The W
Views: 100778153
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
23.11.14 1823
The W - Football - College Football Week 13
This thread has 5 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Thread rated: 4.23
Pages: 1 2 Next
(1168 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (33 total)
redsoxnation
Scrapple








Since: 24.7.02

Since last post: 510 days
Last activity: 510 days
#1 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.79
Could McKnight catch a pass over the middle in the 1st half? Speed kills, and if you can't convert turnovers, you have no chance. At least I got a run out of the Notre Dame national title bet, something I wouldn't have believed entering the 4th quarter of the Michigan State game.
A scenario where UCLA knocks off USC and Arkansas knocks off Florida exists where Wisconsin could end up #3 and in the Capital One Bowl. The 2 team max rule needs to be jettisoned, as now 1 loss Wisconsin is ineligible and 1 of the Florida/LSU/Arkansas troika will be ineligible for the BCS.
The backdoor has killed any chance of Florida winning the national title this season. Michigan gets a late defensive touchdown against Notre Dame, thus making their victory more impressive. USC gets a late onside kick return for a touchdown against Notre Dame, driving up the score. And, the 3 most important examples: Michigan with the late touchdown against Ohio State to lose by 3 rather than double digits, Oregon State starts tripping over their feet, thus allowing USC to get from 23 to 2 and not seeming to have as devastating a loss, and Florida having a lateral with no time left to lose to Auburn by 10 rather than 4 in a game they actually dominated. If Michigan and USC lose by double digits, which was entirely possible, and Florida throws an incompletion to only lose by 4, they would probably be #2 heading into the SEC Title game. Of course, should they get in a close game against Arkansas I don't trust Florida's kicking game in a big spot and that might be their downfall.
Bye-bye West Virginia and Texas from BCS consideration.
A look at the bowl set-up, presuming a USC victory over UCLA.
National Title: Ohio State vs. USC.
Rose: If Arkansas wins the SEC, Florida vs. Michigan. If Florida wins the SEC, Notre Dame vs. Michigan.
Sugar: Florida vs. Louisville/Rutgers or Arkansas vs. Notre Dame.
Orange: Georgia Tech/Wake Forest vs. Louisville/Rutgers should Arkansas win the SEC, Georgia Tech/Wake Forest vs. LSU should Florida win the SEC.
Fiesta: Oklahoma/Nebraska vs. Boise State.

I don't think Rutgers will win in Morgantown against West Virginia, and, even if Rutgers were to win, a 2-loss Notre Dame, a 2-loss SEC team and a 3-loss Texas would be taken before a 1-loss Louisville as an at-large team. Remember, the only things that matters outside the National Title game for eligible teams are: 1. Will a team travel. 2. Will they draw TV viewers.

(edited by redsoxnation on 26.11.06 0007)
Promote this thread!
Mr. Boffo
Scrapple








Since: 24.3.02
From: Oshkosh, WI

Since last post: 483 days
Last activity: 443 days
#2 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.12
So you're picking the Arkansas/Florida loser as the at-large team. All these people online keep telling me that it'll be LSU for some reason that I'm not understanding.

I hope the Rose doesn't do Notre Dame / Michigan, for the same reason that people didn't want Ohio State / Michigan in the championship. But their options are pretty limited. No one is going to want Boise State, so they'll be in the Fiesta. I don't know if anyone is going to want the Big East Champ (Rutgers or Louisville) either. And if they don't want the champ, they probably don't want the second place team from the Big East either. That leaves Notre Dame and the SEC at large teams.
Quezzy
Knackwurst








Since: 6.1.02
From: Pittsburgh, PA

Since last post: 13 hours
Last activity: 2 hours
#3 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.57
    Originally posted by Mr. Boffo
    So you're picking the Arkansas/Florida loser as the at-large team. All these people online keep telling me that it'll be LSU for some reason that I'm not understanding.


Well if Arkansas wins they're in the Sugar Bowl and I would think Florida would be the at large but if Florida beats Arkansas then Arkansas has three losses and is probably the lowest ranked of three and LSU and Florida have 1 loss and 2 losses and both would have wins over Arkansas. So yeah, if Arkansas loses I think LSU would be the at-large SEC team.

