Jump to content
[[Template core/front/custom/_customHeader is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

BCS Rankings - October 31st


Rockerbraves
 Share

Recommended Posts

They haven't been, it's just voters and media are much more aware of how unfair it is to have a team play for a "National" Championship when they weren't even good enough to win their conference, much less their own division. This is why I have no sympathy for Georgia in 2007. Take care of business. End of story. 2003 was another example, as USC was #1 in both the coaches AND the AP polls and were left out of the BCS Title game. If the coaches weren't bound by contract to vote for the BCS Champion as #1 in the nation, USC would've swept both polls. There hasn't been any change, but there seems to be more awareness now. If you remember back in 2007, there was a lot of mention about Georgia not getting there by the mother-ship (ESPN) whereas there was no mention of how unfair it is back in 2001 and 2003. The comeback is "complaining about having to play a conference title game" which is bunk, because more often than not, the conference title game usually serves as a huge positive, rather than a negative. Ask LSU. In both 2003 and 2007, LSU would not have made it to the big game without a conference championship game.

Brian you wait and see how great those conference championship games are. You will love them.

 

Look at Auburn this year. If they happen to beat Georgia and Alabama they would undoubtly be in the BCS NC game if there were no conference championship game. Yet our potential top rank team for the time being Auburn still has to jump one more major hurdle. And that could potentially be a tough out Florida Gator team from the SEC East on a fast track dome stadium playing surface. To me that's alot to ask of Auburn while Oregon sits at home.

 

Now on the plus side should our conference leader stumble somewhere along the way during a full season they have a chance to really make a last impression on the voters as well as the computers. It's the purest of Risk and Reward. I'm pretty sure the SEC Commissionerknew that as well.

 

Trust me on this. Just wait till the day your Iowa Hawkeyes go undefeated in the regular season and have to face a 2 maybe 3 loss Ohio State team in the Big 10 SEC Championship game. Then you might start to realize what a great game that can be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trust me Rocker, as a fan, I am excited for a conference Championship. I will defend the Pac 10 though, because while the rest of the country added FCS teams to their schedule, the Pac 10 added a 9th conference game. Everyone plays everyone in the Pac 10 (not going to be an option next year) and I think THAT is a much better way to determine a conference Champion. In the Pac 10 as it is now, you don't have to worry about some fluke year where USC isn't playing Oregon. In 2007 LSU missed Georga altogether. In 2002, Ohio State missed Iowa. This year Michigan State and Ohio State miss each other. I love that about the Pac 10. And yeah you're right about Auburn having the extra hurdle, but at the same time, they knew about it going into the season that that possibility exists, and more importantly, if Auburn is a worth a chit then it shouldn't be a problem to begin with. Honestly, it shouldn't be much different than Texas having to play that exhibition game vs Colorado in the 2005 Big 12 Championship.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brian you wait and see how great those conference championship games are. You will love them.

 

Look at Auburn this year. If they happen to beat Georgia and Alabama they would undoubtly be in the BCS NC game if there were no conference championship game. Yet our potential top rank team for the time being Auburn still has to jump one more major hurdle. And that could potentially be a tough out Florida Gator team from the SEC East on a fast track dome stadium playing surface. To me that's alot to ask of Auburn while Oregon sits at home.

 

Now on the plus side should our conference leader stumble somewhere along the way during a full season they have a chance to really make a last impression on the voters as well as the computers. It's the purest of Risk and Reward. I'm pretty sure the SEC Commissionerknew that as well.

 

Trust me on this. Just wait till the day your Iowa Hawkeyes go undefeated in the regular season and have to face a 2 maybe 3 loss Ohio State team in the Big 10 SEC Championship game. Then you might start to realize what a great game that can be.

