My beloved Florida State Seminoles beat the Miami Hurricanes the other night for the second straight year and I'm still reveling in the joy of it. I know there are more important things in life than college football, but during this time of year it's hard to think of one.
My free weekend time, that I would normally spend reading or writing, is instead spent in front ESPN or at a game, and my yard chores go to seed. I know people who've planned weddings (why would anyone get married during football season?), surgeries, and even births around the season. Yes births. As my friend explained, they planned the pregnancy so that she wouldn't miss any home games. Is there anybody else out there who lives for this glorious time of year? How's your team doing?
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
I LOVE football season. I have a friend in DC and we talk for hours during football season about the games. My home team is the BYU Cougars, and I love em. But Ill watch just about any game and then root for the underdog. There are only 2 teams I cannot stand. USC, and Idaho (I just can't handle the blue turf, and orange numbering).
I lose my voice every game I go to from yelling so much. If its near freezing and its a good game I will brave the terrible weather and worse traffic to go to the game Posted by Mig (Member # 9284) on :
I reserve all my hate for the Gators and Canes, but there is nothing more annoying than a Notre Dame fan. Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Rutgers beat UNC this Saturday behind a 201 yd, 31 carry, 3 TD performance of sophomore running back Ray Rice. I was quite pleased. Next up, Illinois for the home opener!
We're hoping to go to a bowl for the second year, and we might just have a squad that can do it.
Posted by Dr Strangelove (Member # 8331) on :
Do you live near the university Mig? I live a 2 minute walk from the stadium . I can't wait till home games. Even if I don't go I'll be able to hear the chant while I study .
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
quote:There are only 2 teams I cannot stand. USC, and Idaho (I just can't handle the blue turf, and orange numbering).
The blue turf is at Boise State. Idaho are the vandals, and if I recall correctly their colors are black and gold/yellow. Or maybe brown and gold/yellow.
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
I can't tell you how much I miss College Football.
Even though USC (not the gamecocks, those other ones) beat badly last weekend, I would have loved to have been there.. with 76,000 other Hog fans... cheering and screaming.
I used to live in walking distance to the stadium *sigh*...
Pix
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
quote:there is nothing more annoying than a Notre Dame fan.
Amen.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by El JT de Spang:
quote:There are only 2 teams I cannot stand. USC, and Idaho (I just can't handle the blue turf, and orange numbering).
The blue turf is at Boise State. Idaho are the vandals, and if I recall correctly their colors are black and gold/yellow. Or maybe brown and gold/yellow.
oh I know its Boise State, I was simply stating their school is located in Idaho, I suppose when it comes to college sports you REALLY should specify. WHOOPS!
Posted by Jay (Member # 5786) on :
As a Gamecock, we are off to another mediocre season. At least it's football season agian. Now there is finally something on TV worth watching.
Posted by Mig (Member # 9284) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dr Strangelove: Do you live near the university Mig? I live a 2 minute walk from the stadium . I can't wait till home games. Even if I don't go I'll be able to hear the chant while I study .
I live in town and have season tix.
Posted by Carrie (Member # 394) on :
When you say "Wisconsin" ...
You've said it all.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Just have to say that Rutgers is ranked for the first time in 30 years, coming in at #23.
Posted by kojabu (Member # 8042) on :
I wish I could watch football. Not having cable (even basic cable) sucks sometimes.
Posted by Dr Strangelove (Member # 8331) on :
Anyone watch that Notre Dame game last night? I don't have an opinion on either of the teams, but it was a gooood game. What about that crazy interception? Off the recievers hands, then off the defenders leg, then onto the recievers back, where it was retrieved by another defender ... or something like that.
And in FSU news, 55-7 . Good thing too. If we'd lost that game or even come close to losing that game, my faith my have been lost.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
The Notre Dame game was insane. I turned it off in the 3rd quarter, read about the comeback, then saw the 4th quarter this morning on game of the week. Just amazing.
Posted by SoaPiNuReYe (Member # 9144) on :
VT 4-0 BABY!~!~!~!~!~!
Posted by B34N (Member # 9597) on :
quote:Originally posted by FlyingCow: The Notre Dame game was insane. I turned it off in the 3rd quarter, read about the comeback, then saw the 4th quarter this morning on game of the week. Just amazing.
I'll second that one! It was almost as good as last years rose bowl, and probably better if your not a Texas fan in the least bit. ND just kept scoring and stoping State. One of the best come backs I've ever seen on TV, since I wasn't around during the Heidi game.
Posted by Brian J. Hill (Member # 5346) on :
The Notre Dame game was freakin' awesome. I didn't turn it on till the 3rd quarter when they were down by 17. I was at my brothers house, and since his roommate was a light sleeper we both had to watch the game in almost total silence. From someone who jumps up and yells quite often when exciting plays happen, it was almost unbearably funny to try to stay completely silent.
It's a shame that Notre Dame won't get as much credit for this win since they were ranked so much higher than Michigan State. It really was a great comeback.
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
I always wondered how Notre Dame got on TV every week when I've never met one of their fans. Brian are you actually a fan cuz that would make 1...
Posted by Mig (Member # 9284) on :
I missed most of the ND game because I was watching the NCState game in which BC choked. I also gave up on the game at the halp because the Irish looked like toast. The NCstate win gives me hope that NCState can beat Clemson and give my Noles the division and a shot at the ACC championship game. Assuming, big assumption here, that we can beat NCState in two weeks. Boy, do I miss the days when every ACC v. FSU game was a foregone conclusion and we only needed to worry about the Canes and Gators.
Posted by Mig (Member # 9284) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Pixiest: I always wondered how Notre Dame got on TV every week when I've never met one of their fans. Brian are you actually a fan cuz that would make 1...
Never met a ND fan? Wow, talk about being blessed! Posted by Brian J. Hill (Member # 5346) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Pixiest: I always wondered how Notre Dame got on TV every week when I've never met one of their fans. Brian are you actually a fan cuz that would make 1...
No. If I was a ND fan, don't you think I would have turned the game on before the middle of the 3rd quarter? I don't exactly hate them, though, and I was rooting for them against MSU because I love to see come from behind victories. I did feel really sorry for the Spartans QB who threw two key interceptions at the end of the game.
As for the mess the ACC's in, at least VT is still 4-0 and has a great shot for the ACC championship. Don't think they have the strength of schedule to make it to the national championship, unless a lot of top 10 teams lose.
Posted by beatnix19 (Member # 5836) on :
How can there be a discussion about college football and there still be no mention of the number team in the land? While OHIO STATE didn't have the greatest day on saturday they still came out with a good win and Troy Smith proved he can make it happen when it counts with one of the most spectacular scramble to touchdown passes seen this year.
And what about that defense? While I miss Hawk, Carpenter, and Shlegel , I am tremendously thrilled with the play of this young group. They have nine takeaways, three short of '05's total, haven't allowed a rushing TD and have given up just 32 points. And who else wants to catch a case of Laurinaitis? Number 33 has me breaking out in chills and causing bouts of uncontrollable screaming. 36 total tackles, 2.5 for loss, 1 sack, 3 interceptions, and 2 forced fumbles. And to top it all off he is only a sophamore.
We've got a huge game this weekend at night against the Iowa Hawkeyes. I'm not so gung-ho to think this will be a cake walk. It is very likely this could be the upset game that cruches the spirit of buckeye nation but I think in the end, the Bucks will be too much and we'll walk out of there with a close win. And a statement game for Mr. Smith, the soon to be Heisman Trophy winner.
Posted by BandoCommando (Member # 7746) on :
Go Ducks! Currently no. 12 after a controversial but exciting comeback victory against Oklahoma! Woohoo!
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mig:
quote:Originally posted by The Pixiest: I always wondered how Notre Dame got on TV every week when I've never met one of their fans. Brian are you actually a fan cuz that would make 1...
Never met a ND fan? Wow, talk about being blessed!
This man speaks the truth!
Also gratz to BYU for crushing USU, it was immense slaughter.
Problem with those wins is they dont mean much, and if you lose you just want to commit seppuku
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
"Controversial" is a nice way of putting it.
I'd just like to say I wouldn't want to have any such "controversy" come anywhere near Rutgers this season. I'd much rather have consistently competant officiating than terrible calls go my team's way.
Posted by Risuena (Member # 2924) on :
quote:As for the mess the ACC's in, at least VT is still 4-0 and has a great shot for the ACC championship. Don't think they have the strength of schedule to make it to the national championship, unless a lot of top 10 teams lose. [/QB]
Wow. I haven't even considered whether VT could make it to the national championship game, mostly because I don't really expect them to go undefeated - at most I've been hoping for winning the division - which keeps looking more and more likely... Yeah, made it to 4-0 but there are still a lot of weaknesses and it's not like they've really played anyone yet (although Cinci is a lot better than expected). We'll know a lot more after GT, though.
Posted by zgator (Member # 3833) on :
quote: Boy, do I miss the days when every ACC v. FSU game was a foregone conclusion and we only needed to worry about the Canes and Gators.
You don't need to worry about the Gators this year. It's a forgone conclusion that they will crush FSU, so there's no use worrying about it.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
VT should win their division in the ACC. Then again, the ACC isn't exactly the strongest football conference in the country, even after it absorbed the best Big East teams of the last few years.
Then again, the Big East isn't exactly the strongest conference either - I mean, we've got three ranked teams... but Rutgers is ranked only for the first time in three decades, and the rest of the conference is pretty weak.
Though, if we can end strong this year, I'd love to see VTech, Miami, or BC back on our nonconference schedule... along with some other stronger programs like Michigan State, Wake Forest, Penn State.
I'd love to get a real rivalry started with Penn State. That'd be awesome.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
quote:It's a shame that Notre Dame won't get as much credit for this win since they were ranked so much higher than Michigan State. It really was a great comeback.
How much credit should they get for being manhandled for 3 quarters by an inferior team? Great comeback and all, but it should've never come to that.
quote:The NCstate win gives me hope that NCState can beat Clemson
They can't.
Posted by Brian J. Hill (Member # 5346) on :
BYU beat TCU! Not exactly the biggest victory ever, but it's nice for BYU fans to have something to crow about every once in a while.
Posted by Brian J. Hill (Member # 5346) on :
quote: How much credit should they get for being manhandled for 3 quarters by an inferior team? Great comeback and all, but it should've never come to that.
I didn't see the manhandling. What I saw was good fundamental football by a team who could have just as easily thrown in the towel after 3 quarters. I think it's great when you have a team that refuses to give up, even if it was their fault they were behind in the first place.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
I saw a team that had no business being ranked for the first three quarters. They were playing bad defense, bad offense, and bad special teams. Any team in the top 30 would have whupped them for those first three quarters. Quite frankly, they did everything they could to give that game away.
Then, they miraculously woke up at the end of the game and lucked out with an interception at the end.
Have they been taking cues from the Giants, by any chance?
In other news, Rutgers plays USF tonight on ESPN2 at 8 pm. It'll be a challenge game for them, but I really hope we win. We lost our top receiver to a broken ankle last week. Fingers are crossed.
Posted by SoaPiNuReYe (Member # 9144) on :
VT 4-0 BABY Actually we have a pretty good shot if we just keep the penalties to a minimum. Those are whats been killing us.
Posted by beatnix19 (Member # 5836) on :
I'm a little obsessed. GO BUCKS!!!
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Rugers is 5-0! W00t! And we're currently at the top of the Big East conference!
I don't quite understand how we dropped from 23rd to 24th in the AP poll, though.
Last week, Rutgers was 23 with 117 votes and Missouri was 25 with 70 votes.
This week, Rutgers beat USF (3-1, now 3-2) while Missouri beat Colorado (0-4, now 0-5).
Somehow, this week Rutgers is 24 with 178 votes and Missouri is 23rd with 208 votes. Does beating an 0-4 team give you that much respect? Bizarre.
Posted by Shawshank (Member # 8453) on :
Not a real big sports fan- but I live in TN. And I grow weary of seeing Vols Orange and White all the time. *shudder* Vols fans are pretty bad too if you haven't met them.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
I'm just glad Rutgers has a bye week this weekend, so we can really gear up to put some hurt on Navy. I would love to have a game with as few renditions of Anchors Away as possible - preferably none.
Then again, since they play it not only on every score, but on every first down, that might be an impossible dream.
Still, after losing to them 44-0 my sophomore year in 97, I'd love to return the favor.
Posted by stihl1 (Member # 1562) on :
OSU sucks. My Wolverines are on the warpath and repaying old debts this year. Bucknuts are going down this year, so hard it'll make the Cooper years look good.
Posted by Mig (Member # 9284) on :
I'm really impressed by Rutgers. Their sched may not be the strongest, but they are winning games that they used to lose. Of course they've yet to play the meat of their sched (Louisvill, Pitt, and West Virginia), but I'll be rooting for them. Rutgers in the BCS! Go underdog! Count me in on the bandwagon.
Georgia Tech's victory over VT this weekend, says it all: GT is the team to beat in the ACC this year. I hope my Noles get a shot at them in the Championship game, but my expectation of beating them is low.
U of Miami struggles to beat Houston! (Even at 4-0, Houston was get no respect from The U going into that game.) I talked to my friends down in Miami this weekend and they said that that win felt like a loss. How sad for UM fans.
OSU? Who can beat them? Good schedule with no standout teams. Only Michigan at the end of the year. Fiesta Bowl OSC v. Auburn is my pick, but Auburn has a tough SEC sched. If they can make it through that, they can take on OSC and give them a run. Otherwise, might as well hand them the title right now.
Posted by Tresopax (Member # 1063) on :
quote:VT 4-0 BABY
Let's make that 4-1.... and at least one more loss coming when UVA comes up on their schedule.
(Although, we'd rather just play Duke every game for the rest of the season.....)
I'm thinking Clemson may be the ACC champion for this year (the only college football title that really matters). Early loss, but I think they are ready to get things done now. NC State is good, but they will lose eventually.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
quote:(Although, we'd rather just play Duke every game for the rest of the season.....)
I'm just happy people aren't saying that about Rutgers anymore.
We won 8 games in my four years there - while Duke won a whopping 7 in the same span. We could conceivably win more games this year than my entire time in college.
Posted by Mig (Member # 9284) on :
quote:Originally posted by Tresopax: I'm thinking Clemson may be the ACC champion for this year (the only college football title that really matters). Early loss, but I think they are ready to get things done now. NC State is good, but they will lose eventually.
I'm not impressed by NC state. NC State lost to Akron, but we'll see how they handle the Noles at home this Thursday night.
Clemson has a few games left against some tough ACC competition: Georgia Tech, Va Tech and 5-0 Wake this weekend. If Clemson loses one of those and FSU can win-out, FSU will rep the division in the Champ game not Clemson.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Anyone seen any Navy games this year? Do they have any offense beside the option? I'm curious how our defense will hold up against them.
Posted by beatnix19 (Member # 5836) on :
quote: OSU sucks. My Wolverines are on the warpath and repaying old debts this year. Bucknuts are going down this year, so hard it'll make the Cooper years look good.
OSU sucks? wow, apparently you haen't been watching the same games I have. I understand that you are a Michigan fan but you seem to be a little confused. Don't get me wrong. I hate the wolverines but I am at least fair minded enough to admit that the have finally pulled it all together. They have had the talent there developing for three years now and are finally playing to their potential. Hart is Running all over the place. Henne has finally calmed down and shown good decicion making and consistancy. Breaston is as big of a threat as ever and with the sudden onslaught of Manningham, you have a very strong team. In fact, I have them as the number two team in the nation. I'd be an idiot to say that Nov. 18th doesn't worry me. It's gonna be a battle of two 11-0 teams and everything is going to be on the table for that one. It's gonna be awesome.
But OSU sucks? They are number one for a reason They have played and beaten better teams than Michigan has thus far and will more than liekly pull out the victory over the maize and blue at the end. Pull your head out of the darkness. It's a wonderful world when you live in reality.
oh, and let's look at the numbers... just for fun 4-1 - OSU vs. Michigan during the Tressel Era 4-1 - Bowl game record during the Tressel Era 55-13(81%) - Team Record during Tressel Era 1 - National Championship during the Tressel Era
yep, them Buckeyes sure do suck!
[ October 02, 2006, 02:52 PM: Message edited by: beatnix19 ]
Posted by beatnix19 (Member # 5836) on :
And just for good measure...
Some more numbers from the Tressel Era (2001-present)
1-4 - Michigans record against OSU 1-4 - Michigans Bowl Record 49-18 (73%)- Michigan's Team Record 0 - National Championships
And speaking of Cooper, that's what we call Llyod down in the Big OH. He's our very own Cooper.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
Can I just say BYU beating TCU on thursday made me a VERY happy person. If we had beaten Boston I would be positively giddy. The rest of our schedule is alittle on the dull side
With how badly U of U was beaten by Boise State I don't think the BYU/UofU rival game at the end of the year will be as interesting this year. But hey I could be wrong, I actually hope I am.
Posted by stihl1 (Member # 1562) on :
quote:Originally posted by beatnix19: OSU sucks? wow, apparently you haen't been watching the same games I have.
Yes, OSU sucks. And they're going to get what's coming to them in November. You can post all that crud about Tressel you want, it's not going to help them this year. The Michigan juggernaut is going to run right through the Ohio State Convicts and spoil their perfect season, just like we did in the 90s when that program belonged to us. Get ready to start feeling those same old feelings of anxiety and regret. The wheel is going to turn and OSU is going to find themselves underneath it once again.
And as far as the Tressel years go, even a convicted blind squirrel finds a nut sometimes. But that all ends this year.
And as far as Lloyd (not Llyod) goes, his era extends longer than those 5 years Tressel's been around. Nice ignoring the whole picture.
Posted by Paul Goldner (Member # 1910) on :
"When you say "Wisconsin" ...
You've said it all."
Exactly.
For two years, I lived across the street from Camp Randall. Walk out my front door, and BAM smack my face right into the stadium. Was great, aside from the damn pep band at 6 am on saturday mornings.
Posted by B34N (Member # 9597) on :
GO IRISH! HOOK'EM HORNS!
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
My condolences to the FSU fans on the loss to NC State. That's gotta hurt.
Posted by Mig (Member # 9284) on :
The sad thing is that it doesn't hurt as much as it should. I've gotten used to losing games I thought we should have won and dominated. FSU is stuck, we won't see any improvement or return to our glory days until we get rid of the coach's son as our offensive coordinator. And it's not going to happen unless you want fire Bobby or effectively fire him because he'll quit if you fire his son. Neither will ever happen. Bobby's earned the right to leave on his own terms.
Jeff Bowden had zero coordinator experience before he got the job. I think he was the wide recievers coach under Mark Richt. It was maddening to see them talking on ESPN lastnight about NCState's offensive coordinator and his NFL and colege expereince. shouldn't a program like FSU have as an offensive coordinator some one with expereince and a proven track record and not some one whose best qualification is that he's the coach's son and can't lose his job because it'll risk geting the coach's wife upset?
Posted by SoaPiNuReYe (Member # 9144) on :
My friend got tickets to the Army Navy game. Its supposed to be crazy this year. btw Cow, Hokies will run over UVA lol.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Not sure what UVA has to do with me, but, um, okay! I do wish VTech the best, now that we don't have to play them anymore.
And if by "crazy" you mean it'll be fun to see how far Navy can run up the score against Army, then I agree with you. It doesn't look at this point like it will be much of a contest, though.
Then again, Army always steps up for the Navy game, so we'll see. Last game of the year and all that.
Posted by SoaPiNuReYe (Member # 9144) on :
The fans go crazy I mean.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
That they do. My father was in the Marines, so he's a big Navy fan. In the Army/Navy game I'm always on the Navy side of things. Though, in the Rutgers/Navy game, if I hear Anchors Away one more freaking time, I think I'll lose my mind.
Would it kill them to find some other music to play? Even if they mixed the Marine Corps Hymn in every other song, it'd be a huge improvement.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Hope there aren't any Auburn fans on the board.
Posted by Mig (Member # 9284) on :
My 10/2 prediction:
quote:Fiesta Bowl OSU v. Auburn is my pick, but Auburn has a tough SEC sched.
OOPS, My bad. Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
I hate to say it, but I'm glad Auburn lost. Even though I'm an Alabama fan, I normally pull for Auburn except for when they play Alabama. that's my general rule for all SEC teams - so long as their win doesn't in some way hurt Alabama, I pull for them.
But my lord the Auburn fans have been really obnoxious lately. And Tubberville going on TV and ranting about how his team doesn't get respect and how they keep getting dissed by the BCS - umm...Tommy, you might want to make sure you finish the season unbeaten before you whine about how you don't get any respect. Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
I'm the same with the Big East, Belle. I'm a Rutgers fan, but I want the other Big East teams to win their nonconference games. Even beyond that, I want all Rutgers' opponents to win their other games so that a win against them looks better.
This rule is only broken with basketball, as I just love watching UConn lose - especially the women.
Posted by Eruve Nandiriel (Member # 5677) on :
quote:I'm thinking Clemson may be the ACC champion for this year (the only college football title that really matters). Early loss, but I think they are ready to get things done now. NC State is good, but they will lose eventually.
Heck yes! It looks like the only teams we have left to worry about are GA Tech, and maybe Virginia Tech.
GO TIGERS! w00t!
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
And with Clemson almost getting blown out at home before finally waking up and realizing they weren't Duke, it's looking more and more like the ACC doesn't have a single football team with any level of consistency.
Clemson's the best the ACC has to offer at #12 on the AP poll, and they almost blew it in their own building. GA Tech is next at #15 and they almost lost to Maryland at home. The only other ranked ACC team is VTech at #22.
Not the best year for the ACC - but basketball season is coming soon, don't you worry. Posted by Eruve Nandiriel (Member # 5677) on :
Ummm...I don't know what game you watched, but Clemson has won all of thier home games so far (and scored at least 50 in each).
From yesterday's game: Clemson: 63 Temple: 9 *does a victory dance*
That puts us at 6-1! Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
Guess we'll find out tomorrow of the Hawgs have a let down against SMSU. (I'd snicker but that has a way of tempting fate.)
Gotta pull for Florida over Auburn. Everyone will have 2 losses in the SEC West except Arkansas at 3-0. That'll put us in a good position to tie. (We still have to play LSU and Tennessee, not to mention the 3 other unranked, but always tough SEC games.)
Posted by Mig (Member # 9284) on :
Cannot pull for Florida. No way. Can't. Physically impossible for this FSU fan. The very idea of UF playing in the national championship game, and possibly winning it, in the same year they win the NCAA basketball tourney gives me nightmares. Shudder. Close eyes. Try not to think about it.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
quote:Ummm...I don't know what game you watched, but Clemson has won all of thier home games so far (and scored at least 50 in each).
From yesterday's game: Clemson: 63 Temple: 9 *does a victory dance*
My mistake, it was an away game. You know, the one where Clemson was down 17-3 at the start of the fourth quarter against Wake. I watched where a fumble recovery at the start of the fourth quarter is the only thing that got them back in a game they were trying their hardest to lose.
As for Temple, who hasn't beaten Temple? I mean, they've lost 19 straight (17 by double digits), including a 62-0 blowout to 2-4 Minnesota and a 43-14 loss to SEC bottomfeeder Vanderbilt. They've lost 39 of their last 42 games. I'd be disappointed to let Temple score at all.
Posted by Carrie (Member # 394) on :
My two cents on Auburn:
Let us not forget that at the end of last season, they were ranked #7 and completely dumped the Capitol One bowl to #17 Wisconsin, a game that Auburn most definitely should not have lost.
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
Pix, if Arkansas wins the West, send a thank you note to Alabama's placekickers. No way would you have beaten us if we'd made any of the five extra points and field goals that were missed. *shakes head*
One day my Tide will be back on top where we belong. One day.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
I'm really looking forward to tomorrow's Rutgers v. Navy game, though I'm more than a little concerned.
Navy comes in boasting the #1 Rushing offense in the country, averaging 350 rushing yards a game. However, Rutgers has the #11 rushing defense in the country allowing an average of 74 yards per game.
Rutgers has the #10 rushing offense at 208 yards per game, against Navy's #60 rush defense allowing an average of 130 yards per game.
Navy has the #13 rusher in the country (their quarterback, out of the triple option) with 645 total yards (in 6 games, avg 107.5). Rutgers has the #2 rusher in the country with 806 total yards (in 5 games, avg 161.2).
Rutgers hasn't really been tested so far this year against a good opponent, and the last truly mobile quarterback they saw (Grothe at USF) ran a lot more than I'd have liked. Plus, this game is at Navy on their Homecoming. The Vegas line favors navy by 1.5 points.
If you like running games and good defense, this is definitely one to check out if you have CSTV. If not, cstv.com and scarletknights.com are broadcasting it for free online.
Honestly, Rutgers doesn't have any real reason to be ranked these last three weeks with their early schedule strength, but if they win against Navy and go 6-0, I'd say they finally would earn the bottom of the Top 25.
Fingers are crossed.
Posted by Carrie (Member # 394) on :
If you want to be a Badger... you want the right thing.
Oh, and way to go Indiana!
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Well, I feel really bad for Navy's QB, whose knee got obliterated in the first quarter. Hate to see injuries.
On the brighter side, Rutgers covered the spread, beating Navy 34-0 and staying undefeated with 6 wins. Pitt (6-1) is up next week, and their very effective passing game. That'll be a huge test for our secondary.
I'm curious what our ranking will end up being, too. With key losses by #15 Iowa, #16 UGA, #19 Missouri, and #22 VTech, we might rise as high as #20. That'd be awesome.
(Edit: Got final Mizzou results)
[ October 14, 2006, 07:06 PM: Message edited by: FlyingCow ]
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Rutgers is #19! W00t!
Edit: And we're #16 in the BCS poll!
[ October 15, 2006, 04:50 PM: Message edited by: FlyingCow ]
Posted by Tinros (Member # 8328) on :
I'm kinda hoping for Gators vs. Buckeyes in the big bowl game- my dad and his dad are Gators, born and raised in Gainesville, but all my dad's money is invested in the two nuts he has at OSU right now. ^^
Should be an interested game, nonetheless.
38-7 yesterday for the bucks. And they were saying it would be close.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Unless a lot of teams go down in the next few weeks, it doesn't look good for Florida getting a shot at the national championship. At this point it doesn't look good for an SEC team at all.
The SEC is proof that the BCS system doesn't work. It's got a bunch of fantastic teams, but they all have to play one another - meaning it's nearly impossible to come out of the SEC undefeated. I'm all for a college football playoff system - maybe eight teams seeded into four bowls, then two bowls the next week, and a national championship the following week.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
I was hoping for pouring rain and howling winds for Saturday's matchup against Pitt, but it looks like the weather has let me down.
Looks as though Tyler Palko will have a nice partly cloudy day to see how well his top passer rating in the country holds out against our top scoring defense. Should be a hell of a game - though I'd definitely love to see another RU-administered blowout like we had over Navy.
If Rutgers wins, we'll probably rise to 17-18 in the standings, and 15 in the BCS. If Rutgers loses, we'll be out of the Top 25, likely for rest of the season (unless we can beat Louisville or WVU).
Posted by Ecthalion (Member # 8825) on :
well if you look a the schedule USC will have a very tough time against cal, and in fact seeing the way theyve both played over the last few weeks id pick cal. Mich and osu have to play each otehr and will get rid of another unbeaten. Louisville and WV have to play each other and my pick is louisville even if wv is ranked higher. When you look that Auburn and UF are ranked above the other 1 loss teams and even a few no loss teams you can bet that if mich, WV and USC lose you could have an SEC team in the championship. Auburn needs Ark to lose 2 games for them to win the west. Possible but not likely. Florida has to play georgia, vandy and So. Car. and none of them look threatening esp after the last 3 weks. Fl can still possibly go to the NC but id say the chances are very very low. However one of the other big bowls could feature both. althouhg who wouldnt like to see Wareagle or Gators roll over a USC team that plays 1-2 ranked opponants a year yet claims to showcase the best talent in a bowl game.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
It's also possible that WVU or L'ville go undefeated and *still* not get invited to the national championship. It's even possible that a Big East undefeated might not go if there were only two undefeateds left in the country.
The BCS system is just bizarre.
The WVU/L'ville game will be huge, though. WVU has a better offense, but their defense is not very good - though L'ville has been struggling lately, and barely beat Cinci. Personally, I think that Rutgers stacks up very well against WVU this year, and it's a shame we have to play them on the road. We have a lot better chance of beating them than we do L'ville.
Still, I'm only looking one game at a time, and hoping we can pull it out against Pitt.
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
quote: Auburn needs Ark to lose 2 games for them to win the west. Possible but not likely.
My Hawgs still have to play LSU and Tennessee while Auburn doesn't face another ranked team. It is VERY possible and even likely we will lose.
Further more, you can lose to ANYONE in the SEC. Even the weak sisters aren't that weak. As we showed when we smoked Auburn.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
The SEC is too strong from top to bottom to consistently have teams in the national championship game. It's *very* hard to come out of the SEC undefeated.
As much as there are such strong traditional rivalries between SEC teams, it almost seems it would be in their best interest for one or two of them to go to other conferences - if only to be in better position to win a national title.
While going to a weaker conference hurts strength of schedule, you wouldn't have to play five killer games during the course of the year.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
I just have to say I have an amazing respect for Brian Hampton of Navy.
The article is enough to make you cringe, but he's got an amazingly strong spirit to be handling his injury the way he is.
Posted by Ecthalion (Member # 8825) on :
well as far as the run goes LSU didnt exactly do a good job stopping the second string quarterback from Fla. And ark has a great running game. Tennesee is a problem because they have on ehell of a passing game and not too shabby a run defence. I wouldnt know how well Ark's recievers would stack up against their safties and corners though. Ill be routing for ark since they will probably be the underdog. As for WV or Louis. i think if Louis. runs the table, knocks of everyone including WV they will still be placed outside the top 2. WV i think can run the table and make #2 but i think the computer poll kills them. The computers always ahve favored USC and most of them put USC #1 even though they havent played anyone and have not beat the nobodies by a serious margin of points. WV on the other hand is ranked at the highes computer 9th, and even as low as into the 20's. OSU may only play 3-4 tough ish teams this year but when they play bad teams they show just how bad the other team is.
My prediction: 1. OSU will not fall unless its to Meechigan (and i think its actually gonna be a close game)
2. USC will afll to Cal i think. Considering the computers like USC no matter what their schedule is they may still get ranked # if they have 4 losses.....
3. Mich will run the table till OSU, if they win, new #1 if loss maybe #4-5
4. Auburn can advance to #2 if mich and USC loses. But i think that if Gators and Ark go to SEC champ then Aub will be sitting on the sidelines, if gators win they will be #2 as a one loss team (im sorry but every week espn announces them as the hardest schedule, you can allow them a loss) if ark wins aub may get an invite to the big house. But since the SEC is the red-headed step child of the BCS USC OSU and Texas probably have a better chance.
5. WV is only in it because they havent loss. But seriously the big east isnt exactly the hardest league to play in. If WV run it all the way and loses Louis they will be ranked max of 3 unless lots of teams lose another.
6. UF lost to an auburn team that was ranked #2 2 weeks earlier and did not give up a td on defence, so it can be seen as a respectable loss. Vandy beating georgia hurts the gators in the polls if gators roll the rest because georgia would be see in the same class as Kentucky and SC, and leave 2 powerhouses in the sec east thus weakening the gators strength of schedule. If gators roll and win sec title they will end up 3rd i think behind OSU and USC (althouhg i still hope USC loses to cal or somone worse). if OSU is the only team that runs the gauntlet all year then it could put UF to 2nd.
Posted by SoaPiNuReYe (Member # 9144) on :
Us Hokies fans are already looking forward to next year Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
The Big East isn't the hardest league to play in, but it's not the easiest - not even the easiest BCS conference.
Big East teams posted an .800 record vs. nonconference opponents this year. Granted, the caliber of those opponents is not stellar, and they certainly don't have the depth that, say, the SEC does, but they are hardly a pushover conference.
I'd venture to say the Big East is the fifth toughest conference in BCS play, behind (in no particular order) the SEC, Big Ten, Big 12, and Pac 10. And they're going to get better over the next few years.
Would WVU or Louisville warrant national championship consideration if they win out? I don't think Louisville would, but WVU might. Even so, I don't think either will win out the season. They each still have to play each other, Pitt, Rutgers and USF - all of which have the potential, on a good day, to take down a top 10 caliber team.