I still think Florida is being screwed but at least the win over Notre Dame means USC probably moves in to #2. I'd rather see Ohio State-USC than Ohio State-Michigan again and the Rose Bowl will probably be more interesting with Michigan in it too.



Lance's Response:

THAT IS AWESOME!
wmatistic
Andouille








Since: 2.2.04
From: Austin, TX

Since last post: 5 days
Last activity: 8 hours
AIM:  
#4 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.08
    Originally posted by redsoxnation
    Remember, the only things that matters outside the National Title game for eligible teams are: 1. Will a team travel. 2. Will they draw TV viewers.

    (edited by redsoxnation on 26.11.06 0007)


Well, sorta. I mean there is that rule they haven't put into play that says they have the right to adjust the matchups after the bowls pick teams in the best interests of college football and to avoid such things as rematches if they feel no one will watch.

In other words I'm not worried about a Michigan vs Notre Dame rematch. I don't think they would let that happen. Although there are a lot of people who hate ND that would tune in just to see them crushed again.

Oh and where are all those people that were telling me before about how great the Big East was again? :)
TheBucsFan
TheChiefsFan








Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 103 days
Last activity: 103 days
#5 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.26
    Originally posted by wmatistic
    Oh and where are all those people that were telling me before about how great the Big East was again? :)


I'm not sure I understand your point; did something happen this week - with the Big East teams only playing other Big East teams - to indicate that the conference isn't good?
wmatistic
Andouille








Since: 2.2.04
From: Austin, TX

Since last post: 5 days
Last activity: 8 hours
AIM:  
#6 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.08
    Originally posted by TheBucsFan
      Originally posted by wmatistic
      Oh and where are all those people that were telling me before about how great the Big East was again? :)


    I'm not sure I understand your point; did something happen this week - with the Big East teams only playing other Big East teams - to indicate that the conference isn't good?


They still haven't proven they ARE good yet. And a top team like West Virginia getting beat by South Florida certainly hurts their already weak case.
ges7184
Lap cheong








Since: 7.1.02
From: Birmingham, AL

Since last post: 76 days
Last activity: 1 hour
#7 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.40
But it is still one Big East team beating another Big East team. It may just show that the conference has depth, and is not just a one or two team conference like some of the others. There is so little out-of-conference play, particularly with the top-level teams that it is pretty much impossible to tell which conference is better than the other (I would say that no conference has proven that they are good yet). That said, the Big East does appear to have more depth than some of the other conferences.



The Bored are already here. Idle hands are the devil's workshop. And no... we won't kill dolphins. But koalas are fair game.
TheBucsFan
TheChiefsFan








Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 103 days
Last activity: 103 days
#8 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.26
    Originally posted by wmatistic
      Originally posted by TheBucsFan
        Originally posted by wmatistic
        Oh and where are all those people that were telling me before about how great the Big East was again? :)


      I'm not sure I understand your point; did something happen this week - with the Big East teams only playing other Big East teams - to indicate that the conference isn't good?


    They still haven't proven they ARE good yet. And a top team like West Virginia getting beat by South Florida certainly hurts their already weak case.


South Florida destroyed No. 9 Louisville last year, and this year was a dropped two-point conversion pass away from taking a Rutgers team that was at one point ranked No. 6 to OT. I think you just don't know the teams in the conference that well.

I don't think there's any disputing that Pat White and Steve Slaton are absolutely amazing, and if you watched any of yesterday's game you saw the USF defense absolutely shut them down. Says more to me about USF's merit and the conference's depth than West Virginia being overrated.

Auburn lost to an overmatched Georgia team; does this mean the SEC sucks?

USC lost to an overmatched Oregon State team; does this mean the Pac-10 sucks?

Texas lost to an overmatched Texas A&M team; does this mean the Big XII sucks?

EDIT: And I would just like to add, Steve Slaton's two worst games as a starter have both come against the Bulls.

