|
On November 24 2012 15:14 don_kyuhote wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 14:57 Damiani wrote:On November 24 2012 14:39 don_kyuhote wrote:On November 24 2012 14:29 MountainDewJunkie wrote:On November 24 2012 14:10 don_kyuhote wrote:On November 24 2012 13:48 MountainDewJunkie wrote: I'm not an ND fan whatsoever, but I think USC is going to get cornholed. The whole season has me bitter. I'm unconvinced with ND, but what can you do when everyone else lost? Alabama looks like they will get in, which seems absurd in the sense that there are so many good 1-loss teams right now. On the other hand, if Georgia win the SECCG, they'll hop EVERYBODY (we all know it!), which bothers me because they dodged the better SEC teams this season and got blown out by SC. Oregon will be penalized for an overtime loss to a great team, but K-State scheduled nobody and lost to an unranked team. But even still K-State is an outstanding team. It's almost like if we had some system... involving a series of games between the best teams... single elimination... a tournament of sorts! We'll call it: the playoffs! It seems much better than to arbitrarily compare resumes of teams in different conferences with different opponents and different natures of their losses.
Oh, and of course if ND loses somehow, all hell breaks loose... again.
Of course the main reason I'm sour is because Washington choked on sushi vs Wazzu! Oh, I mentioned that in my last post? I don't care. I'm very, very, very unhappy. Oregon played 1 top 20 defense this season: Stanford. They scored 14 points and lost. If they make it to the NCG, whoever they may face (ND, Bama, Florida, Georgia) it will be a top 20 defense (as of right now). I wouldn't want to see that game. Btw, playoff is coming, just not yet. Well how many did K-State play this season? Zero probably? Why is 'Bama's loss to aTm forgivable but Oregon's loss to Stanford is not? I never defended K-State. They won't play in NCG and I'm perfectly fine with that. Bama's loss is forgivable, because that's what the voters and computers say. I know, not a good system. That's why there is so much outcry every year and they're introducing playoff. It's so sad that some people is making this years bama team into some legendary team or something. They're just a good team. Not even a great team. The hype oh the hype. You're always critical about the sec hype, but you sure don't seem to have any problem buying into the hype of any team that puts up big numbers. (WV when they were undefeated, Oregon) What hype are you talking about? West Virginia? Sure didn't they look impressive early on? Believe me this anti sec hype thing is not just me. It's the voice of many many people. You're the one that's blowing up the SEC to oblivion on this forum. All i do is put facts on the table. All you do is replay SEC history lessons in 2012. I mean you honestly think it's okay that Bama loss to Texas AM is forgivable but Oregon's loss to Stanford was not? I mean really? After reading that i know where your roll is. I don't even know why i even respond to SEC cheerleaders.
|
Dude, the reason SEC trumps all other 1-loss teams is that we're the 6-time defending champion conference. The reason everyone talks about the SEC as if they were the best is that they've won more than half of all BCS titles ever.
Last friday everyone was talking about how Kelly was going to the NFL with his amazing offense that couldn't be stopped, that he was going to revolutionize the game. You hear any of that this week? You don't call that hype?
|
Early non-conference games showed that the SEC isn't as strong as it used to be. Plus a mid-tier Big 12 team stomping their conference is hilarious to watch.
We will learn a lot more tomorrow. Obviously Georgia will stomp a bad GT team, but FSU and Clemson will tell us a lot about the SEC.
|
On November 24 2012 14:57 Damiani wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 14:39 don_kyuhote wrote:On November 24 2012 14:29 MountainDewJunkie wrote:On November 24 2012 14:10 don_kyuhote wrote:On November 24 2012 13:48 MountainDewJunkie wrote: I'm not an ND fan whatsoever, but I think USC is going to get cornholed. The whole season has me bitter. I'm unconvinced with ND, but what can you do when everyone else lost? Alabama looks like they will get in, which seems absurd in the sense that there are so many good 1-loss teams right now. On the other hand, if Georgia win the SECCG, they'll hop EVERYBODY (we all know it!), which bothers me because they dodged the better SEC teams this season and got blown out by SC. Oregon will be penalized for an overtime loss to a great team, but K-State scheduled nobody and lost to an unranked team. But even still K-State is an outstanding team. It's almost like if we had some system... involving a series of games between the best teams... single elimination... a tournament of sorts! We'll call it: the playoffs! It seems much better than to arbitrarily compare resumes of teams in different conferences with different opponents and different natures of their losses.