Posted by Ecthalion (Member # 8825) on :
my main point wasnt to belittl ethe big east or its teams, but it was pointing out that teams that do go undefeated will probably not be recognised, and how would you compare them to teams that are defeated once, in some cases twice? Would undefeated WV beat a 2 loss UF, GA, GT, CLem ND Texas?
im all for playoffs, the BSC system works for the beginning of the year but past halfway point you cant really vote just by "i like their colors" or "well they havent lost so they are better than the other teams" Boise state may make a BSC, but chances are if they play any of the top 6 they will get blown out of the water (statistically and talent speaking, bad teams can knock off better teams). Case could be made then that if they do make a bcs and win that all the minor conferences should then be allowed to play, even perhaps I-AA.
playoffs seem to make sense. Granted with the BSC you can have "multiple winners" but thats too Mr. Rodgers for me.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Personally, I would pit WVU or Louisville against GT or Clemson without any worry. The others, I'd be a little more worried - but I think they'd be able to compete pretty well. I guess we'll see come bowl time.
I'm totally for a playoff series. I mean, the SEC championship game is probably a better indicator of a team's quality than the BCS title - just because it shows a bunch of great teams beating each other up to be the best of the bunch. The BCS system locks out some of the best teams, because they made the mistake of playing too many good teams during the course of the year.
To have the SEC beat each other up, then not have a chance to even play for the title doesn't sit right with me.
Each BCS conference should have a championship and produce one team. Those teams should have a playoff. That seems like it would make the most sense.
Posted by krynn (Member # 524) on :
well, i'd say im a big UGA football fan, but after we lost to valdosta.. i think i can safely say that its now time to call this one a "rebuilding year." Joe T. is a great guy, but he just doesnt have what it takes to be a qb.
Posted by Ecthalion (Member # 8825) on :
hmm georgias offence didnt look too bad, it was their defence that made me cringe
Posted by Mig (Member # 9284) on :
About that football game at the FIU v. Miami fight (or is it the other way around): The police had brought about 700 local under priviledged kids to the game as part of an anti-gang program. Instead of a display of good sportsmanship and how to resolve problems peacefully, these kids got a totally differed display instead. I'm an FIU alum, so I'm happy to see that FIU has from the start taken things more seriously than UM. http://www.sportsline.com/collegefootball/story/9735882 Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Thug U is back in action, and I can't say I'm not happy to have them out of the Big East. Neither the University or the ACC seems too concerned that flagrant violence with the possibility of serious injury was met with a single game suspension for a game against Duke.
I mean, when the NFL's Albert Haynesworth stomped a player with his cleat, he was suspended for 5 games. When Miami players do it, they get 1 game?
Miami should be ashamed of itself.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
7-0!!!! w00t!!! Bring on UConn! We'll have one of the top 3 running backs in the country against the 105th rushing defense in the country!
If we could go 8-0 into the Louisville game, that'd be ridiculous cool.
Posted by Eruve Nandiriel (Member # 5677) on :
Clemson just beat GA Tech 31-7! Posted by Ecthalion (Member # 8825) on :
bad day for the noles tho
Posted by Risuena (Member # 2924) on :
Yay! VT won a game just in time for us to lose to Clemson on Thursday!
Posted by Paul Goldner (Member # 1910) on :
You know, complaining about how the SEC is so strong that its hard for a team to come out of it undefeated and play for the BCS is kinda missing the fact that all the other BCS conferences ALSO have a lot of tough teams.
Big twelve this year has at least 4 very strong teams, and Oklamahoma, TExas Tech, and Baylor aren't jokes.
ACC has clemson, bc, wake, georgia tech and virginia tech all very strong teams.
Big Ten has michigan, ohio state, wisconsin, penn state, iowa, and purdue all tough teams.
Big east is louisville, rutgers, WVU, and pitt.
The only BCS conference that is a "joke" is the pac ten, with only two high quality teams, maybe 3.
Sure, teh SEC teams have a tough road to the championship game. But so do most teams.
Posted by DaisyMae (Member # 9722) on :
Umm, never thought I'd be posting on a football thread, but I just thought I'd mention the great Nebraska/Texas game yesterday. Huskers came so close! It was a good game. And I don't even really like football. We live in Omaha, so it was kind of a big deal here.
ALSO, as a true Ohio State fan (we moved to Omaha from Columbus) let me just interject GO BUCKS and Troy Smith better get the Heisman.
Posted by Eruve Nandiriel (Member # 5677) on :
Does anyone have a link to current ACC rankings? I can't seem to find it.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Here is a link for pretty current sports standings from espn.
Clemson had a good win yesterday - possibly their first "good" win over a good team. The Wake win was shaky at best. Other than VTech, they don't have much competition the rest of the year - so if they can get past that game, they should be pretty good.
Now, no offense to Clemson fans, but I'll be cheering for VTech next week - in hopes that they'll get knocked behind Rutgers in the top 25, and out of a weird sense of former-Big East pride. Posted by B34N (Member # 9597) on :
quote:Originally posted by DaisyMae: Umm, never thought I'd be posting on a football thread, but I just thought I'd mention the great Nebraska/Texas game yesterday. Huskers came so close! It was a good game. And I don't even really like football. We live in Omaha, so it was kind of a big deal here.
ALSO, as a true Ohio State fan (we moved to Omaha from Columbus) let me just interject GO BUCKS and Troy Smith better get the Heisman.
Yeah the Horns about blew their extremely slim hopes of a chance at the Championship game which I seriously doubt they will see anyway. Have a feeling it is going to be the winner of the Mich/OSU game and either Auburn or West Virginia??? Huskers played a really good game though, that fumble was the only thing that killed 'em!
[ October 22, 2006, 10:46 PM: Message edited by: B34N ]
Posted by Dr Strangelove (Member # 8331) on :
I was out with some middle schoolers doing an activity day up (or rather, for most of ya'll, down) here in the Pan Handle and you wouldn't believe the rabid devotion those boys have to FSU. You should've seen their faces when they heard that they lost. Their dissapointment made mine, a student, look like nothing.
And I was pretty dissapointed/disgusted. Posted by Ecthalion (Member # 8825) on :
well... im sure they will rebound just remember. BC is a good team... miami let duke score 15 and narrowly escaped a loss.
I think a team that lets Duke score 15 should automatically get put in a loss column.
Posted by B34N (Member # 9597) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ecthalion: I think a team that lets Duke score 15 should automatically get put in a loss column.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Well, seeing as Miami was short 13 players, I was kind of hoping Duke would pull that one out - if only to teach them a lesson their university doesn't seem to want to.
I'm just happy that Rutgers has moved up to #16 in both the AP and USA Today polls, which is the highest we've been ranked in school history, I believe. We're also #14 in the BCS poll.
Our next game is on a Sunday, so next week's rankings won't be altered by it - but I'm hoping in two weeks, after a big win over UConn Sunday (and hopefully some losses ahead of us), that we can move up even further.
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
Damn you guys for leap-frogging BSU!
We've gotta move up three more spots for an automatic BCS berth, and you're ruining it! Posted by beatnix19 (Member # 5836) on :
Ohio State Buckeyes
That's all I needed to say, because lets face it, that's enough to say it all.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
As much as I think they're waaay overrated, I need Notre Dame to keep winning. If they don't make the BCS, they take one of the Big East's bowl bids because of their Big East status for basketball.
Likely, either WVU or L'ville will get our automatic bid, and the other will get an at large bid. Pitt and Rutgers (and possibly USF) have to fight for whatever other bids the Big East gets, and if Notre Dame takes one, that's going to suck.
As for Boise State, Frisco, I just don't understand how they are ranked as high as they are. I mean, they are 8-0, but they don't play anyone worthwhile all year. They only have four teams on their schedule with winning records at the momment, and those are Oregon State, Hawaii, San Jose State, and Nevada (not exactly heavy hitters). Their nonconference schedule dips into the Big Sky (I-AA), WAC, Mountain West (twice), and Pac 10 (Oregon State - not exactly a Pac 10 power).
I'd have a lot more faith in their ranking if they'd played any team from the Big Ten, Big Twelve, SEC, Big East, or ACC (excluding Duke).
They carry the nation's #16 total offense, which is great until you see that the average of their opponents' total defense ranking is 76th (with only 3 opponents in the top 50, and 1 in the top 25). They have the #5 scoring offense, but their opponents' average scoring defense is 80th (with only 3 opponents in the top 50, and none in the top 25).
They won't see a real defense all year, except possibly in their bowl game.
They should win out (the only possible challenge coming from San Jose state, who has the best defense of the remaining teams at 52nd scoring defense and 69th total defense), but even if they do it seems they'd be stealing a bid just because they won't have shown themselves to be able to compete against a quality opponent all year.
Funny thing is, they could be really good or they could be an illusion... there's just no way of knowing how they'd compare to a quality team, because they don't have one on their schedule.
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
That's the curse of the small conference champion.
They have trouble getting anyone to come to Boise. Who in their right mind in the SEC, ACC, Big 10, or Big 12 (who is any good) is going to schedule BSU as one of their three OOC games? Those games are supposed to be pushovers. In the big conferences, there's enough in-conference power that they don't need to schedule ranked OOC opponents.
I mean, maybe USC or Ohio State would agree to it, but that's not really in BSU's best interest. Next year, we've got Washington, Bowling Green (both on the road--eek), and Wyoming...all teams with the potential to be good.
We got Georgia (finished the season in the Top 10 or so last year) to agree to it for a single year--last year--which was a big mistake for BSU. They went to Georgia on opening day (a sweltering, humid day for a bunch of boys who play in the mountains) and got whooped. Georgia wouldn't agree to come to Boise for a home-and-home.
We can get lesser Pac-10 teams to come, ala OSU, and in the bowl game in Boise, they beat up on average ACC teams, but anything else is tough.
They proved themselves two years ago by going to Memphis(400 miles from Louisville, compared to 2000 from Boise) to play #7 Louisville in the Independence Bowl. They lost by a field goal, though.
I think they'll do well against a good team this year in a bowl, be it BCS or otherwise.
If they do finish in the Top 12, it's likely they'll go to either the Fiesta Bowl to play Texas (assuming they win the Big-12), or the Orange Bowl to play either Clemson or West Virginia (assuming, again, that they win their respective conferences). Texas would be most able to exploit BSU's weaker pass defense (though their own weak pass defense could be a liability), but WVU could really test BSU's good run defense.
[ October 24, 2006, 07:07 PM: Message edited by: Frisco ]
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
I guess being in Idaho does make it difficult to schedule games. You'd figure you could get Oregon, Arizona State, or Nebraska to do a home-and-home series or something. As it is, you could have the #1 offense and defense in the country, but it wouldn't mean anything since you're almost playing against really good high school teams.
Well, maybe you'll get matched up against Rutgers in a bowl game, and we'll see what happens.
Sorry about Clemson, Eruve and Tres, but they really didn't look good against VTech. On the brighter side, they may have just moved Rutgers into the top 15!
Now, if only Georgia can knock off Florida...
Posted by Risuena (Member # 2924) on :
quote:Originally posted by FlyingCow: Sorry about Clemson, Eruve and Tres, but they really didn't look good against VTech. On the brighter side, they may have just moved Rutgers into the top 15!
Ooops... I am a bad Hokie. For the second game in a row, I completely forgot about a game and the Hokies have won. Maybe I should stop watching games for the rest of the season, you know, for the good of the team...
/superstitious sports fan
But yay! They won a game against a good opponent, and from what I've read, they actually looked good doing so!
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
The risk/reward for playing, say, a Nebraska or Oregon is just not worth it. We already play OSU, who is perennially a middle-of-the-pack ACC team, and this year we played Wyoming and Utah, top teams in the Mountain West (well, Utah's usually better than this year). Why play a potential top 10 team when losing even that one game puts you 100% out of the race for the BCS and winning only increases your chance a small amount--certainly not enough to be considered for the National Championship game?
I think BSU does it right. Play decent OOC teams, then hope to go undefeated. Fresno State and Hawaii are usually good in-conference teams--Fresno State almost beat USC last year, even.
quote:I guess being in Idaho does make it difficult to schedule games. You'd figure you could get Oregon, Arizona State, or Nebraska to do a home-and-home series or something. As it is, you could have the #1 offense and defense in the country, but it wouldn't mean anything since you're almost playing against really good high school teams.
Well, Rutgers has pretty much the same sort of schedule, and their defense is being praised this year. Ohio, Pitt and Navy wins, compared to BSU beating Oregon State, Wyoming and Hawaii. (Pitt's 35 in the BCS, Hawaii's 37)
And it's not too likely that BSU and Rutgers will square off. If BSU wins out, they'll likely go to a BCS bowl. If they finish in the top 12, they're automatic. And with #13Arkansas and #11Tennessee, #3USC and #10Cal, #3USC and #9Notre Dame, #4WV and #6 Louisville, #14Rutgers and #4WV, and #14Rutgers and #6 Louisville still having to square off this season (and that's not counting conference championship games), it's almost inevitable that they'll move up the three spots they need. They already likely move up one spot with Clemson's loss tonight to unranked VTech.
Also, if they finish in the top 16 and one of the automatic bids goes to someone ranked lower than 16 (possible, if there are any upsets in the SEC, Big 12, or ACC Championship games), then they're automatically in, too.
If BSU doesn't win out, they'll probably go to the MPC Bowl in Boise (as the WAC Champ) and face the second or third place ACC team.
For Rutgers to get into a BCS bowl, they're going to have to beat Louisville and WV. Pretty tall order.
Posted by Eruve Nandiriel (Member # 5677) on :
quote:Originally posted by FlyingCow: Sorry about Clemson, Eruve and Tres, but they really didn't look good against VTech.
I have never seen them play that bad in a long time. Clemson is a good team, they have great teamwork, and they have proved it. They just weren't with it tonight (and Will Proctor just couldn't throw the ball to save his life). I think not having the support of the crowd, and lack of enthusiasm was a big factor. *sigh*
(Now if you'll excuse me, I need to go cry myself to sleep.)
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
I think it was a letdown game after the Georgia Tech win, and they just weren't "up" for it, it didn't look like.
I'm hoping Rutgers doesn't suffer the same fate after their big win at Pitt going into a trap game against UConn. We should blow the doors off, but I'm never confident about such things. I'm hoping for a 42-7 win, or something along those lines. Take Rice and Leonard out after the half and let the freshmen Corcoran and Young get some game reps.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Wisconsin had a bit of a scare - too bad Illinois couldn't pull it off. They've been snakebit the last few games, it seems - just can't seem to close out a second half.
Posted by Carrie (Member # 394) on :
No kidding Wisconsin had a bit of a scare. I talked to my mother after the game and she was horrified to find out that Juice Williams was only a freshman. Thank the Gods we pulled it out this year!
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
It's true that Rutgers will have a hell of a time getting into the BCS - but if they played BSU's schedule the way they've been playing this year, they'd also likely go 12-0. Of course, they have #4 WVU and #6 L'ville in the way of an undefeated season. BSU doesn't have that.
This is also a ridiculously abnormal year for Rutgers (though I hope it is the start of a trend). Before two years ago, Rutgers was normally spoken only in the same breath as Temple and Duke. Last year we went to our first bowl game in 28 years, and this year we're 7-0 against some pretty decent competition (three teams who will go bowling on the road, plus three more teams in the future who will go bowling including WVU and L'ville).
It's a big turnaround for us, and uncharted territory. Should we be ranked as highly as we are? I don't think so. I don't think we should have been ranked so early, either. I think the numbers are a bit inflated - just as BSU's are.
But Rutgers will have a chance to prove themselves against some of the top caliber teams in the country, and BSU won't ever get that chance. As screwed up as the BCS bowl selection is, it's kinda weird that they can include a team that never played anyone in the BCS Top 25.
It feels almost like BSU is cheating the system. If adding a decent opponent to their OOC schedule is such a huge risk, then maybe BSU shouldn't be considered one of the best 12 teams in the country.
If Rutgers loses to WVU and L'ville (which is likely - though we're better matched against WVU), we don't deserve a BCS bid. That's pretty clear. If we do win against both, then we definitely deserve one. That's also pretty clear.
I just think that the top bowls in the country should be reserved for teams that have shown themselves to be able to play and defeat quality competition - not teams that have shown then can pad their year with weak OOC competition in hopes of going undefeated against the bottom half of the country.
Do I count Rutgers among the top 12 teams in the country? Not yet, no - they'd have to show me a big win against a big team, likely two big wins. Even at 7-0 (or 8-0 if we beat UConn tomorrow), we haven't faced anyone worthy of putting us in the top 12 and don't deserve a BCS bid until we do. I find it hard to see BSU in anything but a similar light - though they will have no way of proving themselves worthy or not before bowl time.
If you don't beat a team in the Top 25, I don't think you have a right to be in a BCS bowl. For major conferences, this is easy, because you *have* to play them - making an undefeated year indicative of some big wins. For minor conferences, it would require scheduling some good OOC competition before you get consideration as one of the country's premier teams.
As an aside, USC went down to Oregon State, making the OSU win mean a bit more. Still, had BSU beaten USC themselves, it would have meant a lot more - and if their numbers are to be believed, they probably could have done it. Then again, numbers can collapse against good competition (see Garrett Wolfe).
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
I don't think you're undestanding my definition of "risk". You may call it cheating the system, I call it playing the system.
Boise State already takes risks--playing an average-to-above average Pac-10 school and the perennial top two WAC programs, not to mention an up and coming Bowling Green. Add that to their own division schedule--Fresno State and Hawaii are almost always either in the top 25 or on the cusp--and you get a pretty good indication of how good they are.
But to play a team in the top 15, now that's not really a risk worth taking. Say they lose by a field goal to the #15 team. It's likely they could go undefeated otherwise and barely crack the top 25.
Do you know how much money a BCS bowl earns a school?
10 MILLION dollars.
And if you can get there by crushing your division and some other teams that are close to the top 25, you'd have to be pretty stupid to do otherwise.
Boise State is already getting some respect because of their reputation as a good program. They were largely untested two years ago when they went blow-for-blow with an awesome Louisville team. The Liberty Bowl organizers knew they were getting a quality program.
As an aside, did you know--no team in the Big East has beaten a current top 25 team?
WVU is ranked #4 and have ONE win against a team with even a winning record--unranked Maryland.
Louisville is ranked #6 with ONE win over a team over .500--unranked Miami.
The ACC as a conference doesn't have a single win over an OOC top 25 team. They pretty much beat up on the doormats of their own league and get top 25 rankings for doing so.
Why single out Boise State for not playing a tough schedule? Just because one can't prove that WAC and MWC teams are any good on paper doesn't mean that they're not. Watch a few games and see. Watch Fresno State almost upset USC last year. Watch Wyoming beat a heavily favored UCLA in a bowl a couple years ago. Watch Utah crush Big East champ Pitt two years ago. Watch Hawaii beat just about anyone who plays them in a bowl game. Watch Boise State whoop a OSU team that beat USC today, or come within a field goal of #6 Louisville two years ago. Any time the cream of the WAC or MWC meets a non-conference foe, they hold their own, winning as often as not.
Really, there comes a point where your program just gets respect. There's really no reason for anyone in the Big East or ACC to be ranked as well as they are, but them's the breaks.
Somebody's got to be in the top 25.
Posted by Carrie (Member # 394) on :
Out of curiosity, what does anyone from outside the Big Ten think about it? I find the analyses of the other conferences fascinating and would love to hear a (relatively un-biased) view from outside the conference.
(edit for spelling - it is, after all, Halloween party night )
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Thing is, everyone in the Big East and ACC will play a top 25 team - actually, more than one. If they come out undefeated, that's a clear indication that they faced down and defeated some tough opposition. If they lose, they are rightly taken out of consideration for a BCS bowl.
Boise St has no such litmus test.
"Above average Pac-10" and "top WAC" should not be the highlights of a schedule from one of the top 12 teams in the country. And Bowling Green just lost to Temple, so I don't know how up-and-coming they are.
I agree that BSU is "playing" the system, and I guess the maxim of "don't hate the playah, hate the game" holds true. They've found a loophole and are exploiting it. Maybe the BCS should close the loophole and require a Top 25 win to qualify for a BCS bowl.
You say there's a time when a team gets respect. To me, that time is when a team has respectable wins. I'm not saying BSU is a bad team by any stretch - obviously, they are a good team with the numbers they are putting up. I just can't respect them as a Top 12 team without any wins over quality competition.
Right now, Rutgers ranking is very "soft" because the hardest teams they've played are Navy and Pitt (about the same level as Hawaii and Fresno St). We'll know at the end of the year, after two tough tests, where they stand.
If Rutgers is 12-0, that will mean a whole lot more than if BSU is 12-0. BSU will end the season with a "soft" ranking, regardless.
Going undefeated means you're good. It doesn't mean you're one of the best 12 teams in the country, in my mind. Going undefeated against strong competition does.
BSU is exploiting the system to get their paycheck. Maybe it's time to close the loophole and put in a stipulation about needing at least one win over a BCS top 25 team.
BSU is doing the football equivalent of graduating with a 4.0 average without ever taking a 300 or 400 level class for fear of getting a B. It doesn't mean they're not smart, just that they abused the system without ever putting themselves to the test.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Well, that wasn't a happy Rutgers game. They won 24-13 when it should have been 42-7 or more. And Ray Rice may have gotten hurt... not good all around.
We made it to 8-0, but if we play like this against WVU, we'll get blown out. Still, we got past the trap game and are looking forward to L'ville on the 9th.
Not at all happy with our defensive lapses against what is really a subpar rushing offense, on the whole.
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
quote:Thing is, everyone in the Big East and ACC will play a top 25 team - actually, more than one.
But why are these teams ranked in the top 25? Nobody in either conference has beaten an OOC top 25 team. West Virginia beating Louisville and Rutgers could just mean that both are overrated, since neither the Cardinals or Knights have played anyone who's proven themselves against a team arbitrarily labeled "good".
Rutgers'(#3 Big East) best win is over Pitt(#4 BE), whose best win is over Cincinatti(#5 BE) whose best win is over South Florida (#6 BE), whose best win is over Connecticut(#7 BE). See a pattern?
WVU's best win is over 5-4 Maryland, whose best win is over 4-4 FSU, whose best win is over 5-3 Miami, whose best win is over Houston.
My point being, it's likely that WVU will win the Big East undefeated with it's most impressive win being the team one below it in the standings, Louisville. Maybe even go to the National Championship game on these credentials! All we can get out of WVS's record will be that it's the best team in the Big East. Is the Big East better than the WAC? As a whole, likely. On top? We'll never know. All we know is that WVU is better than the rest of their conference, and better than the middle of the pack ACC teams.
This will get them to the National Championship game, and could be crowned second best team in the nation with its only top 25 wins being possibly overrated Louisville and Rutgers(if they finish the season in the top 25).
And we're griping that BSU shouldn't be in the top 12 because they haven't been tested? Who's to say that Oregon State couldn't come over and whip Louisville? OSU has lost their three games all to top 25 teams and beaten the #3 team in the country. For this they're rewarded with...nothing in the BCS. Louisville, on the other hand, has beaten no one good, lost to no one good, and sits in the top 10.
Is it possible that schools and conferences who've historically been better get votes for just that reason? And conferences without quite so much ESPN airtime might be underrated?
And do we think that maybe--just maybe--the people voting in these polls know something about football and are qualified to spot talented squads whether they squeak by UConn or blow out Oregon State?
The BCS system was modified this year SPECIFICALLY so that teams outside the big 6 conferences had a shot at these games. The Pac-10 is never going to offer a BSU or a Utah or a Fresno State or a BYU into their conference. And nobody is going to play any of those teams in a home-and-home series. Sure, these big conference teams will let BSU come to Georgia or Fresno to the Rose Bowl...but no way are they coming out to Boise or Fresno the next year. And that's really the bad thing. I know that BSU has offered other Pac-10 teams home-and-homes, but only OSU has accepted.
I think it says something about BSU's program that they're so feared that nobody will come to their turf.
[ October 30, 2006, 02:19 AM: Message edited by: Frisco ]
Posted by beatnix19 (Member # 5836) on :
It's a great time to be a buckeye. Just thought I'd start with that.
I agree with a lot of the comments being made about the Big East and SEC. I think West Virginia has benefitted most from USC loss. They will more than liekly run the tables and be the team in the BCS championship game. Of course if the Big East all beat on eachother and the champion comes out with one loss I think the SEC championship team will play for all the marbles. THat will probably be florida. BUT... No one is going to be able to hang with the buckeys this year. They are head and sholders above the rest of the NCAA this year. Only two teams have scored more than 7 points on them this year. (the defense averages only 7.3 pointsa allowed on the year) They have covered the spread in 15 of their last 16 games. They are winning by more than 17 points a game. The defense is lights out, they have 18 intereceptions on the year and are allowing under 270 total yards of offense per game. The offense is just sick, averaging over 420 yards a game. PLus they have a few of teh biggeest names in College football right now. I know this is a down year for the Big Ten and a lot of people are saying that the Bucks are playing a weak schedule but look at their wins against Texas and Iowa. Heck, look at their wins agains the middle run teams in the big ten. All around the country the top ten teams seem to be struggling against average teams but not the buckeyes. They are dominating and showing no sign of stopping.
A couple of predictions...
tOSU will beat Michigan by at least 2 touchdowns. Michigan has a good team this year but after watching the first 3/4 of the season they just aren't as good as they will need to be to beat Ohio State. Next year is a different story. I think they will be scary good next year, but not November 18th of this season.
tOSU will play West Virginia for the National Championship. WV has their destiny in their own hands and I think they will win out. This Thursday should let us all know if I'm right. I think Louisville is their last real challenge. Again I think tOSU is at least a two touchdown favorite in the championship game.
Heisman Trophy Winner - Troy Smith. This is a pretty easy prediction. Unless he gets injured or has a total meltdwon over the next three games he has the thing wrapped up. But he has been so consistent and calm under center that I really don't see anything stopping him. It's time to get a sixth banner ready for the Horseshoe.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
A few things, Frisco.
WVU's early season ranking was based on a victory over Georgia, last year's SEC champion, last year in a bowl game. Louisville's triple overtime loss to that same WVU team last year factors into their ranking, as well.
Rankings don't exist in a single year bubble. The BCS doesn't just look at this year, but the computers look at your record and victories over the past several years - and your strength of schedule.
If the WAC decided all of a sudden next year to have all Top 25 teams in their OOC schedule, and won against at least half of them, then their overall schedule strength would rise - even if they were denied a BCS slot. If, the following year, they did the same, their overall schedule strength would again rise. If they did a third year, it would continue to rise.
There will come a point when the overall strength of the conference would become self-sustaining and they could drop off their OOC difficulty a bit.
If, for example, Boise St's OOC schedule included wins over Tennessee, Oklahoma, Texas, and Florida, they'd be vying for the national title instead of just hoping people ahead of them drop back and allow them to back-door into the BCS.
If BSU's schedule was that strong, then Hawaii's schedule strength would increase (just for having BSU and their powerhouse schedule on their schedule) as would all the other WAC teams. If Hawaii also added victories over Oregon, Notre Dame, LSU, and Clemson, their strength of schedule would go way up - as would BSU's.
The SEC isn't considered good because someone pulled their name out of a hat. They're good because of years of playing top caliber teams has built a respect for their conference - so much repect that it has become self sustaining.
BSU is undefeated and in the Top 15 in the country at the moment. If, next year, they added a stronger schedule and accomplished the same feat, they'd gain more respect - as would the WAC. If Hawaii and Fresno St got some big wins over big competition, the WAC would get even more respect.
If they continued to win over big competition, the WAC would start to be talked about in comparison to the ACC, Pac 10, and Big East. If they continued to win over big OOC competition, they'd be talked about in comparison to the SEC, Big Ten and Big 12.
And at that point, they could lighten their OOC schedule because BSU, Hawaii, and Fresno St would be considered strong perennial programs like Tennessee, Michigan, Notre Dame etc.
It doesn't happen overnight. And it doesn't happen by padding the OOC schedule every year in hopes of jumping through that BCS loophole.
Right now, BSU is only ranking 18th in total offense against an average total defense of 76th (out of 119, not including their I-AA game). They're only ranking 46th in total defense against an average total offense of 38th. They only show up in the top 15 of two statistical categories - rushing offense (#6 against an average defense of 63rd) and scoring offense(#3 against an average defense of 80th).
They can only make it to the Top 12 by relying on others to lose - not by winning themselves. It's like a gymnast doing a perfect routine with a low difficulty level - they have to hope the people with higher difficulty levels screw up.
To me, BSU is one of two things.
1. A great team that is playing it safe, not challenging themselves, beating up on weaklings, and hoping they'll get a big payday after never being forced to really compete.
2. A mediocre team that has benefited from a weak schedule and will stumble backwards into the BCS when better teams lose to even better teams.
At this point, there's no way for me to tell.
BSU may get a BCS bowl bid, but they're a few good wins away from getting respect.
(As an aside, this is a fluke year for Rutgers, and there's no way in hell we should be ranked so high. Rutgers should be around #20-25 at the moment... with BSU right there with them. When Rutgers loses (and they are almost guaranteed to), they should drop out of the top 25, and... when BSU wins out, they should hover right around #18 or so. Just my opinion, of course.)
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
quote:Rankings don't exist in a single year bubble. The BCS doesn't just look at this year, but the computers look at your record and victories over the past several years - and your strength of schedule.
Unless you can find me a link for that, I'm going to insist that you just pulled that out of thin air.
Every explanation I've ever seen of the computer rankings says opposite. Only your record, your opponents' records, final score, home field, margin of victory, and offensive and defensive stats factor into the computer score. It's a lot of small factors from different computer sources, but there's nothing anywhere I've ever read to even hint that they used a previous year's stats.
Why would they, when players graduate, become academically ineligible, or join the draft?
If anything takes last year into account, it's the human polls. If you've got to pick which unknown is going to perform well, you pick the one that already has, since coaching staffs are relatively unchanging, and can make big differences on the field.
This is why they don't release a computer score until week 8 of the season.
quote:BSU may get a BCS bowl bid, but they're a few good wins away from getting respect.
They may be a few wins from getting respect from you, but they already have the respect of the coaches and voters, who are the people who've actually seen them play. And that's probably all they care about. Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
I can't find a link to it, but I read an article in the Sunday Star Ledger (NJ) that said there is a computer that has Rutgers at an entirely unrealistic 4th in the country (3rd as of Sunday, it seems). The article mentioned that this is the only computer that doesn't take into account previous years' records.
Looking into this myself, I found this was not entirely the case:
The Billingsly Report says this: "I am convinced that carrying a team's RANK over from one season to the next, and then making the rules for the first few weeks of the season "more relaxed" is the best method to use."
The Massery ratings say this: "The only purpose preseason ratings serve is to provide a reasonable starting point for the computer. Mathematically, they guarantee a unique solution to the equations early in the season when not enough data is available yet."
So, prior performance is taken into account in two of the polls for sure. The Wolfe poll was surprisingly vague about what it did and did not take into account. Sagarin and Colley were very clear that they did *not* include previous data.
Beyond the computers, the Coaches Poll and Harris Poll are both large factors in the BCS calculations, and both of these take into account a team's image in the minds of voters.
"All three components—The Harris Interactive Poll, the USA Today Coaches Poll and the computer rankings—shall be added together and averaged for a team's ranking in the BCS standings. The team with the highest average shall rank first in the BCS standings."
Two thirds of the input comes from human voters, and, of the final third, two of the six polls use information from the previous year.
quote:They may be a few wins from getting respect from you, but they already have the respect of the coaches and voters, who are the people who've actually seen them play. And that's probably all they care about.
But they don't. They're not in the top 12 in any human poll. Four of the remaining six undefeateds are in the Top 5 (getting respect from voters) and two are just barely scraping into the Top 15 (not getting nearly the same respect, nor earning it). Eight one-loss teams are ranked higher than BSU and RU, and one two-loss team is.
LSU has two losses, and still gets 20% more votes in the AP and 12% more votes in the coaches poll than BSU does. And BSU's lowest rankings are found in fan polls, which is closer to the court of public opinion.
If BSU had even one quality win over a Florida, Auburn, or Texas team, they'd be in the top 5 along with the other unbeatens. As it is, a team can lose twice and still get significantly more respect than an undefeated BSU team.
I'm glad going undefeated and still hoping against hope for a loopholed BCS bid is considered getting respect in Boise.
[ October 30, 2006, 01:30 PM: Message edited by: FlyingCow ]
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
It's not that they lost -- it's how they lost and who they lost to. Namely, Auburn (by 4 points and with several key calls that could've gone either way) and Florida (again, a much closer game than the final score). Both away.
