So let me see if I understand this correctly

[GWPFFL BrianW]

The stat on Game Day this morning summed my point up beautifully. The percent chance of every team left that's undefeated, to continue to run the table and finish the season unblemished.

 

Boise State clocked in at 96% NINETY SIX PERCENT to finish the season 12-0

 

The next closest was Oregon just under 50 %

 

So in other words, only 1 team has an above average shot at running the table. 96 % folks. THATS PATHETIC. So while EVERY other team has below average odds the rest of the way, Boise is almost a near certainty. THAT IS MY POINT! Oklahoma playing a below average Texas Tech later this season is a lot tougher than facing San Jose State or New Mexico State etc etc etc. And the numbers back that up. Those are staggering numbers.

[Seahawks21]

No, I don't agree and that's the point. I think schools from smaller conferences have done enough to prove that they're more than capable of competing against schools from larger conferences. Enough so that I think it is folly to assume that they're not as good. So, no, I don't think it would be safe to say that FLA or OSU were the next BEST teams.

 

And no, the ACC is simply not stronger. Mind you, I don't know the MWC, but they'd have to be an absolute disgrace for them to be any worse than the ACC. The bottom is putrid. Duke and Wake are getting waxed by anyone who doesn't also suck. Army beat Duke and badly (it was 35-7 going into the 4th) Wake has played stronger teams but is just getting pummeled by all of them. BC and UVA are also a mess this year(which btw, is quite an indictment on FSU beating them by less than a TD this week). In the local paper, they did a mid-season prediction of how the teams would finish and actually put Duke ahead of UVA. So, there's your "handful". A third of the conference that are absolutely easy outs. There is no team at the top that has proven itself as a consistently good team and the middle teams are fine enough but certainly capable of laying a major egg against anyone. Sure UNC could have been great this year had they not screwed up and lost all that talent to suspensions but...

 

More importantly,, there are too few games available, so why waste any of them confirming what we already know? In the case of last year, since Bama had just beaten FLA by 20 pts on a neutral field, then it didn't matter if they might be the next best team in the country because it was certainly clear enough they weren't the best. How many years in the NFL has one conference been clearly better than the other and either the AFC or NFC Championship pitted the two best teams in football? Do we just ignore the champ from the other conference and let those two play again, just because it seems like those are the two best teams? Certainly not.

 

So, it seems like you're the one who wants to play the hunch. Because you seem to be prepared to let a team that has done enough to prove that it most certainly is not the best team in football have another crack at the championship because you think they might be the second best. Meanwhile, there's been a team that has beaten everyone in front of them so, while we don't know if they're the best, we certainly don't know they're not. But you want to pass them over. Despite the fact that the program has shown in recent years that it is not a fluke. And before you play the "it only matters what happens this year" card. Realize that, by assuming traditionally elite schools are better, you are absolutely taking years other than this one into account.

 

Because you know and I know that if Boise finally got a crack and played a great game against whatever big conference team they play in the final, that they either won the thing or lost a close and well-played game, it would change the argument for years to come. Which, btw, is likely why the BCS put TCU vs BSU last year, because they don't want to open that can of worms at all. If they honestly felt that BSU couldn't compete, they'd give 'em a shot against a truly elite team, just once, watch them get their asses kicked and then not have to worry about them ever again.

If this was allowed, you would start to see elite teams from major conferences opt to play in the WAC or MWC or whatever other league. If USC went to play in the MWC, they would play for the national title 8 out of every 10 years. You just can't let a team play 8 cupcakes, 3 decent teams, and then reward them for playing the cupcake schedule. You just can't. If they played in a number of different conferences, there is a very high chance that they wouldn't go undefeated. You can't reward them for playing in a conference with the weak sisters of the poor. If you want the chance to play for a national title, you have to earn it. Nobody will ever know if BSU is any good with the schedule they play. I guess you're right though. Until it actually happens, and they get absolutely stomped in a major bowl against a real team, some people will give them the benefit of the doubt. In that sense, I guess I hope it happens. Any team that plays that schedule deserves NOTHING. Again, that is like Gonzaga going undefeated in their conference, therefore they would get to make the Final 4 every year, when they clearly have shown that they are nowhere near good enough to be at that level. But with your argument, since they have beaten everybody in front of them, they deserve it. C'mon!

[detlef]

The stat on Game Day this morning summed my point up beautifully. The percent chance of every team left that's undefeated, to continue to run the table and finish the season unblemished.