Oh, and of course if ND loses somehow, all hell breaks loose... again.
Of course the main reason I'm sour is because Washington choked on sushi vs Wazzu! Oh, I mentioned that in my last post? I don't care. I'm very, very, very unhappy. Oregon played 1 top 20 defense this season: Stanford. They scored 14 points and lost. If they make it to the NCG, whoever they may face (ND, Bama, Florida, Georgia) it will be a top 20 defense (as of right now). I wouldn't want to see that game. Btw, playoff is coming, just not yet. Well how many did K-State play this season? Zero probably? Why is 'Bama's loss to aTm forgivable but Oregon's loss to Stanford is not? I never defended K-State. They won't play in NCG and I'm perfectly fine with that. Bama's loss is forgivable, because that's what the voters and computers say. I know, not a good system. That's why there is so much outcry every year and they're introducing playoff. It's so sad that some people is making this years bama team into some legendary team or something. They're just a good team. Not even a great team. The hype oh the hype. SEC propaganda would never end until ESPN and the BCS partnership ends. Want proof that ESPN does make a difference? Check out Auburn 2005 (Pre-ESPN-BCS partnership). They were undefeated in the SEC. And they didn't even make the NCG. You think that would ever happen again? It's sad that a one loss SEC team gets first dibs at a NCG over any other one loss team in a different conference. Like who died and made the SEC king of college football. Oh that's right ESPN + BCS. I don't mind Bama or Georgia in the top 5 but Florida? What the flying f..k? Too bad the computers don't have eyes to watch Florida games. It's sad that Ohio st. wins ugly games but gets beat down like a dog for it. But Florida does the same and everyone praises them. You want to put up an argument between Ohio St. and Florida? I'll just say Bowling Green , UL Lafayette and Missouri.
Last 6 years tend to agree with ESPN. Just saying.
|
On November 24 2012 15:41 iGrok wrote: Dude, the reason SEC trumps all other 1-loss teams is that we're the 6-time defending champion conference. The reason everyone talks about the SEC as if they were the best is that they've won more than half of all BCS titles ever.
Last friday everyone was talking about how Kelly was going to the NFL with his amazing offense that couldn't be stopped, that he was going to revolutionize the game. You hear any of that this week? You don't call that hype? Isn't that favoritism? If that's your argument i guess the Patriots should get an auto invite to the SuperBowl every year. And them going 1-2 to the NFC west (The weakest division the past 5 years) was a fluke. Let me remind you from '70-'97 the SEC won only 4 NC. Then suddenly, or miraculously since the injunction of the BCS and ESPN they've won the past 6? You know why? Because i really don't. Anyways this conv is steering the wrong direction. On_Slaught said it best " Plus a mid-tier Big 12 team stomping their conference is hilarious to watch." I repeat a MID TIER BIG 12 team stomping on the "so-called" toughest conference is hilarious. Oh what was that thing you guys preach down south? SEC plays defense? Oh let me remind you Texas AM is the 5th ranked offense team in the country avg 43pts a game. How does a team avg 43 pts in a conference that is known for its "defense". Mind blown.
|
On November 24 2012 16:06 Damiani wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 15:41 iGrok wrote: Dude, the reason SEC trumps all other 1-loss teams is that we're the 6-time defending champion conference. The reason everyone talks about the SEC as if they were the best is that they've won more than half of all BCS titles ever.
Last friday everyone was talking about how Kelly was going to the NFL with his amazing offense that couldn't be stopped, that he was going to revolutionize the game. You hear any of that this week? You don't call that hype? Isn't that favoritism? If that's your argument i guess the Patriots should get an auto invite to the SuperBowl every year. And them going 1-2 to the NFC west (The weakest division the past 5 years) was a fluke. Let me remind you from '70-'97 the SEC won only 4 NC. Then suddenly, or miraculously since the injunction of the BCS and ESPN they've won the past 6? You know why? Because i really don't. Anyways this conv is steering the wrong direction. On_Slaught said it best " Plus a mid-tier Big 12 team stomping their conference is hilarious to watch." I repeat a MID TIER BIG 12 team stomping on the "so-called" toughest conference is hilarious. Oh what was that thing you guys preach down south? SEC plays defense? Oh let me remind you Texas AM is the 5th ranked offense team in the country avg 43pts a game. How does a team avg 43 pts in a conference that is known for its "defense". Mind blown.