And I don't know what you'd have Boise State do -- no good team is going to agree to a home and home with them, so they schedule the best teams they can get and win every game on the schedule. And you want to fault them for that? Frisco points out, rightfully, that the Big East (which has been the Big Least until this year) is just beating up on each other. That was my complaint at the beginning of the season with WVU. Their ranking is based on their bowl game last year against Georgia (which, by the way, was the biggest game in WV history and a game Georgia didn't even want to play -- one of the easiest trap games you'll ever see). I called it early on that they'd probably go undefeated this year and go to the championship game.
At the beginning of the year I gave Louisville a good shot to beat them, but with their stars both coming off of multigame injuries I just don't think they have the offensive consistency right now.
My only hope now is that if they do go to the Nat'l championship that Ohio State pastes them by at least 4 touchdowns.
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
quote:The Billingsly Report says this: "I am convinced that carrying a team's RANK over from one season to the next, and then making the rules for the first few weeks of the season "more relaxed" is the best method to use."
The Massery ratings say this: "The only purpose preseason ratings serve is to provide a reasonable starting point for the computer. Mathematically, they guarantee a unique solution to the equations early in the season when not enough data is available yet."
I read those, too, and in context, it looked like they only made a difference in the beginning of the season. Later in the season, the computers wouldn't let you jump from, say, #60 to #10 with a win even over the #1 team in the country. Earlier in the season, such a jump is possible due to the relaxed rules that Billingsley uses in the first 4 weeks.
quote:So, prior performance is taken into account in two of the polls for sure. The Wolfe poll was surprisingly vague about what it did and did not take into account. Sagarin and Colley were very clear that they did *not* include previous data.
*shrug* Two polls out of 8 use an iota of last year's performance. Not enough for it to make much of a difference, I don't think.
quote:But they don't. They're not in the top 12 in any human poll. Four of the remaining six undefeateds are in the Top 5 (getting respect from voters) and two are just barely scraping into the Top 15 (not getting nearly the same respect, nor earning it). Eight one-loss teams are ranked higher than BSU and RU, and one two-loss team is.
They're ranked in the top 14 (ahead of Rutgers--#15 in both) in both human polls, despite not having had to prove themselves against a top 25 team. This is the respect I'm referring to. That LSU gets more respect doesn't mean that BSU gets none. I figured a smart guy like you would understand that.
OSU and Michigan have respect because they've beaten good teams. WVU and Louisville get more respect for some unknown reason. Perhaps some of the voters actually watch football?
quote:If BSU had even one quality win over a Florida, Auburn, or Texas team, they'd be in the top 5 along with the other unbeatens. As it is, a team can lose twice and still get significantly more respect than an undefeated BSU team.
Tell me, what are WVU's and Louisville's quality wins? Yeah, middle of the road ACC teams. BSU's is a middle of the road Pac-10 team (who, as we know, halted #3 USC's 37 game Pac-10 winning streak).
So in that respect, yeah, the Big East get's too much respect and BSU too little.
quote:I'm glad going undefeated and still hoping against hope for a loopholed BCS bid is considered getting respect in Boise.
Whatever. Have fun in the Meineke Car Care Bowl.
It's not so much hoping against hope as it is just not looking so far ahead at what is likely a given (a BCS bid) that you stumble over an inferior team in your last four games.
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
It's nice to see BSU get some respect from big time ACC, SEC, and Pac-10 coaches, though.
I hadn't even thought about the fact that they barely lost to Boston College(at #18, the ACC's top-ranked team and possible ACC champion) in their bowl game last year. And BSU's a lot better this year.
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
My BCS predictions:
National Championship - OSU vs. Louisville
Sugar Bowl - Florida vs Notre Dame
Orange Bowl - Boston College vs Auburn
Fiesta Bowl - Texas vs Boise State
Rose Bowl - Cal vs Michigan
I think BSU (first automatic-at-large* bid) will go to the Fiesta Bowl, because the FB has the fourth and last pick of at-large teams, and BSU is by far the smallest market.
I think Notre Dame will beat USC and finish the season ranked #7, thus securing an automatic-at-large berth. The Sugar Bowl gets second pick of teams this year, and will pick ND over Auburn, since Auburn will have already played Florida twice during the season.
Michigan will get the third automatic-at-large bid by finishing the season at #4. The Rose Bowl gets first shot at them, since they lose OSU to the NC game.
That leaves one true at-large berth, and Auburn is gonna beat out West Virginia, who gets upset by Louisville this Thursday. Hopefully, the Orange Bowl (with the third pick) takes Auburn over BSU (since Auburn will bring more revenue), because I want to see BSU have a shot to play a Top-10 team (even if they match up unfavorably) rather than play a #10 or 11 Boston College again. The committee also takes into account if the two teams would be playing each other in a bowl game again, and since they met in the MPC Bowl last year, I don't think the BCS would do it again.
*yeah, I know, an oxymoron...but I use the term to distinguish from the automatic berths from the big 6 conferences who already have BCS bowl affiliations
Posted by Jay (Member # 5786) on :
Let's go Mountaineers!
This should be a very interesting game since both teams are sharing similar stats. On offense, WVU has per game has scored 40.9 points and had 459.3 yards (319 rushing, 140.3 passing) while Louisville per game has scored 38.7 points and had 496.1 yards (216 rushing, 280.1 passing). The biggest difference being Louisville is primarily a passing team while WVU a rushing team.
Defensively, WVU has allowed 12.7 points and 271.4 yards (89.3 rushing, 182.1 passing) per game while Louisville has allowed 12.6 points and 284.6 yards (74.9 rushing, 209.7 passing) per game. Both teams have similar defenses with slowing the run and giving some to the pass in an effort to prevent the big play and score.
The one common opponent is Syracuse, with WVU defeating the Orangeman 41-17 and Louisville winning it 28-13. Syracuse coach Greg Robinson was quoted as saying: "Two different styles of offense, two different styles of defense. But both good teams. Both high-powered offenses. Both show defenses that attack you in totally different ways. I'm not a predictor of things, but I think it'll be a great game."
The West Virginia/Louisville match up could come down to whoever has the final possession of the ball. But on the other hand, it could also come down to who has Pat White on their team.
WVU will have a huge advantage with their running quarterback. Of course it’s nice to have Slaton to confuse the defense and Schmitt to plow through them, but when you add in White -- who can pass it or run it -- that could be the difference in this otherwise seemingly even game.
Let's go Mountaineers!
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Meh. Boise State gets the benefit of the BCS version of affirmative action, and that's a mark of pride? There had to be threats of legal action just to make their back door entry possible.
Next year maybe Notre Dame will schedule games against Temple, Duke, and the rest of the bottom ten and take their BCS spot.
You're right, though, that the Big East has gotten too much respect too quickly after losing the core of their conference. But Boise is just as overrated as Rutgers is, and Rutgers has had a harder strength of schedule. Realistically, they're probably a good 20 and 21 right now.
At the end of the season, if Rutgers loses to WVU and Louisville (which they likely will), they'll be dropped into the low "receiving votes". If Boise wins out, they'll only move up the ladder by watching better teams beat themselves up. I mean, down the stretch, their schedule strength just gets worse.
That Boise is undefeated and still not in the top 10 is a testament to the respect voters give their schedule.
Maybe the affirmative bowl action BSU gets this year will give the conference some respect - but if they can't get some wins against BCS conference teams, it'll be short lived.
The WAC is 16-19 against OOC opponents (46%). Against BCS teams, they're 3-13 (19%). Against Top 25 teams, they're 0-5.
By comparison, the Big East (admittedly not the best BCS conference, and also admittedly given more respect than they've earned) went 32-8 against OOC opponents (80%). Against other BCS teams, they're 11-7 (61%). Against top 25 teams, they're 1-2.
Just sayin'. And even outpacing the WAC by that much, I think the Big East is still way overrated. Doesn't say much about the WAC, or teams that come out of it.
Maybe next year they could spot each WAC team a couple of wins... you know, to give them that leg up.
(As an aside, it's also kind of funny that if any WAC team has the audacity to beat Boise St, they'll lose half a million dollars. Some incentive, eh? )
Edit: Missed a couple BCS teams here and there, it seems, based on the link following. Fixed the stats.
[ October 30, 2006, 06:21 PM: Message edited by: FlyingCow ]
Posted by Jay (Member # 5786) on :
That link doesn't say much except the BE is 11-7 against other conferences, but with the weakest SOS of the big 6 conferences.
In other words, you win, but you didn't play anyone good.
5 of those 11 wins came against last place Mississippi St, last place North Carolina, and second-to-last Illinois.
quote:Against top 25 teams, they're 1-2.
Yes, but against current top 25 teams, they're 0-4.
Newly ranked Wake Forest has beat the Big East twice, and the one top 25 team the BE beat, then #17 Maryland, has since dropped out.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
quote:That link doesn't say much except the BE is 11-7 against other conferences, but with the weakest SOS of the big 6 conferences
Actually, it says the BE is 32-8 against other conferences. It's 11-7 against other BCS conferences.
Also, it has the WAC as the third weakest SoS of the 11 conferences, only barely better than the Sun Belt and the MAC.
The Big East's .800 record against a 62.13 SoS is a heck of a lot better than the WAC's .457 record against an 86.78 SoS no matter how you look at it. The WAC plays weaker teams, and loses to them more often.
Of course, the SEC's .825 against a 32.50 SoS is far better - but in a straight comparison between BE and WAC, the WAC loses.
quote:In other words, you win, but you didn't play anyone good.
As opposed to the WAC who doesn't win, and didn't play anyone good.
Plus, you say this as a condemnation, but it's exactly what BSU does. So, are you comdemning BSU, too?
quote:5 of those 11 wins came against last place Mississippi St, last place North Carolina, and second-to-last Illinois.
Have you looked at the WAC's schedule?
- 7 of their 16 total OOC wins came against I-AA teams. (and the combined record of these teams is 24-34... in I-AA! Only two of them have winning records! ) - 5 of the remaining wins came against teams with 2 wins or less. - Of the 4 remaining games, there's Oregon State (5-3), Utah (5-4), Colorado State (4-4), and Wyoming (4-5). Of these, only one (Utah) is in the top 3 in its conference, and only one (Oregon St) has even played a Top 25 team. - Three of these four were beaten by BSU, leaving only 1 pseudo-respectable win for the rest of the conference. - The three BCS teams they've beaten have a combined 7 wins between them in 25 games.
quote:Yes, but against current top 25 teams, they're 0-4.
So, by this bizarre logic, does that mean that Oregon State didn't beat the #3 team in the country? That they just beat the #9 team, because that's what USC is "currently" ranked? And if USC loses against Cal and Notre Dame, does that mean Oregon State didn't beat a Top 25 team at all?
Even so, with "current" ranked teams, the WAC is still 0-5.
Not sure how any of this was supposed to boost the WAC's respectability.
Posted by Ecthalion (Member # 8825) on :
Well the Big east does have a chance at the NC, but...
Mich and OSU can still play 2x for conference and NC. One would have to completely blow out the other in order to drop them from contention.
WVU Louis and Rut have a problem in that if rutgers wins out they would not reach the top 2. Rutgers is fit to play the spoiler (so is pit) If the team that wins the Louisville/WVU loses to Pit or Rut, it will hand #2 to UF, Aub or Tex. depending on what happens in thier respective conferences. UF needs Auburn to win out and also needs Ark to either lose to both Tenn and LSU or completely dominate them. If Ark does and beats UF in the SEC TG it will ruin the SEC bid and hand it right to Tex or USC.
In all likelyhood i don tthink the OSUvMich game will be a blowout. Since we all know the BCS is all about money a close game between those two would only make more money as a NC rematch (UFvFSU anyone?) so i think pretty much everyone else will be sitting on the sidelines begging for a playoff system.
or eating cheeseburgers like Weiss
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
Cow, I don't get where you read any of my recent post as comparing the Big East to the WAC.
I know the WAC, as a whole, is not as good as the Big East. I was just pointing out that by the numbers, the Big East is probably the weakest of the big 6 conferences.
I've compared BSU to all the BE undefeateds, but beyond BSU and Hawaii (and to a lesser degree Nevada and Fresno State in years past), the WAC is really weak.
Nowhere did I mean to imply that the WAC, from top to bottom, could compete with a "power" conference.
quote:So, by this bizarre logic, does that mean that Oregon State didn't beat the #3 team in the country?
I don't think USC is the third best team in the country, do you? They were overrated all year. Not so overrated, though, that losing to an unranked Beaver team wasn't a stunning upset. Even losses to #9 ND and #10 Cal probably wouldn't drop them out of the top 25, though, unless they really got blown out.
Why is that logic so bizarre? You're only as good as where you finish the season. Maryland was overrated, probably. If they win out and maybe beat a ranked ACC team along the way and get back into the top 25, then the WV win will mean a bit more. As of right now, Maryland's last four wins are by a combined 15 points over four teams with a combined record of 11-22. Not terribly impressive, especially where they almost lost to a winless Florida International team.
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
quote:Mich and OSU can still play 2x for conference and NC. One would have to completely blow out the other in order to drop them from contention.
While I think that Michigan will still be near the top, if Florida and either WV or Louisville win out, both will be ranked ahead of UM. Louisville or WV will have beaten #15 Rutgers and the #3 or #5 team in the country, boosting their computer rankings. Florida will have beaten Arkansas or Auburn, helping too. Michigan has no such chance to help themselves. They play only Ball State and Indiana, which won't raise their stock, and losing to OSU will likely drop them to #4...possibly #5 if Texas is impressive against TTU and whoever wins the Nebraska-Missouri game.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
If Rutgers wins out with solid victories over L'ville at home and WVU away (highly, highly, highly unlikely... did I mention the word highly?), and the WVU/L'ville game is very close and Ohio St. blows out Michigan (also highly unlikely), and Texas loses to Texas A&M, and something happens to spoil the claims from Auburn and Florida...
Rutgers could have a chance at seeing the NC.
Then, at the game, the devil will ride in on his flying pig selling raffle tickets for a ski vacation in hell.
I'm just hoping we can knock off one of either WVU or L'ville. And even then, Cincinnati isn't going to be a cake walk. They almost beat Louisville and fared better against OSU for the first half than any other team but Penn State. In fact, Cincy is the only team to lead OSU after the first quarter (with Penn State the only team to lead after the first half).
The Big East backloaded their schedule this year for dramatic, nationally-televised effect, and it's worked out well for them. All the top conference teams are meeting in the last weeks of the year.
Oct. 21 Rutgers at Pittsburgh (ESPN2) Nov. 2 WVU at Louisville (Thurs/ESPN) Nov. 9 Louisville at Rutgers (Thurs/ESPN) Nov. 16 WVU at Pittsburgh (Thurs/ESPN) Nov. 25 Louisville at Pittsburgh Dec. 2 Rutgers at WVU (ESPN or ESPN2)
Should be some great games. I can't wait. Posted by Ecthalion (Member # 8825) on :
Well when you look at the numbers given to OSU, Mich, WVU, UF (top 4 BCS) OSU and Mich are at .99 while UF is .007 off from #3 with a .779 Mich is in a healthy spot to keep #2 as one loss as long as the loss isnt big, OSU the same. UF can potentially sink without losing any games if ARK wins LSU and Tenn, esp if they lose to South Car(not likely). WVU could lose SoS depending on how well Louis, Pitt and the teams that they have beaten (miami etc.) play. Tex doesnt really play anyone else and Cal and ND can beat USC which would diminish each of their wins with them.
Boise State however has a real good chance at a bid since the Acc isnt doing so hot, i think they could easily take their bid.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
The Big East is actually probably fourth in the big six conferences this year.
I mean, the top 3 are pretty clearly the SEC, Pac-10, and Big Ten this year (in no particular order). They had strong, similarly ranked schedules, and performed well against them. They're pretty close, in that slightly tougher schedules had slightly lower win %.
SEC - SoS: 35.00 Win v. OOC: 82.5% Big Ten - SoS: 28.09 Win v. OOC: 73.2% Pac-10 - SoS: 21.80 Win v. OOC: 69.0%
The next three are clumped, too. Still, though, the Big East's 11-7 BCS mark puts them above the ACC's 4-7 and Big Twelve's 3-8. Even if you take out the 5 wins over weaker BCS teams, the Big East would still be 6-7.
Big East - SoS: 62.13 Win v. OOC: 80.0% ACC - SoS: 52.00 Win v. OOC: 67.5% Big Twelve - SoS: 54.50 Win v. OOC: 68.8%
quote:Why is that logic so bizarre? You're only as good as where you finish the season.
I don't believe that at all. A win over Oklahoma St. pre-Adrian Peterson injury is a lot different than a win post-injury, for instance. From what I remember reading of the computer rankings, they take into account ranking-at-the-time as well as the current ranking. And all schedules have the ranking-at-the-time listed, rather than the current ranking.
To answer your question, though, did I think USC was #3 in the country? No. But I also don't think BSU is 14th. Or Rutgers as 15th, for that matter.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
quote:WVU could lose SoS depending on how well Louis, Pitt and the teams that they have beaten (miami etc.) play.
Actually, WVU's SoS will only rise over the last weeks with games against Louisville, Pitt, and Rutgers. All three of those teams are better than their schedule to date. Throw in Cincy (almost bowl eligible, with the strongest SoS in the conference) and USF (also looking for bowl eligibility) and their final stretch is a lot tougher than the first 7 games.
If they win out, they'll be in good shape.
Posted by Ecthalion (Member # 8825) on :
well it was a highly improbably scenario, but i was more referring to the down the line teams, louisvilles win over miami, teams that inflate WVU victory could possibly collapse and may drop the SoS for WVU. Similar to how S.Car can play a spoiler in the SEC, say S.Car beats Ark or UF destroys Tenn and Aub chance of going anywhere, esp if they beat LSU and Tenn. IF Ark beats LSU and Tenn then it drops UF's SoS and kills Aub.
The Catbird is really Tex i think. IF WVU Rut and Lousville knock each other off and if Ark, S.car mess up SEC Tex could potentially pick up many spots especially if ND blow out USC and especially if that USC team blows out Cal.
[ November 06, 2006, 11:22 AM: Message edited by: Ecthalion ]
Posted by Ecthalion (Member # 8825) on :
actually SoS isnt as important as winning for style points is now. UF has to win handily at Vandy, post a vitory (i don tthink score is important) to SC then win big at both W.Car and FSU. WVU has its best shot because of the Televises Big East games, the coaches can be swayed easily because of these factors. And the coaches will count more than the SoS at this point in the year.
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
quote:Boise State however has a real good chance at a bid since the Acc isnt doing so hot, i think they could easily take their bid.
BSU doesn't have to take any bids. The six conference champions get bids, and there are four more up for grabs. Notre Dame gets one if they're in the top 8 and Boise gets one if they're in the top 12(or 16, depending on who gets the rest of the automatic bids). The #3 or 4 teams get them if they don't get an automatic.
After that, a committee decides who gets in if there are more bids left.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
quote:A win over Oklahoma St. pre-Adrian Peterson injury ...
Ahem, Oklahoma. Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
D'oh! My mistake. Oklahoma.
I don't think Notre Dame has much of a chance at the national championship game this year. They needed to beat a USC team that went undefeated and legitimately claimed the #3 spot. I think they're out of contention for that.
I'm curious what happens if the three undefeateds in the Big East each end the season with one loss. Say, for sake of argument, that West Virginia beats Louisville, Louisville beats Rutgers, and Rutgers beats West Virginia. Who wins the Big East and gets the automatic bid if each of these teams win the rest of their games? They'd each by 6-1 in conference, 11-1 overall, and have one loss to one of the other tied teams.
Anyone know how that tie is broken?
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
quote:Anyone know how that tie is broken?
Highest final BCS standing gets the bid.
Posted by Jay (Member # 5786) on :
The last post was from my article in Your Bulletin Board that I do each week. Here is part of this week’s that adds a bit more to the BCS fun!
Underdogs
The Mountaineers greatly enjoyed the USC loss this past weekend as it opened the gates for a possible WVU national championship game. The Mountaineers moved up to number 3 in all the major polls (the highest ranking in school history) and in this spot they control their own destiny. As long as WVU keeps winning, and once #1 Ohio State and #2 Michigan play each other, the other spot in the big game will open up. WVU’s biggest game of the season happens tonight at 8:00 on ESPN as they take on Big East conference foe #5 Louisville.
Louisville is a 2 point favorite in this game and that should help motivate the Mountaineers to rise to the occasion and show they deserve all the recognition they have been getting. WVU plays best when they are the underdogs.
For those worried about a one-loss team jumping WVU in the BCS, let not your hearts be troubled. When you look at the BCS rankings you’ll notice the Mountaineers are 13th average in the computer poll. This can only go up as long as we continue to win and will separate ourselves from the other one-loss teams.
The other scenario that seems to be popular on the sports talks shows and amongst worried fans is a close game by Michigan and Ohio State and the thought that the loser would hold on to the #2 spot. Again, our strength of schedule towards the end of the season will help us greatly with this. If by chance WVU and Rutgers are both undefeated when they play on Dec 2nd that would be for the Big East Championship and another game with two top ranked teams, which should give us no problem encountering any one loss jump issue.
Posted by Mig (Member # 9284) on :
I think that Frisco's Bowl predictions on 10/30 are dead-on. The only thing that makes me hesitant is that Florida may win the rematch with Auburn in the SEC championship, and they may get the pick over an undefeated Louisville. A one-loss SEC team carries more respect than an undeafted Big East team in my book.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
If WVU beats UofL and UofL beats Rutgers, that would make the final game of the season likely #2 WVU v. #20(???)Rutgers. If Rutgers wins, that would likely drop WVU several spots, and raise Rutgers several spots.
I wonder who'd come out highest in the BCS after all that. I mean, everyone would be 11-1, but WVU would have a loss to a #20ish team and a win over a #5, UofL would have a loss to #3 but a win over a #15, and RU would have a loss to a #10-15ish (guessing at UofL's rank after a loss to WVU), but a win over a #2. Of the three, WVU has the lowest schedule strength, and Rutgers the highest.
It would just be pure chaos... and totally awesome.
Personally, I'm already stoked that Rutgers is going to *any* bowl. Two bowls in two years? Unheard of! To possibly end the season 10-2 or better, and maybe get a chance to play at a major non-BCS bowl?
I'd love to jump into the Sun Bowl vs. USC/Washington State. Or possibly the Texas Bowl against Texas A&M/Mizzou/Nebraska. The Car Care bowl or Gator Bowl would be great, too, and a chance to maybe meet up with a former Big East power.
The closest bowls would be the Car Care or International bowls - though I wouldn't mind a short vacation to Texas or Florida. Posted by Ecthalion (Member # 8825) on :
in most books i think
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Personally, I'd probably respect a one-loss Florida, Auburn, or Tennessee more than an undefeated WVU or UofL. At least this year.
The Big East has had a lot of national spotlight this year and last, and has been bringing in a lot of nationally recognized recruits. Some good bowl showings (and possibly a shot at a national title) would definitely boost recruiting, and more serious Heisman talk for Slaton and Rice next year as juniors will do so as well.
If (and it's a big if) the Big East can continue to perform the way it has this year and last, it could steal away a lot of those players who would have formerly headed to the SEC or other major BCS conference.
Unfortunately, schedules are planned 5 years in advance, and our conference OOC schedule strength isn't going to get immediately better. The best thing we could do is to buyout some of the I-AA contract games and try to replace them with BCS games, but we're still locked into contracts with the likes of UNC, Ohio, and Illinois.
Even so, the "one-loss SEC team trumps undefeated Big East team" concept will hopefully become a thing of the past in the next few years.
Posted by Jay (Member # 5786) on :
Yes, future schedules do help. WVU’s is fun: http://westvirginia.scout.com/3/fbfuturesched.html We have a few bum ones, but we also have Auburn, Michigan State, and Florida State. We had Maryland back out of our yearly game for a couple of seasons. Guess they were getting tired of getting spanked!
I’m pretty excited about tomorrow’s game. We’re leaving in the morning for the drive down.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
I watched the Boise St v. Fresno St game and had a long post with commentary throughout. Then, when I tried to post it, hatrack ate it and it was lost forever.
Sigh.
Here are the highlights I can remember:
First Quarter: The game felt like a high school game with better facilities, and both teams came out like they had just woken up. 7-3 to Fresno St? Clearly neither of these teams are ready for primetime.
Second Quarter: BSU finally wakes up and starts playing some football against a really, really bad Fresno St defense. The only thing worse than the Fresno defense is their offense. The refs obviously feel that offensive holding was removed from the rulebook before the game.
Third Quarter: BSU shows signs of being a legitimate team before falling asleep again at the end of the quarter. BSU defensive back and Piscataway, NJ native Kyle Wilson gets some love from the announcers after some big hits. BSU hands Fresno their first interception of the season.
Fourth Quarter: Fresno shows some signs of life when a WR goes uncovered for a touchdown. Uncovered? You've gotta be kidding me. The refs finally rediscover the rules regarding offensive holding. Johnson gets absurd Heisman talk that's even more ridiculous than Ray Rice or Steve Slaton's. 20 TDs against WAC defenses isn't anything to be proud of - that's like saying you've stolen candy from 20 babies.
Final comments: BSU is a good team that can be very inconsistant and has mental lapses. In a good conference, they'd probably finish third or so, with a 10-2 or 9-3 record. A top BCS team would exploit their weaknesses and take advantage of their inconsistency.
They'll backdoor into the Fiesta Bowl and lose by more than two touchdowns. Johnson will get less than 100 yards and Zabranksy will finally see some pressure and sacks.
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
quote:First Quarter: The game felt like a high school game with better facilities, and both teams came out like they had just woken up. 7-3 to Fresno St? Clearly neither of these teams are ready for primetime.
For one, it was 10-7 BSU after the first quarter. Two, a "low" scoring quarter is a sign of teams not ready for prime time?
Besides, Boise was a late touchdown against its backup D from beating Fresno just as badly as #13 LSU did a week ago. And had they not run the clock out to end the game, they could've probably scored again (though there are now penalties for running up the score in the computer polls). Is LSU not ready for prime time, either?
If it felt like a high school game, it was likely because Boise doesn't have the giant football stadium the big conferences do. Well, that and the FSU offense. Their defense and special teams accounted for two of the scores (they have speed and athletes, I give them that), but their only offensive score was a blown coverage from the BSU bench.
quote:Final comments: BSU is a good team that can be very inconsistant and has mental lapses. In a good conference, they'd probably finish third or so, with a 10-2 or 9-3 record. A top BCS team would exploit their weaknesses and take advantage of their inconsistency.
Recently, 10-2 or 9-3 would have been more than enough for BSU to get the BCS bid in the Big East. Hell, wasn't Pitt 7-4 a few years back when they went to the Orange Bowl?
And one blown coverage (a big one, but not by players likely to play against Texas in the Fiesta Bowl) and they're inconsistent?
They held FSU to 105 yards of offense before they threw in the scrubs late in the third quarter, and the offense scored on six of their first seven drives.
Their passing defense is their weakness, yes, but Texas isn't exactly the kind of team that can exploit that. I foresee a close game.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
quote:20 TDs against WAC defenses isn't anything to be proud of - that's like saying you've stolen candy from 20 babies.
That sounds like something someone who's never played so much as a down of football would say. 20 TDs against any level competition is something to be proud of. If you want to make the point that WAC defenses are weak, I'd take another angle.
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
True...and Ian Johnson had 240 yards and 5 touchdowns against an Oregon State defense that ranks third in the Pac-10 against the run--they allow 96 yards a game and held USC to 101 yards on the ground.
In fact, take Ian Johnson't game out of OSU's schedule (since he's just a candy-stealing WAC wussy), and their average drops to 74.9 yards a game allowed on the ground, which would be #8 in the nation (they're 20th, currently).
[ November 02, 2006, 11:32 AM: Message edited by: Frisco ]
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
El JT, I'm not saying he's a bad player, just that 20 touchdowns against bad teams isn't much better than 14 touchdowns against good teams.
Looking up his stats, he's scored: 2 TDs v. Fresno (59th rush defense) 4 TDs v. NM State (78th rush defense) 5 TDs v. Oregon St (20th rush defense) 0 TDs v. Wyoming (38th rush defense) 2 TDs v. Hawaii (80th rush defense) 0 TDs v. Utah (112th rush defense) 1 TD v. La Tech (118th rush defense) 4 TDs v. Idaho (74th rush defense) 2 TDs v. Sacramento State (I-AA)
Edit: Was looking at Oregon, not Oregon St.
He's seen exactly three rush defenses in the top half of the country, and has scored 13 of his TDs vs. rush defenses ranked 74th or lower. The average I-A rush defense he's seen is 72nd.
By comparison, James Davis (also a sophomore) of Clemson has 17 TDs against an average rush defense of 59th (with 7 of those TDs coming against the top 25 rush defenses in the country).
And Johnson gets the Heisman talk? It's just silly.
Frisco,
quote:For one, it was 10-7 BSU after the first quarter. Two, a "low" scoring quarter is a sign of teams not ready for prime time?
My mistake on the score - in my original hatrack-eaten recap, I'm sure I had that TD in the first quarter, but my memory somehow jumped it to the second... probably because of the quality of play there had been for the first 14 minutes.
It wasn't the low score, but the quality of play overall. Both teams were playing terribly. BSU starts with a three and out with Johnson getting tackled for a loss - against Fresno's defense? Then, later, again against Fresno's tissue paper defense, they needed a fake punt to get a first down? Fresno didn't even get a first down until the second quarter.
After that performance, I was shaking my head wondering how BSU even went 8-0 so far - and even more about why ESPN chose to televize a game involving Fresno.
They finally started playing after about the first 14 minutes or so, but coming out that poorly against any of the top 10 teams in the country would have had them in a 14-0 hole.
quote:Is LSU not ready for prime time, either?
LSU didn't let Fresno score 21 points - in fact, they didn't allow a single touchdown, backup players or not. There weren't any points put up by Fresno in the 4th quarter, and only a field goal each in the second and third quarters. There also weren't any kickoff return touchdowns for 93 yards.
quote:Recently, 10-2 or 9-3 would have been more than enough for BSU to get the BCS bid in the Big East.
Recently. This year, BSU would finish behind L'ville, WVU, and likely Rutgers - and possibly post a loss against Pitt and Cincy. I'm not saying BSU is bad, just that they haven't earned a BCS bid. 10-2 and 9-3 are both very good records, and BSU is a good team, but the way they're sneaking into the BCS ahead of better teams rubs me the wrong way.
As an aside, I don't know why BSU didn't just hoist 40 yard pass plays every time they had the ball, seeing how Fresno had no pressure on the QB or coverage in their secondary.
quote:They held FSU to 105 yards of offense before they threw in the scrubs late in the third quarter, and the offense scored on six of their first seven drives.
They kept Johnson in until the final 2 minutes and Zabranksy in the whole game. Not exactly throwing in the scrubs. And were the scrubs on the field for that kickoff return?
I'm not knocking BSU as a team, but it's not like they're gods among college football players. They're good. Better than average, surely. They'd perform well in almost any conference, absolutely. They have good athletes and quality players.
But they're not deserving of a BCS bowl bid supposedly set aside for the best 10 teams in the country. There's a reason the top 11 BCS teams have ratings of .700 or better and BSU has only a .476.
They would certainly do well against the bottom halves of the BCS conferences, and maybe win 50% of its games against the better teams of the major conferences, leaving them with 2-3 losses (or possibly 4) if they were a BCS team.
They would likely still be ranked (though much lower), they'd still get national television coverage, and they'd still win most of their games. They would not, however, be in the BCS bowl games. They need their non-BCS standing and rules loophole to accomplish that.
So, in summary: Boise St is good, but not BCS worthy. Johnson is good, but not Heisman worthy.
[ November 02, 2006, 11:02 AM: Message edited by: FlyingCow ]
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Frisco, not sure what numbers you're looking at for Oregon State's defense. And they're not in the ACC.
Edit: My mistake! I was looking at Oregon! Will adjust numbers above!
That gives him a bit more respectability, but still not anywhere near Heisman-level respectability.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
quote:El JT, I'm not saying he's a bad player, just that 20 touchdowns against bad teams isn't much better than 14 touchdowns against good teams.
This isn't what you said. And I'm not even going to ask how you manage to normalize the TDs scored against bad teams vs. good teams.
Do you think that most backs score most of their TDs against the best teams on their schedules?
There's much more parity in college football than you seem to realize. The difference between Fresno St's D and, say, Ohio State's boils down to OSU's bottom 3-4 are better than their F.S. counterparts, OSU has much better schemes, and (most importantly) are playing with much more confidence. Take the 3 best players on any IA team in the country, and chances are they could start for most any other team, or at least have a chance to. The difference between the haves and the have nots is largely depth, coaching, and confidence (which is precisely how a doormat such as Rutgers is able to follow a series of mediocre seasons with an okay one, then follow that with a great one).