 

Boise State clocked in at 96% NINETY SIX PERCENT to finish the season 12-0

 

The next closest was Oregon just under 50 %

 

So in other words, only 1 team has an above average shot at running the table. 96 % folks. THATS PATHETIC. So while EVERY other team has below average odds the rest of the way, Boise is almost a near certainty. THAT IS MY POINT! Oklahoma playing a below average Texas Tech later this season is a lot tougher than facing San Jose State or New Mexico State etc etc etc. And the numbers back that up. Those are staggering numbers.

Right, but Oregon or the rest have a nearly 100% chance of getting to the title game if they do go undefeated and BSU or TCU or Utah or any of the other other teams have to go undefeated and hope things break right. So far, it hasn't happened yet. So they do get penalized for the fact that they have an easier road. What I'm saying, and I believe Wildcat is saying is that they shouldn't be completely eliminated from the conversation right off the bat. That's a far cry from saying that each and every time a school goes undefeated, they should automatically go.

 

If this was allowed, you would start to see elite teams from major conferences opt to play in the WAC or MWC or whatever other league. If USC went to play in the MWC, they would play for the national title 8 out of every 10 years. You just can't let a team play 8 cupcakes, 3 decent teams, and then reward them for playing the cupcake schedule. You just can't. If they played in a number of different conferences, there is a very high chance that they wouldn't go undefeated. You can't reward them for playing in a conference with the weak sisters of the poor. If you want the chance to play for a national title, you have to earn it. Nobody will ever know if BSU is any good with the schedule they play. I guess you're right though. Until it actually happens, and they get absolutely stomped in a major bowl against a real team, some people will give them the benefit of the doubt. In that sense, I guess I hope it happens. Any team that plays that schedule deserves NOTHING. Again, that is like Gonzaga going undefeated in their conference, therefore they would get to make the Final 4 every year, when they clearly have shown that they are nowhere near good enough to be at that level. But with your argument, since they have beaten everybody in front of them, they deserve it. C'mon!

See above. If USC played in the MWC, they'd be stuck answering the same question BSU is now and would likely get passed over just like BSU has been and likely will be this year. Hell, when the season started, they just needed Bama and OSU to lose because they were #3. Well, guess what. They both lost and where is BSU? Still at 3, so they've been leap-frogged by two teams already. The winner of the Auburn LSU game is going to pass them as well. So you guys are basically getting what any reasonable person would want, that teams going undefeated against better competition than them are passing them up. But that's the thing, you're not reasonable because that doesn't seem to be enough. Basically, you want them eliminated from the conversation right from the outset. And they've simply shown too much of late for that to be remotely fair.

[GWPFFL BrianW]

No my point is that the overwhelming odds are that Boise is the only undefeated team remaining, because of the sheer easy schedule (come on 96 %??!?). With that schedule we're now talking about 1 loss teams. While other teams scratch and claw all the way to the end, and don't even have a better than average chance of going undefeated, Boise is on Extremely easy street. Forget about just plain old Easy Street. They have a cakewalk. A near certainty, and no one else is expected to do that.

[detlef]

No my point is that the overwhelming odds are that Boise is the only undefeated team remaining, because of the sheer easy schedule (come on 96 %??!?). With that schedule we're now talking about 1 loss teams. While other teams scratch and claw all the way to the end, and don't even have a better than average chance of going undefeated, Boise is on Extremely easy street. Forget about just plain old Easy Street. They have a cakewalk. A near certainty, and no one else is expected to do that.

Well, for starters, where are those numbers coming from and do they take into account the quality of the team itself. I mean, you're talking about that number like it's not some cooked up thing to cause discussion. How the hell are they going to figure this out? Again, and maybe it says as much about how good they are as it does about who they're playing. Maybe MSU's % is low because they not only have a possibly harder schedule but the guys putting together this study don't think they're all that great.

 

Regardless, BSU isn't simply being asked to go undefeated this season, they're basically being asked to go 25-0. Because had they not gone undefeated last year and not returned basically everyone, they would have been seeded where they usually are and been playing catch-up all season, like they usually are. Had they they lost last year in a bowl game, especially badly, the pollsters would have penalized them. Of course, that wouldn't happen to someone like OSU. They'd be slotted right where they normally are and would be right at the top if they started out 4-0. So, all these teams that you think aren't getting a fair shake, actually are. We're just looking at the one year where a team like BSU finally will get a chance.

