Alabama - Florida

[dalakhani]

Congrats to all who had Florida today. That was a tough beat. Yes, i lost cash on Bama today.

Is it just me or is Julio Jones the second coming of Michael irvin?

[docicu3]

Originally Posted by dalakhani

Congrats to all who had Florida today. That was a tough beat. Yes, i lost cash on Bama today.

Is it just me or is Julio Jones the second coming of Michael irvin?

Again the MAN has the line perfectly......10 in most places at some point this week. Florida wins by 11....

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by docicu3

Again the MAN has the line perfectly......10 in most places at some point this week. Florida wins by 11....

Well the MAN really screwed up the Army /Navy line. How was that not a 20 point line?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Bigsmc

My point about BYU was that it was a complete bull.s.hit national championship. I was not agreeing with you in any way shape or form. If a playoff system exists, BYU doesn't sniff the NC in '84. If there is a playoff this year, Utah and Boise don't stand a chance to win more than once before being bounced.

USC, Okalahoma, Texas, Florida, Alabama, Texas Tech, Penn State......etc....>>>>Boise and Utah.

The problem tha i have with the current system is that if these teams like Utah and Boise dont have a chance to win the title then why are they in the same division? make a super division 1 with all the power conferences and have seperate playoffs or whatever. While there is no doubt they would be unlikely to be undefeated in bigger conferences what else can those teams do except win every game? Unlike the NCAA tourney in basketball, football is settled with ridiclous computer polls and opinions, rather than the results on the field. The perfect example is Texas beats OK, Texas Texh beat Texas, Ok beats Texas Tech. Who is better? Why should what you or I or anyone else thinks matter? A playoff will settle matters. It isnt about who is the "best" team or who would win the most if they played 100 times. It is about winning the game on the field. Naturally there would be some controversy about who gets in and the 9th and 10th teams will cry but there has to be a cut off somewhere. This isnt 1970 anymore where a few teams are vastly superior to everyone else and carry 125 scholarship players. Just about anyone can beat anyone on a given day and to not have a playoff system is unfair to everyone. The reasons given against the system are so ludicrious that I cant believe that they are made with a straight face. The Conferences like the Pac 10 and Big 10 that hold it up should simply be excluded from a system until they drop thier opposition. If the SEC, Big 12, ACC, Big East, Wac, Mountain west, Conference USA and MAC all joined together to have a seperate playoff system the Big 10 and Pac 10 would be screwed and have to join in. I still dont see why the "bowls" have so much power over college football when they arent even part of the NCAA or any of the schools.

[Danzig]

one problem with the current system is that there is still a bias towards certain schools/regions due to their tradition and history-it explains why osu (for example)begins the season practically every year ranked very high. it also explain why just a couple of years ago, many wanted a rematch between osu/mich in the title game, rather than fla getting in.
if utah and boise st want to get more recognition, they can begin by changing their schedules in future, and taking on some tougher non-conference opponents. they are currently considered the 'peppers pride' of bcs football. if they want to fight amongst the supposed power houses, they can help control their destiny. BUT, they still fight an uphill battle, because ratings still matter-witness osu possibly getting a bcs bowl, rather than the higher-ranked utah.

and for anyone still wondering why the current system is in place, and seemingly unchangeable--i recommend finding the dec 1 issue of SI, and reading the article titled 'ka-ching!' by terry mcdonnell.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by Danzig

one problem with the current system is that there is still a bias towards certain schools/regions due to their tradition and history-it explains why osu (for example)begins the season practically every year ranked very high. it also explain why just a couple of years ago, many wanted a rematch between osu/mich in the title game, rather than fla getting in.
if utah and boise st want to get more recognition, they can begin by changing their schedules in future, and taking on some tougher non-conference opponents. they are currently considered the 'peppers pride' of bcs football. if they want to fight amongst the supposed power houses, they can help control their destiny. BUT, they still fight an uphill battle, because ratings still matter-witness osu possibly getting a bcs bowl, rather than the higher-ranked utah.
and for anyone still wondering why the current system is in place, and seemingly unchangeable--i recommend finding the dec 1 issue of SI, and reading the article titled 'ka-ching!' by terry mcdonnell.