(edited by TheBucsFan on 26.11.06 1223)
wmatistic
Andouille








Since: 2.2.04
From: Austin, TX

Since last post: 5 days
Last activity: 8 hours
AIM:  
#9 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.08
    Originally posted by TheBucsFan
      Originally posted by wmatistic
        Originally posted by TheBucsFan
          Originally posted by wmatistic
          Oh and where are all those people that were telling me before about how great the Big East was again? :)


        I'm not sure I understand your point; did something happen this week - with the Big East teams only playing other Big East teams - to indicate that the conference isn't good?


      They still haven't proven they ARE good yet. And a top team like West Virginia getting beat by South Florida certainly hurts their already weak case.


    South Florida destroyed No. 9 Louisville last year, and this year was a dropped two-point conversion pass away from taking a Rutgers team that was at one point ranked No. 6 to OT. I think you just don't know the teams in the conference that well.

    I don't think there's any disputing that Pat White and Steve Slaton are absolutely amazing, and if you watched any of yesterday's game you saw the USF defense absolutely shut them down. Says more to me about USF's merit and the conference's depth than West Virginia being overrated.

    Auburn lost to an overmatched Georgia team; does this mean the SEC sucks?

    USC lost to an overmatched Oregon State team; does this mean the Pac-10 sucks?

    Texas lost to an overmatched Texas A&M team; does this mean the Big XII sucks?

    EDIT: And I would just like to add, Steve Slaton's two worst games as a starter have both come against the Bulls.

    (edited by TheBucsFan on 26.11.06 1223)


Wow, you mean Big East teams played each other last year too? I'm impressed now.

The difference in those other teams you mentioned is that either we already KNOW they play tough in conference competition that is at national title level or we saw them this year play OOC teams that are top level. We can't say that about ANY Big East team so again, why should I buy into them now? What have they done to PROVE it? What top level team has any of them beaten to show it's not just the same old Big East? Maryland? Wow, totally kick ass.

You and another seem to think because I don't give them respect they haven't earned that I must not understand or know about the Big East. I'm a diehard college football fan of over 20 years. I know the Big East now and it's past. I'm just saying I don't give you credit until you earn it and NONE of those teams have done so yet. They very well may in time, but until then I'm not going to be impressed. Sorry, I came from Missouri. You gotta Show Me.

(edited by wmatistic on 26.11.06 1418)
TheBucsFan
TheChiefsFan








Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 103 days
Last activity: 103 days
#10 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.26
I understand your point, but just because they haven't played top teams doesn't mean they aren't good. Look at Louisville and West Virginia play; I don't need to see them face Ohio State to know that they play damn good football.

In the case of Louisville (and USF), top teams don't WANT to play them. They were lucky to get Miami to go to Lousivlle, and just their luck, it happens in a year when Miami is an absolute joke. So all you have to go by is what you see on the field; I see very good teams losing to other very good teams.

Now, I don't understand what your definition of a "good" conference is. The Big East isn't the strongest conference, but it's leaps and bounds better than the ACC and, dare I say it, the Big XII. I also am not as impressed as many with the SEC. Again, it's just a bunch of teams only playing each other.

Also:


    Sorry, I came from Missouri. You gotta Show Me.


I was born in St. Louis!
Quezzy
Knackwurst








Since: 6.1.02
From: Pittsburgh, PA

Since last post: 13 hours
Last activity: 2 hours
#11 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.57
    Originally posted by TheBucsFan
    I also am not as impressed as many with the SEC.


Right because they only have four 10 win teams all of who have done it despite playing two other teams that were at one time in the top 10. Not to mention a 9 win team that destroyed the Pac-10's second place team Cal. Then Georgia who wasn't even as good as they usually are went and beat the ACC's first place team. The team that should've been 10th or worse (Kentucky) quietly went 7 - 5 . South Carolina and Alabama would be at least 9 win teams if they didn't each play five ranked teams on their schedule (South Carolina played six). Even Vanderbilt wasn't put away by Michigan until 2 minutes left in the game. Yeah you're right, not that impressive. Only hands down the best conference in the nation.



Lance's Response:

THAT IS AWESOME!
TheBucsFan
TheChiefsFan








Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 103 days
Last activity: 103 days
#12 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.26
    Originally posted by Quezzy
      Originally posted by TheBucsFan
      I also am not as impressed as many with the SEC.