No it's pedigree, it's the same reason GB and NE are always such favorites to go to the super bowl and not auto invites. I also don't see this Big 12 reference seeing as the best 6 teams in the SEC all have conference losses and no out of conference losses
Also against top SEC teams, A&M has scored 17, 19, and 29 points. The numbers are skewed by teams like South Carolina St., Arkansas, Louisiana Tech, Auburn, and Sam Houston(two of which are at the bottom of the SEC).
Edit: honestly Idc, the SEC has been the strongest conference for awhile and Idk why people are surprised. All that matters to me now is KENT STATE!
|
On November 24 2012 10:41 MountainDewJunkie wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 09:45 itkovian wrote: WSU wins 31-28 vs UW. A good note on the end of our terrible season. Gives me a little hope for next year at least. Oh man... I had stopped watching for a bit when it blew up to 28-10. After a brief commute home, I come to find that the score is suddenly 28-25. Then I watched as the Cougs tied things up. Washington drove down the field in no time, and went for a slam-dunk field goal. No good! And then in overtime, Price makes the DUMBEST throw you'll ever see: as he's getting sacked he lobs the ball in the air: interception. He doesn't chuck it out of bounds, he fucking lobs it about 4 yards, hanging in the air for what seemed an eternity. Instead of protecting the ball and living to play for another down, he completely panics and does something completely illogical, something they explicitly tell you not to do since childhood. I just knew Washington would find a way to stagnate another year. Blowout losses, odd upsets, and then boom: succumbing to the worst team in the Pac-10... and your rival... Blowing a 18 point lead! Missing a field goal at the end of regulation! Throwing up a brain-dead lob when you could have taken the goddamn sack! Seven wins, again. Woohoo.
Haha, yeah that Price interception in OT was absurd. I'm sorry you had to be on the wrong end of it. It was very amusing watching the big lineman run down towards the other end zone. So close to scoring on it too!!
But I feel for ya, the Huskies definitely "coug'd" it. WSU is not the worst in the pac though! I think we can give that title to Colorado. Though they did beat us head to head >_>
|
On November 24 2012 15:27 Damiani wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 15:14 don_kyuhote wrote:On November 24 2012 14:57 Damiani wrote:On November 24 2012 14:39 don_kyuhote wrote:On November 24 2012 14:29 MountainDewJunkie wrote:On November 24 2012 14:10 don_kyuhote wrote:On November 24 2012 13:48 MountainDewJunkie wrote: I'm not an ND fan whatsoever, but I think USC is going to get cornholed. The whole season has me bitter. I'm unconvinced with ND, but what can you do when everyone else lost? Alabama looks like they will get in, which seems absurd in the sense that there are so many good 1-loss teams right now. On the other hand, if Georgia win the SECCG, they'll hop EVERYBODY (we all know it!), which bothers me because they dodged the better SEC teams this season and got blown out by SC. Oregon will be penalized for an overtime loss to a great team, but K-State scheduled nobody and lost to an unranked team. But even still K-State is an outstanding team. It's almost like if we had some system... involving a series of games between the best teams... single elimination... a tournament of sorts! We'll call it: the playoffs! It seems much better than to arbitrarily compare resumes of teams in different conferences with different opponents and different natures of their losses.
Oh, and of course if ND loses somehow, all hell breaks loose... again.