[wildcat2334]

No my point is that the overwhelming odds are that Boise is the only undefeated team remaining, because of the sheer easy schedule (come on 96 %??!?). With that schedule we're now talking about 1 loss teams. While other teams scratch and claw all the way to the end, and don't even have a better than average chance of going undefeated, Boise is on Extremely easy street. Forget about just plain old Easy Street. They have a cakewalk. A near certainty, and no one else is expected to do that.

 

 

well, you are conveniently leaving out 2 good non conferences Wins that got them to this point..... I don't care what anyone says - VT and OSU are quality wins, and both will be in or around the top 25 as the season progresses.

 

No on is arguing the WAC is terrible, but there are is alot of information in favor of Boise being damn good.

 

Not sure why you all get bent out of shape on the WAC being weak, which no one is arguing against.... and we all know the chances of them getting to the NC are slim - they will get a BCS bowl game - and more than earn that spot.

[detlef]

well, you are conveniently leaving out 2 good non conferences Wins that got them to this point..... I don't care what anyone says - VT and OSU are quality wins, and both will be in or around the top 25 as the season progresses.

 

No on is arguing the WAC is terrible, but there are is alot of information in favor of Boise being damn good.

 

Not sure why you all get bent out of shape on the WAC being weak, which no one is arguing against.... and we all know the chances of them getting to the NC are slim - they will get a BCS bowl game - and more than earn that spot.

For the record, I believe that percentage is going forward, not for the whole season. Mind you, I would still love to see how they came up with it and, considering Nevada and Hawaii aren't completely awful, I don't see how the number can be so high. They have 5 games. In order to have a 96% chance of winning all, they basically have to have a 100% chance of winning each one. Now, it may not be a murder's row, but they still have three teams that are 4-2 or better. Sorry, but I don't see how anyone in college ball has a 100% chance of beating pretty much anyone. Let alone 100% chance five weeks in a row.

 

Check that, I just did the math. If they have a 99% chance of winning each of their 5 remaining games individually, they end up at 95%. Do you know what the point spread would have to be to support a money line that comes even close to that? They'd have to be like 50 pt favorites in each and every game. Including Nevada on the road.

Edited October 23, 2010 by detlef

[wildcat2334]

For the record, I believe that percentage is going forward, not for the whole season. Mind you, I would still love to see how they came up with it and, considering Nevada and Hawaii aren't completely awful, I don't see how the number can be so high. They have 5 games. In order to have a 96% chance of winning all, they basically have to have a 100% chance of winning each one. Now, it may not be a murder's row, but they still have three teams that are 4-2 or better. Sorry, but I don't see how anyone in college ball has a 100% chance of beating pretty much anyone. Let alone 100% chance five weeks in a row.

 

 

no, understood- my point is, BSU was not at 96% at the start of the season to go undefeated, which is all that really matters. Not picking some arbitrary number after they have a couple good wins, it is misleading.

 

fwiw - I would put them at about 75% to run the table with the Mich State schedule

[GWPFFL BrianW]

Ok so what is it detlef? What should we be going by. Eyeball? Computers? what? ESPN Gameday put the stat up. Boise State has a 96 % chance of going undefeated the rest of the way. Next closest is Oregon at like 48 maybe? And on down you go. Auburn and LSU each are under 5 %. Maybe you would like to factor in how good your precious SEC teams are? I mean You tell me. How are we supposed to rank a team that is claming 2 "quality" non conference wins, and now is the only undefeated team left with favorable odds. Ask ESPN where they got there numbers. Obviously they thought it was telling enough to put it on the Gameday show. Where do any of you rank it? I mean Boise has "done enough" according to you. According to me they haven't. I'm just pointing out how staggering that is that one undefeated team has a near certain chance of running the table, and all other undefeated teams have below average odds of doing it. It tells me that there schedule the rest of the way is extraordinarily easy, and moreso, FAR EASIER than any other undefeated team. Not just easier, but FAR easier. Which was the point. Boise State going undefeated last year means nothing. They were beating the same jokers last year. They had the big win against Oregon in their trashcan. Big Deal. Ohio State dominated Oregon too when Oregon was supposedly the most unstoppable team in the country going into the bowls according to our Pac 10 fan who "watches a lot of football."

 

You tell me. I mean there are differences, and then there are DIFFERENCES. FWIW, I believe that the stats they gave were based on the BCS rankings as a whole. I would have no idea what mathmatical formula they use, but either way you look at it, Boise has it easy, and any of those undefeated teams would probably go undefeated with Boises schedule. That isn't even figuring in 1 loss teams, which there are a bunch that I would favor over Boise. A team that you can say is all but certain to go undefeated the rest of the way, tells me that team did not play a championship-worthy schedule. Anyway you slice it.