    Right because they only have four 10 win teams all of who have done it despite playing two other teams that were at one time in the top 10. Not to mention a 9 win team that destroyed the Pac-10's second place team Cal. Then Georgia who wasn't even as good as they usually are went and beat the ACC's first place team. The team that should've been 10th or worse (Kentucky) quietly went 7 - 5 . South Carolina and Alabama would be at least 9 win teams if they didn't each play five ranked teams on their schedule (South Carolina played six). Even Vanderbilt wasn't put away by Michigan until 2 minutes left in the game. Yeah you're right, not that impressive. Only hands down the best conference in the nation.


I guess I should have made my sarcasm a little clearer.

My point was, just because teams don't play the hardest out of conference schedule doesn't mean they're not good. Look at the SEC as proof.

On a second read, my sarcasm is not even close to evident. It made sense when I wrote it. Anyway, I agree with you.
wmatistic
Andouille








Since: 2.2.04
From: Austin, TX

Since last post: 5 days
Last activity: 8 hours
AIM:  
#13 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.08
    Originally posted by TheBucsFan
    I understand your point, but just because they haven't played top teams doesn't mean they aren't good. Look at Louisville and West Virginia play; I don't need to see them face Ohio State to know that they play damn good football.

    In the case of Louisville (and USF), top teams don't WANT to play them. They were lucky to get Miami to go to Lousivlle, and just their luck, it happens in a year when Miami is an absolute joke. So all you have to go by is what you see on the field; I see very good teams losing to other very good teams.

    Now, I don't understand what your definition of a "good" conference is. The Big East isn't the strongest conference, but it's leaps and bounds better than the ACC and, dare I say it, the Big XII. I also am not as impressed as many with the SEC. Again, it's just a bunch of teams only playing each other.

    Also:


      Sorry, I came from Missouri. You gotta Show Me.


    I was born in St. Louis!


I didn't say they weren't good, I said they haven't proven themselves to be national title caliber or really even close to that yet. That they were horribly overhyped for not having proven anything. Again, maybe they will but until they do I don't get why anyone earlier this year or now would even think about talking like that. MAC teams have played great against each other and yet no one talks about them as top contenders either.

The difference between the Big East and SEC is SEC teams have year in and year out been national title contenders, and taken on and beaten other top teams in the nation. Every single year. So yeah they only play each other, but we KNOW they are good enough. We don't know that about the Big East and it's a HUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGGGGGGEEEE assumption to say just because they are competitive with each other that they are on the level of the other top conference schools.

And I'm sorry but the old, no one wants to schedule us, is a lame pile of bull that you should not be buying into. Sure some times here or there you'll find teams backing out but you find that with all schools big or small. People keep using this line but I've yet to see consistent proof it's true.
redsoxnation
Scrapple








Since: 24.7.02

Since last post: 510 days
Last activity: 510 days
#14 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.79
    Originally posted by Quezzy
      Originally posted by TheBucsFan
      I also am not as impressed as many with the SEC.


    Right because they only have four 10 win teams all of who have done it despite playing two other teams that were at one time in the top 10. Not to mention a 9 win team that destroyed the Pac-10's second place team Cal. Then Georgia who wasn't even as good as they usually are went and beat the ACC's first place team. The team that should've been 10th or worse (Kentucky) quietly went 7 - 5 . South Carolina and Alabama would be at least 9 win teams if they didn't each play five ranked teams on their schedule (South Carolina played six). Even Vanderbilt wasn't put away by Michigan until 2 minutes left in the game. Yeah you're right, not that impressive. Only hands down the best conference in the nation.






I wouldn't put an Alabama team that lost at home to Mississippi State up as a team that could have won 9 games.
I'm not defending the Big East, but since Kentucky was actually competitive this year, Louisville's dismantling of them actually has to be viewed as impressive.
Also, looking at the new BCS numbers, it appears LSU will be the at-large SEC team no matter whether Florida or Arkansas wins the conference title. Some of the lesser bowls are going to have more interesting match-ups than the BCS bowls.
Texas Kelly
Lap cheong








Since: 3.1.02
From: FOREST HILLS CONTROLS THE UNIVERSE

Since last post: 80 days
Last activity: 3 days
ICQ:  
#15 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.99
Ladies and gentlemen, the following public service message is brought to you by your friends from D-Generation X, who would like to remind each and every one of you that if you're not down with that, we've got two words for you...