Of course the main reason I'm sour is because Washington choked on sushi vs Wazzu! Oh, I mentioned that in my last post? I don't care. I'm very, very, very unhappy. Oregon played 1 top 20 defense this season: Stanford. They scored 14 points and lost. If they make it to the NCG, whoever they may face (ND, Bama, Florida, Georgia) it will be a top 20 defense (as of right now). I wouldn't want to see that game. Btw, playoff is coming, just not yet. Well how many did K-State play this season? Zero probably? Why is 'Bama's loss to aTm forgivable but Oregon's loss to Stanford is not? I never defended K-State. They won't play in NCG and I'm perfectly fine with that. Bama's loss is forgivable, because that's what the voters and computers say. I know, not a good system. That's why there is so much outcry every year and they're introducing playoff. It's so sad that some people is making this years bama team into some legendary team or something. They're just a good team. Not even a great team. The hype oh the hype. You're always critical about the sec hype, but you sure don't seem to have any problem buying into the hype of any team that puts up big numbers. (WV when they were undefeated, Oregon) What hype are you talking about? West Virginia? Sure didn't they look impressive early on? Nope. WV beats unranked Baylor by 7, the country goes "WOW", then they beat unproven Texas (later to be proven average at best) by 3, and the country goes "WOOOW". Any unbiased person predicted that WV would lose easily as soon as they play teams with at least somewhat of a defense, because WV doesn't have a defense.
On November 24 2012 15:44 On_Slaught wrote: We will learn a lot more tomorrow. Obviously Georgia will stomp a bad GT team, but FSU and Clemson will tell us a lot about the SEC. When Tennessee, the butt of the joke for the SEC, beats NC State who beats FSU, I think that's saying something. Obviously I'm not saying Tennessee is better than FSU, but it's something to think about. At least the SEC championship game won't field a team who got blown out by a team with a losing record. (see UCLA/Pac-12 Championship)
|
On November 24 2012 13:48 MountainDewJunkie wrote: I'm not an ND fan whatsoever, but I think USC is going to get cornholed. The whole season has me bitter. I'm unconvinced with ND, but what can you do when everyone else lost? Alabama looks like they will get in, which seems absurd in the sense that there are so many good 1-loss teams right now. On the other hand, if Georgia win the SECCG, they'll hop EVERYBODY (we all know it!), which bothers me because they dodged the better SEC teams this season and got blown out by SC. Oregon will be penalized for an overtime loss to a great team, but K-State scheduled nobody and lost to an unranked team. But even still K-State is an outstanding team. It's almost like if we had some system... involving a series of games between the best teams... single elimination... a tournament of sorts! We'll call it: the playoffs! It seems much better than to arbitrarily compare resumes of teams in different conferences with different opponents and different natures of their losses.
Oh, and of course if ND loses somehow, all hell breaks loose... again.
Of course the main reason I'm sour is because Washington choked on sushi vs Wazzu! Oh, I mentioned that in my last post? I don't care. I'm very, very, very unhappy.
It's not about who you lose to. It's about when you lose. Alabama lost to Texas A&M and fell to #4, right behind Notre Dame, K-State, and Oregon. A team lost and the teams behind it leapfrogged them, makes sense right?
So the next week Oregon and K-State lose, and fall to #5 and #6 respectively, and #4 Alabama moves up to #2, and #5 Georgia moves to #3, and #6 Florida moves to #4. Because Georgia lost very early in the season (October 6), they were ranked #11 in the first BCS standings, and had five weeks to climb to where they are now by winning out, and they did just that, including beating #2 (now #4) Florida along the way at a neutral field.
A similar thing happened in the Big Ten the year before they added Nebraska and got a championship game to decide the conference's BCS bid. Wisconsin, Ohio State, and Michigan State were all 11-1, and 7-1 in the Big Ten.
Normally the tiebreaker is the head-to-head matchup, however Ohio State and Michigan State didn't play each other that year. So the tiebreaker used was the BCS standings, which had Wisconsin at #5 (loss October 2 to Michigan State), Ohio State #6 (loss October 16 to Wisconsin), and Michigan State #9 (loss October 30 to Iowa).
Is this stupid? Yes. Is it possible to take it seriously? No. But that's the way it is and there's nothing we can do about it. Until we get a big tournament (not a stupid 4 team playoff that still favors the big conferences) where everyone plays each other and every team (even the teams in the Sun Belt and MAC) has an equal chance to win the national championship, college football will always be a joke to me.