[GWPFFL BrianW]

no, understood- my point is, BSU was not at 96% at the start of the season to go undefeated, which is all that really matters. Not picking some arbitrary number after they have a couple good wins, it is misleading.

 

fwiw - I would put them at about 75% to run the table with the Mich State schedule

 

As an Iowa fan I would LOVE LOVE LOVE if Boise was coming to town next week instead of the Spartans. Boise would want to play the game in Missouri or something though.

[detlef]

Ok so what is it detlef? What should we be going by. Eyeball? Computers? what? ESPN Gameday put the stat up. Boise State has a 96 % chance of going undefeated the rest of the way. Next closest is Oregon at like 48 maybe? And on down you go. Auburn and LSU each are under 5 %. Maybe you would like to factor in how good your precious SEC teams are? I mean You tell me. How are we supposed to rank a team that is claming 2 "quality" non conference wins, and now is the only undefeated team left with favorable odds. Ask ESPN where they got there numbers. Obviously they thought it was telling enough to put it on the Gameday show. Where do any of you rank it? I mean Boise has "done enough" according to you. According to me they haven't. I'm just pointing out how staggering that is that one undefeated team has a near certain chance of running the table, and all other undefeated teams have below average odds of doing it. It tells me that there schedule the rest of the way is extraordinarily easy, and moreso, FAR EASIER than any other undefeated team. Not just easier, but FAR easier. Which was the point. Boise State going undefeated last year means nothing. They were beating the same jokers last year. They had the big win against Oregon in their trashcan. Big Deal. Ohio State dominated Oregon too when Oregon was supposedly the most unstoppable team in the country going into the bowls according to our Pac 10 fan who "watches a lot of football."

 

You tell me. I mean there are differences, and then there are DIFFERENCES. FWIW, I believe that the stats they gave were based on the BCS rankings as a whole. I would have no idea what mathmatical formula they use, but either way you look at it, Boise has it easy, and any of those undefeated teams would probably go undefeated with Boises schedule. That isn't even figuring in 1 loss teams, which there are a bunch that I would favor over Boise. A team that you can say is all but certain to go undefeated the rest of the way, tells me that team did not play a championship-worthy schedule. Anyway you slice it.

Sorry, but I think that ESPN's numbers are crap. Either that or you missed something. But, again, if they have a 96% chance of winning out, that means they have a greater than 99% chance of winning each and every game. You want to give me 99-1 odds in the Nevada game? Because that's what they'd have to be for that % to work.

 

Also, where have I said I've seen enough to put them in the title game? I've made it abundantly clear that things will still need to break the right way for them to go even if they keep winning. I realize it's easier to make your point when you pretend the guy you're arguing with is saying something other than he is, but that's hardly very honorable.

 

You're trying to make it sound like I think they absolutely 100% should be playing in the NC game this year if they win out and all I'm saying is that they shouldn't be completely removed from the conversation. Do me a favor. If you're going to bother responding, kindly respond to what I'm actually saying, not what you're pretending I am.

[GWPFFL BrianW]

No detlef, but I would give you way better odds than that against

 

La Tech at home

Hawaii at home

at Idaho

Fresno State at home

and Utah State at home

 

 

I agree, At Nevada is a decent match up, but its sad when that is your toughest road test of the year, and more importantly than that, you play no one of quality before or after. Hawaii and Fresno are ok clubs, but those games are in Boise, where Boise hasn't lost in forever. I'd take my chances vs all of them then having to play anyone left on Michigan States schedule, or any SEC, Big 12, Pac 10 etc etc etc

[detlef]

It should also be added that it's not like BSU is simply winning these conference games, they're freaking destroying people. TCU is at least struggling with their games before getting it together at the half. BSU is up by 30 at the half and coasting the rest of the way. Sure, they needed to pull one out against V Tech but they never trailed vs OSU and beat them by 2 TDs.

 

Listen, I'm not saying that BSU's schedule is not easier than the other teams. I'm just saying that should not be the only criteria. I'll give that it's enough of one to typically give the nod to another undefeated team, just not each and every one of them.

 

And I would much rather play MSU than them any day.