    Originally posted by redsoxnation
    Bye-bye West Virginia from BCS consideration.

*Family Feud Buzzer*

Sorry, West Virginia's still in it. It's a small chance, but they're still in it.

First, they've got to beat Rutgers next week. Then, Louisville has to lose to Connecticut. (Hey, I know the latter is unlikely, but if Rutgers can get blown out by Cincinnati and West Virginia can choke at home against South Florida in consecutive weeks, it's certainly not impossible.) Should that happen, you'd have a three-way tie for the conference title. The only tiebreaker the Big East employs is head-to-head record amongst the tied teams, and each would have won one and lost one against the other. That means it would fall on the BCS rankings to determine who gets to go to the big games. Rutgers, at #13 right now, would certainly be knocked out of the picture with a loss to West Virginia. Louisville right now is #6, and West Virginia is #15. The question is whether or not the boost WVU would get from a win over Rutgers combined with the steep drop Louisville would get from a loss to an unranked team would be enough for WVU to pass Louisville for the slot. It certainly has the potential to be, IMO.

Texas, on the other hand, is done, though.

(edited by Texas Kelly on 26.11.06 2158)

e-mail me at texas (dot) kelly (at) gmailread a bunch of incoherent nonsense
now 52% more incoherent!
smark/net attack Advisory System is Elevatedsmark/net attack Advisory System Status is: Elevated
(Holds; June 18, 2006)
While the switch from Cena to RVD should alleviate some complaints, the inevitability of the belt's return to Cena (note where Summerslam is this year) and the poor initial showing by the new ECW are enough to keep the indicator where it is for now. The pieces are in place, though, especially on RAW, for improvements to be made to the IWC's psyche in the near future.
wmatistic
Andouille








Since: 2.2.04
From: Austin, TX

Since last post: 5 days
Last activity: 8 hours
AIM:  
#16 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.08
    Originally posted by redsoxnation
    I'm not defending the Big East, but since Kentucky was actually competitive this year, Louisville's dismantling of them actually has to be viewed as impressive.



Not to totally poo poo what you're saying, but I kind of don't see it. I mean look at what kentucky did(opponants overall record):

losses to
(10-1)Louisville 59-28
(11-1)Florida 26-7
(7-5)South Carolina 24-17
(10-2)LSU 49-0
(9-3)Tennessee 17-12

Wins over
(5-6)Texas State 41-7
(4-8)Mississippi 31-14
(8-4)Central Michigan 45-36
(3-9)Mississippi State 34-31
(8-4)Georgia 24-20
(4-8)Vandy 38-26
(3-8)Louisiana Monroe 42-40

So...they lost to anyone decent except Georgia, who they caught during their huge freefall. All other teams they beat were utter crap. You are of course free to do as you wish, but Louisville gets no credit for this win from me.
Battlezone
Potato korv








Since: 27.2.03
From: Seattle, Washington

Since last post: 2176 days
Last activity: 228 days
AIM:  
Y!:
#17 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.78
    Originally posted by Quezzy
      Originally posted by TheBucsFan
      I also am not as impressed as many with the SEC.


    Right because they only have four 10 win teams all of who have done it despite playing two other teams that were at one time in the top 10. Not to mention a 9 win team that destroyed the Pac-10's second place team Cal. Then Georgia who wasn't even as good as they usually are went and beat the ACC's first place team. The team that should've been 10th or worse (Kentucky) quietly went 7 - 5 . South Carolina and Alabama would be at least 9 win teams if they didn't each play five ranked teams on their schedule (South Carolina played six). Even Vanderbilt wasn't put away by Michigan until 2 minutes left in the game. Yeah you're right, not that impressive. Only hands down the best conference in the nation.


Sorry, not buying it. If Wisconsin were in the SEC, I'd be hearing about them being national title contenders, despite the fact they played one ranked team, and lost that.

