involved seeding the top four teams in the BCS standings and adding "one" extra game after the season.

Even that idea was shot down like skeet out of sky.

The news out of South Florida could not have been any more definitive.

The commissioners announced the BCS, a controversial rankings system to determine the national title-game participants, would remain in place through the games of 2014.

[cont] ……………… BCS commissioners, knowing they have more power than the president-elect on this issue, got a kick out of Obama's "60 Minutes" interview.

The Pacific 10 and Big Ten conferences, which have been partnered with the Rose Bowl since 1947, have been staunchly opposed to any kind of playoff movement that would further diminish a game that was first played four years before the NCAA was founded.

"It is good to learn that President-elect Obama is an interested fan of college football and its postseason," Pac-10 Commissioner Tom Hansen said. "A strong majority of the Football Bowl Subdivision members does not support creation of a FBS playoff, preferring the bowl system and the BCS, and we would welcome an opportunity to explain the reasons for our position at his convenience."

Obama, obviously, is a bright man.

He graduated from Columbia, a school from a conference, the Ivy League, that does not permit its football champion to participate in the I-AA playoffs.

"I have no idea how much he doesn't know about the postseason," Hansen said. "Would he insist on the Ivy League having an AQ [automatic qualifier]?"

Karl Benson, commissioner of the Western Athletic Conference, said Obama is like a lot of fans who rail against the BCS on a weekly basis.

"He doesn't understand all the nuances of the system that we have," Benson said.

Obama doesn't understand that school presidents didn't want a playoff last week and don't want one next week.

He doesn't understand that college football isn't interested in compromising the best regular season in sports with a postseason that could jeopardize a delicate bowl construct.

Obama suggested an eight-team playoff could work if the regular season were "trimmed back."

And what non-revenue sport would he like cut because of revenue lost from home football games played in a stadium that seats 80,000?

Big 12 Commissioner Dan Beebe: "The decision makers for postseason college football have to consider much more than the entertainment aspect of the sport, and in weighing all the factors carefully and repeatedly, we have concluded that the format we currently enjoy is best."

The SEC's Slive even had some fun with Obama.

"While I'm against a formal playoff, I would enjoy the opportunity to speak with him at any time about the positives of Plus One," Slive said.

Benson doubted there was anything Obama could do to force change.

"But it makes for good blogs, and good talk shows," Benson said, "and my guess is that he'll probably get an invitation to the BCS championship game."

Teddy Roosevelt won a Nobel Prize for helping to negotiate a treaty between Russia and Japan.

President Obama deserves one if he can bring peace to the college landscape.

My guess is he'll sooner have North and South Korea over for tea.



 
388steve houpt
      ID: 451161019
      Fri, Jan 02, 2009, 18:57 		Here's another article why it won't happen [before 2018]. - these are my arguments from posts long gone from 5-10 years ago. Maybe I'm old. Maybe when all of the old folks are gone you'll get your playoff. Til then ........

Multiple factors make posteason changes by 2018 unlikely, By Mark Schlabach
ESPN.com, MAY 2008

Want to know what the BCS is really going to look like in 2018? (Warning: If you're a college football fan clamoring for a playoff, close your eyes.)


It's going to look exactly the same as it does today. [cont] ………………………… "If it takes something of a catastrophic nature to change it, I hope we don't change it," said ACC commissioner John Swofford, the reigning BCS chairman.


Even a catastrophic event might not be enough to sway the Big Ten and Pac-10, which are wholly opposed to any sort of playoff that would diminish their long-standing relationship with the Rose Bowl.


"I really don't see a playoff in the near future," Wisconsin athletic director Barry Alvarez said. "I just don't see it. You'd have to see somebody come up with a very strong argument and have a number of people support it. It would have to be the best thing for college football and I'm not convinced it is. Obviously, most people aren't convinced it is. Our league feels strongly in the bowl system. We feel strongly in what we have, rather than a playoff system. I think [the future] will be very similar to what you see today."