BTW if Kansas State could have beaten a 4-5 Baylor team we wouldn't even be having this dicussion
|
On November 24 2012 21:02 Ferrose wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 13:48 MountainDewJunkie wrote: I'm not an ND fan whatsoever, but I think USC is going to get cornholed. The whole season has me bitter. I'm unconvinced with ND, but what can you do when everyone else lost? Alabama looks like they will get in, which seems absurd in the sense that there are so many good 1-loss teams right now. On the other hand, if Georgia win the SECCG, they'll hop EVERYBODY (we all know it!), which bothers me because they dodged the better SEC teams this season and got blown out by SC. Oregon will be penalized for an overtime loss to a great team, but K-State scheduled nobody and lost to an unranked team. But even still K-State is an outstanding team. It's almost like if we had some system... involving a series of games between the best teams... single elimination... a tournament of sorts! We'll call it: the playoffs! It seems much better than to arbitrarily compare resumes of teams in different conferences with different opponents and different natures of their losses.
Oh, and of course if ND loses somehow, all hell breaks loose... again.
Of course the main reason I'm sour is because Washington choked on sushi vs Wazzu! Oh, I mentioned that in my last post? I don't care. I'm very, very, very unhappy. It's not about who you lose to. It's about when you lose. Alabama lost to Texas A&M and fell to #4, right behind Notre Dame, K-State, and Oregon. A team lost and the teams behind it leapfrogged them, makes sense right? So the next week Oregon and K-State lose, and fall to #5 and #6 respectively, and #4 Alabama moves up to #2, and #5 Georgia moves to #3, and #6 Florida moves to #4. Because Georgia lost very early in the season (October 6), they were ranked #11 in the first BCS standings, and had five weeks to climb to where they are now by winning out, and they did just that, including beating #2 (now #4) Florida along the way at a neutral field. A similar thing happened in the Big Ten the year before they added Nebraska and got a championship game to decide the conference's BCS bid. Wisconsin, Ohio State, and Michigan State were all 11-1, and 7-1 in the Big Ten. Normally the tiebreaker is the head-to-head matchup, however Ohio State and Michigan State didn't play each other that year. So the tiebreaker used was the BCS standings, which had Wisconsin at #5 (loss October 2 to Michigan State), Ohio State #6 (loss October 16 to Wisconsin), and Michigan State #9 (loss October 30 to Iowa). Is this stupid? Yes. Is it possible to take it seriously? No. But that's the way it is and there's nothing we can do about it. Until we get a big tournament (not a stupid 4 team playoff that still favors the big conferences) where everyone plays each other and every team (even the teams in the Sun Belt and MAC) has an equal chance to win the national championship, college football will always be a joke to me. BTW if Kansas State could have beaten a 4-5 Baylor team we wouldn't even be having this dicussion Ive always been of the mindset that if you lose a game, you cant bitch at the end of the season if you don't get in the NCG. It was in your control to not lose the game.
|
On November 24 2012 21:02 Ferrose wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 13:48 MountainDewJunkie wrote: I'm not an ND fan whatsoever, but I think USC is going to get cornholed. The whole season has me bitter. I'm unconvinced with ND, but what can you do when everyone else lost? Alabama looks like they will get in, which seems absurd in the sense that there are so many good 1-loss teams right now. On the other hand, if Georgia win the SECCG, they'll hop EVERYBODY (we all know it!), which bothers me because they dodged the better SEC teams this season and got blown out by SC. Oregon will be penalized for an overtime loss to a great team, but K-State scheduled nobody and lost to an unranked team. But even still K-State is an outstanding team. It's almost like if we had some system... involving a series of games between the best teams... single elimination... a tournament of sorts! We'll call it: the playoffs! It seems much better than to arbitrarily compare resumes of teams in different conferences with different opponents and different natures of their losses.
Oh, and of course if ND loses somehow, all hell breaks loose... again.
Of course the main reason I'm sour is because Washington choked on sushi vs Wazzu! Oh, I mentioned that in my last post? I don't care. I'm very, very, very unhappy. It's not about who you lose to. It's about when you lose. Alabama lost to Texas A&M and fell to #4, right behind Notre Dame, K-State, and Oregon. A team lost and the teams behind it leapfrogged them, makes sense right? So the next week Oregon and K-State lose, and fall to #5 and #6 respectively, and #4 Alabama moves up to #2, and #5 Georgia moves to #3, and #6 Florida moves to #4. Because Georgia lost very early in the season (October 6), they were ranked #11 in the first BCS standings, and had five weeks to climb to where they are now by winning out, and they did just that, including beating #2 (now #4) Florida along the way at a neutral field. Lose earlier the better. But it's also about how you win your next games too. 2008, USC lost the earliest of all the 1 loss teams, but was unable to make it to the NCG because they couldn't put up as much points on the board as Oklahoma, who lost like 4 weeks after USC lost.