Florida has a quality win over LSU, and a loss to Auburn. That's it. Where's this tough schedule I keep hearing about? If you're holding up Georgia and Tennessee as quality wins for Florida, then Michigan's got Iowa, Penn State, and Wisconsin to counter that.

I don't even really want to get into your insane "if they hadn't lost, they would have won" argument re: South Carolina and Alabama, but Indiana was picked to finish last in the Big 10, but came within a few plays of playing in a bowl. Penn State's four losses came to teams that are a combined 44-4. Iowa's a nine-win team if they didn't lose to three ranked teams-including the two best teams in the country.

And, if you're going to point to Tennessee's win over "the Pac-10's second place team Cal", then I'll point to the Pac-10's champion's thumping of the team currently waiting to play for the SEC title.

Top to bottom, the Big-10 and Pac-10 are easily as deep, talented, and competitive as the SEC. The SEC simply isn't "hands down" the nation's best conference, they just have the best PR.

Edit: I want to clarify something about Florida. I think they are a good team; they remind me of the 2002 Ohio State championship team. Played a lot of close game-including games where they should have won big. Plays good defense, a conservative offense-basically play the field position game, and wait for the other team to make a mistake. In fact, if those two teams were to play today, Ohio State would probably win in a 3-0 barnburner because neither team would move the ball, but that year's OSU special teams were better than this Florida team's.

I just don't think, when you look at the schedules, the rankings, and the teams, and who they play, that the SEC is heads and shoulders above any other conference. And this complaining about "style points" really needs to stop. Especially when schools like Florida and Florida State scheduled directional schools so they could hang 70 on them so as to look impressive to the pollsters.


(edited by Battlezone on 26.11.06 1941)

(edited by Battlezone on 26.11.06 1959)

"It's the four pillars of the male heterosexual psyche. We like naked women, stockings, lesbians, and Sean Connery best as James Bond because that is what being a [man] is." -Jack Davenport, Coupling
wmatistic
Andouille








Since: 2.2.04
From: Austin, TX

Since last post: 5 days
Last activity: 8 hours
AIM:  
#18 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.08
    Originally posted by Battlezone
    And this complaining about "style points" really needs to stop. Especially when schools like Florida and Florida State scheduled directional schools so they could hang 70 on them so as to look impressive to the pollsters.


Ok no problem with your style points issue, but I of course must defend FSU by saying you are nuts if you want to pick on them as slacking in the OOC scheduling. For years they played Florida and Miami as well as usually one other tough OOC game. Now Miami in in conference(and sucks) but they still play Florida and most years a team or two that are solid as well such as Notre Dame back to back seasons recently. Of course they have a "directional school" on there as well, as does pretty much every single team in the nation. You want to pick at that kind of stuff though you need to go find another target to bring up.

Let's see, yep Alabama and Colorado plus Florida for next year. BYU, Florida And Colorado after that, moving on to a home and home with Oklahoma after that and O M G LOOK AT THIS IT'S NOT TRUE IT'S A LIE that's right a home and home with West Virginia after that. Wait, I thought no one would put these Big East schools on the schedule? Must be a mistake. Wait I guess technically they are a "directional school".

Side note: jesus I hope changing coaches makes FSU better or these schedules will be the death of me.



(edited by wmatistic on 26.11.06 2039)
Battlezone
Potato korv








Since: 27.2.03
From: Seattle, Washington

Since last post: 2176 days
Last activity: 228 days
AIM:  
Y!:
#19 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.78
    Originally posted by wmatistic
    Ok no problem with your style points issue, but I of course must defend FSU by saying you are nuts if you want to pick on them as slacking in the OOC scheduling.


I was really referring to Florida/FSU in the mid-90s, when they scheduled schools just looking for a payday, but fair enough. You're absolutely correct that most schools do it*, but Urban Meyer's the only one I hear complaining about "style points" all of a sudden.

Actually, now that I think about it, I'm not quite sure why I put FSU on there, they've always played competitive OOC (although five years ago, having Alabama and Colorado OOC would have looked like a killer schedule). It's the SEC I have the issue with.