 

 

Cost Missouri a shot at the NC a couple of years ago, when LSU went because OU throttled an undefeated Missouri team in the Big 12 Champ game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trust me Rocker, as a fan, I am excited for a conference Championship. I will defend the Pac 10 though, because while the rest of the country added FCS teams to their schedule, the Pac 10 added a 9th conference game. Everyone plays everyone in the Pac 10 (not going to be an option next year) and I think THAT is a much better way to determine a conference Champion. In the Pac 10 as it is now, you don't have to worry about some fluke year where USC isn't playing Oregon. In 2007 LSU missed Georga altogether. In 2002, Ohio State missed Iowa. This year Michigan State and Ohio State miss each other. I love that about the Pac 10. And yeah you're right about Auburn having the extra hurdle, but at the same time, they knew about it going into the season that that possibility exists, and more importantly, if Auburn is a worth a chit then it shouldn't be a problem to begin with. Honestly, it shouldn't be much different than Texas having to play that exhibition game vs Colorado in the 2005 Big 12 Championship.

 

Have they always had two bye weeks during the season for the PAC 10? That is just weird.

 

Oh, yeah, and what a bunch of vaginas...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But for some voters, it put Oklahoma into the discussion. I wouldn't have had a problem with a 2 loss Big 12 Champion in the title game anymore than a 2 loss SEC Champion.

 

 

OU proved later that year, they were not worthy of playing in that game. LSU beat Ohio St, so they were as worthy as Ohio St. Though I was at that NC game and would have loved to see OU vs Ohio St. LSU had the house packed and it was like a home game for them. Never heard a louder stadium at a college game before. Dome probably had alot to do with that, as most college teams play outside.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OU proved later that year, they were not worthy of playing in that game. LSU beat Ohio St, so they were as worthy as Ohio St. Though I was at that NC game and would have loved to see OU vs Ohio St. LSU had the house packed and it was like a home game for them. Never heard a louder stadium at a college game before. Dome probably had alot to do with that, as most college teams play outside.

 

2007 in general was extremely weak at the top. Only reason Ohio State was there was because they were the only 1 loss team left. My only point is, Oklahoma was a 2 loss Conference Champion, same as LSU. Same as USC. If the BCS came out and had one of those teams vs Ohio State, I wouldn't have complained. That's the classic year for a playoff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2007 in general was extremely weak at the top. Only reason Ohio State was there was because they were the only 1 loss team left. My only point is, Oklahoma was a 2 loss Conference Champion, same as LSU. Same as USC. If the BCS came out and had one of those teams vs Ohio State, I wouldn't have complained. That's the classic year for a playoff.

 

 

as is 2004, when 3 major conference champions. SC, OU and Auburn were all undefeated and one was left out.

 

 

I see a playoff in the near future. The conferences and chancellors dont want it, but feel congress is going to get in this mess with anti-trust laws leaving someone like Boise or TCU out over a 1 loss team from another conference. Its going to have to get ugly and smear these conferences in order for them to change. But when they do, it will be great for the rest of us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2007 in general was extremely weak at the top. Only reason Ohio State was there was because they were the only 1 loss team left. My only point is, Oklahoma was a 2 loss Conference Champion, same as LSU. Same as USC. If the BCS came out and had one of those teams vs Ohio State, I wouldn't have complained. That's the classic year for a playoff.

Don't mean to nitpick but if you recall both LSU losses that year happen in triple OT and LSU trump card was likely that 48-7 out of conference win over Virginia Tech who was also being considered as a choice for that BCS NC game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't mean to nitpick but if you recall both LSU losses that year happen in triple OT and LSU trump card was likely that 48-7 out of conference win over Virginia Tech who was also being considered as a choice for that BCS NC game.