Also I just looked at Oregon's schedule this year. Arkansas State = unranked Fresno State = unranked Tennessee Tech = unranked Arizona = 24th in BCS/unranked in AP this week, going to be unranked as they lost to ASU WSU = unranked Washington =25th in BCS/unranked in AP this week, going to be unranked as they lost to WSU ASU = unranked Coloradio = unranked USC = unranked Cal = unranked Stanford = 8th (lost) Oregon State = 15th I am ready to say out of all the contenders, Oregon by far has the weakest strength of schedule.
|
On November 25 2012 01:23 don_kyuhote wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 21:02 Ferrose wrote:On November 24 2012 13:48 MountainDewJunkie wrote: I'm not an ND fan whatsoever, but I think USC is going to get cornholed. The whole season has me bitter. I'm unconvinced with ND, but what can you do when everyone else lost? Alabama looks like they will get in, which seems absurd in the sense that there are so many good 1-loss teams right now. On the other hand, if Georgia win the SECCG, they'll hop EVERYBODY (we all know it!), which bothers me because they dodged the better SEC teams this season and got blown out by SC. Oregon will be penalized for an overtime loss to a great team, but K-State scheduled nobody and lost to an unranked team. But even still K-State is an outstanding team. It's almost like if we had some system... involving a series of games between the best teams... single elimination... a tournament of sorts! We'll call it: the playoffs! It seems much better than to arbitrarily compare resumes of teams in different conferences with different opponents and different natures of their losses.
Oh, and of course if ND loses somehow, all hell breaks loose... again.
Of course the main reason I'm sour is because Washington choked on sushi vs Wazzu! Oh, I mentioned that in my last post? I don't care. I'm very, very, very unhappy. It's not about who you lose to. It's about when you lose. Alabama lost to Texas A&M and fell to #4, right behind Notre Dame, K-State, and Oregon. A team lost and the teams behind it leapfrogged them, makes sense right? So the next week Oregon and K-State lose, and fall to #5 and #6 respectively, and #4 Alabama moves up to #2, and #5 Georgia moves to #3, and #6 Florida moves to #4. Because Georgia lost very early in the season (October 6), they were ranked #11 in the first BCS standings, and had five weeks to climb to where they are now by winning out, and they did just that, including beating #2 (now #4) Florida along the way at a neutral field. Lose earlier the better. But it's also about how you win your next games too. 2008, USC lost the earliest of all the 1 loss teams, but was unable to make it to the NCG because they couldn't put up as much points on the board as Oklahoma, who lost like 4 weeks after USC lost. Also I just looked at Oregon's schedule this year. Arkansas State = unranked Fresno State = unranked Tennessee Tech = unranked Arizona = 24th in BCS/unranked in AP this week, going to be unranked as they lost to ASU WSU = unranked Washington =25th in BCS/unranked in AP this week, going to be unranked as they lost to WSU ASU = unranked Coloradio = unranked USC = unranked Cal = unranked Stanford = 8th (lost) Oregon State = 15th I am ready to say out of all the contenders, Oregon by far has the weakest strength of schedule. Assuming Stanford wins today, Oregon would have only one quality win assuming they beat oregon state. They really dont even belong in the discussion.
|
On November 25 2012 01:44 Duravi wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2012 01:23 don_kyuhote wrote:On November 24 2012 21:02 Ferrose wrote:On November 24 2012 13:48 MountainDewJunkie wrote: I'm not an ND fan whatsoever, but I think USC is going to get cornholed. The whole season has me bitter. I'm unconvinced with ND, but what can you do when everyone else lost? Alabama looks like they will get in, which seems absurd in the sense that there are so many good 1-loss teams right now. On the other hand, if Georgia win the SECCG, they'll hop EVERYBODY (we all know it!), which bothers me because they dodged the better SEC teams this season and got blown out by SC. Oregon will be penalized for an overtime loss to a great team, but K-State scheduled nobody and lost to an unranked team. But even still K-State is an outstanding team. It's almost like if we had some system... involving a series of games between the best teams... single elimination... a tournament of sorts! We'll call it: the playoffs! It seems much better than to arbitrarily compare resumes of teams in different conferences with different opponents and different natures of their losses.