Texas athletic director DeLoss Dodds once served on an NCAA committee that studied the idea of a Division I-A playoff. Dodds was so convinced of its benefits he hoped to make a playoff the shining achievement of his long career in intercollegiate athletics. Now, as Dodds' 27th year as Texas' athletic director ends, he believes a playoff might never happen.


"I've given up on it," Dodds said. "I just don't see it. I don't see the Pac-10, Big Ten and the Rose Bowl ever giving up what they have. You can't do a plus-one model without the seeding of the semifinals and they won't go for that. I've given up. [cont] ………………….. "I think last year probably crystallized it for us," Big East commissioner Mike Tranghese said. "I think if there had been a four-team playoff last year, the yelling and screaming from Georgia and Southern California would have been so outrageous that the pressure to go from four to six to eight would have just been a matter of time. Then we would have gone to 12 and 16. I've seen what's happened in Division I-AA. It started as four and went to eight and then 16. Now they want to go to 20. It's just not where we want to go. I know it's what the public wants, but as I sit here and my people sit here, we don't think it's in the best interest of college football.

[cont] ………. SEC commissioner Mike Slive, the architect of the proposed plus-one model, said his proposal wouldn't have eliminated controversy because some teams outside the top four might have felt they deserved to be included.


"I'm on the NCAA basketball committee and there's controversy at Nos. 66, 67, 68, 69 and 70," Slive said. "That's not going to end no matter what you do."


College football purists also insist a playoff would diminish the importance of bowl games, one of the sport's greatest traditions. While the current BCS bowl games would likely have to be incorporated into any playoff format, Tranghese isn't sure it would stay that way for long.


"If we went tomorrow to a full-blown playoff, what makes anybody think the bowls are going to be preserved?" Tranghese said. "If the Big East or the Big Ten are going to engage in a full-blown playoff, then why the heck am I going to play everybody in their home area? If I'm a No. 1 or No. 2 seed, then come to New York and play in 20-degree weather. You and I know none of that's going to fly."

[cont] …………. But Alvarez [WISC - AD] said eliminating the bowl experience, in which players are wined and dined in the host city for several days, is one of the biggest pitfalls of a potential playoff. Alvarez, who led the Badgers to back-to-back Rose Bowl victories in 1999 and 2000, said he cherished the bowl experience as a player at Nebraska and as a coach.


"Everybody talks about having a true playoff, but they forget about the tradition of the bowls," Alvarez said. "It's still about the kids and the experiences the kids have. I made the decision to go to Nebraska because I wanted to play in big bowl games and to play in the Orange Bowl and the Sugar Bowl. I wanted to have experiences where you normally wouldn't be treated like that. It doesn't have to be the Orange or Sugar bowls. It could be the bowl game in Boise or any bowl because if you're treated special it's an experience you're never going to forget. If you go to a playoff system, you throw that out the window."




 
389Pancho Villa
      ID: 51546319
      Fri, Jan 02, 2009, 20:30 		OK, I know the game just started, but Utah looks FREAKIN AWESOME so far!!!
 
390KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 186321620
      Fri, Jan 02, 2009, 22:21 		If the SEC Championship is part of the "regular season," then why aren't the teams announced before the season begins? After all, every other regular season game has the teams announced ahead of time.

Nope, every conference championship is a mini-playoff between the best two teams in the conference; the two teams with the best conference regular season record in their divisions.

And you know it's a playoff because otherwise they'd just crown a champion like the Big Ten... and the BCS.

And, honestly, all the articles can (and have) been written about why NOT to have a playoff, but it's just going to take more teams getting screwed out of a chance of playing for bigger money to make that change. When bigger money is involved, everybody always seems to find a way to make things happen.
 
391DWetzel
      ID: 33337117
      Fri, Jan 02, 2009, 22:32 		Boy, that Utah "upsetting" Michigan in the first post of this thread looks silly now! ;)
 
392Pancho Villa
      ID: 51546319
      Fri, Jan 02, 2009, 23:47 		And Sakoda hits the field goal for the clincher - the over - barely. I had 46, the other two books had it at 47 in Wendover.