[detlef]

No detlef, but I would give you way better odds than that against

 

La Tech at home

Hawaii at home

at Idaho

Fresno State at home

and Utah State at home

 

 

I agree, At Nevada is a decent match up, but its sad when that is your toughest road test of the year, and more importantly than that, you play no one of quality before or after. Hawaii and Fresno are ok clubs, but those games are in Boise, where Boise hasn't lost in forever. I'd take my chances vs all of them then having to play anyone left on Michigan States schedule, or any SEC, Big 12, Pac 10 etc etc etc

Then your precious ESPN stat is mathematically impossible. The odds of winning the other games can not be high enough to offset even a 90% chance of winning and still end up with an aggregate 96% chance of going undefeated.

 

Oh, and your "neutral site" bit on the V Tech game is about as lame as when Sgt Shortbus pretends the OU/UT game is a road game because it's played in the state of Texas. Let's see, you've got a team Blacksburg, VA and a team from Boise each traveling to just outside of DC for a game. I wonder who's got the advantage.

Edited October 23, 2010 by detlef

[GWPFFL BrianW]

Then your precious ESPN stat is mathematically impossible. The odds of winning the other games can not be high enough to offset even a 90% chance of winning and still end up with an aggregate 96% chance of going undefeated.

 

Oh, and your "neutral site" bit on the V Tech game is about as lame as when Sgt Shortbus pretends the OU/UT game is a road game because it's played in the state of Texas. Let's see, you've got a team Blacksburg, VA and a team from Boise each traveling to just outside of DC for a game. I wonder who's got the advantage.

 

No matter how you want to spin it, Boise has a significantly easier road than any other team undefeated. By your logic, every other team would have lower percentages as well.

 

And there is still a huge difference between playing in Lane Stadium and FedEx Field. HUGE difference. And it doesn't matter anyway, because VT lost to an FCS team the next week. That right there proves that the VT win wasn't good at all. Oregon State I'll give you SO FAR, but they've still got to improve on there .500 record. And that was in Boise. Boise doesn't go outside of the trashcan and play BCS opponents in their stadiums. When they do, they lose. Why is it so hard to hold them to a standard at least of someone in there conference like Fresno State who plays anyone anywhere? I'm not even talking about a murders row, but is it too much to ask to find some middle of the road Pac 10 team to play on the road? Again, compare the schedules of the past 5 years to that of Fresno State, a team in the same conference. Then look at what happened when Boise DID in fact go on the road. The results are pretty ugly. This is a team that skates by playing one of the easiest 12 games as any.

[detlef]

By your logic, every other team would have lower percentages as well.

Not at all. I don't know what the numbers were for the other teams and whether the odds are nearly mathematically impossible. It sounds like most are below 50% and that seems quite reasonable especially since you implied that they really fell off quickly from there. So no, by my logic, it seems absurd to consider anyone's odds of winning the rest of their games 96%. That's all, nothing more. Once again, please stop pretending I'm saying things I'm not.

Edited October 23, 2010 by detlef

[wildcat2334]

As an Iowa fan I would LOVE LOVE LOVE if Boise was coming to town next week instead of the Spartans. Boise would want to play the game in Missouri or something though.

 

 

wrong here my man- I think Boise is quite a bit better than Sparty IMO. Just my "eyeball" test since Mich State didn't challenege themselves and squeaked by a piss poor ND

[wildcat2334]

No matter how you want to spin it, Boise has a significantly easier road than any other team undefeated. By your logic, every other team would have lower percentages as well.

 

And there is still a huge difference between playing in Lane Stadium and FedEx Field. HUGE difference. And it doesn't matter anyway, because VT lost to an FCS team the next week. That right there proves that the VT win wasn't good at all. Oregon State I'll give you SO FAR, but they've still got to improve on there .500 record. And that was in Boise. Boise doesn't go outside of the trashcan and play BCS opponents in their stadiums. When they do, they lose. Why is it so hard to hold them to a standard at least of someone in there conference like Fresno State who plays anyone anywhere? I'm not even talking about a murders row, but is it too much to ask to find some middle of the road Pac 10 team to play on the road? Again, compare the schedules of the past 5 years to that of Fresno State, a team in the same conference. Then look at what happened when Boise DID in fact go on the road. The results are pretty ugly. This is a team that skates by playing one of the easiest 12 games as any.