*In the interest of complete disclosure, I've noticed that Ohio State has Youngstown State on the schedule for next year. But...um...at least they're a GOOD 1-AA school. Yeah, that's it! [/spin control]



"It's the four pillars of the male heterosexual psyche. We like naked women, stockings, lesbians, and Sean Connery best as James Bond because that is what being a [man] is." -Jack Davenport, Coupling
TheBucsFan
TheChiefsFan








Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 103 days
Last activity: 103 days
#20 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.26
    Originally posted by wmatistic
    O M G LOOK AT THIS IT'S NOT TRUE IT'S A LIE that's right a home and home with West Virginia after that. Wait, I thought no one would put these Big East schools on the schedule? Must be a mistake.


Wow, a home-and-home three years down the line, at a point when FSU probably has more to gain from it than West Virginia does; that is clearly so relevant to this season and insightful in general.

VaTech refused to play West Virginia this year after playing them the last two years. That is the only example I know for certain for them. Louisville has been trying for years to get some SEC schools to play them.

USF has been trying to get the Gators to play them for three years now (they've only been IA since 2002); finally last offseason they agreed to two games against the Bulls ... in 2008 and (I think) 2012. It might be back-to-back seasons; regardless, both games are in Gainesville, as a condition of the agreement. Next season, USF goes to Auburn; it would have happened sooner, but USF was holding out looking for a home-and-home deal. Nobody will go to Tampa because they're afraid to lose and lend the program legitimacy. I'm sure they encounter similar scenarios in Louisville and Morgantown. The way it is now, the sheep still have their "they don't beat anybody" mantra.

USF has a home-and-home with Miami coming up, which was a big coup for the team, just like it was for Louiville; but Miami can do that because they need the money, what with their inability to sell out the Orange Bowl. You give me Auburn, UF, LSU and others playing big games out of conference on the road more often and maybe this point means nothing. OSU and Texas agreed to a home-and-home, and I'm glad they did; I think more of those programs for being a part of it.

The only out-of-conference road games UF has played since 2002 are one against Miami and two against FSU. You're telling me they're willing to play tough teams out of conference? I don't see you saying they aren't impressive.

Auburn has played a total of three games OOC in that time span against BCS schools - last year against Georgia Tech (a win) and a home-and-home against USC in 2002-03 (Auburn lost both).

If these teams aren't willing to play anyone tough OOC, how can you 1) expect the Big East to, and 2) tell me it's a lie that nobody will play the Big East teams? If I were running a BCS team, I wouldn't be willing to go play two straight away games against another BCS school, especially in state with so much recruiting power on the line; but that's what USF has to do to answer these retarded calls.

West Virginia got in lucky in landing these two stud athletes, because now any intelligent fan would say the Mountaineers are at the very least on even ground with VaTech, so it's not quite so pressing for them to compete with the Hokies. But now, if they're going to compete for a national title year after year, they're either going to have to harvest on BCS has-beens (like Florida State) or swallow their pride (and some money) and not get home games in return. Same for Louisville. But that's clearly their fault.

EDIT: I understand that USF isn't at the center of this argument, it's UL and WVU that are the conference powerhouses. I use USF as an example because it's the team I know most about.

Also, another example:

Arkansas has played H&H with both Texas and USC in the last four years; they won one against Texas in 2003. The last two years, they were outscored by USC by a total of 120-31! Including 50-14 at home! They're still ranked in the top 10 and playing for an SEC title. Do you think they're "not impressive?" Seeing as how they're apparently the best the SEC West can offer, and they just got DESTROYED two straight years by an OOC foe, does this mean the SEC is no good? Please.

(edited by TheBucsFan on 27.11.06 0032)
Pages: 1 2 Next
Thread rated: 4.23
Pages: 1 2 Next
Thread ahead: Vanderjagt kicked
Next thread: USC LOSES!
Previous thread: NFL Network game thoughts?
(1168 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
The dolphins gave him a raise: http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sports/football/pro/dolphins/sfl-dolphins27aug27,0,6305693.story?coll=sfla-dolphins-front BEST QUOTE OF ENTIRE ARTICLE:
Related threads: College Football Week 12 - College Football Week 11 - College Football Week 9 1/2 - More...
The W - Football - College Football Week 13Register and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.146 seconds.