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
quote:5 TDs v. Oregon St (94th rush defense)
I'm not sure what stats you're looking at, but OSU is 20th in the country against the run. (your edit is noted)
quote:They kept Johnson in until the final 2 minutes and Zabranksy in the whole game. Not exactly throwing in the scrubs. And were the scrubs on the field for that kickoff return?
When I'm talking about them only giving up only 105 yards to FSU, I'm clearly talking about defense. Johnson and Zabransky are offensive players. The defensive backups are to blame for the blown coverage and FSU's only offensive touchdown.
quote:My mistake on the score - in my original hatrack-eaten recap, I'm sure I had that TD in the first quarter, but my memory somehow jumped it to the second... probably because of the quality of play there had been for the first 14 minutes.
BSU sustained a 72 yard drive in the last 4 minutes of the first quarter, resulting in a touchdown. Maybe you mean the first 11 minutes?
quote:LSU didn't let Fresno score 21 points - in fact, they didn't allow a single touchdown, backup players or not. There weren't any points put up by Fresno in the 4th quarter, and only a field goal each in the second and third quarters. There also weren't any kickoff return touchdowns for 93 yards.
And they also didn't put up 45 points with an opportunity for more. Offense and defense both count towards the final score. And LSU even had a bigger home-field advantage. FSU is pretty used to coming to Boise, and as you pointed out, it's not exactly an intimidating stadium. LSU on the other hand?
quote:Recently. This year, BSU would finish behind L'ville, WVU, and likely Rutgers - and possibly post a loss against Pitt and Cincy. I'm not saying BSU is bad, just that they haven't earned a BCS bid. 10-2 and 9-3 are both very good records, and BSU is a good team, but the way they're sneaking into the BCS ahead of better teams rubs me the wrong way.
Except this year, I think BSU beats Rutgers easily, and either WVU or Louisville, if not both. You're clearly of the opposite opinion, but I've watched all three Big East unbeatens, and they're all terribly overranked, IMO. Maybe the Big East should offer an invitation. I mean, Marquette's in freaking Wisconsin, right?
And how do you feel about the Big East in past years sneaking in ahead of better schools because of their automatic bid? Or this year's ACC, who'll likely put in a team outside the top 12?
Really, the BCS isn't flawless. And it's not there just so the top 10 teams can square off. The system ensures that the top 2 play, so there's a clear champion...aside from that, it's a mix of Notre Dame, the Good Ol' Boys network of the big 6 conferences, and the occasional spattering of the rest of the conferences.
Would a Tennessee-Texas or a Wisconsin-Texas mathup really be that much more entertaining to you? At least now the networks will have the Cinderella story to play up.
quote:I'm not knocking BSU as a team, but it's not like they're gods among college football players. They're good. Better than average, surely. They'd perform well in almost any conference, absolutely. They have good athletes and quality players.
In a big conference, they'd be even better. More money, more scholarships, more recruiting power...
quote:But they're not deserving of a BCS bowl bid supposedly set aside for the best 10 teams in the country. There's a reason the top 11 BCS teams have .700 or better and BSU has .476.
But they're not set aside for the top 10 teams. They're set aside for the conference champs of the Pac-10, SEC, ACC, Big 10, Big 12, and Big East, regardless of their ranking. Why should BSU have to fit some criteria that not everyone else is subject to? Pitt was #21 a couple years back. BC is currently #15. The Big 12 and ACC could still possibly send unranked teams to the BCS this year.
quote:So, in summary: Boise St is good, but not BCS worthy. Johnson is good, but not Heisman worthy.
I agree with you on Johnson, but we're going to have to agree to disagree about BSU. If they get blown out by Texas, I'll concede they merely played a "loophole". But if they win, I'll have no more of your mouth running.
Past BCS bowl participants not in the top 8 (since there were only 4 BCS bowls prior to this year):
1998: #9 Wisconsin #11 Texas Tech #15 Syracuse
1999: #9 Michigan Unranked Stanford
2000: #11 Notre Dame #14 Purdue
2001: #10 Maryland #13 LSU
2002: #14 Florida State
2003: #10 Miami #15 Kansas State
2004: #13 Michigan #21 Pittsburgh
2005: #11 West Virginia #22 Florida State
edit: And keep in mind that this was all before they expanded the BSC series to 5 bowls. So, by your theory, only the top 8 should've made these games. But I'm too lazy to go back again to see who wasn't in the top 8.
edit: no, I'm not.
[ November 02, 2006, 12:30 PM: Message edited by: Frisco ]
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
quote:and confidence (which is precisely how a doormat such as Rutgers is able to follow a series of mediocre seasons with an okay one, then follow that with a great one).
I was thinking about this last night. Fresno State was 14-1 in their previous 15 games going into their match with USC last year. Since losing that nailbiter by a touchdown, they've gone 1-12! Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
Going along confidence is momentum, which is huge in football. It's really freaking nebulous, and it's about as predictable as craps (giant swings of fortune with zero warning). It can swing a series, a game, or a whole season and no one watching will have a clue why.
It's the whole reason for the expression, "that's why they play the games."
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
You're right, El JT, I said it wasn't anything to be proud of. That's not true - it *is* something to be proud of. But a Heisman candidate needs to have more than just a lot of touchdowns off of weak opponents.
Do I think Ray Rice, Steve Slaton, or Ian Johnson should even be in Heisman consideration? No way. They're all very good, all comparable with one another in terms of stats, and none have really faced very challenging teams. On top of that, they're all sophomores.
Johnson's a good back - but not clearly better than other good backs in the country.
quote:Do you think that most backs score most of their TDs against the best teams on their schedules?
No, but for a sophomore to win the Heisman as a running back, he needs to blow away all other running backs in the country and put up big numbers against big competition. He's good, but he's not Heisman good.
If he goes wild in the bowl game against Texas for 200+ yards and 3 TDs, and then goes wild again next year, he'll have made his case for a Hiesman as a Junior.
quote:There's much more parity in college football than you seem to realize.
Any given Saturday - I get that.
But there is far less parity between the top teams and the bottom teams than there is between any two teams ranked within 40 or so places of each other.
I mean, La Tech gives up 243 rushing yards and 220 passing yards per game... compared to Florida's 67 rushing yards and 153 passing yards per game.
Florida's defense is just better all around, all talk of parity aside.
If you have the 118th ranked defense in the country, you can't have a lot of depth, confidence, or defensive schemes backing you up - to use your indicators. And success breeds success, as you start getting better recruits.
quote:Past BCS bowl participants not in the top 10:
I get that. But who did they beat to get there? Who did BSU beat to get there?
You can graduate with a 4.0 after taking mostly remedial classes, or you can graduate with a 3.4 after taking a few honors classes. It just really seems that BSU has done its best to avoid all challenges in getting its check to the bank.
quote:If they get blown out by Texas, I'll concede they merely played a "loophole". But if they win, I'll have no more of your mouth running.
In an totally chaotic world, WVU will lose causing a scramble for which one loss team will be in the championship, that one loss team will get blown out by Ohio St causing all kinds of second guessing about why *that* one loss team was taken, BSU will get blown out, and the ACC champion will get obliterated too, throwing the whole BCS concept out the window.
The best that could be hoped for? WVU goes to the National Championship and defeats Ohio St (giving the Big East more legitimacy), BSU obliterates Texas in the Fiesta Bowl (granting the WAC some legitimacy), and the ACC champion beats up on their competition (returning some of the ACC's legitimacy). In the aftermath, maybe the Big East and BSU will schedule some tougher OOC games.
Time will tell what we get - but whatever happens, it sure will be fun to watch. If BSU hangs close with Texas (win or no), they'll get a lot more respect from me. If they win, that would be great for them - and would hopefully give their conference a kick in the butt.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
quote:Do I think Ray Rice, Steve Slaton, or Ian Johnson should even be in Heisman consideration? No way. They're all very good, all comparable with one another in terms of stats, and none have really faced very challenging teams. On top of that, they're all sophomores.
Agreed, with the caveat that I don't think what year they are should have even the faintest whisper to do with Heisman consideration. But then, I mostly consider the Heisman a sham (as well as the NFL MVP, for similar reasons).
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
quote:I get that. But who did they beat to get there?
Judging by the fairly reliable rankings, nobody better than the people ranked ahead of them did.
Do you mean to imply, contrary to your insistence that BSU is taking a bid from a better team and that the BCS is for top 10 teams, that it doesn't matter who they put in the BCS or who they pass over as long as they've beaten a top 25 team?
Make up your mind, man!
BSU hasn't beat anyone in the top 25 yet, but they've beaten two teams in the top 37. One will probably end the season ranked, but not both, probably, since they play each other.
quote:In an totally chaotic world, WVU will lose causing a scramble for which one loss team will be in the championship,
It wouldn't be totally chaotic, since they're not even favored. And with a Louisville win, it's possible, if not probable, that they'd jump to #2 and play for the NC.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
quote:Make up your mind, man!
What I mean is that in order to win their conference, they had to play well against some strong competition. In the case of Florida St in 2005, they beat #5 Virginia Tech, #9 Miami, and #19 Florida to win their conference championship.
In comparison, BSU hasn't beaten anyone of real significance except Oregon State - unranked David to USC's goliath.
Granted, there are other teams on your list that shouldn't have been there (namely any Big East team in 2004 or 2005) which is one of the reasons I've never really liked the BCS system.
quote: I don't think what year they are should have even the faintest whisper to do with Heisman consideration.
Just saying that no sophomore in the history of the trophy has won it. It seems Heisman voters prefer to give the trophy to someone they assume will go very early in the NFL the following year, not someone who will come back and have the chance to win it again.
quote:It wouldn't be totally chaotic, since they're not even favored.
True. I worded that badly - I meant the chaos that would erupt if there is no undefeated Big East team (I'm assuming WVU pulls it out at L'ville). A handful of one-loss teams all clamoring at the National Championship door, all feeling they have more of a right to go than the next one-loss team.
quote:Except this year, I think BSU beats Rutgers easily, and either WVU or Louisville, if not both. You're clearly of the opposite opinion, but I've watched all three Big East unbeatens, and they're all terribly overranked, IMO. Maybe the Big East should offer an invitation. I mean, Marquette's in freaking Wisconsin, right?
I don't know how easily BSU beats Rutgers this year. I'd love to watch it though - high powered offense vs. stingy defense. I definitely think that White/Slaton is a better combo than Zabranksy/Johnson, and I think WVU has a better defense than BSU. As for L'ville, the loss of Bush hurts them a lot, and Brohm still isn't 100% - though their defense is again a lot better than what BSU is used to.
I'd love to see the matchups. Maybe Boise St. can join the Big East?
quote:Would a Tennessee-Texas or a Wisconsin-Texas mathup really be that much more entertaining to you? At least now the networks will have the Cinderella story to play up.
It's funny, though, that BSU is still getting very little press. You can't open a newspaper or turn on ESPN without hearing something about Rutgers - and they're almost certain to lose two, if not three games this year. BSU is going to win out (most likely) and searches on google news yield next to nothing about it.
Pretty crazy. You'd figure the Cinderella hype would have started already.
As for Rutgers, I'm not hopeful. Then again, I graduated in 2000, seeing a grand total of 8 wins in my four years as an undergrad (including a 5-6 season!). The team is not as good as the press is making out, and, quite honestly, have the possibility of not winning another game.
I mean, they'll probably lose to Louisville. The could fall to Cincy's defense (though Cincy doesn't have an offense to speak of). There's a slim, slim chance they could lose to Cuse. And they'll probably lose to WVU. Even so, 9-3 is cause for celebration at Rutgers - hell, 8 wins is more than we've had in two decades, and there's a decent chance we could go 10-2.
If Schiano stays long term, we could be the ones fighting for national titles in a couple years. Posted by B34N (Member # 9597) on :
Got a question? What happens if Louisville beat West Virginia tonight? Does Texas move into 3rd or does Louisville jump them and move into number three since they beat them. This depending on a Texas win this weekend.
** Edited to make sure everyone knew I was talking about top 25 not BCS standings **
[ November 05, 2006, 04:39 PM: Message edited by: B34N ]
Posted by Ecthalion (Member # 8825) on :
louisvill will probably jump to third. If louisville doesnt texas wont jump auburn or UF until this weekend at least. All the one loss teams need whoever wins the WVU/Louis game to lose to rutgers, or possibly pitt. That is really what will cause the comottoin. Most of the voters will vote for a team with no losses over teams with one loss even if the team's schedule isnt worth looking at.
Posted by Ecthalion (Member # 8825) on :
Rut and BSU will be the exception of tha ti think. They will not get ranked that high even if they do win out.
Posted by Ecthalion (Member # 8825) on :
just as a fyi update. Louisville is pretty much making WVU eat the turf
Posted by Ecthalion (Member # 8825) on :
WVU has started to go blow-to-blow with louis again, after letting them jump out to that big lead.
Posted by Ecthalion (Member # 8825) on :
i dunno about anyone else whos watching this game but there is something that just jumps out at you about these two teams. Their defences are horrible. Their "good" offences may not be anywhere near as good as anyone thinks they are simply because they havent faced defences that can do anything, including each other's. There are plays all game that go for 20+ yards. They are both missing tackles. Multiple tackles.... Blown coverage all over the place. Louisville is admitedly the better team in this contest. But i see rutgers giving them trouble down the road.
Posted by Ecthalion (Member # 8825) on :
well hand it to wvu for getting the last 2 stops they needed (although it was because Louis wanted to run time out) but you can pretty much give it to louisville with less than a minute and 10 point lead. Although if Louis wanted to keep hope for a NC chance they should have kept scoring. Allowing this game to get close will only favor one-loss teams.
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
I think Louisville's chances for a shot at the NC are pretty good, despite the fact that they don't play any defense to speak of.
Troy Smith is going to feast on the Cardinals.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
I learned a few things about the two teams last night.
-First off, Louisville is a good team, while WVU just has a good group of players.
If you take WVU's best two players out of the lineup (White and Slaton), they'd collapse. It showed just how much they need Slaton when he was out with an injury for much of the third quarter - and if White wasn't there, they'd have had no shot at all.
By contrast, Louisville lost star running back Michael Bush and star QB Brian Brohm at the start of the season, and stayed solid. Now that Brohm is back, they're only better.
- Another thing I noticed is that both teams are very sloppy. All the fumbles, dropped passes, tripping on the turf in the open field... the game was not as close as the score indicated, for sure.
From what my girlfriend tells me (she's studying to be an Occupational Therapist), the way the trainers were rehabbing Slaton looked as though his pinky and ring fingers on his left hand were somehow affected - which are the two fingers that provide grip strength. It's possible he was trying to play through it, but couldn't hold onto the ball well - and came out after it was obvious (the two fumbles).
- As far as Rutgers' chances, we match up better against WVU than against Louisville, but both will be hugely challenging games.
If we can harrass Brohm like we managed to do to Palko, we might have a chance against Louisville. However, Louisville has a lot better O-Line than Pitt did, and a 6'6" receiver in Uruttia that we'll have trouble with. Beyond that, our offense still isn't clicking and Rice isn't 100%. We need our freshmen and sophomore WRs to catch passes to keep Louisville's defense from packing the box.
As far as WVU, I think we can limit Slaton and White, but again our offense has to start producing. We've been strong on the road lately, but it will still be a challenging environment. We'll see.
I mean, we have some great talent on offense. Ray Rice is one of the top running backs in the country, Brian Leonard is considered one of the best fullback/all-around back in the country, and Clark Harris has been talked about as the best tight end. Beyond that, we have a crew of young, but talented receivers and a young, but talented QB. The pieces of the puzzle haven't yet come together completely, yet - mainly through lack of experience. Hopefully it will click by next Thursday. :fingers crossed:
- As far as Rutgers and the NC, even if we win out I don't think it will happen. We'd probably end up #2 in every computer, but there's no way we'd be ranked second in the Coaches or Harris polls to come out #2 in the BCS overall. Maybe if we brutally outplay both Louisville and WVU, but I don't think that will happen either.
I'm just happy for a good bowl bid, having any BCS bid at all would be cause for huge celebration. The NC just isn't really on the radar.
- The defense showed promise at times (three goal line stands by WVU) and was just terrible mostly (WVU's nonexistant pass defense, UofL's nonexistant run defense). That Louisville couldn't stop the run at all is good news for Rutgers, but if we can't keep them honest in the air it won't matter because they'll put 8 in the box every play.
Overall, neither defense was very good in the long haul. 1008 yards of total offense? 46 total first downs? 78 total points? , I mean, there were only 5 punts! Yeesh. It seems Rutgers and Cincy got the Big East's defense, and WVU and Louisville got the offense.
- Can't wait until next Thursday. Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
Louisville's O-line did an excellent job protecting Brohm. Unless Rutgers D is much better than I think they are, I don't give them much chance at harassing him.
I expect Louisville to win out, and WVU to do the same.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
I expect that, too.
Rutgers D is very good - mainly because of Schiano. He has worked as a defensive assistant/coordinator at Penn State, the Chicago Bears, and Miami during years when those defenses were very highly regarded. He knows a few things, and has players that will do anything he asks them to do. It's the only reason our defense has been as good as it is.
They weren't the most highly recruited bunch, but they play good team defense, and believe in doing their 1/11th and not overextending themselves (opening gaps). I'm far more worried about whether our pass defense can handle Louisville's receivers than whether we can bring pressure. The pressure will come - it's just when Brohm throws out of it, can we stop the receptions.
Sacks I don't know about, but he'll definitely be hurried and have to change his rythym - it's just whether that will be enough.
Edit to add: If we can get recruits like Anthony Davis to commit, the future will definitely look even brighter.
[ November 03, 2006, 10:41 AM: Message edited by: FlyingCow ]
Posted by Ecthalion (Member # 8825) on :
Rut and Pitt have more ability to pressure the QB than WVU did. They are obviously the trap games for louisville.
If rut went undefeated i dont think the computer would give them #2. The Ap poll might, but i think most 1 loss teams have an advantage at this point.
That being said Louisville can still not be #2 if they go undefeated. Uf has a good shot if they win big over 3 of the next 4 opponants. Of course the SEC TG could end that fast, but style points always count.
Im still skeptical about OSU and Mich not making it tho. Especially if Mich pulls it out by a small score.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Well, after this weekend, I'm definitely starting to agree that BSU deserves a BCS bid more than the ACC champion. It seems whenever one of their teams starts to rise in the rankings, they lose. They now have six teams ranked between 18-26 - none of them can seem to pull away from the pack.
That pretty much gives BSU a lock, because they will definitely be ranked higher than the ACC champion, unless they should lose a game this season.
Michigan and Ohio St. both showed some weakness this weekend, too, as Ball St. and Illinois sprung upset bids that fell short. Ball St, who has lost to western michigan, central michigan, and northern illinois... and Illinois, who got blanked by Rutgers 33-0. Crazy.
Totally looking forward to next Thursday.
[ November 05, 2006, 04:29 PM: Message edited by: FlyingCow ]
Posted by Ecthalion (Member # 8825) on :
Strangely enough, looking at the BSC standings now, it looks as if Tex is going to probably jump Louis and UF. Lville didnt play really good defence on WVU and has to play some pretty stiff opponants.
Tex only has to play A&M and probably Nebraska again in the Big 12 TG. UF will drop if Ark wins out, even if they beat Ark in the SEC TG it would probably drop LSU and Tenn out of respectable win rank. Not to mention that FSU looks like Lee might bring some life to it, and any spurrier team is one to worry about.
Whew... so much tension for this season. At least we wont have one of those "shared NC" this year.
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
So now WVU is 2-1 vs. teams with winning records--wins at East Carolina and over #23 Maryland and a sloppy loss at #3 Louisville.
This is good enough for #10 in the country, apparently.
BSU, on the other hand, is 3-0 vs. winning teams with victories over #24 Oregon State, #29 Hawaii, and Utah.
#14 worthy.
Wha? Why can't the poll voters admit what the computers have been telling us all season--that West Virginia is grossly overrated.
I can mostly accept #9 Notre Dame being ahead of BSU. Even though they only squeaked by #18 GT and got whooped by #2 Michigan, they've at least beat Purdue and Penn State, both 6-4.
#12 LSU played #6 Auburn tough in a 7-3 loss, and beat #16 Tennessee in Knoxville. And even though that Tennessee win is their only one over a team over .500, I give teams in the SEC a little leeway, especially when they play such awesome defense. But if they don't play impressively next week at home vs. Alabama, they're gonna lose that leeway. I can accept them ahead of BSU for now.
And I can even sorta accept Rutgers being #13, because even though they haven't played an opponent in the top 35, their wins over Ohio, Navy, South Florida, and Pitt (all winning records) combined with their better computer score make me believe that they're not as overrated as the rest of the country (outside NJ ) seems to think.
But WV at #10?! Come on, voters.
My Top 15 predictions for the coming weekend:
Ohio St. 44 Northwestern 6 Michigan 31 Indiana 13 Louisville 38 Rutgers 28 Florida 35 S. Carolina 21 Texas 34 Kansas St.20 Auburn 30 Georgia 28 Oregon 30 USC 27 Cal 44 Arizona 20 Air Force 38 Notre Dame 35 Cincinnati 28 WVU 24 Arkansas 30 Tennessee 27 LSU 38 Alabama 17 Boise State 49 San Jose St. 14 Wisconsin 24 Iowa 14
Posted by Mig (Member # 9284) on :
I'm excited for this weekend. Florida State v. Wake Forest. Can't belive I'm excited about a Wake game. Florida State is starting Xavier Lee again. He wasn't spectacular against Virginia this weekend, but he's shown some flashes of brilliance in his two starts. Our defense is getting stronger each game. With the number of freshman we're playing this year playing as well as they are, this is going to be a brutal defense next year.
I've been looking at bowl predictions and I have a question. Miami is 5 and 4, but one of their victories is against 1-AA Florida A&M. I don't think that victory counts for bowl eligibility. Am I wrong? Miami has three games left (Maryland, Virginia, and Boston College). I can see them pulling out one of those games (maybe UVA) but not two.(QB Wright has an injured thumb and may not play this weekend against Maryland, not that he'd be much help to the Canes.) Which means that if I'm right, Miami doesn't get a bowl. Don't know why that makes me so giddy? Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
One victory against a I-AA team is counted towards a team's bowl eligibility, but no more than that.
The ACC has ties to 8 bowls, so Miami is most likely going to a bowl. Sorry.
ACC bowl tie-ins:
BCS Champs Sports Peach Emerald Music City Meineke Car Care MPC Computers Gator
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
WVU is benefiting from perceptions - mainly perceptions of two games last year (Georgia and Louisville) and perceptions of the numbers their two star playmakers can put up (Slaton and White).
BSU and RU are hurt by perceptions - mainly that they haven't beaten anyone worthwhile in years.
Honestly, other than their preseason perceptions, there was no reason why L'ville and WVU were ranked ahead of Rutgers all season - seeing as Rutgers actually had a tougher strength of schedule through the first six weeks.
The Big East (to a far lesser extent) suffers the same perception problems as the WAC - they're not proven, so they can't be good. And, quite honestly, I think that's fair. With some good bowl showings this year, and continued OOC success next year, the Big East will start to prove itself more and more and wins against Cincy, Pitt, and USF will start to be perceived as more worthwhile.
If BSU and Hawaii can totally smack around their bowl opponents, and the WAC can start winning OOC games, they'll start to approach the (low) level of respect the Big East enjoys now.
As a Rutgers fan I shouldn't be saying this, but one year does not make a team. WVU and Louisville were good last year, and so they get more respect this year.
If Louisville goes 12-0 in the Big East, they'll likely play for the NC. If Rutgers goes 12-0 in the same Big East (with a comparable OOC schedule), they likely won't. Just because of Louisville's preseason perceptions and ranking.
Next year, if Rutgers goes 12-0 (which it almost definitely won't), RU will start the year in the Top 25, and we'll see how they go from there.
(As an aside about team confidence - Georgia was 20-4 (12-4 in conference) the day before the WVU bowl game last year, and is 6-5 since that day (3-4 in conference). Pretty crazy.)
Edit to Frisco: I think your prediction for the RU v. L'ville game is too high. I'd go more 28-17 or 28-20. I just don't think the total score will top 50 points.
Still, I'm hopeful that we can pressure Brohm enough and get Rice/Leonard free enough to pull out the W.
:fingers crossed:
(oh, and Air Force won't beat Notre Dame, nor will Cincy score that many points in a game against a I-A opponent this season)
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
Anytime I wonder about rankings that are close, I just imagine which team I'd favor on a neutral field were they to play next week.
I'd take LSU over the whole lot of 'em ('em being the teams Frisco mentioned). BSU and L'ville is a push, and I think BSU would also beat WVU. I don't know enough about Rutgers to make a prediction, but I think they'd lose to all of the other teams I mentioned above.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
quote:I don't know enough about Rutgers to make a prediction, but I think they'd lose to all of the other teams I mentioned above.
Then how can you make a prediction? It's like saying you don't know enough about physics to make a prediction, but you think we'll have faster than light travel in our lifetimes. The first part of your sentence cancels out the second.
Edit to add: This is probably how the polls work more often than not.
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
quote:Edit to Frisco: I think your prediction for the RU v. L'ville game is too high. I'd go more 28-17 or 28-20. I just don't think the total score will top 50 points.
I have three top 10 teams getting upset--two by unranked opponents--and that's your big beef?
I'm just not so sure that Rutgers is going to be able to stop Louisville's 39-points-a-game offense so much as they're going to end up being forced to play Louisville's game--a shootout.
But they have fewer bullets.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
We totally have fewer bullets. In fact, I think a few of the bullets are rubber... though maybe we can hit them in the eye with one of those.
In all seriousness, though, I also don't think we can stop their offense - though I'm pretty sure we can slow it down. They average 39 points against far weaker defenses than RU. I'm thinking they'll probably post in the 24-28 range (then again, I figured Navy and Pitt would, too ).
I don't think we can score enough points to top that, though, unless our offense finally gels - which it has had trouble doing.
Also, you missed the edit to my parenthetical that included two other issues with your predictions. Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
quote:Then how can you make a prediction?
By saying "I think". That was probably poorly worded. What I mean was that I feel confident about the 'predictions', and the fact that they're all better than Rutgers is just a guess, since I haven't seen Rutgers play this year.
I'm not sure how that was rofl!! funny, though.
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
quote:(oh, and Air Force won't beat Notre Dame,
Oh, so you noticed that prediction.
Notre Dame's rush defense is 45th in the country, and Air Force pounds the ball on the ground 267 yards/game.
The Irish will be relaxed after an easy week against North Carolina, and they'll be playing in Colorado against a team still high off crushing rival Army and needing two more wins this season to be bowl eligible.
And this is Notre Dame's first non-nationally televised game since 1992.
quote:nor will Cincy score that many points in a game against a I-A opponent this season)
Did you see WV play defense last week?
Neither did I.
Plus, WVU is having a major bout of NC depression, I'll bet. Knowing they don't control their own destiny as far as even the conference championship goes and being all but totally out of the NC picture, I wouldn't be surprised if they come out of the gate a lot more sluggish than usual. And with their defense, that's tough to do.
Cincinnati's rush defense is decent--15th in the country (playing a much tougher schedule than WVs #14 rush defense)--and everything depends on Slanton and White being mature enough to bounce back and find a reason to win now that "undefeated or bust" is but a memory.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
El JT, it just struck my funny bone, is all. The "I don't know enough to predict, so I predict..." nature of it. Hopefully the game Thursday will be a good showing for RU, and you'll get to see why people have been speaking so highly of them.
Frisco, Cincy has a very good defense - one I'm pretty damn worried about when RU faces them in Cincinatti. They just don't have any offense to speak of. I'm not saying they won't beat WVU (they very well might - they're a hell of a sleeper threat in the Big East), I just don't think they'll score 28 points.
Posted by Mig (Member # 9284) on :
quote:Originally posted by Frisco: One victory against a I-AA team is counted towards a team's bowl eligibility, but no more than that.
The ACC has ties to 8 bowls, so Miami is most likely going to a bowl. Sorry.
Darn! Every cloud has a silver lining: There's still joy in watching them lose in a bowl, like last years beating by LSU.
I think that the Rutgers Louisville game will be a good one. I pick Louisville, but that's a safe pick. I wouldn't be surprised if Rutgers pulled it out.
As for a match-up between Louisville and winner of the OSU/Mich. game in a NC game, I don't think eiher team has seen a offense as well coached and talented as Louisville. However, the best defensive team Louisville has faced all year was Miami, and they would have lost that one if Miami had any life on offense. That said Louisville should be given a shot at the title if they win out. Fairness should dictate that the same should be true for Rutgers, but I just can't bring myself to pick them.
Posted by Mig (Member # 9284) on :
Let me add that I'm picking Michigan to beat OSU.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
I could definitely see Michigan beating OSU.
I mean, if Illinois' defense held OSU in check, what will Michigan's defense do? Then again, Ball St took Michigan's vaunted defense for a ride, so what would OSU's offense do?
I'd like to see a double-overtime Michigan victory, but that's just me. Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
quote: I think your prediction for the RU v. L'ville game is too high. I'd go more 28-17 or 28-20. I just don't think the total score will top 50 points.
Well, you're only two field goals away (25-14) on your prediction.
If only it weren't the second quarter.
[ November 09, 2006, 09:43 PM: Message edited by: Frisco ]
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
Maybe I spoke too soon! Louisville doesn't seem to know what to do against an above average defense this half.
It'll be over 50, obviously, but I'm impressed that Rutgers has held Louisville to only 25 points so far.
Posted by Mig (Member # 9284) on :
Rutgers. Wow. What a great game. Put them in the top five or the BCS poll system has no meaning.
Posted by dab (Member # 7847) on :
top 5 is a BIG jump... congrats to Rutgers, but I would be surprised to see them in the top 5... I would bet that they move up to 7th... If they beat WV then they will move higher...
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
Not gonna happen. Not that they don't deserve it, but rarely does an upset propel a team 9 spots this late in the season.
I do think they'll jump to #10, though. #7 at the very highest, if the computers put them at #3 .
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Aside from a 30 second period where they apparently misplaced their brains under a rock and allowed a 100 yard return and 2 point conversion, Rutgers played a great game.
You can't imagine how much I was yelling at my television when our receivers kept dropping passes in the first half. Teel kept putting the ball where it needed to be, but they couldn't come down with it (even on the first play, where the receiver slowed up to try to shake off his defender and then was too short to make a reception).
I'm glad we did have a bit more of a balanced attack, though. The second half was amazing. I have to give the game ball to William Gay, though - great coming through for us in the clutch.
Schiano really found the answers at the half, though, and made the right adjustments. A bunch of mostly unrecruited defensive players just doing what he tells them to - just think when we have top flight recruits in those same positions in the coming years.
I have to say, there are plenty of good feelings in NJ tonight - and much drunken revelry in New Brunswick and Piscataway. Eight days to enjoy this win before a tough game against Cincy on the road. Just gotta keep choppin'.
My projection is a move to #9 in the AP/Coaches polls, and #8 in the BCS (obviously depending on what else happens this weekend). If we win out the year (still unlikely with tough games ahead), we'd probably rise to about #3-#5 or so. I suppose we'll see.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Oh, and Frisco, I'm hoping more and more that you're right with Cincy upsetting WVU. That way, the door would be open wider for us to win the Big East and get a BCS bowl bid. :crosses fingers:
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
I have to change my BCS Bowl predictions now.
Troy Smith vs. Colt McCoy in the NC (Texas, 37-24) Florida vs. Rutgers in the Sugar Bowl (Rutgers, 20-13) Cal vs. Michigan in the Rose Bowl (Cal, 35-32) Auburn vs. Maryland in the Orange Bowl (Auburn, 38-10) Boise State vs. Notre Dame in the Fiesta Bowl
I predict BSU beats Notre Dame 74-71. Boise's swiss cheese pass defense vs. ND's porous run defense.
Posted by Ecthalion (Member # 8825) on :
If UF or Ark or if Aub goes to CG 1 loss they will put texas out of the NC. A win by UF over a #6 or #10 will look better than an unranked nebraska that could still beat them. Same goes for Aub and Ark, they will have to play a top 10 team in the Title. However if SEC goes to NC then it will most likely be SEC(2) vs ND in the sugar.
As for strange predictions ill go ahead and predict that Cal beats USC. Mich beats OSU.... and just for kicks, Tex A&M beat Tex.
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
quote:If UF or Ark or if Aub goes to CG 1 loss they will put texas out of the NC.