 

And if you recall, I said that in my opinion LSU was the most deserving because they had the most impressive resume of the 2 loss teams. But certainly a 2 loss Big 12 Champion would at least be in the discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trust me Rocker, as a fan, I am excited for a conference Championship. I will defend the Pac 10 though, because while the rest of the country added FCS teams to their schedule, the Pac 10 added a 9th conference game. Everyone plays everyone in the Pac 10 (not going to be an option next year) and I think THAT is a much better way to determine a conference Champion. In the Pac 10 as it is now, you don't have to worry about some fluke year where USC isn't playing Oregon. In 2007 LSU missed Georga altogether. In 2002, Ohio State missed Iowa. This year Michigan State and Ohio State miss each other. I love that about the Pac 10. And yeah you're right about Auburn having the extra hurdle, but at the same time, they knew about it going into the season that that possibility exists, and more importantly, if Auburn is a worth a chit then it shouldn't be a problem to begin with. Honestly, it shouldn't be much different than Texas having to play that exhibition game vs Colorado in the 2005 Big 12 Championship.

The round robin format is probably as fair as any especially if all the games could all be played at a neutral site .

 

The one thing that does bother me somewhat about the new PAC12 Conference Championship game is that it won't be played at a neutral site.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The round robin format is probably as fair as any especially if all the games could all be played at a neutral site .

 

The one thing that does bother me somewhat about the new PAC12 Conference Championship game is that it won't be played at a neutral site.

 

 

round robin at a neutral site?? on what planet??

 

The Pac 10 - this year (minus WSU) is an effing grind

 

You gotta give them props for playing everyone, and 1 more conference game than your SEC brethren, who then schedule a 2nd FCS like LAL or Chattanooga choo choo....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The one thing that does bother me somewhat about the new PAC12 Conference Championship game is that it won't be played at a neutral site.

 

 

Why do you think they did this, rather than like all the other conference who play at a neutral site for their conference Champ game. . They want the money from the extra game, but want their favorite to have a decidely advantage to win the game, which gives the conference the best shot at getting to a NC game. Pretty weak if you ask me. Like saying the Superbowl should be played at the home park, of the team with the best record. This isnt a conference game, its the conference champ game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why do you think they did this, rather than like all the other conference who play at a neutral site for their conference Champ game. . They want the money from the extra game, but want their favorite to have a decidely advantage to win the game, which gives the conference the best shot at getting to a NC game. Pretty weak if you ask me. Like saying the Superbowl should be played at the home park, of the team with the best record. This isnt a conference game, its the conference champ game.

The first problem is that since the conference is so spread out (even more so with the new teams), there isn't really a location that makes sense for most people. The only alternative would be to have it in LA every year, which I'm assuming some schools wouldn't stand for. They have the conference basketball tournament in LA every year, and when UCLA or USC isn't playing, the place is a ghost town. They simply didn't want to take the risk of playing the conference championship game in a half-empty stadium.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why do you think they did this, rather than like all the other conference who play at a neutral site for their conference Champ game. . They want the money from the extra game, but want their favorite to have a decidely advantage to win the game, which gives the conference the best shot at getting to a NC game. Pretty weak if you ask me. Like saying the Superbowl should be played at the home park, of the team with the best record. This isnt a conference game, its the conference champ game.

 

Perhaps an added incentive to have the best record? Hmmm ..... maybe :wacko:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The first problem is that since the conference is so spread out (even more so with the new teams), there isn't really a location that makes sense for most people. The only alternative would be to have it in LA every year, which I'm assuming some schools wouldn't stand for. They have the conference basketball tournament in LA every year, and when UCLA or USC isn't playing, the place is a ghost town. They simply didn't want to take the risk of playing the conference championship game in a half-empty stadium.

 

 

Seriously, I thought football was big in that area of the country. The Big 12, had the game in Kansas City, and in Arlington texas, and I dont remember seeing an empty seat in either venue, and we are spread out over 6 states. But then again, football is pretty big in the midwest. :wacko:

 

If they are scared of not selling out the place, that is pretty sad .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seriously, I thought football was big in that area of the country. The Big 12, had the game in Kansas City, and in Arlington texas, and I dont remember seeing an empty seat in either venue, and we are spread out over 6 states. But then again, football is pretty big in the midwest. :wacko:

 

If they are scared of not selling out the place, that is pretty sad .