Couple of things. For schools like Utah and Boise St, it is very difficult scheduling non-conference opponents. A lot of the big schools want nothing to do with them because they can be a very tough opponent. Also, if they were to get a big name opponent to take the game, it's almost always going to have to be a road game for Utah or Boise St. No way in the world do the big time power schools take road games at one of those types of places. It's too risky. Second thing is that Utah will be in a BCS bowl this year. They are automatically in. OSU is in competition with Boise St for a spot.

[mark2061mn]

Originally Posted by Danzig

one problem with the current system is that there is still a bias towards certain schools/regions due to their tradition and history-it explains why osu (for example)begins the season practically every year ranked very high. it also explain why just a couple of years ago, many wanted a rematch between osu/mich in the title game, rather than fla getting in.
if utah and boise st want to get more recognition, they can begin by changing their schedules in future, and taking on some tougher non-conference opponents. they are currently considered the 'peppers pride' of bcs football. if they want to fight amongst the supposed power houses, they can help control their destiny. BUT, they still fight an uphill battle, because ratings still matter-witness osu possibly getting a bcs bowl, rather than the higher-ranked utah.
and for anyone still wondering why the current system is in place, and seemingly unchangeable--i recommend finding the dec 1 issue of SI, and reading the article titled 'ka-ching!' by terry mcdonnell.

Utah does get a BCS Bowl game, they will play Alabama in the Sugar Bowl. The following is the procedure for a non BCS conference team to play in a BCS bowl game>

3. The champion of Conference USA, the Mid-American Conference, the Mountain West Conference, the Sun Belt Conference or the Western Athletic Conference will earn an automatic berth in a BCS bowl game if either:


A. Such team is ranked in the top 12 of the final BCS Standings, or,
B. Such team is ranked in the top 16 of the final BCS Standings and its ranking in the final BCS Standings is higher than that of a champion of a conference that has an annual automatic berth in one of the BCS bowls.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by mark2061mn

Utah does get a BCS Bowl game, they will play Alabama in the Sugar Bowl. The following is the procedure for a non BCS conference team to play in a BCS bowl game>

3. The champion of Conference USA, the Mid-American Conference, the Mountain West Conference, the Sun Belt Conference or the Western Athletic Conference will earn an automatic berth in a BCS bowl game if either:


A. Such team is ranked in the top 12 of the final BCS Standings, or,
B. Such team is ranked in the top 16 of the final BCS Standings and its ranking in the final BCS Standings is higher than that of a champion of a conference that has an annual automatic berth in one of the BCS bowls.

i was referencing what i read the other day when they were discussing osu possibly getting a higher bowl than utah because of assumed better rating-if that didn't happen, good for the utes.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

Couple of things. For schools like Utah and Boise St, it is very difficult scheduling non-conference opponents. A lot of the big schools want nothing to do with them because they can be a very tough opponent. Also, if they were to get a big name opponent to take the game, it's almost always going to have to be a road game for Utah or Boise St. No way in the world do the big time power schools take road games at one of those types of places. It's too risky. Second thing is that Utah will be in a BCS bowl this year. They are automatically in. OSU is in competition with Boise St for a spot.

if they do nothing to toughen their schedule, than they have no right to turn around and complain-you can't have it both ways. i doubt an honest effort has been made to take on tougher opponents. for example, lsu and oklahoma will start facing each other in i believe two years. neither one has to add tougher opponents, yet they chose to do so, which is a good thing for fans. if they can do this, certainly these other schools can do the same-and with multi-year contracts, it would be done on a rotation as far as home field.

A whole lot more people will watch Texas v. Ohio St., than Texas v. Boise I would think, even with the Boise miracle. Secondly, I would think it will be a bit of a boost to the people around Glendale. The crappy Alamobowl here turns into a Winter vacation for the inferior Big 10 teams... City loves it.

All these places that have bowl games apparently have some pull with the college presidents. No one wants to lose their bowl game. Who gets the final in a playoff? Who gets the first round games? pretty darn messy. The NCAA officials in basketball that decide on future sites... think they get a good meal when they come to a prospective tournaments site?