You're probably right, but stranger things have happened. Texas has looked much more impressive than any of the SEC schools as of late, but it's mostly wishful thinking on my part to get the best two teams in the NC game.
Actually, you're not all right. Florida winning the SEC CG would likely put Texas out of the NC game, but I don't think either of the other two winning it would.
If USC wins out (they play #21 Oregon, #8 Cal, and #9 Notre Dame yet), then I think they could push Texas (and Florida, even) out, too.
Posted by Paul Goldner (Member # 1910) on :
THe way things are going, it will be OSU and Mich in the national title game... and from what I've seen, they are the two best teams in the country, and deserve to be there.
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
If Arkansas wins out they will have defeated (2)* Auburn, (12) Tennessee and (13) LSU having only lost to (2)* USC in the first game of the year.
IF we pull that off we deserve to be in the NC game.
But that's a big if.
Pix
(*) At the time.
Posted by Carrie (Member # 394) on :
quote:Originally posted by Paul Goldner: THe way things are going, it will be OSU and Mich in the national title game... and from what I've seen, they are the two best teams in the country, and deserve to be there.
This is my personal optimal scenario, provided the Big Ten still gets a "Conference Champion" BCS bid. Posted by B34N (Member # 9597) on :
quote:Originally posted by Frisco: I have to change my BCS Bowl predictions now.
Troy Smith vs. Colt McCoy in the NC (Texas, 37-24) Florida vs. Rutgers in the Sugar Bowl (Rutgers, 20-13) Cal vs. Michigan in the Rose Bowl (Cal, 35-32) Auburn vs. Maryland in the Orange Bowl (Auburn, 38-10) Boise State vs. Notre Dame in the Fiesta Bowl
I predict BSU beats Notre Dame 74-71. Boise's swiss cheese pass defense vs. ND's porous run defense.
Wow, Frisco, you actually think that it'll be a Texas vs. OSU Championship game. I figured that even if Michigan lost to OSU they would still keep their no. 2 seat considering they are undefeated and would only have lost to the no. 1, but I guess Texas is in the same boat. What happens if Mich beats OSU???
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
No matter who loses, I don't think they'll keep a ranking of #2 with the computer if Texas or an SEC team finishes with 1 loss. The polls are a different story, of course, but I can see either Texas or a 1-loss SEC team slipping into the #2 spot with the OSU/Michigan loser dropping to #3.
If Rutgers is undefeated, Rutgers might end up #3, with the OSU/Michigan loser dropping to #4.
Best case scenario? OSU, Texas, Florida, and Auburn all lose, Rutgers goes undefeated, and it's a Michigan/Rutgers defense-fest for the NC!
A guy can dream, can't he? Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Holy Cow. I just read on ESPN.com that a botched replay booth feed allowed the winning touchdown in last year's Rose Bowl between Texas and USC. Posted by B34N (Member # 9597) on :
Yeah, I remember that play. It should have been ruled down from what I saw on the replay and I hate when things like this pop up so late. Maybe Texas wil get another chance at the NC to rectify the call??? But then again it won't be Texas vs. USC either.
And Michigan vs. Rutgers would be an awesome NC!
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Wow.
Cal goes down.
Auburn goes down hard.
Florida gets to exhale after a game they should have probably lost. The spot the refs gave Leak on that last run of his was pretty darn favorable, setting up the game-winning TD. On top of that, if S Carolina's special teams could, you know, block, Florida's NC hopes were done. Florida did everything they could to give that game away.
Just wow.
Go Tennessee! Go Oregon!
PS - Frisco, you might want to rethink those BCS predictions again. Posted by Paul Goldner (Member # 1910) on :
Tennessee needs to win... that effectively removes arkansas, and tennessee both from the NC game. WVU, Louisville, are already out of it. Cal is now out of it. Auburn is out of it.
I'm pulling for that ohio st michigan rematch, and that becomes more likely the more of these one loss teams pick up a second Posted by Carrie (Member # 394) on :
I was at the Arizona/Cal game. It was amazing. Posted by B34N (Member # 9597) on :
Well, that Mich Rutgers NC is looking more likely after the Texas loss and the Louisville upset. Wow, what a week in college football. Without McCoy Texas didn't stand a chance though, Snead is good but he hasn't really played all season. Be interesting to see who ends up where in the BCS on Monday.
Posted by Ecthalion (Member # 8825) on :
well today certainly took the linchpin out of the BCS system didnt it.
My prediction of a OSU Mich rematch might come true....
Posted by B34N (Member # 9597) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ecthalion: well today certainly took the linchpin out of the BCS system didnt it.
My prediction of a OSU Mich rematch might come true....
Yeah, computer ranking systems just can't account for a lot of things. Being the Texas fan that I am I wonder if the computers factor in things like only losing to the #1 team and an injury to your starting quarterback. Don't get me wrong I am not saying that Texas should get anything higher than a #10 spot but I have a feeling they are going to fall farther than that and if McCoy is out for the Season than it doesn't really matter much anyhow? Posted by Paul Goldner (Member # 1910) on :
Auburn, Texas, Cal, Louisville all fall out of the NC race this weekend. Pretty much Florida, Rutgers, Mich, Ohio State, USC, Notre dame, Arkansas are all thats left, I think. Notre Dame, and Rutgers are only in the hunt if they win out, AND some of the other top teams lose again. And michigan would have to get blown out for those two teams to climb over them in the BCS, I think. Really, its probably Ohio St, Michigan, Florida, USC, and arkansas, fighting it out right now. The other two are slim hopefulls that are relying on a lot of things happening before they get in.
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
Boy, am I done making predictions. You can watch all the football you want, and still if one team comes to play, and the other doesn't, it doesn't matter if you have the #3 offense in the country or the #73 offense.
Boise State freaked me out! San Jose isn't a bad team by any means (no matter what you "power" conference snobs say ), but they took it to BSU like it was the biggest game of their season.
Which it is.
That's the rough thing about being a conference juggernaut--it's just that much easier for your opponents to get pumped up about playing you, especially in their own house.
What a crazy day!
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
I just have to quote myself for a moment:
quote:they should win out (the only possible challenge coming from San Jose state, who has the best defense of the remaining teams at 52nd scoring defense and 69th total defense)
After the half, I really thought San Jose had it. Their defense had held BSU to 6 points, and they seemed like they had control. They were even up by one after three quarters. If it wasn't for that big return in the fourth quarter, they would probably have had to go to overtime.
Well done San Jose. They played a great game.
I was amazed that Texas lost, but after hearing McCoy went out, it wasn't as shocking.
The BCS is wide open at this point. I think Arkansas will probably come out of the SEC with one loss, beating Florida in the SEC title game - but Arkansas had a longer way to climb in the rankings than Auburn or Florida.
It's possible that Rutgers could leapfrog them if they win out (which is possible, but unlikely). Then again, this is still really a building year for Rutgers, and we weren't expecting this sort of success for at least another couple of years - we're ecstatic over 9 wins, forget about what else could happen this season.
Still, I can't help but cheer on LSU to a defeat of Arkansas, and Arkansas to a defeat of Florida, leaving no one-loss SEC teams.
Edit: The computer average ranking for Rutgers is #2! We're #6 in the BCS! (why is there no fainting smiley?)
[ November 12, 2006, 09:09 PM: Message edited by: FlyingCow ]
Posted by Carrie (Member # 394) on :
Wow, Wisconsin is #9 in the BCS? Talk about awesome! I wonder if it's possible that Wisconsin goes to a BCS game even without the OSU/Michigan NC game...
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
quote:Wow, Wisconsin is #9 in the BCS? Talk about awesome! I wonder if it's possible that Wisconsin goes to a BCS game even without the OSU/Michigan NC game...
Unfortunately for Wisconsin fans, no more than two teams from any conference can play in the BCS bowls.
Posted by dab (Member # 7847) on :
I didnt know that, I guess the only way for Wisc. to get a BCS would be for Umich to slaughter OSU next week. I would love to see Umich-rutgers NC, but I dont think it is likely.
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
Well, as long as one of the two (UM or OSU) drops to at least #5, it'll be up to the BSC selection committee to choose, since unless you're in the top 4, the only way to secure an automatic bid is to win your conference.
OSU has the biggest chance to drop that far, since they dropped to #3 in the computer rankings this week. But unless they get totally embarassed by UM, I don't think it'll happen.
But it could...and then Rutgers (and Wisconsin) fans can just hope for Cal to beat USC and USC to beat Notre Dame and LSU to beat Arkansas who can beat Florida.
But Wisconsin only plays Buffalo (last place in the MAC) to finish the season, while Rutgers can get a boost in the polls by beating Cincinnati (possibly bowl bound) and #8 WVU.
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
And Colt McCoy had better be healthy by the Fiesta Bowl, so when BSU beats them, they can't come up with an excuse as to why.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Maybe Texas will hire San Jose's defensive coordinator as a consultant... then BSU would be in *big* trouble.
I'm still trying to figure out how the computers have Rutgers ahead of Ohio State. I mean, we have a lot of comparable wins... but Rutgers has an I-AA team on its schedule, and has still only played 9 games to OSU's 11. I don't get it.
Edit: I just looked, and OSU's opponents are a combined 55-62, while RU's I-A opponents are 42-37 (all opponents combine to 46-43). I guess that swings the computers?
Posted by Carrie (Member # 394) on :
Well, bugger. Forgot about that "only two teams" garbage.
Aren't there only two conferences where that would be an issue anyway? Most of the other BCS conferences have a championship game, which almost necessarily prohibits a national 1-2 ranking within the conference.
*kicks Michigan for being so darn good*
Posted by B34N (Member # 9597) on :
quote:Originally posted by Frisco: And Colt McCoy had better be healthy by the Fiesta Bowl, so when BSU beats them, they can't come up with an excuse as to why.
If Colt McCoy can go for the rest of season. He'll win the rest of the games and BSU won't stand a chance. If he isn't they'll probably lose another game and be out of it unless they can win the B12 Championship.
And I have a feeling Dame's gonna give USC their second loss. Michigan will beat OSU. Florida will lose to Western Carolina (sorry it's a dream of mine! ) And I'm pretty sure Arkansas will get taken out by LSU. Hey it could all happen. Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
In my dream world....
Ohio St. beats Michigan by at least three TDs. USC loses to Cal. USC beats Notre Dame Arkansas loses to LSU Arkansas beats Florida. Rutgers wins out.
The sad thing is, I *still* don't think they'd let Rutgers in the NC. Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
quote:If Colt McCoy can go for the rest of season. He'll win the rest of the games and BSU won't stand a chance. If he isn't they'll probably lose another game and be out of it unless they can win the B12 Championship.
What did Colt McCoy have to do with giving up 45 points to KSU (who, up to that game, had logged 15 points/game and a single win over opponents with a winning record)? What will the Texas D do against a real offense--one not led by a freshman QB who completes 50% of his passes?
BSU doesn't go to the ground game because of necessity. Jared Zebransky's more than capable of firing off a 300+ yard game, as he's proved in his 4-year career (30-5 as a starter) at BSU. Two years ago, pre-Ian Johnson, he threw for almost 3000 yards with an average of 9 yards/pass, second best average among the top 20 QBs that year--right behind #1 draft pick Alex Smith.
BSU is going to take Texas's #117 rated pass defense for the ride of its life. If Colt McCoy's healthy, he may be able to do the same to BSU (#78 pass defense). If so, it's going to be close.
I almost think having Ian Johnson sit out (partially collapsed lung in last week's game) next week at home against Utah State will help BSU prepare for either Texas or Nebraska (a similarly horrible pass defense ranking-#107).
Posted by Ecthalion (Member # 8825) on :
especially when you notice Kansas state only had 16 rush yards.
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
If by 16 you mean 69, you're absolutely correct. Of course, K-State averages only 123 yards/game on the ground, anyway, while BSU averages 227.
Posted by Ecthalion (Member # 8825) on :
16 or 69, its still a rediculously low number. And 16 was the last graphic i saw during the game. The point was to note that it was done all through the air, even when Kansas state wasnt even dedicated to the run, texas then would put more focus on the pass and still ended up losing.
to sum it up texas pass defence=suck
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
Not just suck...it is tEh suXoRz!1!!
But you're right. It is pretty telling that they knew what was coming and had the chance to gear their entire defense towards stopping it...but still couldn't.
Nebraska's got the type of balanced offense that's gona give Texas a fit, and A&M isn't too bad in that respect, either. Which disappoints me, because in addition to getting to the BCS, I'd also like for BSU to get a shot at playing a top 10 team.
Posted by Mig (Member # 9284) on :
Jeff Bowden, son of Bobby, has resigned as offensive coordinator at Florida State.
We've hit rock bottom at Florida State. We've lost every game in our division and got shut out by Wake this weekend. What was once the elite team of the last decade is in the gutter with an inept offense. Hopefully this signals our return to greatness.
Posted by B34N (Member # 9597) on :
quote:What did Colt McCoy have to do with giving up 45 points to KSU (who, up to that game, had logged 15 points/game and a single win over opponents with a winning record)? What will the Texas D do against a real offense--one not led by a freshman QB who completes 50% of his passes?
A lot actually, moral and spirit play an important role. If he keeps driving them down and scoring KS loses moral and spirit in the game and thing maybe don't go the same as they did. But they could've just as easily scored as much with McCoy in the game. Turnovers is what allowed KS to win the game. There was something like 21 points scored off turnovers in 3.5 minutes of play or something like that. I wasn't able to watch the game cause they showed the wake game instead so I don't know the exact details enough to really comment on it anymore than that.
As for their defense, yeah their secondary isn't the best out there and ranked horribly but they get the job done against much better teams. When they almost lost to Nebraska, I think it was one of the CBs that caused the fumbled that gave them the go ahead score so they do what they need to do to win games. Plus the KS quarterback is pretty good generally speaking from what I hear so he gets a lot of credit for making the great reads and capitalizing on all the UT mistakes.
If Texas beats A&M I am pretty sure they can handle Nebraska. Beyond that if they play BSU remember that Texas has the #2 rush defense in the nation and BSU isn't known for their passing game (not in the top 50 pass offense that I saw) and is big on the running game so it'll be interesting to see how far that ride you were talking about goes. I'm guessing less than 100 yds. on the ground and depending on if the secondary that day less than 250 in the air. Posted by B34N (Member # 9597) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mig: Jeff Bowden, son of Bobby, has resigned as offensive coordinator at Florida State.
Unfortunately it was inevitable because of all the talk about nepotism. Sucks cause he's not bad just hasn't had the best talent to work with lately. Aren't they sort of rebuilding their dynasty anyways?
Posted by Ecthalion (Member # 8825) on :
whereas i wouldnt think its his fault, or even bobby's for FSU's bad luck, it does have to be rooted somewhere. Watching them play this year i just dont believe they have good players, but then you look at S.Car and Spurrier has a group thats playing better than their what analysts are claiming their talent level is.
Well, im fairly certain that since Jeff is gone, Bobby will follow in a few years, although he may hold out for Joepa to get hit again and be taken out indefinately. I cant imagine who they could hire that would replace him though.
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
quote: Beyond that if they play BSU remember that Texas has the #2 rush defense in the nation and BSU isn't known for their passing game
I see you stopped reading my post after the first line.
BSU is known for its passing game. Only this year, Ian Johnson has become a star, so it's taken a backseat to the ground game. Jared Zebransky's a senior (three full seasons as a starter) who threw for almost 3000 yards two years ago and almost 2600 last year, both BI (Before Ian). He's just attempting only 2/3 the number of passes he has either of the previous two seasons because the running game is such a powerhouse. He's more than capable of exploiting a weak pass defense. He's the 13th ranked QB in the nation, and ranks 11th in yards/attempt at 8.6--ahead of one Colt McCoy.
Posted by Paul Goldner (Member # 1910) on :
yea, when somone goes ahead and does that.. im thinking they are gonna be in some trouble...
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Yikes. See, that's a little over the top.
I'm just hoping Pitt can top WVU tonight in Pittsburgh - backyard brawl and all that. If WVU gets a second loss, that really opens the door for Rutgers to win the Big East.
Granted, we have to get by a very tough Cincy squad this weekend, which will be no walk in the park. They have five losses, but four of them are away games against ranked opponents (#1 OSU, #7 Louisville, #10 WVU, #11 VTech). They're 5-1 at home, outscoring their home opponents by 130-66... and giving up only 9 points in their last two home games. They're also coming off a rough loss at WVU, and Rutgers is coming off a big win at home.
It's practically the definition of a trap game, and it makes me worried. I sure hope we can pull it out. We're only a 6 point favorite. Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
If only Pitt could have played as well in the second half! They were doing great! :sigh:
They just didn't have the defense to hold WVU for that long, and as good as Palko is he couldn't go blow for blow with Slaton and White. I mean, it really was two on one... how fair is that?
It was a good showing for Big East football, though, and a display of what WVU can do - even if they lost to Louisville. I just hope RU can win this weekend. :crosses fingers:
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
quote:It was a good showing for Big East football, though, and a display of what WVU can do
What, beat the same defense that gave up 46 points 5 days ago to the University of "They have a football team?" Connecticut?
Pitt's DEs and LBs looked like they'd never even watched video of an option offense in their lives, let alone played against one.
More and more, I'm thinking Rutgers is going to "upset" WVU. All it takes to score on them is a QB with two functional arms.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Well, to be fair, 14 of those 46 points were scored in overtime, and Connecticut is not actually as bad as all that. They have a freshman RB named Donald Brown who's just lighting up the field right now - but he's only started playing the last two games since their starter got hurt.
Pitt's defensive line is porous, admittedly. Their offensive line is mostly freshmen, too, which is how Rutgers got to abuse Palko all game.
It really seems that the defense of the league has fallen to Cincy and Rutgers, while the offense has fallen to Louisville, WVU, and Pitt.
The thing that bothers me about WVU is that, although they're sloppy and screw up 3 out of 4 plays, the plays they make are *huge*. White and Slaton are both phenomenal athletes who often do better when plays break down then when they go as planned. And they're both only sophomores.
The trick is staying consistent, forcing White to pitch the ball on the option, and keeping Slaton in check. It's not easy, because they're both freakish athletes, but if you can contain those two guys, the rest of the team can't beat you.
But let's not get ahead of ourselves - Rutgers has to get by Cincy, which will not be a walk in the park. Arguably, though, we could lose to Cincy and still win the Big East if we beat Cuse and WVU. Not that I'm advocating that route, of course.
Edit: As an aside, Rutgers has a QB with two functional arms - he's actually very good - it's just receivers that I worry about. Then again, by WVU, our senior WR who broke his ankle will be back, which should help.
[ November 17, 2006, 09:04 AM: Message edited by: FlyingCow ]
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
Well, I wouldn't say very good. He's the 89th rated QB in the country, with a 53% completion percentage (98th) and 7 TDs to go with his 9 INTs. That can't all be because of dropped passes and bad routes.
But still, he should be able to do better-than-usual damage against the WVU secondary and pass rush.
Hopefully that'll be enough, because he's not exactly mobile enough to do any damage with his legs.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
He is very good, but he's also a sophomore with all freshman/sophomore receivers. He's 34-1 in career starts between high school and college, and his only loss was at Louisville last year (where we got plastered).
There are at least four touchdown passes I can distinctly remember that were just plain dropped, and a couple of the interceptions were good passes the receiver just couldn't pull in and were tipped. On top of this, there are at least four or five easy catches the receivers drop in each game. Most of the routes are sound, they just aren't holding onto the ball.
Our starting receivers have a total of less than 15 starts between them. Freshman Kenny Britt, Sophomore Tiquan Underwood, and Redshirt Freshman Dennis Campbell are all very talented, they just haven't gotten a lot of game reps. Add to that the fact that our offense runs the ball *way* more than it throws, and they don't get so many touches in game scenarios.
All our veterans were hurt early in the season (two before the season began), and they've been forced to turn to raw, inexperienced talent.
While a lot of Rutgers fans are very critical of Teel's performance, and a lot of defensive plans are designed to force him to throw the ball, I'm not one to jump on the guy. He's very good - he was considered one of the nation's 50 best players coming out of high school (23-0 and two state championships as a starter), and was highly recruited by Penn St, BC, Maryland and Virginia.
I've got confidence in him - and I'm slowly gaining confidence in our receivers, Britt in particular. They just need to mature a bit and get some experience.
Posted by Tinros (Member # 8328) on :
How bout them Buckeyes? 42-39 against Michigan, and they're headed towards another national championship. No one beats the Lethal Nuts.
Go Bucks!
Posted by Paul Goldner (Member # 1910) on :
And that might be the type of game that allows michigan to sneak into the NC game. Sweet.
Posted by Tinros (Member # 8328) on :
Unless USC wins tonight, which they probably will. Then it'll be USC v. OSU. Which I could handle. I think my dad'll die of a heart attack if OSU has to play Michigan in the National Championship.
Posted by Paul Goldner (Member # 1910) on :
USC has to get by both cal and notre dame.
Posted by Tinros (Member # 8328) on :
I don't think Notre Dame will be an issue for them. After all, they're playing to go to the championship, and Notre Dame's already lost that chance. Unless a lot of Notre Dame players are also Michigan fans- then they'd play to have Michigan go to the championship.
Posted by Paul Goldner (Member # 1910) on :
I never buy into who has the most to play for. It always seems to work out to be "who has the better team," more then "for whom is this game more important."
Posted by Tinros (Member # 8328) on :
In this case, I firmly believe USC has both the better team and the most to play for.
Posted by Paul Goldner (Member # 1910) on :
Probably they do have the better team. But notre dame is still tough. Having "more to play for" won't help them, because notre dame will be "playing to spoil," and because if notre dame wins, they will be in a BCS bowl, and USC and notre dame are traditional rivals.
But its not a given that USC will win that game.
Posted by B34N (Member # 9597) on :
I agree Dame's got a chance and the NC may still be Michigan OSU depending on how the computers rank them. But they have only lost to the #1 team in the country. Where USC lost to an unranked team in Oregon State. So Mich may stay #2?
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Man, that Rutgers game was hard to watch. We were just awful. Just awful at every step of the way.
Some thoughts.
- Mike Teel. I take back what I said. He was just terrible tonight. I swear his favorite receiver was #21 on the Bearcats (who, by the way, has a hard time covering anyone without interfering with them... having 3 interference calls and 2 interceptions on the night)
- Where was the run? We didn't even try to run the ball. On the season, we average 21 pass plays and 40 rushing plays per game... against Cincy we attempted 42 passes and 21 rushes. Why flip-flop the game plan that has won every game so far this year?
- Where was Ray Rice? He's one of the top rushers in the country and a Heisman candidate, but was given fewer rushing *attempts* (18) than he's had all year, 9 below his average of 27 per game. Again, what's the deal?
- Our defense. All year they've set up before the play in two front to back lines, only setting up their defensive set just as the ball is about to be snapped. Tonight, they showed their defensive set well before the snap every time. A lot has been said and written about how QBs don't know what defensive set they'll have to throw against until the last minute... and we telegraphed every time tonight. Why change what's been working all year?
- Our defense, part II. Rutgers leads the country in sacks (3.89 per game). Cincy is 99th in the country in sacks allowed (2.7 per game). How did we not manage to get to the QB once? We harried Brian Brohm and Tyler Palko *far* better than a JuCo transfer last-minute replacement QB.
- Our defense, part III. Why couldn't we make tackles all of a sudden, or have any sort of pass protection? A nobody QB lit us up. There's no excuse for that.
I just don't know what to say. That's the worst I've seen them play all season. They didn't show any of the things that have made them good and went away from what brought them success all year. I'm not sure what Schiano was thinking, quite honestly.
Keeping some hope alive, if we can beat Syracuse and WVU to finish the season, we can still win the Big East. But playing the way we did, I can't see how we could beat anyone, let alone WVU.
I'm still happy we have 9 wins this year, which is the most we've had in 30 years. But I'm not happy that we lost after playing so terribly - if we'd lost after playing our best, I wouldn't have been so disappointed. This one is tough to swallow.
Posted by David G (Member # 8872) on :
Flying Cow,
I have been routing for Rutgers for the past 5 years (Greg Sciano was a friend and fraternity brother of mine at college, and I have been absolutely inspired by what he has done with the Rutgers program).
A few responses to some of your comments:
- Cincy's defense was focused on stopping Rice early in the game - that was their game plan. Then after Rutgers fell far behind, Rutgers had no choice but to throw the ball every chance they could. As far behind as Rutgers was for so much of the game, it is not surprising that Rice wasn't given more time to run with the ball.
- Cincy's back-up QB played brilliantly. I think the back-up QB may have had a style that was less susceptible to sacks than their first string QB. The back-up was not a "nobody QB" - at least he isn't a "nobody" anymore.
- Teel and his receivers haven't really been all that impressive this year. (Don't get me wrong, they have had some very good games and some great plays. But they also have been mediocre at times.) It appeared to me that the Rutgers passing game matched up particularly poorly to the Cincy defense.
- If it wasn't for the Cincy defense interfering Rutgers receivers, a couple of those penalties against Cincy would have turned into big plays (probably touch downs) for Rutgers. With just another touchdown or two in the first half, Rutgers could have kept Rice in the game and perhaps they would have kept the game close.
If anyone can turn the team around after this loss to beat Syracuse and WVU, Sciano can do it.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
I went to Rutgers. I know just how bad we have been. My four years at RU, we won 8 games total.
As poorly as we executed last night, it was still better than back then. I know Schiano will get this team back on track - he's the best thing that ever happened to the program - but the team's performance last night was not in line with anything the team had really done all year.
- I realize Cincy's defense focused on Rice early, but so has every other defense we've played all year. We came out passing early and often, and when that didn't work... we continued passing.
There were plenty of easy dropped passes, and interference calls - but there's no guarantee, based on the receivers' past performance, that they would have caught those long balls anyway.
All year it's been "chop away" - taking small chunk by small chunk and working down the field. Last night it seemed like they were trying to get all the yardage at once throwing (and missing) the longball.
The only time we saw the five- to ten-yard routes Teel's had success with was when we were already in third and long situations. We threw long when we should have been looking short, and short when we should have been looking long.
When behind to Louisville, we went with Rice and won. When behind with Cincy, we went with Teel and lost. The emphasis on passing was evident from the first quarter.
- Cincy's backup QB was a senior JuCo transfer getting his first collegiate start. While maybe not a "nobody" - he certaily isn't a Palko, Brohm, or Grothe. He was also playing behind a line that gave up 2.7 sacks per game this year - a line we didn't get through effectively once.
- You're right that the receivers haven't been good all year. They just haven't been able to connect consistently - they're young and inexperienced, though very talented. So, against one of the best defenses we've faced, why did we go to this shaky passing game so often? It seemed all we wanted to do was pass - from the first drive (3 and out) on.
- Cincy's pass interference doesn't guarantee we would have caught those passes. The interceptions didn't help, either. Down 14 coming into the second half, why didn't we go back to the ground?
There were 30 minutes left in the game. We weren't controlling the clock and we were either going 3-and-out or throwing interceptions. We only had the ball 27 minutes - when we average more like 32 minutes.
- What bothered me most was the defense. Cincy hadn't scored more than 25 points against a I-A opponent all year. They averaged 19 points and 328 ypg over their first ten games. Against the best defense they've faced (#2 pass defense, #4 total defense, #4 scoring defense, #4 pass efficiency defense) they managed to score 30 points on 402 total yards.
What I really didn't get was how our defense was lining up. In every game this year, they stood two by two, holding hands in a column extending straight back from the line. At the last couple of seconds, they scramble into positions, confusing the offensive line and QB and forcing them to get a read on the defensive set at the last possible instant.
They didn't do that against Cincy, for some reason.
I know this has been the best Rutgers season in three decades, and I still can't believe we're going to a bowl game at all, let alone for the second time in two years. I just would sting a lot less if we didn't play so poorly. It was almost like watching a different team.
If we'd been beaten after we played a good game, I'd have been been far less frustrated. As Schiano has said, it's not the result that matters, but how well you prepared and whether you played your best. It just doesn't feel like they played their best.
Posted by B34N (Member # 9597) on :
Well the top five in the BCS didn't move? Figured that OSU Michigan game being so close would keep Michigan at #2.
Posted by Ecthalion (Member # 8825) on :
It will raise hell though if 2 teams from the same conference go to the NC. I think Mich is ony there for show, they will drop if USC wins out and if UF or possibly Ark win out. That being said if USC beats Dame and somehow droppes UCLA, if UF drops FSU and Ark drops UF games. Mich will be the best 1 loss team to go to the NC.
Posted by B34N (Member # 9597) on :
quote:Originally posted by B34N:
quote:Originally posted by Frisco: And Colt McCoy had better be healthy by the Fiesta Bowl, so when BSU beats them, they can't come up with an excuse as to why.
If Colt McCoy can go for the rest of season. He'll win the rest of the games and BSU won't stand a chance. If he isn't they'll probably lose another game and be out of it unless they can win the B12 Championship.
And I have a feeling Dame's gonna give USC their second loss. Michigan will beat OSU. Florida will lose to Western Carolina (sorry it's a dream of mine! ) And I'm pretty sure Arkansas will get taken out by LSU. Hey it could all happen.
My man Colt let me down not to mention got put down for the count. What's up with the vicious blows by A&M - bad play all around! Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
Man, you're almost as bad at making predictions as I am.
Though I was pleased with myself for winning money tonight on the USC-ND game. Even doubled my winnings by giving ND 14 points, even though the spread was 7.
And man, now will the voters see how overrated WV is? I have a feeling Rutgers is going to watch a lot of film this week and figure out how to slow down the two players that are the WV offense. Of course, they also have to figure out a way to exploit the Mountaineers' total lack of defense, mainly the secondary.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
I've been saying for weeks: Stop Slaton's run, and Stop White's option. Force White to beat you consistently as a QB and Slaton to beat you as a receiver.
They can score points that way, but not nearly as consistently or as quickly as they can with the run.
I have to say, though, that USF is a good team and Grothe will be a great quarterback in a couple of years. We just barely squeaked by them, and the only teams that really manhandled them were Louisville and Cincinnati (who is also a very good team, despite their record).
I think the Big East could have a good bowl showing this year with the teams it's sending. We'll see.
If Rutgers can pull off the win in Morgantown, that will just be amazing. We've never won there, and it hasn't been many years since we lost there 80-7 at the start of Schiano's tenure.
Posted by Dr Strangelove (Member # 8331) on :
I'm proud of my Seminoles. No one expected them to win (except me), so no one was disappointed, but we gave them a run for it. If that kick return hadn't been called out ... *sigh*. It was a good game. Next year we'll be better.
Posted by sarcasticmuppet (Member # 5035) on :
BYU beat Utah with 3 seconds left!!!
*dies*
Posted by Mig (Member # 9284) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dr Strangelove: I'm proud of my Seminoles. No one expected them to win (except me), so no one was disappointed, but we gave them a run for it. If that kick return hadn't been called out ... *sigh*. It was a good game. Next year we'll be better.
Ditto. The Noles' young defense id awesome. Can't imagine how great they will be during the next few years. Next year the offense will be better because, frankly, I can't imagine they could be any worse.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
quote:Originally posted by El JT de Spang: posted August 05, 2006 01:17 PM West Virginia is the most overrated program in the country this year. Congratulations.
Forgive me for self-quoting, but given that they managed to lose two games (with a chance to lose a few more) with easily the weakest schedule out of the preseason top 25, I couldn't resist gloating.
I wouldn't argue with Jay before the season, because I knew how futile that would be. But now maybe some people will realize what anyone who watches college football already knew.
Posted by Ecthalion (Member # 8825) on :
most people who watch college football know its not about strength of schedule or quality wins. Its about popularity and whoever can grab a flash for the week.
Posted by ricree101 (Member # 7749) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ecthalion: most people who watch college football know its not about strength of schedule or quality wins. Its about popularity and whoever can grab a flash for the week.
There is far too much truth to that statement. There seriously needs to be a playoff. It doesn't have to be a big one. An eight team playoff will go a long way to getting rid of these lingering questions that pop up year after year. This whole system of just picking two teams to play each other and calling the winner the champion just doesn't sit right with me. Really, the BCS rankings aren't terrible. However, when you start getting to the difference between the number two and number three teams, that is really the sort of that should be decided on the field.
Posted by Ecthalion (Member # 8825) on :
especially when teams have to compare how good they are with many in conference teams. You end up with potentially great teams playing each other for the majority of games. making it almost statistically impossible to measure good schedule by wins v losses.
Until you have teams champion a division, then divisions champion each other there will always be questions as to who is really the best.
Posted by B34N (Member # 9597) on :
quote:Originally posted by Frisco: Man, you're almost as bad at making predictions as I am.