Utah - faster
more physical
better skill positions
better tackling
better game plan

Likely nothing will change. There will be no clamor for a guaranteed BCS slot for the Mountain West Conference champion outside of Salt Lake City.

Utah could go 11-1 next year and be banished to the Las Vegas or Poinsettia Bowl, while an 8-4 Boston College will be the recipient of a $17 million payout at a BCS Bowl.

What a sham.
 
393Seattle Zen
      ID: 30022212
      Fri, Jan 02, 2009, 23:58 		Congrats, Utah, that was impressive.
 
394TB
      ID: 9116716
      Sat, Jan 03, 2009, 03:51 		Utah played a great game and really dominated on both sides of the line. I was a little worried that they were going to get too conservative in the 2nd half, but they turned it back on again. Congrats to them and their fans.
 
395barilko6
      ID: 58133021
      Sat, Jan 03, 2009, 10:47 		Nice payday for me too, as I had Utah on the ML!
 
396Slizz
      ID: 19049312
      Sat, Jan 03, 2009, 14:11 		SZ - Big 12's "Big 5" is 1-2...most likely going to be 1-4! Outside of Oklahoma (TCU), all of them played crappy non-conference schedules with defenses softer than a down pillow.Mizzou had to survive the football powerhouse in Northwestern whereas Texas Tech probably never saw a defense that fast and stout in Ole Miss.

Won't surprise me one bit to see Colt McCoy and his "Simple Jack" offense (hell...it made vince young look like peyton manning) get shut down by the Buckeyes and OU get blown away by UF.

You know whats funny...the MWC had a solid record (don't know it off the top of my head) vs BCS conference teams (mainly the Pac-10) this season, and is 2-0 in BCS games. If there is one "non-power" conference that would deserve an automatic, it would be that one.

Its funny b/c it is a better "football" conference than the Big East (doesn't take much for that though) and their top programs (Utah, TCU, & BYU) are better than the ACC's (Boston College? Virginia Tech? Clemson?).

I can't help but think if the Mountain West was to add Boise State & maybe Fresno to its conference that it would get some serious consideration for a BCS Automatic.

Pancho - I think you'd also hear clamoring out of Provo and Fort-Worth as well.

 
397Seattle Zen
      ID: 26042311
      Sat, Jan 03, 2009, 14:26 		Completely agree with the thought of the MWC adding Boise State. To me, that's a no brainer.

I'd like to see the MWC become a "BCS Conference" under this plan: Either the MWC or the Big East champion gets an "automatic" BCS bowl berth. In essence, the MWC and Big East become a second tier of BCS conferences from which one conference, not both, are in for sure. Obviously, there will be years when both conferences provide a worthy team.

This argument can be named: "No More Cincinnati's"
 
398art's in the hall
      ID: 13031313
      Sat, Jan 03, 2009, 14:49 		glad to see my utes are getting some respect on the boards. I am still on cloud 9. I was just hoping our defense could make it a game. I didn't think the ofence would be able to move the ball at will against bama. This year the MWC was studdly, I will be the first to admit that they are not always this good. They are typically on par with the Big East though. This year though the conference was better than the PAC-10, Big East and the ACC. TCU and BYU both looked great at times during the season. yes, I know BYU got beat by Zona. BYU has a recent history of not showing up in Bowl games. They have played in the Vegas bowl the last 3 years and I still think they were thinking about the Utah game. I also saw the Hawaii team play last year. They played a bunch of patsies, but what do you expect when they played UGA. Hawaii travled about 4000 miles and it was a home game for UGA. I am still amazed about the Utes victory. For the entire state of Alabama you have two schools to rout for and they had what a 3-4 hour drive to get to the sugar bowl. I am sure most of the stands were filled roll tided fans. The Utes held bama to 31 rushing yards. the won on both sides of the bowl. the punched bama in the mouth and didn't stop. Great game. Utah is not always going to have seasons like this, but I will take two BCS victory's in 5 years. Only a few other schools can claim this. Go UTES
 
399KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 186321620
      Sat, Jan 03, 2009, 20:04 		Boy, it's a good thing the regular season "playoffs" ensured Utah, at 13-0, had a chance of winning the national championship. Especially after beating #4 Alabama.
 