And come to think of it everyone seems to be talking a whole lot more about how bad the BCS system is. Everyone has an opinion. I guess that is good. I also prefer a playoff (those that decide seem to ignore my preferences sadly)... but all the crap that goes on with the BCS is very entertaining.

I thoroughly enjoyed all the angles my fellow Longhorn's tried to take to persuade my team into the championship. The 45-35 flyover debacle, the whining, its all good stuff.

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by Danzig

if they do nothing to toughen their schedule, than they have no right to turn around and complain-you can't have it both ways. i doubt an honest effort has been made to take on tougher opponents. for example, lsu and oklahoma will start facing each other in i believe two years. neither one has to add tougher opponents, yet they chose to do so, which is a good thing for fans. if they can do this, certainly these other schools can do the same-and with multi-year contracts, it would be done on a rotation as far as home field.

Here is a great paper on the subject i found doing a search. Very interesting read.

http://www.momentummedia.com/article...rightmoves.htm

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Danzig

one problem with the current system is that there is still a bias towards certain schools/regions due to their tradition and history-it explains why osu (for example)begins the season practically every year ranked very high. it also explain why just a couple of years ago, many wanted a rematch between osu/mich in the title game, rather than fla getting in.
if utah and boise st want to get more recognition, they can begin by changing their schedules in future, and taking on some tougher non-conference opponents. they are currently considered the 'peppers pride' of bcs football. if they want to fight amongst the supposed power houses, they can help control their destiny. BUT, they still fight an uphill battle, because ratings still matter-witness osu possibly getting a bcs bowl, rather than the higher-ranked utah.

and for anyone still wondering why the current system is in place, and seemingly unchangeable--i recommend finding the dec 1 issue of SI, and reading the article titled 'ka-ching!' by terry mcdonnell.

Utah and Boise are hardly desirable non-conference teams for major conference teams to schedule. The SEC teams wont want to schedule them, the Big 12 teams wont want them. They will claim their inconference schedules are too hard to play a tougher out of conference teams. Utah has played at Michigan, at Louisville, oregon state (2x) the last 2 years. They won the Fiesta bowl a few year ago in a laugher. Boise St plays in a weaker conference that Utah but noone any good will go and play on that blue field and they have a rep from beating Oklahoma in the Fiesta Bowl.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Utah and Boise are hardly desirable non-conference teams for major conference teams to schedule. The SEC teams wont want to schedule them, the Big 12 teams wont want them. They will claim their inconference schedules are too hard to play a tougher out of conference teams. Utah has played at Michigan, at Louisville, oregon state (2x) the last 2 years. They won the Fiesta bowl a few year ago in a laugher. Boise St plays in a weaker conference that Utah but noone any good will go and play on that blue field and they have a rep from beating Oklahoma in the Fiesta Bowl.

can you blame them?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Danzig

can you blame them?

hell no

[ddthetide]

Congratulations Fla. Gator fans . it was a pretty well played game. go now and win the NC for the SEC, Again!

Originally Posted by ddthetide

Congratulations Fla. Gator fans . it was a pretty well played game. go now and win the NC for the SEC, Again!

If Oklahoma doesn't win with that offensive line they've got then they are never going to win another championship.

[ddthetide]

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

If Oklahoma doesn't win with that offensive line they've got then they are never going to win another championship.

i think OU is soft on both side of the ball and i think fla can play enough defense to slow them down. i'd like to see the gators win it. (choking he whole time i typed that)

Originally Posted by ddthetide

i think OU is soft on both side of the ball and i think fla can play enough defense to slow them down. i'd like to see the gators win it. (choking he whole time i typed that)

I don't. I'd rather they both tie and the championship goes to Bama.

[Danzig]

i don't care who wins, they both do nothing for me. but i will be cheering for penn st in the rose bowl.

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by Danzig

i don't care who wins, they both do nothing for me. but i will be cheering for penn st in the rose bowl.

I love those points in that game. I have done well in the past betting USC over the big ten rep but i think this Penn St team is a little different. I think they are fast enough to contend.