Yeah, I got killed in my college predictions this season. A&M always plays UT tough but that game was just rediculous. The Dame game was a blow out and I am actually glad they lost. If they had one and gone to #2 which they probably wouldn't ahve anyhow, they would've got killed by OSU. I think USC vs. OSU is going to be a much better game to watch. But then again I thought Texas was going to be defending their Title? Posted by dab (Member # 7847) on :
Although I am a UMich fan, I would like to see the NC go to OSU vs. Boise State.
IF there was a 3rd undefeated team with a harder schedule, than sure that team should go... but BSU beat Oregon State, who beat USC, so why should USC go the the NC game... especailly since UM is probably a much better team anyway, but wont go because they just played ohio state and lost.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Is WVU overrated? I don't think they are anymore - #15 sounds about right. I certainly don't see premier programs lining up to get them on their non-conference schedule, that's for sure. And I read that Louisville has been turned down by every SEC and ACC team it has contacted aside from Kentucky, who it is contractually bound to play.
On a good day, I think WVU can beat almost anyone in the country. The problem is, on a bad day they can be beaten by pretty much any disciplined defense with a good QB.
But much the same can be said about Florida - on a good day, they're tremendous, but on a bad day they need every scrap of luck they can muster and poor playing by their opponent to scrape away with a win.
It remains to be seen if Rutgers can stay defensively disciplined enough to stop Slaton's run and White's option. It also remains to be seen which Mike Teel will show up to throw. Will it be the UNC/Navy/Syracuse QB who went 39 of 61 for 506 yds, 5 TDs and 1 Int? Or will it be the Ohio/UConn/Cincy QB who went 37-82 for 444 yards, 0 TDs and 8 Ints?
If it's the former, we have a chance of winning at Morgantown. If the latter, we're going to get housed.
How big is Rutgers loss to Cincy now? Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Dab, USC has more of a right to go (if they beat UCLA next week) because they'll have beaten #6 Notre Dame, #17 Cal, #19 Nebraska, and #21 Oregon.
Who has BSU beaten that's even comparable?
Sure Oregon St beat USC, and BSU beat Oregon St. But the transitive property doesn't really work so well in college football. Cal beat Oregon St 41-13, but lost to USC 23-9.
To follow the "We beat a team that beat that other team" logic, you could say the following:
Temple beat Bowling Green, who beat Ohio, who beat Illinois, who beat Michigan State, who beat Pitt, who beat Cincinnati, who beat Rutgers, who beat Louisville, who beat WVU. Therefore, Temple is better than Rutgers, WVU, and Louisville (3 of the top 15) - all by just winning one game (their only win in the last two seasons).
From what I've seen, BSU is a good team. But to fight for a NC (and get that spot ahead of a one-loss USC or Florida), they need to have a far more challenging noncon schedule (because their conference strength is so low).
Posted by beatnix19 (Member # 5836) on :
i was real happy to see USC win. this makes things much more comfortable for me. I am in the camp that beleives the rematch between OSU and Michigan should NOT happen. I believe you have to win the conference if you want a piece of the title game. I'm confident that a remtch would only end up with the buckeyes winning by at least two touchdowns this tiem around
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
quote:Is WVU overrated? I don't think they are anymore - #15 sounds about right.
Maybe you missed the timestamp on the quoted post -- it was from preseason.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Actually, I was responding more to Frisco's post, where he said: "And man, now will the voters see how overrated WV is?"
But, you were totally right in that they were overrated in the preseason. As were Florida St, Miami, and Iowa, obviously.
Preseason polling is ridiculous, though. They shouldn't have any polls, BCS or otherwise, until Week 6. Then voters could then more objectively look at teams' performance without the baggage of the previous year.
But yeah, WVU in the teens is closer to reality.
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
quote:Actually, I was responding more to Frisco's post, where he said: "And man, now will the voters see how overrated WV is?"
I wrote that before these last BCS standings, but yeah, I do think #15 is about right. Right near the bottom of the 2-loss teams.
And now, with the season nearly over, I can more accurately pick the BCS bowls! But I'm not going to try...I'll just put in the more likely scenarios.
Michigan-LSU in the Rose Bowl. Can Michigan score enough points? The Tigers average more points on offense and fewer given up on defense than the Wolverines, and did it in a tougher conference. Oughtta be a fun one. Michigan might even have a case for the AP National Championship if they win big and USC squeaks by OSU on neutral turf.
Florida/Arkansas-Notre Dame in the Sugar Bowl. I think Arkansas and Darren McFadden would be able to hang with the ND offense, but I don't think Florida could score enough points against a 1-A opponent. But with Urban Meyer behind the wheel, anything can happen. Either way, it's a game I'll be watching.
Louisville/Rutgers/WVU-Wake Forest/Georgia Tech in the Orange Bowl. Meh. I think Louisville or WVU could run right over the average defenses of either WF or GT, and I don't think either ACC team has the offense necessary to win. Rutgers versus either would be a slug-it-out defenseive game, full of good fundamentals and rife with great coverage and open field tackling. *yawns* *stretches* *rolls over*
Boise State-Nebraska/Oklahoma in the Fiesta Bowl. Ian Johnson in a flak jacket (to protect broken ribs) vs. Adrian Peterson in possibly his first full game back from a broken collarbone would be a fun one to watch. Oklahoma's pass defense isn't nearly as horrendous as Nebraska's is, but I still think this would be a high-scoring affair that would depend on how well the star backs fare with their bodies in less than tip top shape. BSU-Nebraska would be a Boise rout.
OSU-USC in the National Championship. What a game. I think USC's constantly improving defense will do a better job stopping Troy Smith than Michigan's did, and I think they'll be able to force turnovers and score points. This one is too close to call. If the oddsmakers give USC more than 2 points, I think I'll get in on a little of that action.
Posted by Ecthalion (Member # 8825) on :
quote:Originally posted by FlyingCow: [QB] Is WVU overrated? I don't think they are anymore - #15 sounds about right. I certainly don't see premier programs lining up to get them on their non-conference schedule, that's for sure. And I read that Louisville has been turned down by every SEC and ACC team it has contacted aside from Kentucky, who it is contractually bound to play.
That is a little misleading, since Lvil hasnt contacted most of the conference teams. UGA has enterd a deal and Miss St and Vandy have not declined yet. For the most part of the SEC those are bottom feeders. The only "good teams that have rejected Lvil has been Bama and Tenn on an outright proposal.
in all honesty though... not adding Lvil isnt a sign of fear, or a sign of Lvil's strength (although i dont think they are a bad team). When you play 3, 4 or 5 ranked teams from within the conference and only have 2 out of 12 teams that continually have losing records, you can afford to play less than saavy opponants, and probably will want to to keep team healthy for conference games.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
quote:in all honesty though... not adding Lvil isnt a sign of fear, or a sign of Lvil's strength (although i dont think they are a bad team). When you play 3, 4 or 5 ranked teams from within the conference and only have 2 out of 12 teams that continually have losing records, you can afford to play less than saavy opponants, and probably will want to to keep team healthy for conference games.
I understand it's not a sign of fear - it's common sense. It's similar to the common sense that Boise St. uses to get to the BCS.
Don't play any threatening opponents unless you have to.
The SEC is very strong, and their conference schedule is brutal. It makes sense not to schedule a lot of challenging OoC games. But when strong teams refuse to play teams that are trying to beef up their schedule, they then can't turn around and say "your schedule wasn't strong enough."
I'll try to find where I read about L'ville's scheduling woes v. the SEC, but my computer's all wonky at work right now.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
I can't believe non of you mentioned the outcome of The Holy War last weekend.
It was down to the last play and what a great pass!
Go BYU! Posted by Paul Goldner (Member # 1910) on :
13-9.
Life is sweet.
Posted by Wowbagger the Infinitely Prolonged (Member # 7476) on :
I love when the BCS fails.
Maybe someday we'll finally get a playoff...Big Ten all the way
Posted by Paul Goldner (Member # 1910) on :
BCS isn't failing. The two best teams will be in the NC. Michigan and Ohio state are clearly the class of the field.
That said, we definetely need a playoff.
[ December 02, 2006, 08:54 PM: Message edited by: Paul Goldner ]
Posted by B34N (Member # 9597) on :
quote:Originally posted by Paul Goldner: 13-9.
Life is sweet.
UCLA downs USC - Craziness!
Thought that might happen, but I love when things like this happen. Ha niether USC or Texas are going back to the big show. Posted by Dr Strangelove (Member # 8331) on :
This Florida game is fun to watch. So far (1 minutes left in the game) 5 different people have thrown TD passes.
Did anyone else see that graphic comparing schedules? I don't know football teams well enough to be any judge, but it sure seemed like the commentators were saying Florida should be in the National Championship. Posted by B34N (Member # 9597) on :
Yeah, that's what they said and they may be right. Florida had a tougher schedule in comparison to Michgan. It will probably be OSU vs. Florida in the championship, which is better than the rematch if you ask me.
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
Michigan had their shot and couldn't get it done. A rematch is a silly idea. Give Florida a chance at them.
Posted by SoaPiNuReYe (Member # 9144) on :
That interception in the UCLA game...
Amazing..
Almost as good of an upset as when my George Mason Patriots beat them UCONN Huskies.
Posted by Paul Goldner (Member # 1910) on :
"Michigan had their shot and couldn't get it done. A rematch is a silly idea. Give Florida a chance at them."
Of course, that game was AT ohio, and was probably the best college game of the year. On a neautral site, I'm betting we'd get a far better game then florida/ohio st. Having seen each other before this year, means that they'll have to do different things. Rematches arent silly ideas. Rematches are what make sports great. The first time around, its about "who is the better athlete." The second time around, its "Who has the better handle on what their opponent is trying to do, and how to stop it."
And, of course, I thought the point of the NC game is to determine the best team in the country? Its one of michigan/ohio st. I want to find out which team is really better. The game a few weeks ago really didn't tell us.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Man, those of you who missed RU v. WVU missed a great game. 41-39 in triple OT, won on a broken up 2-pt conversion attempt. That game was such an emotional rollercoaster that I am totally spent.
Still, though, there are two moments that stand out clearly in my mind that should have sealed a Rutgers victory before there was ever an OT. One was entirely out of our controll, and the other was well within it.
The first was a blown call. Steve Slaton clearly fumbled the ball, and Rutgers ran it in for a touchdown. That would have been 7 points and a 27-20 lead. Instead, the ref blew the play dead, making it nonreviewable, even though on replay he clearly fumbled the ball.
Aggravating, and ultimately game-changing. I hate it when a blown call decides the fate of any game, but when it ruins our chance of winning the Big East for the first time ever, going to a BCS bowl for the first time ever, and beating WVU in Morgantown for the first time ever... I hate it even more.
The second moment was entirely in our control, when junior transfer WR James Townsend (who has a total of 9 career receptions) dropped a perfectly thrown TD pass in the endzone at the end of regulation. That *also* would have made it 27-20.
Also aggravating, but at least something that was within our control.
Great game, still, though. I'm sure it had ridiculous ratings in the NY/NJ area.
I just wish that essentially one blown call in an otherwise great game didn't change our bowl prospects from the Orange Bowl to the Texas Bowl.
Edit: Reading about it on some forums, another bad call was brought up. In the second OT, WVU's QB ran back about 15 yards, pursued by RU defenders, when he threw the ball way out of bounds. Problem is, he never left the tackle box, and that should have been intentional grounding, which is a spot foul with loss of down. Also aggravating.
[ December 03, 2006, 01:35 AM: Message edited by: FlyingCow ]
Posted by Rohan (Member # 5141) on :
Flying cow, if you see a replay of that play, you'll see that, despite him not having left the tackle box, there's clearly a receiver in the area. I'll grant you that it was probably just dumb luck that there was a receiver in the area, but still.
You are totally right about the fumble, though.
My thoughts on the BCS, condensed down from 4500 words: If Michigan doesn't get a shot to play in the NC game, it'll be a travesty. If Florida doesn't get a shot to play in the NC game, it'll be a travesty. Down with the BCS. Up with an 8 team playoff.
Posted by Ecthalion (Member # 8825) on :
quote: Of course, that game was AT ohio, and was probably the best college game of the year. On a neautral site, I'm betting we'd get a far better game then florida/ohio st. Having seen each other before this year, means that they'll have to do different things. Rematches arent silly ideas. Rematches are what make sports great. The first time around, its about "who is the better athlete." The second time around, its "Who has the better handle on what their opponent is trying to do, and how to stop it."
And, of course, I thought the point of the NC game is to determine the best team in the country? Its one of michigan/ohio st. I want to find out which team is really better. The game a few weeks ago really didn't tell us.
sayinging that a team loses because its home field isnt a strong arguement. Comparing their records, and the records and stats of the teams they play could be considered legitimate data for arguement. In those cases Florida wins by a large margin. Saying Mich is "clearly" the second best team is a little misleading because up until today USC was "clearly" the second best team even with a loss to an unranked.
UF v Ohio is really the only way you will settle this. If OSU is as good as everyone hypes them to be then this should be an easy win, and it will confirm their dominance. If UF wins it will confirm that the way teams are ranked is flawed. You cant judge "stylish" wins and losses because the rankings are a popularity contest. Is Wisconsin really a top 10 team? (example) They play one ranked team and lose to them, how valuable is their ranking #? ND has played 3 ranked teams and got blown out by 2 of them. How valuable was their #2 and #6 tags?
Mich would be a pretty lame game. Uf might be a bad one... but at least you can then compare Big 10 strength vs SEC.... not Big 1 vs little 2
Posted by Paul Goldner (Member # 1910) on :
" Comparing their records, and the records and stats of the teams they play could be considered legitimate data for arguement. In those cases Florida wins by a large margin."
I don't agree with that at all. Michigan has the number 3 schedule in teh country, florida 1. Thats not a large margin. Thats "statistically no different."
"Saying Mich is "clearly" the second best team is a little misleading because up until today USC was "clearly" the second best team even with a loss to an unranked."
I disagree. USC was never the second best team in the country, they just gets lots of love from the national press.
"You cant judge "stylish" wins and losses because the rankings are a popularity contest."
I agree. But your wisconsin and notre dame examples, to me, are the same as most of the SEC games florida plays... are these teams they beat REALLY that good? I don't think they are... the SEC teams get their awesome rankings on popularity contests just as much as wisconsin or notre dame do.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
I just can't stop thinking that if the refs hadn't totally screwed up the Oklahoma/Oregon game, that there wouldn't be as much argument over a Ohio St (12-0)/Oklahoma(12-1) NC game. Michigan wouldn't even be in the picture - just Florida or Oklahoma, and I think Okla would have taken it.
I mean, if the refs hadn't handed the game to Oregon, Oklahoma would have had wins over #18 Oregon, #19 Nebraska, #21 Texas A&M, and #23 Missouri - with their only loss coming against #7 Texas.
Then again, maybe I'm just a little ref-biased after watching them take the Orange Bowl away from us by blowing a fumble play dead three seconds after the ball was loose.
Posted by Wowbagger the Infinitely Prolonged (Member # 7476) on :
quote:Originally posted by Paul Goldner: BCS isn't failing. The two best teams will be in the NC. Michigan and Ohio state are clearly the class of the field.
That said, we definetely need a playoff.
I stand by my statement, once again the BCS has failed to produce a clear match-up of the top 2 teams.
Posted by Ecthalion (Member # 8825) on :
quote:Originally posted by Paul Goldner: " Comparing their records, and the records and stats of the teams they play could be considered legitimate data for arguement. In those cases Florida wins by a large margin."
I don't agree with that at all. Michigan has the number 3 schedule in teh country, florida 1. Thats not a large margin. Thats "statistically no different."
thats only based off wins v and the other teams rank. When you take into the teams that they play's ranking in offence and defence and in wins of those teams and their opponants UF plays statistically tougher teams.
quote:"Saying Mich is "clearly" the second best team is a little misleading because up until today USC was "clearly" the second best team even with a loss to an unranked."
I disagree. USC was never the second best team in the country, they just gets lots of love from the national press.
they were ranked #2, since its the only way people judge whos where they were considered the second best. Under all forms of logic no one really knows wehre anyone places because no one plays all 118 other teams.
quote:"You cant judge "stylish" wins and losses because the rankings are a popularity contest."
I agree. But your wisconsin and notre dame examples, to me, are the same as most of the SEC games florida plays... are these teams they beat REALLY that good? I don't think they are... the SEC teams get their awesome rankings on popularity contests just as much as wisconsin or notre dame do.
Except that you can once again compare the stats of the teams they play. This isnt fool proof because there are stats that get inflated by teams who play bad teams. The SEC has been titled the "toughest" conference for many, many years, not the "best" but the "toughest". Since the announcers and voters all like to see high flying west coast offences over hard hiting defences its hard to say that the SEC rides the same popularity wave of USC and ND. Secondly SEC has the most out of conference wins and most out of conference bowl wins. It also has the least dispairity top to bottom between teams stats.
but it doesnt matter in the end... Florida gets the vote. If OSU whoops them, no surprise, if UF upsets, big surprise.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
I really hope OSU dismantles Florida and Urban Meyer has an anxiety attack at the start of the fourth quarter when he looks up to a 42-10 scoreboard. Maybe that would stop his whining.
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
There's another point to be considered - Florida won their conference championship, playing an extra game Michigan did not. Would it really be right for Michigan to advance to the championship game without even winning their conference? I say no.
If you can't win your own conference, you don't deserve to play for the national champsionship. If Michigan were the best team in the country, they would have beaten Ohio State. Regardless of where the game was played. "We're the best team in the country! That is, if we get to play our tough opponents at home or in a neutral sight."
Ohio State deserves to be in the game. They've proven it on the field. Florida is the "best of the rest". Ohio State will rightfully be favored by a large margin. As an SEC fan though, I'm hoping Florida beats them.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
However, if Michigan had won, the NC would have almost definitely been a rematch game with OSU.
Personally, I want Florida to lose because Urban Meyer hasn't stopped running his mouth all year, even when it takes three blocked kicks to beat a South Carolina team they should have dominated. His ego needs some deflating.
I don't care enough either way about either team to root for one or the other, but all the press I've seen with Urban Meyer has annoyed me. If nothing else, I'd like to see him blown out to knock the smug look off of his face.
This is similar to why I like watching the UConn women lose at basketball, because Geno Auriemma is a jerk.
Also, as an aside, if you're looking for the "Best Two" teams in the country, I'd have to go with OSU and Michigan. If we agree that OSU is the best, who has more of a chance to beat them on a neutral field? I'd say Michigan, and that's why I'd say they are a better team than Florida - all hard data and statistics aside.
Posted by Ecthalion (Member # 8825) on :
Meyer has actually had less to say about the title game than you are giving him credit for. All the quotes that are circulating about him "jockying" for Florida's chance at the BCS come from reporters asking him if he believes they belong. Its not like hes Tubervill or WVU who start jockeying before half the season is over.
Interesting how people point to the SC game as a low point in UFs year when it was actually a clean and well played game by UF. SC has good QB's and at least one very good WR. You give that type of setup to spurrier and you have a team that just barely lost to some of the toughest teams in the league, and eventually pulled it off against Clemson. They pick that as weak but chose to skip over the Illinois and Ball state games that are much worse teams than SC.
Saying that somone is better despite all hard evidence is really illogical. Also the idea was to keep the champion legitimate. By playing the top from two conferences, which are really the only strong conferences this year, with what looks like the BE coming up in third(strangely). If Mich beats OSU then what? They have the same record and then the loss to a team they beat already, how is that fair to OSU? Not to mention if UF went to a different Bowl and won, then theyd have a win over OSU or Mich and theyd all have 1 loss. How would that be fiar to them? If OSU won, especially if the Gators won another bowl game it would beg the question of could OSU have actually been better than florida having both won 13 games, UF actually having to play 14 wich gives them an extra chance to lose that OSU doesnt have.
If Mich can really beat OSU then why didnt they bring their A-game the first time? If you cant show up when you are supposed to why should you expect to be given the chance when theres somone who is in the least, as qualified as you and statistically more qualified?
I hope Florida wins just to keep the BCS controversey alive.
Posted by Rohan (Member # 5141) on :
The point should be that, even if it'd been Florida who was left out, the system sucks. It fails many more times than it succeeds. Even the times it succeeds are tainted because of the times that it fails. The fact is, you have (at least) three teams who are very deserving of a shot at the national championship, but only two slots, and, let's face it, the slots are awarded based on subjectivity and some-guy's-personal-opinion, for Pete's sake. Even a measly four-team playoff would go a long ways toward cutting down on the suckiness. In my ideal situation, it's an 8 team playoff, you eliminate the totally ridiculous and indefensible FIFTY DAY LAYOFF between the last game and the postseason, and then we're arguing over whether Auburn or Oklahoma should get in as the 7th and 8th seeds instead of Wisconsin and Boise State (for my money, I'd let Oklahoma in, instead of Wisconsin but seed Boise St. 7th and Oklahoma 8th). You think that won't be as exciting debating the merits of those teams? AND, you can say at the end of your argument "well, I guess we'll see next week" instead of "Michigan would definitely beat the University of Whatever by two touchdowns" (because you don't know, if you did you'd be rich betting on UCLA Saturday).
Frankly, speaking subjectively (as the college football gods have decreed we MUST speak) I'd take LSU against pretty much any team right now. In an eight team playoff, I might put my money on the Bayou Bengals.
Posted by Rohan (Member # 5141) on :
Just read this article at SI.com about the BCS and this comment was made:
quote: Even if academia's powers-that-be had a sudden change of heart tomorrow and instituted a playoff, there would still be someone, somewhere determining who plays in it.
That's the point. It's much better and much more legitimate to have the debate be over who gets in at 7th and 8th, rather than 2nd. I mean, Wisconsin fans will be up in arms, but realistically, they'd have a very outside chance of winning 3 games in a row against top 10 opponents. And all the teams that everyone KNOWS should have a shot WOULD have a shot, instead of all of them being shut out except for ONE.
Posted by zgator (Member # 3833) on :
quote: Personally, I want Florida to lose because Urban Meyer hasn't stopped running his mouth all year, even when it takes three blocked kicks to beat a South Carolina team they should have dominated. His ego needs some deflating.
Sorry, but too someone who was in school when Spurrier was the coach, that's funny. Meyer is meek and mild when compared to Spurrier.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Not saying Spurrier doesn't have an ego, I'm just saying Meyer's just grates on me. Every time I watch him he seems like a pompous jerk - you know, the sort who always plays the arrogant stock broker foil in movies and tv. You know, the guy dating the girl the protagonist eventually ends up with in the end.
I don't know why, it's just a feeling I get from him. He's not someone I'd invite over for dinner, that's for sure.
That all said, I don't want him to win.
I also don't want Florida to win, because that would validate the BCS's choice of picking them over someone else. In fact, I want them to get blown out to more clearly show that they were not the second best team in the country at all, and the system is just *that* broken.
As far as Florida, I know they played a hard schedule, and they also barely scraped by more than once. I kind of see them almost like Notre Dame - often coming away with a W after being outplayed most of the game. I guess we'll see what happens.
On an unrelated subject:
The Big East bowl situation is awful. We're sending 5 of our 8 teams to bowls, but three of them no one's ever really heard of, and the other two are against ACC teams.
Louisville v. Wake in the Orange (where hopefully the Cards will pound on Wake and show Miami, BC, and VTech just what a great idea it was to jump ship)
WVU v. GTech in the Gator (our runner-up v. the ACC runner-up? So, neither of our top two teams get to play Pac-10, Big 10, Big 12, or SEC teams... great)
Rutgers v. Kansas St. in the Texas Bowl (The inaugural Texas Bowl. Broadcast on NFL Network, which is not carried on any NJ cable provider. Wonderful. Rutgers played in two of the top 5 rated sports events in the NY/NJ area, and it's going to be on a network that only comes in satellite sports packages.)
Cincy v. Western Michigan in the Independence Bowl (It's in Canada. In January. Against the MAC. But at least it's on ESPN2)
USF v. East Carolina in the inaugural PapaJohns.com Bowl (Against the C-USA. But at least it's also on ESPN2, and in a warm climate.)
I'm hoping for the BE to go 5-0, but to have arguably the third strongest conference end up in the papajohns.com, independence, and texas bowls, with its two major bowls against the ACC, is a little weird.
[ December 04, 2006, 11:41 AM: Message edited by: FlyingCow ]
Posted by Architraz Warden (Member # 4285) on :
Actually, of all the NC matchups I'd like to have seen, Ohio State vs. Oklahoma would have topped the list.
As much as I agreed with the NCAA's ruling at the time, now I wish they had gone with OU's preferred solution and simply thrown the game out. Oh well, at least they get a BCS bowl I suppose...
And stupid Texas Tech, making me go to their bowl game by having it where I live. Now I'll be working a total of 1.5 days that week.
Posted by Carrie (Member # 394) on :
quote:In my ideal situation, it's an 8 team playoff, you eliminate the totally ridiculous and indefensible FIFTY DAY LAYOFF between the last game and the postseason, and then we're arguing over whether Auburn or Oklahoma should get in as the 7th and 8th seeds instead of Wisconsin and Boise State (for my money, I'd let Oklahoma in, instead of Wisconsin but seed Boise St. 7th and Oklahoma 8th).
I'm sorry, but how the heck does Boise State get into the playoffs over Wisconsin? Personal bias aside, the Big Ten is far more difficult to come out of with an 11-1 record than the Western Athletic Conf. with a 12-0.
Also, I'd like to remind everyone that these are student-athletes, and the fifty-day layoff that would become a playoff time is finals. Many of the star players have their hands held through this period, but there are also the bench-warming Genetics majors who lend credibility and their GPAs to the team. That is why there will not be a playoff.
Posted by Ecthalion (Member # 8825) on :
Boisie state is in it because of the rule that allows mid-major conferenced to have an automatic at-large spot. Its close to ND's setup how they get into a BCS. ND must finish in the top 8 and ahead of a BCS conference champion to be gauranteed a slot in the BCS, a mid-major conference must finish in the top 12 and ahead of a BCS conference champ to get the autobid. This is allow teams who dont get a chance to play the "powerhouse" teams a shot at winning big. If you ask me its not a very good plan but hey, whatever makes them money.
Posted by Carrie (Member # 394) on :
Oh, sorry, I meant the hypothetical playoff situation. I get the BCS. Posted by Paul Goldner (Member # 1910) on :
You know, EVERY OTHER college sport finds a way to do playoffs. I don't find the college athlete argument compelling, since all the other athletes are playing during finals too.
Posted by brojack17 (Member # 9189) on :
My beloved Sooners revived their season. Played without a surefire Heismann candidate, overcame losing a game due to officiating, got a little lucky when Texas lost to A&M, and beat Nebraska in the Big 12 Championship. What do we get for all of that?
A chance at Boise State.
Sure, it's a BCS game. But Boise State.
I hope I didn't offend anyone from the great state of Boise, but I am not excited about this game.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Actually, a non-BCS conference has to either finish in the top 12 (which Boise did ) OR finish in the top 16 and ahead of a BCS conference champion (which it also did).
I don't know ND's deal, specifically.
Personally, I'd be happy with the "plus one" system I read that someone has proposed. Essentially, the NC is not determined until *after* the BCS bowls, and plays the following week. That way, if you pit Michigan v. Florida in the Rose Bowl, for instance, you'd be able to more clearly put the winner in the Championship game.
It's an interesting way of doing things.
And, by the way...
Schiano turned down Miami. Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Well, bro, you just have to make sure that you aren't BSU's statement win. Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
quote:I'm sorry, but how the heck does Boise State get into the playoffs over Wisconsin? Personal bias aside, the Big Ten is far more difficult to come out of with an 11-1 record than the Western Athletic Conf. with a 12-0.
Did you see Wisconsin's schedule this year? They beat two teams with winning records--Penn State and Purdue. And Purdue lost to Hawaii, who Boise State beat.
BSU manhandled the #22 team in the BCS (a 28-point win over Oregon State) and beat the #31 team (Hawaii), too. Wisconsin beat #26 Penn State 13-3.
Wisconsin's 11 wins were over opponents with a combined 53-79 (.402) record. They got whooped by Michigan and didn't even play Ohio State.
Boise, on the other hand, beat 6 bowl-eligible teams (compared to Wisconsin's 4) and their victims had a combined record of 68-78 (.466)
AND they had the added disadvantage of having every single team they played trying to be the one to knock off their conference juggernaut and one of only a few undefeated teams in D-1 football.
We'll find out in the Capital One Bowl against Arkansas if Wisconsin is overrated, or merely untested.
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
And don't even start with the "Oklahoma got a lame deal" whining. Their schedule was almost as much of a cakewalk as Wisconsin't was. They beat as many top 40 BCS teams as Boise State did (2), one by a single point, and one in a sloppy Big 12 Conference Championship game.
And even though they ultimately shouldn't have lost that Oregon game, they did give up 533 yards of offense to the now-unranked Ducks and didn't look impressive in the process. Luckily, Dennis Dixon is an interception throwing machine and the Ducks put the ball on the ground three times (Oklahoma recovered twice).
Oklahoma-BSU will be an exciting game, especially if AP is playing at close to 100% (though he'll certainly be rusty). The line right now is BSU+8.5, and I think that's crazy talk. I think BSU is going to pull this one out.
Posted by Carrie (Member # 394) on :
quote:Originally posted by Paul Goldner: You know, EVERY OTHER college sport finds a way to do playoffs. I don't find the college athlete argument compelling, since all the other athletes are playing during finals too.
Which ones are those? I know Women's Volleyball does, but the basketball playoffs aren't during finals, and cross country's over for both men and women, which is before finals; men's golf playoffs aren't until June, which is after finals...; hockey's at the same time as basketball; crew's after finals in June again... I'm confused. Posted by Wowbagger the Infinitely Prolonged (Member # 7476) on :
quote:Originally posted by Carrie:
quote:Originally posted by Paul Goldner: You know, EVERY OTHER college sport finds a way to do playoffs. I don't find the college athlete argument compelling, since all the other athletes are playing during finals too.
Which ones are those? I know Women's Volleyball does, but the basketball playoffs aren't during finals, and cross country's over for both men and women, which is before finals; men's golf playoffs aren't until June, which is after finals...; hockey's at the same time as basketball; crew's after finals in June again... I'm confused.
I don't think he means anyone else has playoffs around this time. I think he's saying other sports play during finals. I checked the NCAA Hoops schedule, the only 3 days without games are Dec 24-26th.
-edited for spelling-
Posted by Mig (Member # 9284) on :
I can't belive that Schiano turned down Miami. Rutgers gave him an extension that uped his annual income to $625,000, with incentives. But Coker was making about 2 million. If he'd accepted Miami, Schiano could have at least doubled his earnings and coached at a school with NC potential. Is he holding out for a better offer? Maybe Penn State down the line? Does he know about some problems at UM that he doesn't want to be a part of? Just speculating, because I can't understand the decision. Sure he loves Rutgers, but he should strike while the iron is hot. I don't mean to disrespect Rutgers fans (please forgive me if I do), but he should try to stretch his abilities into a program that offers more upside. This is the most successful year Rutgers has had in decades, and it ends up in the innuagural Texas Bowl and I'd be surprised if Rutgers could repeat the success of this year any time soon. Alternatively, Miami, recent history excepted, should expect to compete for NC's or BCS bowl bids year after year. Whatever his reasoning, if I were a Rutger's fan I'd be happy today.
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
quote:Does he know about some problems at UM that he doesn't want to be a part of?
Problems? At Miami? Please.
Posted by Ecthalion (Member # 8825) on :
maybe he just likes Rutgers... wouldnt a NC be a slap in the face to all the other teams if he wins one or more there? Heck.. that would be worth it in and of itself....
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
quote:Originally posted by Rohan: Just read this article at SI.com about the BCS and this comment was made:
quote: Even if academia's powers-that-be had a sudden change of heart tomorrow and instituted a playoff, there would still be someone, somewhere determining who plays in it.
That's the point. It's much better and much more legitimate to have the debate be over who gets in at 7th and 8th, rather than 2nd. I mean, Wisconsin fans will be up in arms, but realistically, they'd have a very outside chance of winning 3 games in a row against top 10 opponents. And all the teams that everyone KNOWS should have a shot WOULD have a shot, instead of all of them being shut out except for ONE.
Thank you. It's so frustrating how deliberately obtuse Bowl Series supporters seem to be.
-o-
The other college football divisions can manage a playoff. When I was a kid, the season was shorter--ten games was typical. Now we have twelve games, minimum, plus possibly a conference championship, plus several bye weeks. The argument that there isn't time for a playoff is specious.