400Seattle Zen
      ID: 26042311
      Sun, Jan 04, 2009, 01:45 		What Utah's regular season got them was a chance to shine against one of the best teams in the country. Maybe you and all y'all Auburn fans think a 13-0 season is something to remain bitter about for a decade because it did not end with a National Championship, but from the sound of these Utes, they are pretty stoked.

You've become quite the hater in this thread, KKB. This is the fate for Auburn fans for some time, I'm afraid.
 
401KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 186321620
      Sun, Jan 04, 2009, 10:14 		SZ, actually, the Utah coach said after the game that he's going to vote his team #1. So, I don't think he's just happy to be there.

I'm sure they're all pretty stoked immediately after the game for going 13-0, but wait until a team with a loss wins the "national championship" and ask them how they feel. I'm sure they'll all be happy for their record, but I'd bet that each and every one of them will feel like they deserved a shot.

And I'm actually not bitter about 2004 (not quite a decade). I've thought this whole BCS crap was crap from the beginning; well before 2004. It's been a big facade (and, some would say, a fraud) since it was instituted. 2004 was just yet another example of how the BCS doesn't work. There were examples before then and there will be examples after, like this year.

In fact, I probably accept 2004 more than most Auburn fans BECAUSE I didn't like the BCS from the start. When you understand the system is just a big fake championship, it's MUCH easier to accept when your team doesn't win it.

Honestly, I'd be fine if they stopped calling it a national championship. Just call it something more like what it is, like the USAToday/ESPN Poll Award or something.
 
402art's in the hall
      ID: 16021510
      Mon, Jan 05, 2009, 11:32 		still on cloud 9 after the win. I would love to see another split national championship, just to piss of the BCS peeps. Vote USC or Utah or TX #1. All of the non-BSC conferences should have their coaches vote for Utah as #1. It is still the haves and have nots. Glad to see their are fans of the SEC that know the BCS is a bunch of crap and just want to give all of the money to the good old boys.
I would love to hear some national perspective about the Utah coach- Kyle Whittingham. Why isn't he getting more love. Urban Meyer got all sorts of offers after the Utes made it to the Fiesta Bowl. Why no national love for Kyle. He is just not a Mountain West guy. His dad played for the saints and was the def Coordinator for the Raiders back in the day. Kyle played in the NFL for a short time, even during the strike years. He has coached for a long time. Why no love for him?
 
403Nerfherders
      ID: 347242717
      Mon, Jan 05, 2009, 13:20 		It is probably my biggest peeve with major college football is that everyone in the same division is not on equal footing. I am not talking about FBS vs. FCS. Within FBS there are teams, including Utah, that even if they go undefeated can never win a national championship. There is no other sport (or division of the sport) in this country where that can happen. Not even college basketball. They either have to make EVERYONE in FBS equal, or create another one-off from FBS which includes the MAC, CUSA, MWC, WAC, and SB conferences.

To me, being a fan of a MAC team would be even worse than being a fan of an FCS team. At least they can win a national championship. The MAC team gets to play in the Motor City Bowl against the 7th best Big Ten team. Whoopdee-freakin-doo.
 
404Slizz
      ID: 4710371415
      Mon, Jan 05, 2009, 16:33 		Art - Only thing I can think of is that Urban rebuilt Bowling Green, than went to Utah and officially "crashed" the BCS and had a bunch of buzz even before their first BCS win.

Don't get me wrong, he'll be a big name soon...especially if they are able to sustain this success.

Nerf - Too much $$$ at stake for the networks and conferences to get a playoff in order. Sure the public wants to see it, but we are stuck with this until at 2018 at least.

Either way, don't expect this to change anytime soon.

All I can hope for is that the MWC gets some more love with a BCS automatic...or what SZ said..."NO MORE CINCYS"

 
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.