 

The SEC championship game doesn't have much of an issue selling out. Come to think of it, neither does the Chic-Fil-A bowl... I think that has a lot to do with the shoe shows in Atlanta, though.... Mmmmmmmm, 9 inch heels and brass poles... :tup::tup::lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seriously, I thought football was big in that area of the country. The Big 12, had the game in Kansas City, and in Arlington texas, and I dont remember seeing an empty seat in either venue, and we are spread out over 6 states. But then again, football is pretty big in the midwest. :wacko:

 

If they are scared of not selling out the place, that is pretty sad .

There are subtle differences between KC, Arlington and Los Angeles, and the people that live in the respective cities. What the heck else are you going to do in Arlington , TX? I've been to Arlington, TX. Go to the game or tip cows. That is about it. Surely we can't be held accountable for the way that people in LA act towards college sports.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I for one have no problem with the Pac 10's decision. Where would the neutral site be? LA? I just don't think it would be feasible. Look at the Pac 10 Tournament in Basketball. By far the least interesting out of all of the conference tournaments. I think it also adds to the regular season. For example, look at the SEC. Auburn has already beat South Carolina, and Florida has 3 conference losses, but yet that game is gonna be played on a neutral field. In the Pac 10, regular season excellence is rewarded. The big question is, how do you determine it if you have a Alabama-Florida situation where both teams went 8 (or 9 depending on if they are going to stick with the 9 game conference schedule, WHICH I HOPE the Big Ten ultimately goes to) -0? Who gets the nod? They go by BCS or what?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

*******************************************************

 

So here is how I see the FINAL BCS standings:

 

1. Oregon - 12-0 Ducks win out and play for a NC

2. Auburn - 11-1 Lose to Bama, but still win the SEC over USC*

OU and AU play for the NC and OU wins

 

3. TCU - 12-0/11-1 might get beat by Utah, but even with that win, finish 3rd at the highest, with a loss to Utah they end up 11th

4. OSU - 11-1, run the table beating Baylor, TX and OU, beat Neb in the Big 12 CG......what? You heard it first right here.

5. Wisconsin - 11-1 win out, no Big 10 CG hurts them

6. Nebraska - 11-1, win out and lose in the Big 12 CG to Okie St, might fall a spot or three

7. Boise - 11-1 three tough games and they slip in one of them (HI, FSU, NV)

8. OSU - 11-1 runs the table, no Big 10 CG hurts here too

9. Alabama - 10-2, get beat by LSU or AU 2 losses = too many

10. Oklahoma - 10-2, lose to Okie St last game of the year

 

13. LSU - 10-2/9-3 can't win SEC unless AU gets beat by UGA and Bama, even if they run the table they are out with NO SEC CG.

 

15. Utah - 10-2, lose to ND and TCU or BYU

 

:wacko::tup::tup::lol:

 

 

Looks like we are only 2 games from seeing this happen...your Huskers need to go to TAM and win and OK ST needs to beat OU. Good thing the game is @ Okie St. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like we are only 2 games from seeing this happen...your Huskers need to go to TAM and win and OK ST needs to beat OU. Good thing the game is @ Okie St. :tup:

Meh, Nebraska has played far better on the road this year so I'm not sure that is really a downside (with all due respect to Kyle stadium and the 90K that will be there). Nebraska's problems right now are injuries and mental mistakes. If Martinez can get healthy enough to run, they stop putting the football on the ground (most turnovers of any D1 team), and keep the penalties down... they should be able to beat aTm and Colorado. I was kind of hoping to play Oklahoma in the Big 12 championship but Okie state is definitely the better team this year. It was a wild one when they played earlier this year and a rematch would be interesting. Right now though, we can't look past aTm :wacko:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information