-o-
I don't think a Florida win validates the BCS. On the contrary, that creates a possible situation with a half-dozen teams that have just one loss. One could certainly argue that Michigan could defeat Ohio State on a neutral field, and Florida as well. A Florida victory on a neutral field does not prove Florida could defeat Michigan. Personally, I am rooting for a Florida victory because I think it leaves the BS in the most embarrassing position.
Posted by Paul Goldner (Member # 1910) on :
"Wisconsin's 11 wins were over opponents with a combined 53-79 (.402) record. They got whooped by Michigan and didn't even play Ohio State."
Erm. If you watched that game, they did NOT get whooped. They played michigan closer then anyone other then ohio state did all year.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Here's a little bit of background on the decision.
- First, Schiano is going to make about $1.25 million this year at Rutgers with incentives. This Sunday, Rutgers put together a 10 year, $20 million counteroffer in case Schiano was tempted, and he is already back in contract negotiations. More than the money, he wants a commitment to the program by the administration and expansion of the stadium.
- Second, Rutgers has definite championship potential, and if he stays long term, it will be a perennial top 10 program and NC contender. That's been his belief since he took over the program in 2000, and it's his belief today. It's just that more people are starting to come around to his way of thinking. There is immense talent in the state, it's just that other schools have cherry picked it for decades. You keep that all at home, and you've got a juggernaut of a program.
- Rutgers offers a lot more upside than Miami, and a lot less downside. Coker was fired after going 59-15 with a NC. If he did that in NJ, they might have elected him governor. Plus, with the new expansion plans to bring Rutgers into the 80k seat range, there will be plenty of money in the metro area to pay for the program. Rutgers is in the #1 media market in the world, and started capitalizing on it this year.
- Rutgers will have 9 wins next year at least, and again has the potential to go undefeated. It's a young team. This past year was the best freshman class in RU history, and now next year's is. Rutgers is on the rise, and Miami is falling apart at the seams.
- Miami has the some of the worst facilities in the country, a reputation for thuggery, an administration that turns a blind eye to the problems, and a penchant for losing star FL recruits to neighboring progams - and to Rutgers. And Schiano knows that better than anyone, because he worked there.
- If he stays long term, Schiano has the potential to be the next Paterno, Holtz, Lombardi, Bowden, etc. Coaches don't stay long term at Miami.
I think it's a good move. He's got a vision and he's following it - so far it's paid dividends.
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
quote:Erm. If you watched that game, they did NOT get whooped. They played michigan closer then anyone other then ohio state did all year.
Erm, what about Penn State and Ball State, both of whom had chances to win in the fourth quarter?
Posted by Ecthalion (Member # 8825) on :
quote:I am rooting for a Florida victory because I think it leaves the BS in the most embarrassing position.
im not sure i see how that would be embarassing....
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
A Florida victory would vindicate the BCS system. It would mean that they did pick a #2 with parity to the #1, despite all claims that it should have been a Michigan rematch. If Florida gets annihilated, then people will say "See? It should have been Michigan".
Regardless, though, unless Florida does better than Michigan did against Ohio St., people will say they don't deserve to be there. And Michigan lost by 3 in the final minutes on OSU's home field.
Florida wins, and there is vindication for the choice. Florida gets run out on a rail, and people will just shake their head and say the BCS is still broken.
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
quote:Michigan lost by 3 in the final minutes on OSU's home field
They only led for seven minutes, trailed for more than three quarters, and only had the ball twice with the opportunity to take the lead in the second half (and went 3 and out both times).
To say they lost in the final minutes is misleading. The Buckeyes moved the ball at will. Going into the half with a 14 point lead made OSU complacent and bored. They started the third quarter looking sluggish. They got sloppy in the second half and had no real sense of urgency. Were it not for the freak accident that was Troy Smith's only interception, Michigan loses by 13 even with OSU playing half-assed.
Michigan never had a chance. Sometimes I wonder if other people were watching the same game as I was.
[ December 05, 2006, 01:14 AM: Message edited by: Frisco ]
Posted by Mig (Member # 9284) on :
quote:Originally posted by FlyingCow: - Miami has the some of the worst facilities in the country, a reputation for thuggery, an administration that turns a blind eye to the problems, and a penchant for losing star FL recruits to neighboring progams - and to Rutgers. And Schiano knows that better than anyone, because he worked there.
Amen, Brother.
quote:- If he stays long term, Schiano has the potential to be the next Paterno, Holtz, Lombardi, Bowden, etc. Coaches don't stay long term at Miami.
I think it's a good move. He's got a vision and he's following it - so far it's paid dividends. [/QB]
It would be great if you turn out to be correct. College Football would benefit from having one more Northeast team that can build a fan base. But I would be cautious. But one successful year is not enough to turn Schiano into the next coaching legend. Plenty of underdogs/undervalued programs have had great years then tanked in subsequent years. I'm not convinced that Rutgers can do that until it does remain for competitive for year after year. On the other hand look at what Patrino has done at Louisville; they've been able to maintain and grow their excellence.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Well, if you look at 1996-2000, the years I was an undergrad, our records were 2-9, 0-11, 5-6, and 1-10... for 8 wins over four years.
When he took over the program in 2000, it was about as low as it could get. In his first three seasons he won only 4 games, and no conference games, as he was building the program, improving the facilities, and recruiting players like Brian Leonard, Shawn Tucker, Ryan Hart, and Clark Harris.
In 2004, we went 4-7, then in 2005 we went 7-4 (first bowl appearance in 27 years), and in 2006 we've gone 10-2 (first back-to-back bowl appearances ever), as the recruits became more talented and he got more Jersey guys to stay home.
Now Rutgers has some of the best facilities in the country, several former NFL assistant coaches on the staff, continually improving recruiting classes, and massive popular appeal.
Five years ago, they were giving tickets away for free. Bought a Basketball ticket? Have a free football ticket for next year! Bought a football ticket? Have two free football tickets for your friends!
This year we averaged 41,150 in a stadium with a 41,500 capacity, and tickets to the Louisville game were going for $600+ a pair.
The future is looking bright, and I'd expect us to have at least 7 wins a year for a while and start making bowls a habit.
Posted by brojack17 (Member # 9189) on :
quote:Originally posted by Frisco: And don't even start with the "Oklahoma got a lame deal" whining. Their schedule was almost as much of a cakewalk as Wisconsin't was. They beat as many top 40 BCS teams as Boise State did (2), one by a single point, and one in a sloppy Big 12 Conference Championship game.
And even though they ultimately shouldn't have lost that Oregon game, they did give up 533 yards of offense to the now-unranked Ducks and didn't look impressive in the process. Luckily, Dennis Dixon is an interception throwing machine and the Ducks put the ball on the ground three times (Oklahoma recovered twice).
Oklahoma-BSU will be an exciting game, especially if AP is playing at close to 100% (though he'll certainly be rusty). The line right now is BSU+8.5, and I think that's crazy talk. I think BSU is going to pull this one out.
No whining here. If OU had played in that game the way they did toward the end of the year, it would have been a non-issue. You do have to admit, the refs blew that call.
The Big 12 championship game was a great game. Especially for OU's defense. How many times in the second half did OU stop Nebraska when they started with great field position.
I'll take this season over most for sure. I would just hope to get more out of the BCS game than Boise State.
I just hope it's a good game. I hate for the final game of the year to be a blowout. (See OU vs. USC from a couple of years ago. Unfortunately, OU was on the wrong end of the blowout)
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
If nothing else, there are some compelling games to watch. I definitely want to watch OSU v. Florida, and also Michigan v. USC. I'll watch Louisville/Wake in the hopes that Wake will get plastered, and I'll watch BSU/Okla just to see if BSU is for real or not.
I don't have any interest in ND/LSU other than hoping LSU beats them soundly, continuing ND's streak of not being able to win a bowl game, despite the unflagging respect the voters give them every year.
And I'm hoping to go to Houston for the Rutgers game, if my boss will let me off work for two days. :fingers crossed:
Posted by brojack17 (Member # 9189) on :
quote:Originally posted by FlyingCow: If nothing else, there are some compelling games to watch. I definitely want to watch OSU v. Florida, and also Michigan v. USC. I'll watch Louisville/Wake in the hopes that Wake will get plastered, and I'll watch BSU/Okla just to see if BSU is for real or not.
I don't have any interest in ND/LSU other than hoping LSU beats them soundly, continuing ND's streak of not being able to win a bowl game, despite the unflagging respect the voters give them every year.
And I'm hoping to go to Houston for the Rutgers game, if my boss will let me off work for two days. :fingers crossed:
You will like Reliant Stadium if you have not been before. I lived in Houston for five years and got to see the Big 12 champ game there in 2003. Very nice stadium. Plenty of tailgating.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
My girlfriend and I wouldn't be able to get there until like 2 pm on the day of the game - then it would be lots of tailgaiting, selling the t-shirts I designed, and hopefully a great game.
After that we want to check out NASA, definitely. Is there anything else of serious interest in Houston we wouldn't want to miss?
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
Dunno if you'll be awake the morning after the game, but I recommend the breakfast klub. This place breaks (shatters, actually) my cardinal rule about intentional misspellings, but man, it's worth it. It's a bit pricey (10-12 bucks a person for breakfast), but you won't finish your meal. And it's freaking delicious. Waffles, pancakes, grits, eggs, fried catfish and wings, and any other breakfast food you may want.
Posted by Mig (Member # 9284) on :
Essentially, the arguement is that the BCS exists to determine who is number one and deciding who is number two is not what the BCS is for. Michigan already showed us that it is not number one by virtue of losing tot he number one team, so that leaves UF. I never looked at this from this perspective before. This is also the best justification for the BCS system I've ever read. I like the BCS and think that part of the fun of college football is the debating about who should be ranked where.
Posted by brojack17 (Member # 9189) on :
quote:Originally posted by FlyingCow: My girlfriend and I wouldn't be able to get there until like 2 pm on the day of the game - then it would be lots of tailgaiting, selling the t-shirts I designed, and hopefully a great game.
After that we want to check out NASA, definitely. Is there anything else of serious interest in Houston we wouldn't want to miss?
Definately check out NASA. That is where I worked while I was down there. They just restored the Saturn V and it looks like it originally did.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
I think the BCS is good "in theory" but not so much in practice - much like socialism, and No Child Left Behind.
It relies too heavily on the biases and politics of coaches and conferences to really gauge who the "best" teams are.
There are what, eight computers cruching numbers? And the average of these eight ranking methods accounts for one third of the system? While coaches who may not have even seen the other top 25 teams play, and almost definitely haven't looked too in-depth at their numbers, have an equal share?
Maybe back the AP poll and boost the percent for the computers to 40%. That way you'd have the Harris, AP, and Coaches at 20% each, and the average of many computers at 40%.
The vote of one coach would weigh less, and the unbiased "statistics only" methods would count a bit more. Plus you'd have the people who are paid to watch all the games contributing to the mix.
Even so, though, there will be problems. The "plus one" post-bowl ranking to determine the NC is an interesting way of solving them.
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
quote:The Big 12 championship game was a great game. Especially for OU's defense. How many times in the second half did OU stop Nebraska when they started with great field position.
I'll take this season over most for sure. I would just hope to get more out of the BCS game than Boise State.
Boise State may just well prove to be more than they can handle.
I called the Big 12 CG sloppy because of the five fumbles, four interceptions, and Nebraska's defense. OU's defense was good. Their offense--not so much. Aside from one big play and a fumble recovery on Nebraska's 2-yard line, Oklahoma walked away victorious with a single drive over 40 yards. Granted the single drive was pretty impressive (99 yards in 11 plays), but they should've been able to move a whole lot better on Nebraska's 107th ranked pass defense.
BSU will not be so ineffective. OU won't get those big third down stops--not with the ball in the hands of Ian Johnson. And BSU doesn't turn the ball over like OU or NU. If the Sooners let themselves get outgained again (366 to 307 yards in favor of Nebraska), they'll have no chance in this one.
As a BSU fan, I'm a little disappointed at having to play OU. I was hoping for a #3 Texas team with only a single loss to #1 OSU. Instead we get a team that performed better against its weak in-conference foes than it did OOC (they gave up 403 yards/game OOC vs 3-9 UAB, 5-7 Washington, and 7-5 [*6-6] Oregon and 244 yards/game against Big 12 foes). And the one test they had in-conference they failed miserably--at home against Texas with a healthy Adrian Peterson.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
I think you're underestimating Oklahoma's defense. They're very good.
I like Boise State's chances, but they're gonna have a tough time running the ball against that front 7.
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
The BS is not good system in theory. It's a piece of crap in theory and a piece of crap in practice. And a Florida win does not vindicate it, because it does not prove that Florida could beat Michigan, or any of the other one-loss teams. And don't forget there is still an undefeated team out there. An undefeated shouldn't be locked out because "everyone knows" they're not for real; they should prove it on the field.
Rutgers will lose at least thirteen starters to NFL or graduation this year. I don't think the future is all that bright for them. It is true that there is more pressure to win at Miami. I can see why Schiano might prefer to stay where the expectations are lower.
Posted by Ecthalion (Member # 8825) on :
quote:Originally posted by Icarus: And a Florida win does not vindicate it, because it does not prove that Florida could beat Michigan, or any of the other one-loss teams. And don't forget there is still an undefeated team out there.
Well, there really arent that many one-loss teams out there i can only think of 3. But along that logic theres no way to prove any of them can beat florida. Even if florida loses to OSU, florida oculd potentially demolish Mich, yet you know if that happens Mich fans will be screaming how it was supposed to be them going and how it was a mistake to send florida. And in all honesty... as mush as i doubt UF or Mich can beat OSU.... i really really really doubt Boisie would get within 20....
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
quote:Rutgers will lose at least thirteen starters to NFL or graduation this year. I don't think the future is all that bright for them.
We're not losing as much as you'd think. And all the NFL losses are graduating anyway - we don't have any NFL caliber juniors who can leave.
Beyond that, 58 players on the team have two years of eligibility left or more. Our entire aerial unit is comprised of freshmen and sophomores, and will only improve. Ray Rice is a sophomore, and is backed by talented freshmen Kordell Young and Jack Corcoran. Plus, our recruiting class next year is the best ever.
Our key offensive losses are Brian Leonard, Clark Harris, and Shawn Tucker - but all have been given a more limited role this year than they've had in the past. Our key defensive losses are Ramel Meekins and Devraun Thompson, but we have plenty of depth on defense (last year, when we graduated our two tackle leaders everyone said our defense was in trouble - instead, it got better). The biggest loss is probably punter Joe Radigan, who as of right now I don't think has a replacement in line.
quote:It is true that there is more pressure to win at Miami. I can see why Schiano might prefer to stay where the expectations are lower.
I don't know how expectations can be any lower for players than they are in Miami. They'd probably recruit from the Taliban if they thought it'd get them a shot at the title. The fact that Coker had to request that his players didn't carry guns - legal or otherwise - is a pretty telling statement (especially with two players shot in the last two years, one fatally). A player in Miami stomped on another with his cleats, and got only a one game suspension - what sort of lesson is that? It's okay to assault your opponent, so long as your next game is against Duke?
Thug U is in full swing again, and I wish the best of luck to whatever coach decides to wade chest deep into that muck.
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
Brian Pata's death had nothing to do with any thuggery, and Pata was not a thug. If you want to start a ragging-on-each-other's-teams thing, that's fine, but leave this kid out of it. By all accounts he was a very classy kid.
You're right about Coker's lack of leadership, but then you criticize Miami for firing him. You can't have it both ways.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
quote:Brian Pata's death had nothing to do with any thuggery, and Pata was not a thug. If you want to start a ragging-on-each-other's-teams thing, that's fine, but leave this kid out of it. By all accounts he was a very classy kid.
I never mentioned him by name, nor said that he wasn't a classy kid. My comment wasn't directed at him, but at situation in Miami where players are in physical danger. Is this the environment a coach wants to get involved with?
What I've read is that in 1996, a linebacker was bludgeoned to death in his dorm room and slashed with a knife. In July of this year, a safety was shot in the butt, and a teammate returned fire. Then in November Pata was shot and killed.
Pata sounds like he was a good kid, but he was in a dangerous environment that resulted in tragedy. Compound the dangers off the field with the black-eyes Miami gave NCAA football with its actions on the field (brawls last year and this year). It's not an environment I'd want to step into, and I'm sure they were looking at Schiano's track record of character and integrity to give the school a much needed boost in that department.
He said no, and it's their loss. They need to find someone whose focus is on strength of character and cultivating responsible student athletes, and not on being an NFL player factory and "win at any cost" program.
quote:You're right about Coker's lack of leadership, but then you criticize Miami for firing him. You can't have it both ways.
I don't criticize them for firing him - but for *why* they're firing him. Take all of the leadership problems of the past two years (brawls, guns, everything), and give Miami a 12-0 record and a shot at the NC, and Coker keeps his job. Dee, Shalala and Miami's administration don't care about the character of their players, just about the win/loss record. Coker even handed out three indefinite suspensions after this year's brawl... but only one was actually enforced.
Miami has problems that go beyond Coker. Having worked there as defensive coordinator, I'm sure Schiano is well aware of the downsides of the environment.
Posted by Rohan (Member # 5141) on :
quote: Sometimes I wonder if other people were watching the same game as I was.
I was. I was pulling for Ohio St. (sorry, I have extreme anti-Lloyd Carr bias) and I was never too worried. Even though I was screaming at Tressel during Michigan's last drive to bring some pressure (giving Henne that much time to throw is silly) I guess such a defense is designed to let the other team score (mission accomplished) but to take a lot of time to do it (also accomplished). Anyway. I though Michigan played about as well as they can play, and still lost to a mediocre effort by Ohio St.
quote: i really really really doubt Boisie would get within 20
I bet you thought UCLA wouldn't get within 20 of USC either. That's the point. You don't know. Anybody can speculate (and anybody does) but until it's on the field all you have is a lot of BS and hot air. I'm tired of that, I get enough of it with politics. THAT'S why I hate the BCS, it FORCES coaches and fans to be political. People have ripped on Urban Meyer for commenting on the situation. Hello, people, he works in a system where convincing another person logically of the merit of your position is worth two touchdowns on the field. I mean, he can either run up the score on Arkansas or simply convince a few other coaches or writers that he could have, and the effect's the same.
A St. Louis Cardinals fan who doesn't want to debate with somebody over the VORP or win shares of Pujols vs. Beltran, or how "everyone knows" they don't have the pitching to shut down the Mets can just sit back and say "well, we'll see." and then, lo! the winner is decided on the field, instead of in the minds of sportswriters.
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
Word on sports talk radio down here is that Schiano is still in consideration for the Alabama job. Though Rodriguez looks like a front runner, the unofficial word from the university is that they are taking a good hard look at Schiano as well.
Posted by Ecthalion (Member # 8825) on :
i expected USC to win. i didnt expect UCLA to keel over, so yes i expected UCLA to be within 20 points. In fact, the score was almost what i would have had in mind, just reversed. UCLA and USC are a closer matchup than BSU and OSU though.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
I don't think Schiano will go to Alabama, either, but to me that's a far more attractive job than the Miami one.
Though I hear Bernie Kozar wants the Miami job - even though he has no actual coaching experience. Think they'll have to settle for someone who's never coached anything before?
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
I think it would be crazy to put someone with no experience in to big-time college football, but that's me. The kind of money Miami can throw around will ensure someone, somewhere will take it.
Schiano is not tops on Alabama's list, I don't think. I'm pretty sure the administration wants Rodriguez pretty bad. But wooing him away from his alma mater may not be easy. However, there are reports that Rodriguez asked for some things that the WVU admins promised him and it never materialized, so maybe he's unhappy with them right now. One of those things was an academic center for the athletes....and guess what Alabama has? A new multi-million dollar Student Athlete Academic center. Add to that the recent renovations to Bryant-Denny stadium and our state-of-the art practice and weight training facilities and Bama has a lot to offer a coach. Oh, and there's also that little thing called salary - word is that Bama is prepared to make the next coach among the highest paid coaches in the SEC if possible which means something around the range of $1.8 to possibly $2 mil per year.
Not that Bama doesn't have its drawbacks though - certainly it's a high-profile, high pressure job and Mike Shula proved you can have a 10 win season and get fired at the end of the next season.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Could someone please explain to me why Darren McFadden is a Heisman candidate?
Could someone explain to me how he set himself apart from Steve Slaton, Ray Rice, Ian Johnson, PJ Hill, and even Garrett Wolfe?
Just what did he do this year that was so different?
- He ran for 1558 yards. Wolfe ran for 1900, Slaton for 1733, Rice for 1624, and Johnson for 1613.
- He averaged 5.9 per carry. Slaton averaged 7.1, Wolfe 6.6, and Johnson 6.4.
- He had 265 carries. Rice had 311, Hill 292, and Wolfe 289.
- He received for 149 yards. Slaton received for 340, Wolfe for 247, and Hill for 213.
- He scored 14 TDs. Johnson scored 24, Rice 19, Wolfe 18, Slaton 16, and Hill 15.
- His team went 10-3. Johnson's was 12-0, Hill's was 11-1, Rice's 10-2, and Slaton's 10-2.
- He played in a BCS conference. So did Slaton, Rice, and Hill.
- He's got such great numbers and is still only a sophomore. So are Slaton, Rice, and Johnson... and Hill's only a freshman.
So what is it about McFadden that got him an invite to NY as a Heisman finalist and has ESPN touting him as the frontrunner from next year?
The only thing I can see is three letters that he has that no one else has...
S. E. C.
And that's just ridiculous to me.
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
To be entirely fair, he did sit out the equivalent of two and a half games worth of blowouts. The big games he did have were key, though, and against the best defenses--182 yards against LSU, 181 versus Tennessee, 219 at South Carolina, 145 at Auburn.
Plus, he wasn't at 100% for the first few games (only 184 yards against Utah State. ), and he still made up a lot of ground over the season.
He also lined up at QB a lot in Arkansas' Wildcat offense. He threw for three touchdowns, too.
Add to that the fact that he's been voted "Most Likely To Succeed In The NFL" by coaches and peers and has spent the entire season under the radar of opposing coaches as the one player on Arkansas they MUST STOP AT ANY COST...
Well, you get the picture.
Slaton's not even the best runner on his own team ( ), and a lot of his stats are a benefit of the offense he's in (much like Colt Brennan and Hawaii). The one team that looked like it had even looked up the Wikipedia article on "Option Offense", South Florida, held him to 43 yards--in Morgantown.
PJ Hill padded his stats against a SOS almost as bad as most mid-majors'. You'd think the guy could fall further than 5 yards/carry, weighing 245 pounds.
Ian Johnson will get no respect as a player from the WAC, even though his best game was 240 yards and 5 TDs against Oregon State, the Pac-10's #3 team.
Rice was good, but not spectacular. A very solid, hard-nosed back. His 54-yard performance in the loss to Cincinnati, the best defense they faced all year, probably damned him.
And Wolfe...aside from the fact that he played in the weakest conference in 1-A football, he had a stretch near the end of the season in which he rushed for 190 yards in four games, which NI lost three of. Had the Huskies played more Ohio States than Ball States, we might be talking here. Very explosive kid.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
I'm not saying that McFadden is a bad player - he's fantastic - but it didn't look like this season really set him that much further apart from the pack.
I mean, sitting out and not being 100% doesn't add to your resume. Slaton sat out plenty in blowouts and because of injury (against Louisville). Unfortunately Rice's performance in Cincy was because they didn't run him at all in the third or fourth quarter, being down so much (which is normally where he gets stronger and picks of up most of his yardage).
Even so, McFadden had four close games this year where he averaged less than 4 yards per carry. Vandy, a 21-19 win where he carried 19 times for 71 yards (3.7); Florida, a 38-28 loss where he carried 21 times for 73 yards (3.5); and Miss St, a 28-14 win where he carried 26 times for 84 yards (3.2).
He only broke 190 yards once, where Rice did it 4 times, Slaton 3 times, etc, etc..
I honestly didn't know about the 3 passing TDs, but that's just one standout stat - where he's behind the other running backs in many other standout stats.
He's a great player, don't get me wrong. He's as good as Slaton, Rice, Johnson, Hill, and Wolfe - the best backs in the country. And I certainly wouldn't want to face him as a defense.
I just don't see how he's clearly so much better as to be the only non-senior, non-QB to be invited to NY.
It's either the voters are looking at what he has the potential to do next year, or that he's got that strong political SEC affiliation. Of course, neither of those should factor into the decision, but I'm sure they do. The statistics alone, though, have him firmly in the heart of the pack of running backs.
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
A local sports radio host (who played for UM) said this morning that the Texas Tech coach is going to UM. ESPN and the Miami Herald do not confirm this, so I'm curious to know if it's true.
-o-
If Schiano didn't go to UM, he won't go anywhere. Whatever you may think, UM alumns and ex-coaches have incredible loyalty to the program. I'm willing to bet he does not see Alabama as more attractive than UM--especially given that UM has fired exactly one coach in twenty years, while Alabama has fired numerous winning coaches over the years.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
I've watched all of those backs you mentioned, FC, this year. And more than one game of each (I'd guess 3-5 each is the average).
Not only has McFadden done it against stiffer competition, but he's without a doubt the most physically talented of the quintet. You can call it SEC bias or whatever, but it's the conference that pretty much every expert in the country agrees is the toughest. No amount of stat quoting will change what I saw with my own eyes -- McFadden's moves, vision, explosiveness, and breakaway speed are second to none.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
So, he's head and shoulders above all his competition? Clearly better than every other running back in the country, and one of the three best college football players in the game this year?
I suppose it's possible. Personally, I've only seen Rice, Slaton, Johnson, and Wolfe of that sextet, so I don't have direct experience with him.
Just looking at all the data, though, he doesn't seem that much better than the other top backs in the country, and statistically is behind them in almost every category.
Granted, he played against tougher competition on the whole, but he also padded his resume with 384 yards and 5 TDs against his share of weak OOC competition (Utah St, SE Missouri St, and LA Monroe). Admittedly, looking at the SE Missouri St game, he came out very early after only 6 carries and 2 TDs - where he could have clearly padded his numbers even more.
I don't know. He's obviously a great back, but I have a hard time seeing him as a clear step above all the others in the field.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
quote:Just looking at all the data, though, he doesn't seem that much better than the other top backs in the country, and statistically is behind them in almost every category.
Stats are virtually useless in player evaluation, especially in college football, which has a way bigger competitive gap between the top and the bottom than any other major sports.
quote:Clearly better than every other running back in the country, and one of the three best college football players in the game this year?
No, but that's a problem with the Heisman selection committee; not the player. Same problem as every year. I mean, can you honestly tell me that a defensive player is never the best player on the field, or in the nation? Defense is waaay underrepresented in Heisman ballotting.
And especially given that the very definition of the award is a bit nebulous (is the best player in the land, the best player on the best team, or the most valuable player to his team? Or some combo of the three?), I've come to pretty much expect that the Heisman is a hype-driven beauty pageant.
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
I just hope McFadden stays around till he wins it... twice.
I'm afraid if he wins it this year he'll go pro.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
quote:I've come to pretty much expect that the Heisman is a hype-driven beauty pageant.
This seems to be the case.
quote:No, but that's a problem with the Heisman selection committee; not the player.
Oh, absolutely. I'm not knocking him, just questioning why the selection committee picked him from a group of standout backs. A healthy Adrian Peterson or Michael Bush might even have put him in their shadow.
He just doesn't seem like more of a Heisman caliber player than a handful of others. Then again, this is a year that the trophy could have been given to Troy Smith before the first game.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
He can't go pro this year.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
Sorry, I didn't see that FC and I posted simultaneously.
I didn't realize you were criticizing the selectors -- I completely agree. It's fairly arbitrary. I feel sure that if AP or Michael Bush had stayed healthy and on pace they'd be there instead.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
You know, I posted that on another thread under the title "Could someone explain the Heisman voters' love affair with Darren McFadden?"... and I just copied the text over, not the title.
That probably would have cleared things up a bit.
He really is tremendous, and I wouldn't want Rutgers' defense to have to stop him, but I wonder about the voters' conversation:
"So, we all agreed Troy Smith wins this thing?"
"Yeah."
"Who else do we need to nominate?"
"Does Notre Dame have a quarterback this year?"
"I think so."
"Well, he's on the list. Who else?"
"We have anyone from the SEC?"
"Crap, we don't. How did that happen?"
"Who's the best guy in that conference that's not a QB - we already got too many of those."
"There's this McFadden guy on Arkansas."
"That'll do. Put him in there. We need anyone else?"
"Three's good. It makes it look like we really thought long and hard about the decision, rather than knowing going in that we've had Troy Smith's name engraved on the darn thing since preseason."
Posted by beatnix19 (Member # 5836) on :
I just want to point out that, yes, at this point Troy Smith seems to have the Heisman fairly locked up but it definately didn't start that way. Brady Quinn was the overwhelming preseason favorite. It wasn't until Notre Dame showed their true colors as a mediocre team and Brady had his let down against Michigan that people started dropping him in the voting. And right after Quinn started dropping Adrian Peterson really started gaining some momentum. And we all know what happened to him and his collar bone.
I have been a big Smith Supporter for the past couple of years and he most certainly deserves the award. But had these other two not had the breakdowns they had I think the race would be much tighter than it is. Even if the other two had continued to play well without the problems I still believe that Smith would have won this year but it would have just taken the country a while longer to recognize him as standing out.
editted to put an e at the end of notre dame instead of an n. I'm really not that angry with them)
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
The preseason thing was an exaggeration, but he's been in solid command of the Heisman since Peterson got hurt on October 14th. That's almost two months ago.
No one has come close. And I still believe Quinn's in there in large part because he wears a gold helmet - also why Notre Dame is in a BCS bowl, those gold helmets. Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
And Darren McFadden won the Doak award. I'll be curious to see how his numbers look next year.
Speaking of next year, though, Rutgers' schedule is awful. Just plain awful. Pathetically awful.
Granted, it was made a few years ago when our team was awful, but it certainly doesn't help us earn any respect to have such a weak OoC schedule. We play Maryland, Buffalo, Army, Navy, and I-AA Norfolk St. Yech. The Terrapins are our best OoC opponent, and they're middle/bottom of the ACC.
On top of that, we have 8 home games and 4 away games (away at Louisville, Syracuse, UConn, and Army). We could conceivably go 12-0 next year if we can beat WVU and USF at home and Louisville on the road - and if we did, I don't know if I would even say we deserved to be in the NC.
At least we get to play Notre Dame annually starting in 2010 - though they won't play in our stadium, making our home games in Giants Stadium instead (then again, if we can expand to 60 or 80k seats by then, that may change).
Posted by Architraz Warden (Member # 4285) on :
Bumpity.
Alright, contrary to my earlier comment I'll concede that the Boise State vs. Oklahoma game was probably the most entertaining football game I've seen (college or pro). The end of it was just exceedingly fun to watch.
The only competition was the Texas Tech vs. Minnesota game last Friday, and I don't count that because I was there, and as a Tech grad I'm biased.
And poor, poor Michigan.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
FRISCO!! CONGRATS!
That was an awesome game. BSU walked into the BCS and planted their flag right in the chest of the Big 12. Major respect for BSU and all the props in the world to the team. Just awesome.
Probably one of the best games I've watched this year - right up there with Louisville/Rutgers and WVU/Rutgers. (not that I'm biased)
And Ian Johnson proposed to the head cheerleader after the game, and she accepted! Just amazing. Amazing, amazing.
Great job all around, and I truly, truly hope your coach doesn't pull an Urban Meyer and disappear next year.
Posted by Wowbagger the Infinitely Prolonged (Member # 7476) on :
What a game. The comebacks on both sides were amazing. That had to be the best end of a football game I've ever seen. Some great play calls by BSU at the. BSU nearly lost that game but they took it right back. Great game.
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
Easily the best game I've ever watched. My heart rate is almost back to normal. I stormed out of the room after the last JZ INT, but relented and came back just in time to see the lateral/50-yard TD.
And a freaking Statue of Liberty? Coach Peterson has balls of steel.
Change the outcome of the OU-UO game, and given OU's #3 preseason ranking, the Sooners are pushing for a spot in the NC game.
And BSU took it to them for four quarters. Were it not for the freak bounce on that one OU punt that the Sooners recovered in the red zone (and later took in for a TD), BSU probably wins easily.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
That was the best bowl game of the year, if not the best game of the year.
The final offensive play from BSU was the hook and ladder, though, not the statue of liberty. /nitpick.
'Grats to BSU.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
The final offensive play of regulation was a hook and ladder - but the final offensive play in OT was a sort of pseudo-Statue of Liberty.