 

 

just stop -

 

this is college football, the FCS loss is 1 game - u do realize that right now VT AND NEVADA are in the BCS top 25 right?? The ACC is down, but VT looks like they may win the ACC title. Oreg St. may right the ship and get in the BCS as well.......they probably aren't going to make the NC game, and I am by no means a BSU fan, I just respect the progam and team I see each week. IMO - Boise has 5 quality games - VT.OSU, Nevada,Hawaii & Fresno

 

but why isn't anyone talking about Mich State missing OSU in the bchit unbalanced schedule and loading up on 3 cupcakes non conference - to me that is every bit of a fraud as Boise...honestly MSU looks like a fringe top 25 squad - as evidenced by being a 6.5 dog @Iowa. I find it hard to believe a top 5 BCS team should be gettting a TD on the road - ridiculousness............ ETA Mizzzou as well, I understand it is Lincoln, but vegas has this one right - Neb rolls them and we start weeding out the pretenders this weekend, thank god

Edited October 28, 2010 by wildcat2334

[Rockerbraves]

TOP TEN - Apparently alot of people think Boise has a legit shot to win it all.

 

ODDS TO WIN THE 2011 BCS NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP GAME

Team Open Current

Oregon 20/1 3/1

Alabama 9/2 7/2

Boise State 10/1 9/2

Ohio State 5/1 6/1

Texas Christian 12/1 8/1

Auburn 75/1 10/1

Oklahoma 12/1 15/1

Nebraska 15/1 15/1

Michigan State 125/1 18/1

Missouri 100/1 20/1

[wildcat2334]

TOP TEN - Apparently alot of people think Boise has a legit shot to win it all.

 

ODDS TO WIN THE 2011 BCS NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP GAME

Team Open Current

Oregon 20/1 3/1

Alabama 9/2 7/2

Boise State 10/1 9/2

Ohio State 5/1 6/1

Texas Christian 12/1 8/1

Auburn 75/1 10/1

Oklahoma 12/1 15/1

Nebraska 15/1 15/1

Michigan State 125/1 18/1

Missouri 100/1 20/1

 

pretty spot on..... Vegas would do a much better job setting rankings than the BCS...........

[detlef]

As an Iowa fan I would LOVE LOVE LOVE if Boise was coming to town next week instead of the Spartans.

How much were you planning on beating BSU by? 40? More?

[GWPFFL BrianW]

How much were you planning on beating BSU by? 40? More?

 

The way they played today, it wouldn't have surprised me. Iowa was playing pretty pi$$ed off today after the 1 point loss against the Badgers at home last week.

[SEC=UGA]

As flawed as all of the top 10 teams are this year there is no way to assertively state that Boise may not legitimately be the best team in the nation.

 

Oregon - Amazing offense, their defense is not that stellar.

Auburn - Offense not as potent as Oregon, will lose at least one game, I'm betting two, Defense has many flaws.

TCU - Pretty solid all the way around, though they really haven't been tested. I haven't seen them play a game this season, so I can't pass judgement on their weaknesses (they could be the total package)

BSU - Returning most of their team, strong offense, good defense. Have beat a few decent opponents. Won their BCS bowl game against a good TCU team last year. Could have the most solid team.

Utah - See TCU

OSU - Erratic team. Defense is not too stout, wheels come off of the offense at times against strong defenses.

Bama - Some questions with regard to their O-line in pass protection. Defensive line not nearly as strong as it was last year. Have trouble against the pass.

[detlef]

As flawed as all of the top 10 teams are this year there is no way to assertively state that Boise may not legitimately be the best team in the nation.

 

Oregon - Amazing offense, their defense is not that stellar.

Auburn - Offense not as potent as Oregon, will lose at least one game, I'm betting two, Defense has many flaws.

TCU - Pretty solid all the way around, though they really haven't been tested. I haven't seen them play a game this season, so I can't pass judgement on their weaknesses (they could be the total package)

BSU - Returning most of their team, strong offense, good defense. Have beat a few decent opponents. Won their BCS bowl game against a good TCU team last year. Could have the most solid team.

Utah - See TCU

OSU - Erratic team. Defense is not too stout, wheels come off of the offense at times against strong defenses.

Bama - Some questions with regard to their O-line in pass protection. Defensive line not nearly as strong as it was last year. Have trouble against the pass.

Good points. I would add that my knock on TCU is that they've had trouble getting started against teams they should have handled from the outset. By the second half, they put them away enough that the score makes it not look so bad. But winning 45-10 because you went out to a 31-0 halftime lead and took off the gas is one thing. Winning 45-10 because you went into the half up 17-7 and got your chight together after your coach reminded you that you were playing Directional Tech is yet another.

[Seahawks21]

I think we officially all have to start rooting for Boise St. to make the championship game and get beat by 40 so all of this nonsense can finally just stop.