At least in my understanding of the terms.
Regardless, Coach Peterson does, indeed, have balls of steel.
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
BSU-National Champs! Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
Oh, I didn't realize Frisco was talking about the last play of OT. I'm not sure I would categorize that as a statue of libery play either. Since the whole reason it's called that is that the pose struck by the QB or RB look like the Statue of Liberty, this play would definitely not fit that criteria.
It was an awesome call, though.
If Ohio State loses, I would definitely push for BSU nat'l champs.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
If Florida beats Ohio St, BSU should challenge them to a January 20th game at a neutral site.
Then, when they get turned down, BSU can call them cowards. Posted by brojack17 (Member # 9189) on :
OK, I'm back to eat crow (or potato). I didn't give BSU a chance against an OU team with something to prove. BSU was not scared of a huge opponent like OU they had a great game plan and stuck with it. They completely shutdown the OU running game.
That said, OU's defense was awful. And once, a long long time ago, Stoops was not afraid to take chances and throw in a trick play every now and then. Everyone knew if BSU scored a TD in OT they would go for 2. So why didn't OU do one on their TD. They just converted 2 out of 3 a few minutes before.
I still feel nauseous.
Congrats BSU, can I get some butter and cheese for this mound of potatoes I have to eat?
Posted by Mig (Member # 9284) on :
OU v. BSU! That was a great game. I just hope that the remaining bowls are half as exciting. Too bad that BSU can't claim a BCS NC. Under BCS rules the winner of the champion ship game is automatically number one. Best BSU can hope for is a number two ranking.
I wish these bowls would start a little earlier. Wish they'd cut all that useless pregame and just start the game fifteen munites earlier. As it is, I'm not getting much sleep this week.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
They wouldn't attempt to claim they were the BCS champ. If the AP ranks them number 1 (which is highly unlikely, I think) they'd claim a split nat'l champ like USC did a few years back.
They'd hang a banner, get rings, and send out postcards saying they were the champs, as would Florida.
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
I wish they'd scrub the bowl system and the month long break and start a 16 team play off 2nd week in december.
And don't give me that tradition crap. My team lost "the Capital One Bowl" this year. Tradition went out the window years ago. Give the bowls to the teams that can't get in the play off.
Posted by The Reader (Member # 3636) on :
The way Boise State played, they could have beaten anyone. They deserve the chance to, but they won't get it, which is unfair to the players and program.
There are too many good teams this year to give a National Championship to one, but that will happen anyway. Yeah, that's a mushy sentiment, but until there is a playoff, there will never be a real champion.
Go Buckeyes!
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
quote:They'd hang a banner, get rings, and send out postcards saying they were the champs, as would Florida.
If that happened, I think Urban Meyer would throw a fit. He'd go on and on about how BSU could never be co-Champions, that it's a BCS-conference-only honor, and that he would never recognize them as sharing in the accolades.
Which would all be very ironic, given his history.
But we won't have to worry about that, because OSU is going to blow the doors off of Florida.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
So, I was thinking... you think they'll turn the BSU v. Oklahoma game into a movie?
I mean, it's perfect. Untested underdogs getting no respect vs. a potential NC team jilted early by the refs. The underdogs punch out early, only to have a crucial mistake at the end nearly cost them everything - finishing in a barrage of theatrical trick plays, resulting in the hero proposing to his girl on national television.
I know I'd watch...
Oh wait, I think I already did. Posted by Wowbagger the Infinitely Prolonged (Member # 7476) on :
Usually in sports movies they tack on a love story...this one has one built in. Then you have the back up QB's asking the coach to go for the Hook and lateral. Several key 4th Down plays. Going for the 2 point conversion. It's already a movie...lol.
Posted by airmanfour (Member # 6111) on :
I don't even like football that much, but they had the game playing in our shop last night, and I started paying attention when the guys actually watching started making some real noise. I was impressed with BSU. Really impressed.
Posted by The Reader (Member # 3636) on :
As soon as that proposal happened on the field after the end of the Fiesta Bowl, I just knew it would become a movie. In twenty years, there probably will be one. All they need is game footage, with a cheesy score added for over-the-top emotional effect. Wait, Fox does that already.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Big East is now 4-0 in bowl games, and looking for a clean sweep on Jan 6th. Not a bad year at all, with three year-end top 15 teams - probably three top 11 teams (with an outside, outside chance of sneaking all three into the top ten).
A lot to build on for next year.
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
quote:If that happened, I think Urban Meyer would throw a fit. He'd go on and on about how BSU could never be co-Champions, that it's a BCS-conference-only honor, and that he would never recognize them as sharing in the accolades.
That really contradicts everything I've ever heard come out of Meyers' mouth. He's really recieved a lot of heat for a few mild comments. I mean, now that it's clear to everyone, not just people who actually watched the UM-OSU game, that Michigan is definitely not the #2 team in the country, you'd think the hatred would die.
More in response to FC's quote, I just finished reading this quote from Meyer:
quote:Meyer coached the Utes that night, but he had already accepted a big-money offer from the Gators. Two years later, he discounted the distinction between the six BCS conferences and their oft-overlooked brethren.
I think that the separation of BCS, non-BCS, I think that era is over," Meyer said. "Everybody knows what Oklahoma was getting into -- everybody that knows football.
Doesn't sound like a man who'd begrudge sharing a title with an undefeated team that pounded his old school en route to a BCS victory over what could arguably be considered a top 5 team in Oklahoma.
[ January 03, 2007, 01:43 AM: Message edited by: Frisco ]
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
This is a guy who said that no other team had the right to play for a national championship. He continually stressed schedule strength as a major determining factor for the NC teams, not even accepting an undefeated Big East team as being even equally deserving as a one-loss SEC team.
If Rutgers or Louisville had finished 12-0, he would have campaigned just as hard against them, claiming that Florida's one loss in the SEC made them more worthy of playing for a national title.
And if he wins? You think he'd willingly share that with a team that wasn't even from a BCS conference? That he'd somehow deem BSU worthy of sharing the NC accolades with a team from the holier than holy SEC that finished the year with only one loss and a victory over the #1 team in the land?
He says that the difference between BCS and non-BCS era is over - just don't tell him that the difference between SEC and non-SEC is over. He specifically campaigned several weeks before the end of the season that a one-loss SEC team had far more right to play for the title than a one loss Big 12, Pac 10, or Big 10 team, or an undefeated Big East team. An undefeated WAC team wasn't even on his radar.
If, say, Rutgers had gone undefeated, lost out to Florida for the NC, then beat Wake in the Orange bowl... do you think Meyer would have said "Okay, let's have co-champs"? I don't get that feeling from anything he's said in the last two months.
As much as he came from humble roots, he is now definitely in the "my conference is tougher than your conference" camp. And while he isn't surprised BSU could knock off OU, I don't see him equating "undefeated WAC + Fiesta Bowl" with "one-loss SEC + NC Game" to get co-champions.
I could be wrong, though. Maybe he only wears his weasely-campaigning-politician hat to get a chance to play in the NC, but doesn't care if he's crowned co-champions with a team that played one ranked opponent all year.
I doubt it.
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
You're going to have to point me to these quotes, because the only thing I remember him saying was that if Michigan gets a rematch in the NC game, the BCS system should be scrapped.
And people need to stop spouting all this nonsense about BSU only playing one ranked opponent all year! Oregon State is ranked, and Hawaii likely will be in the final poll again, after dropping off the last one, with their bowl victory. Oklahoma is as high as #7 in the polls, and without the blown call in the Oregon game likely finish the season at #3, possibly competing for a chance to play tOSU.
And Utah and San Jose State won their bowl games convincingly, while Nevada only lost to talented but underachieving Miami by a single point with some questionable calls going the 'Canes' way.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
The "only one ranked team" bit was meant to have been part of Meyer's reasoning, not my own. Sorry for the confusion.
Looking at "ranking at time of the game" rather than "final ranking", it appears as though Oklahoma was the first ranked team they've seen. And if you look at final rnaking, then Oklahoma is lower than a #7. Either way, though, an SEC team will say that they played a tougher schedule regardless.
My favorite is the "If BSU were in a BCS conference, they'd have at least three losses" argument.
I've been trying to find some Meyer quotes, but I'm at work and a lot is blocked (and time is a bit restricted). So far I've found:
quote:> Meyer: “The two schools that could go ahead and say we deserve a shot are Florida and USC. If USC and Florida take care of business, they deserve a shot.”
This was before the last game of the season. No mention here of, say, Louisville, WVU, BSU, Arkansas, etc. No, the only teams worthy of NC consideration were Florida if they won the SEC title, and USC if they could beat UCLA.
quote:“We’ve played several (of the top defenses). Ohio State doesn’t have any. Michigan doesn’t have any.
Here he seems to be saying that he has more of a right to be in the NC than OSU, even.
I found some aftermath quotes, though:
quote:“See, I've learned. I made comments in this room before (that were criticized)," Meyer said after counting from 10 to one. "Watch how mature I am. You're going to hear a lot of nonsense out of my mouth from here on out.
"I'm going to start talking like a lot of these other coaches. ... I think we're going to take it one game at a time. We're going to play very hard. Ohio State's got great players. How's that?"
Even BCS coordinator Mike Slive jumped in:
quote:“As far as having a rule that coaches can’t talk about their own teams’ chances of playing in a bowl or giving reasons why they should be (in the national title game), we’re not going to try to do something like that.”
I understand that Meyer just wants what's best for his players, and that is a shot at a NC. He's spent so long pumping up Florida as the best of college football, the best in the SEC, playing the toughest teams, winning in the hardest conference, that I don't see him sharing the accolades willingly.
Out of curiosity... was Utah considered co-champions when they beat Pitt?
Posted by Tresopax (Member # 1063) on :
Are people still talking about football? Don't you guys know it is basketball season now - you know, that college sport that DOES have a meaningful postseason? Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
As a Rutgers fan, I'm finding it hard to switch from football to basketball this year... in the past, that was a *FAR* easier transition.
Though we do have a big game against Seton Hall at 7:30 tonight - though it may not look like it from the outside. I mean, instate rivalry, two brand spanky new coaches, recruiting image on the line, first game of Big East play... I'd love to see a Scarlet stomping of the Pirates.
But, I digress. Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
quote:"Meyer: “The two schools that could go ahead and say we deserve a shot are Florida and USC. If USC and Florida take care of business, they deserve a shot.”
This was before the last game of the season. No mention here of, say, Louisville, WVU, BSU, Arkansas, etc. No, the only teams worthy of NC consideration were Florida if they won the SEC title, and USC if they could beat UCLA.
Okay, that's a good quote. I guess his reasoning was that Louisville and WVU were ranked #9 and #7, respectively, and in the same interview he discounted Arkansas and Notre Dame because of their head-to-head losses to Florida and Michigan.
Boise State didn't deserve to be in the talks then because they were an unknown variable. But now that they've beat on one of college football's power programs, they're getting more talk.
I, personally, don't think there's going to be a co-championship. But if there is, I expect Meyer to take it well.
And no, neither Utah OR Auburn were considered co-champs when they finished undefeated in 2004. Which is why it won't happen this time. What I expect is a top 5 finish for BSU.
The real reason they weren't considered for a NC is the preseason poll. They weren't even in the top 25 until week 4. Preseason rankings are crap. Wait until week 6.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
I don't think there's any serious chance of a co-championship. But I hope Florida wins so that there's at least some talk of one.
Anything to get a playoff, even if it's just a plus one or an 8 team bracket.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
quote:The real reason they weren't considered for a NC is the preseason poll. They weren't even in the top 25 until week 4. Preseason rankings are crap. Wait until week 6.
Hear, hear.
BSU should be in the Top 5 when all is said and done, I think.
My predictions for the top 15 final season rankings:
That's not exactly how I'd rank them myself, but that's my guess as to how they're going to fall out.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
I don't think there's any chance that Florida falls that far.
Posted by Mig (Member # 9284) on :
Pretty good, but my only question is Florida and where they'll land, assuming they lose to OSU. If its a close game, I say they fall no further than four. If they get blown out, they might fall to 9 (behind Michigan). So 7 is a safe pick. I'd also put Texas ahead of Oklahoma, whom they beat soundly. And Texas won its bowl, and OU looked bad in its loss. I'm also tempted to switch Wisconsin and Lousville, but Louisville is ahead of Wisc in the current standing and I haven't seen anything that would make the voters change their relative rankings. I also think that the good will BSU has earned with their impresive win may move them up more. LSU is in a tough position. If they blow-ou ND their win will be discounted. If its a close game, all the more reason to differ to BSU. Arkansas, after their loss to Wisc., will be edged out by Wake, which has one more win than Arkansas, but that's a tough pick. I think WF's extra win will make all the difference with the computers. That and they lost to a (slightly) higher ranked opponent. So going out on a limb:
1. Ohio State (13-0) 2. USC (11-2) 3. Boise St (13-0) 4. LSU (11-2) 5. Louisville (12-1) 6. Wisconsin (12-1) 7. Florida (12-2) 8. Auburn (11-2) 9. Michigan (11-2) 10. WVU (11-2) 11. Rutgers (11-2) 12. Texas (10-3) 13. Oklahoma (11-3) 14. Cal (10-3) 15. Wake Forest (11-3)
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
The thing is, for Boise St to move up to 3, the voters would have to consistently vote them 1/2 to overcome the computer rankings. I don't think that will happen. If the voters put them at 3, they'll end up with about a 5 ranking, I think.
Same with LSU dropping below BSU - the computers won't let that happen. BSU beat a team the computers rank 16th, and LSU will have beaten a team the computers rank 9th. Given that the computers have LSU 5th and BSU 7th already, I don't see BSU jumping ahead without a lot of #1 or #2 votes.
As for Arkansas, I don't think their loss was any worse than Wake's. I don't seem them going from 12 to 16, with Wake only going from 14 to 15.
As for Texas/Oklahoma, Texas would have to come up from 19th to 12th, with Oklahoma dropping from 10th to 13th. Then again, the computers have Texas at 21st and Oklahoma at 16th - so it would be up to the voters. And a loss to BSU can't help with the voters... then again, a two point win over Iowa isn't exactly convincing.
As for Florida, they may not drop that far - but I think OSU will blow the doors off, so that's where that came from. Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
OSU would have to play their best game of the year to blow out Florida.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
You think? I don't know. I'm expecting Florida to lose by 17 or so.
Then again, I expected Wake to lose by at least 21, so I may not be the best one to judge.
But the games I've seen Florida play this year haven't been the most impressive. 21-14 over FSU... 17-16 over SC... 25-19 over Vandy... Florida hasn't won by more than 10 points over a Div 1A school since October 7th, when they won by 13.
They're not the most explosive scoring offense in the world (32nd nationally, including blowouts of W Carolina and C Florida). Add to that the fact that OSU's scoring defense is the best in the country, and their total defense is the second best Florida has seen all year.
And while their defense has been very good, Michigan's was better until OSU put up a relatively easy 42 points on them.
My prediction is 35-17 OSU, or thereabouts. But again, I could be very wrong - my Orange bowl prediction was 35-7 Louisville.
Posted by The Reader (Member # 3636) on :
quote:Originally posted by El JT de Spang: OSU would have to play their best game of the year to blow out Florida.
Under Tressel, their best-played games have been in bowls.
It will be close.
Posted by Mig (Member # 9284) on :
quote:Originally posted by El JT de Spang: OSU would have to play their best game of the year to blow out Florida.
From your fingertips to God's ear.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Well, ND got a spanking. How long is it going to take the college football world to accept that they're no longer a major football power?
They haven't won a bowl in 12 years, losing 9 games by an average of 17.7 points. They didn't beat a team ranked higher than 19th this year (Penn St), and got blown out by their only three challenges (USC by 20, Michigan by 26, and LSU by 27).
Yet, they'll likely be ranked in the preseason Top 25 again, even after losing Brady Quinn and Jeff Samardzija.
I just don't get how everyone is still so blinded by the gold helmets.
Posted by Architraz Warden (Member # 4285) on :
My opinion on ND's general high rankings and bowl appearances: "Rabid and very affluent fan base"
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
I just wish they'd get out of the Big East. When the world starts waking up and not inviting them to BCS bowl games, they get to take Big East bowl slots because of their affiliation with the conference in basketball.
Well, we've got 16 basketball teams. I don't think we'll miss them if we say, "You want to be independent? Fine, be independent. Good luck."
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
I give Florida about a 40% chance to win the game. I give OSU about a 30% chance to win and not cover, and a 30% chance to win and cover.
But I don't go by stats, I go by watching both teams a half-dozen times.
Bowl games are hard to predict, because you never know which team will come out rusty.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
And you never know what the refs will do.
Does anyone know what league's refs are being used for this game?
Posted by graywolfe (Member # 3852) on :
I still expect Florida to lose, couldn't stand Urban Meyer either, apparently he wasn't familiar with Florida's title from the '96 season, and the Michigan loss was not a product of Michigan being overrated, in my view it was a combo of 3 factors, USC being a big game team (every single loss they've had during their run to promise has been an upset loss by a lower power, the only one that wasn't was last years win by Texas that was a product of stupendous play from VY, and two eggregious foul ups by the refs that gave Texas a minimum of 10 unearned points), Michigan choking in all big games under Carr of late (3 straight OSU+Bowl Defeat games), and Michigan's heart not being in it after being hosed by voter fraud.
This is one of those years where a playoff really could have made an enormous difference, Oklahoma and Michigan almost certainly would have shown more, USC always plays big in big games, and then teams like Boise State, Florida, Ohio State, West Virginia and the like, all fighting for a chance to truly win it all.
As it is, I see OSU winning by double digits, I dont think the Michigan game really will mean much of anything. OSU is special, Florida is a year away from reaching their potential (and in the SEC, w/o a playoff, your conference winner more often than not will be screwed because there are so very few truly weak teams), and OSU will get the job done in my view. I see something along the lines of 24-10, 31-14, something like that. I'm 19-9 picking the games so far, so take that for what its worth. Could be nonsense. Of all the biggest games starting on January 1st, I hit on Auburn, Wisconsin, LSU, and West Virginia straight up, and Auburn, Wisconsin, LSU and Boise State against the Spread. So I've been a bit hit and miss.
How have the rest of you done picking this stuff?
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
I want Florida to win. I don't think they will, but I want them to. For a few reasons, actually.
First, there is this story, which shows that Ohio State is a big part of the "problem" rather than part of the solution in the academic question surrounding college football.
Second, a loss by OSU might potentially tip a big recruit Rutgers' way - and I'll take any edge we can get.
Third, while OSU is a great team, a win by them just shows that preseason ranking is all that matters. Had they been unranked going into week 1, they might not even be playing for the national championship (as had been speculated an undefeated Rutgers might have been left out in favor of one-loss teams that had started in the preseason top five).
And finally, I like Florida's 2-QB setup.
So, while I'd enjoy watching a Florida victory, I just don't think it will happen.
Posted by Adam_S (Member # 9695) on :
Jimi Hendrix is an SC supporter, their alumni network reaches beyond the grave!
quote:Originally posted by Tresopax: Are people still talking about football? Don't you guys know it is basketball season now - you know, that college sport that DOES have a meaningful postseason?
Unfortunately, the college basketball postseason makes the regular season useless. The BCS is very messed up, but I want my team to go out there on Saturday and know that their entire season is on the line.
Of course I say that and I am an OU fan. OU has made it a habit to throw away games the past two or three years (I'm not taking anything away from BSU, so don't get your panties in a wad).
Posted by The Reader (Member # 3636) on :
quote:Third, while OSU is a great team, a win by them just shows that preseason ranking is all that matters. Had they been unranked going into week 1, they might not even be playing for the national championship (as had been speculated an undefeated Rutgers might have been left out in favor of one-loss teams that had started in the preseason top five).
OSU is not often going to be unranked going into the season, so it isn't an issue. That's just a fact whether it's fair or not. I understand your displeasure with the problem though. Had Rutgers gone unbeaten, they deserved a better shot at a title than any one loss team, and Boise State did as well.
College football needs a playoff. I don't think it makes the entire regular season irrelevant because the powerful teams in the regular season tend to do just as well in the postseason. Sometimes there are bracket busters, like George Mason, that pulled it together and made it through, but that doesn't usually happen.
quote:the games I've seen Florida play this year haven't been the most impressive. 21-14 over FSU... 17-16 over SC... 25-19 over Vandy... Florida hasn't won by more than 10 points over a Div 1A school since October 7th, when they won by 13.
That's meaningless. They won, just like they needed to. Ohio State won the 2002 title the same way, unless you think they won that title because of a refs bad call (I don't think it was, but I'm biased). To that I say . If Miami wanted to win, they should have played better offense than they did. I know they were good enough to keep the game out of overtime, and they didn't.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
I'm loving it. Florida is handing OSU their behinds. I'd love to see Florida win this game 60-24. Better yet, 70-24. Run up the score and show how preseason rankings are worthless.
This game is awesome.
Posted by hatrkr81 (Member # 9317) on :
Goooooooo Florida! what a great game so far.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Just awesome. I love it. And we got Anthony Davis to commit to RU! I bet he's loving that decision about now! Posted by Ecthalion (Member # 8825) on :
41-14 UF>OSU
For all those who said Florida doesnt deserve to play on the same field looks like they were right, florida needed better compettition.
Posted by ricree101 (Member # 7749) on :
And once again, there really needs to be a playoff system. The OSU team we saw out there showed no indication whatsoever that they belonged in a national championship game. As I see it, there are two alternatives. Either they really were that bad, in which case a playoff would have weeded them out. Or they were rusty from so much time off, in which case a tournament would allow them to warm up on easier teams before the big game.
No matter what, it is complete bull that they just pick two teams that they happen to think are good and call it the national championship.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
*basks*
Posted by Ecthalion (Member # 8825) on :
Well, since i saw both of them play pretty much all year, a tournament wouldnt give us the true #1 anyway. David can kill Goliath any day of the week, a tournament will just allow more chances of seeing teams with less regular season "respectability" get through. It would also downplay the significance of season games, especially with conference champions going in, you can have 4 loss teams playin for a championship game. The BCS is flawed but after hearing the arguements agains a playoff im thinking its really the only way that you can have that many teams and let them showcase in front of the public and yet still declare a mostly definitive national champ.
Uf was clearly better, just because one man gets injured, or because they had 2 extra weeks with no opponant (which s their fault for not scheduling a by, and the conference fault for not having a championchip game) should not mean you forget how to play. UF demonstrated championship poise throught the year and then showed that they still cared enough to play at the end.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
I think that the NCAA requires 12 teams for a championship game - which is the prime reason the ACC raided the Big East, to raise their number from 9 to 12. Unless Notre Dame agrees to settle in a conference (ha), I don't see the Big 10(11) gaining a new member soon. Though I could be wrong - they might have their eye on Ohio, or something.
As for a playoff, I like the "plus one" concept quite a bit. Basically, the four BCS bowls happen without a NC game (heck, we can even bump it to five bowls without a NC game). Then, the results of bowl season are factored into one last round of rankings - at which time the #1 and #2 are determined for the NC.
Just as an aside: Urban Meyer proved me wrong, and showed a lot of class towards BSU. Some quotes...
quote:"Let's go play 'em next week," Florida coach Urban Meyer said with a laugh about Boise State. "I love Boise State, but I wouldn't want to do that. We're done."
quote:"There's only one way to figure out who the better team is and that's go play the game," Meyer said.
Posted by Mig (Member # 9284) on :
From a Seminole fan: Congrats Gator nation.
That said,
My top five for next year: 1. Florida 2. USC 3. Texas 4. WVU 5. Oklahoma or OSU (Can't decide)
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Kirk Herbstreit has Rutgers as his preseason #5!
I'd love to have us slide in at preseason #9 or #10. That'd be awesome. Our O-line for the next few years is going to be fantastic - and I hope Teel keeps up the performance he's had the last three games of this year.
Rutgers could be a force to be reckoned with.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
quote:My top five for next year: 1. Florida 2. USC 3. Texas 4. WVU 5. Oklahoma or OSU (Can't decide)
Out of curiosity, how do you explain leaving LSU off of this list when they'll finish #3 this year and return more starters than all 5 of your top 5? (not to mention they're just flat out better than 3-5).
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Perhaps because they are losing both JaMarcus Russell and Dwayne Bowe and finished third in the SEC this year with two losses, only to go to a bowl game because the bowl organizers knew they'd sell more seats than Auburn or Arkansas who finished ahead of them in the conference?
Just a possibility.
Personally, I wouldn't put a specific SEC team in the top five. I'd just say "The winner of the SEC" and leave it at that - in any given year, that could be pretty much anybody.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
Yeah, a loss to the nat'l champ and to the one team who did beat the nat'l champ. *snort*
<editted because it was snarkier than I intended. Though totally valid>
I'm not sure what their bowl selection or season record has anything to do with, anyway.
And they're better equipped than any team in the nation to replace a star QB: two excellent backups, 4 really good RBs, and a completely intact OL.
quote:Personally, I wouldn't put a specific SEC team in the top five. I'd just say "The winner of the SEC" and leave it at that - in any given year, that could be pretty much anybody.
That's true, although completely irrelevant. It's not a preseason ranking if you just say: 1)SEC #1 2)Big 10 #1 3)PAC 10 #1 etc.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
I'm just saying that there are very valid reasons to keep LSU out of the top five.
No offense, but LSU could easily drop 4-5 games next year... or they could go undefeated. It's the nature of the SEC. They lost two huge weapons and their signature win was against this year's most overrated team.
Is that a good enough resume for the top five? For me, sure. But I understand why people might leave them out of the top five. They're certainly not a no-brainer, at least imho.
quote:That's true, although completely irrelevant. It's not a preseason ranking if you just say:
Actually, I think preseason rankings are completely irrelevant - but they unfortunately determine who ends up in BCS bowls. If you're not "in the club" at the start of the year, it is very hard to fight your way in by the end.
I'd love to see preseason polls done away with entirely, with the first rankings coming out in week five or six.
[ January 09, 2007, 02:13 PM: Message edited by: FlyingCow ]
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
quote:No offense, but LSU could easily drop 4-5 games next year... or they could go undefeated. It's the nature of the SEC. They lost two huge weapons and their signature win was against this year's most overrated team.
There's no team in college football that this doesn't also apply to. Your arguments are spurious, stretched so thin that you can see right through them. But that's one of the fun things about college football -- it leads to endless debates and there's really no way to be wrong because the teams from different conferences don't play each other except in rare instances.
But LSU in the top 5 certainly is a no-brainer*, at least as far as such things go. Preseason rankings being, as you hinted, fairly arbitrary.
*assuming you have some knowledge of college football and aren't a total homer. As in, I'd be surprised if any college football analyst does not include them. Just as I'd be surprised if any analyst doesn't include USC (a team to whom your objections against LSU all apply even stronger).
Posted by Mig (Member # 9284) on :
My main and only reason for keeping LSU off my top 5 is the loss of Russell. They've also lost their offfensive coordinator, Jimbo Fisher, to FSU.
In the tough SEC they lost two games this year; lose a QB like Russell and an OC and things don't look good for them next year.
Flyingcow, I agree wholeheartedly with your assessment of preseason rankings.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
Okay. I was just curious if you had a reason or if it was an oversight.
From what I'm hearing there's a chance they might lose their DC, too. Supposedly he's under serious consideration for the Minnesota job.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
I think you could arbitrarily pick five teams out of a hat from the likes of Ohio State, Michigan, USC, LSU, Florida, Texas, WVU, and Auburn to round out your top 5. And other outlying teams are apt to creep in, as well.
I don't think LSU has a lock on the preseason Top 5 at all - as meaningless as such a designation is. I mean, they're #3 right now, and lost their two biggest threats (and OC). Mix into those big losses the fact that three of their 6 conference wins were by 5 points or less, and it makes me hesitant to rank them that high.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
You don't have to put them in your preseason top 5 (nor does Mig). In fact, I encourage you not to. I think you should put Rutgers, L'ville, and WVU as 1-3.
I'm just saying I'll be very surprised if anyone who's both knowledgable and unbiased doesn't have them top 5.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Oy, where's the chip on your shoulder coming from, JT?
LSU is going to be a very solid team next year. They'll also be a very different team, with a different offensive look. They'll have a talented but inexperienced QB running an offense designed by someone else without their star receiver. I wish them the best - mainly because I love how they smacked around ND, and because we don't have to play them.
But I'm not going to say "ZOMG TEH TIGERZ R TEH ROXXORZ!!!111oneoneone" and say they're one of the best five teams in the country before anyone's played a single down. It's just silly.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
quote:Oy, where's the chip on your shoulder coming from, JT?
No chip. I just get sick of the rampant homerism that there's sort of no way around in college football. As much time as I spent defending LSU to people outside the SEC, I spent probably an equal (if not moreso) amount of time defending mid-majors to people in the South. I didn't mean to imply that you (or anyone in this thread) is not knowledgable and unbiased, btw. That was poorly worded. I meant that sentence to refer to the hypothetical fan who watches with interest but has no strong team or school affiliations.
quote:say they're one of the best five teams in the country before anyone's played a single down. It's just silly.
Of course it is. But I might advise you to not comment on preseason rankings if that's how you feel.
p.s. -- I'd really lay off the Dwayne Bowe angle if I were you. He will not be missed. He's a good blocker who routinely dropped the third down catch only to make the fourth down catch, and I think they're better off without him. LSU has a trio of youngsters and I don't think they'll see any dropoff at receiver.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
quote:LSU has a trio of youngsters and I don't think they'll see any dropoff at receiver.
For this, I am totally sympathetic. We didn't get to our good receivers until, well, our first five went out for the season.
quote:But I might advise you to not comment on preseason rankings if that's how you feel.
How about just plain old preseason expectations? I *expect* that LSU will be good, but that they will be a step or two behind where they ended up this year. At least until their new QB gets a lot of game reps and the veterans get used to a new OC (and potentially DC, you said? yikes). That is, of course, what the OoC schedule is for, though, neh?
Personally, I'm very excited for Rutgers next year, all ranking nonsense aside. We've kept the core of our team, and have some great young talent coming in to fill in the gaps. Our recruiting class this year is the best ever, and we've sold out our season tickets for the first time ever. Unfortunately, our OoC schedule is pretty weak, but that gives us the potential to start the season 6-0 or better again.
And with Louisville taking a punch in the mouth from Petrino, our most challenging away game becomes that much less scary.
Heady times for a program that won a whopping 8 games in my four years as an undergrad. Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
I think Rutgers is poised for a very good year, too.
And I think Louisvulle lost a lot more than a coach when Petrino split. Bush has already declared for the draft and I expect Brohm to do the same. I don't know what they have in the cupboard, but they could be in for a biiiig dropoff.
As for LSU, who knows? I wouldn't be surprised if they lose 3 games, but I also wouldn't be surprised if Flynn (who hung 40+ on Miami in last year's Peach Bowl) or Perilloux (who was #1 QB recruit in the nation two years ago) step in and they roll to the N.C. game. And I think the former is only slightly more likely than the latter.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Louisville also lost a big commit from Matt Simms when Petrino left, which does not bode well for the program. He was going to be Brohm's legacy in two years. Now their program is going to have a hard time getting over this speed bump.
WVU is up for a good year, as well, with a lot of key returners - and Pitt has a lot of potential in 2008 with a fantastic recruiting class this year.
I'd love to have SEC/Big East dominance for a few years, with repeated spankings of the ACC and Big 10. Unlike a lot of other Big East fans, I like the SEC and give it a lot of respect - I reserve my ire for ND, BC, and State Penn. Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
As an aside, I'd like to point out, that while some analysts have LSU as high as 2 (which I feel is probably generous), Mark Shlabach has them at 13 (which I feel is probably a bit off the mark).
Just sayin'.
Posted by Mig (Member # 9284) on :
Thanks for the link, good article, and putting LSU at 13 is not too far off the mark, Considering that their likely to have more losses than this year's two, it's not unreasonable to put them out of the top ten.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
If that's how you feel, Mig, I'd be happy to make a friendly wager with you that LSU does not finish out of the top 10 next year.
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
. I can't wait till home games. Even if I don't go I'll be able to hear the chant while I study ![[Wink]](wink.gif)
. ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Party]](graemlins/party.gif)
![[Laugh]](graemlins/laugh.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[The Wave]](graemlins/thewave.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Taunt]](graemlins/taunt.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Blushing]](graemlins/blushing.gif)
![[Grumble]](graemlins/grumble.gif)
![[Wall Bash]](graemlins/wallbash.gif)
Florida did everything they could to give that game away.![[Evil]](graemlins/evil.gif)
![[Angst]](graemlins/angst.gif)