Oh, and of course if ND loses somehow, all hell breaks loose... again.
Of course the main reason I'm sour is because Washington choked on sushi vs Wazzu! Oh, I mentioned that in my last post? I don't care. I'm very, very, very unhappy. It's not about who you lose to. It's about when you lose. Alabama lost to Texas A&M and fell to #4, right behind Notre Dame, K-State, and Oregon. A team lost and the teams behind it leapfrogged them, makes sense right? So the next week Oregon and K-State lose, and fall to #5 and #6 respectively, and #4 Alabama moves up to #2, and #5 Georgia moves to #3, and #6 Florida moves to #4. Because Georgia lost very early in the season (October 6), they were ranked #11 in the first BCS standings, and had five weeks to climb to where they are now by winning out, and they did just that, including beating #2 (now #4) Florida along the way at a neutral field. Lose earlier the better. But it's also about how you win your next games too. 2008, USC lost the earliest of all the 1 loss teams, but was unable to make it to the NCG because they couldn't put up as much points on the board as Oklahoma, who lost like 4 weeks after USC lost. Also I just looked at Oregon's schedule this year. Arkansas State = unranked Fresno State = unranked Tennessee Tech = unranked Arizona = 24th in BCS/unranked in AP this week, going to be unranked as they lost to ASU WSU = unranked Washington =25th in BCS/unranked in AP this week, going to be unranked as they lost to WSU ASU = unranked Coloradio = unranked USC = unranked Cal = unranked Stanford = 8th (lost) Oregon State = 15th I am ready to say out of all the contenders, Oregon by far has the weakest strength of schedule. Assuming Stanford wins today, Oregon would have only one quality win assuming they beat oregon state. They really dont even belong in the discussion.
Assuming Stanford wins, Oregon would only have one quality opponent.
So much for the tough Pac-12.
|
Surely you think Okie State had a right to bitch last season, right? They had the same record as 'Bama and won their conference. 'Bama finished second in their division, and was basically awarded a rematch vs LSU because of the reputation of the SEC. Any team has the right to bitch if another team with similar credentials gets the nod over them.
What's interesting about the Pac-10 is that Oregon has a chance to not make a BCS bowl at all. Stanford or UCLA could be champions in the end, leaving their fate at the whim of an at-large bid. And on the other hand, finishing the season with wins over Oregon State and UCLA could be quite useful for Oregon if certain dominoes fall the correct way on the national level.
On a similar note, it's amusing the third-best team in a Big "10" division has a chance to win the conference and go to the Rose Bowl, which I suppose would be divine justice against Nebraska's odd luck thus far.
There's quite a few good games today, really And I'll be spending the day helping my buddy move. *sigh* what are friends for, right?
|
Im about to blow a gasket watching the michigan osu game. My hatred for OSU has been magnified by my utter disgust and hatred for Urban.
I dont think I would be able to watch this game with alcohol.
|
On November 25 2012 03:02 Sadist wrote: Im about to blow a gasket watching the michigan osu game. My hatred for OSU has been magnified by my utter disgust and hatred for Urban.
I dont think I would be able to watch this game with alcohol. Maybe he'll resign again to "spend more time with his family"
|
On November 25 2012 03:03 MountainDewJunkie wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2012 03:02 Sadist wrote: Im about to blow a gasket watching the michigan osu game. My hatred for OSU has been magnified by my utter disgust and hatred for Urban.
I dont think I would be able to watch this game with alcohol. Maybe he'll resign again to "spend more time with his family"
This team is nothing like a Jim Tressel coached team. Not sure if it is a good thing yet or not but theres wayyyyyyyyyyyyy more penalties and stupid mistakes than I would ever see when Tressel was there.
|
Braxton, gotta watch your blind side. That was great to see him just get blown up like that.
Go Michigan.
|
On November 25 2012 03:07 Joker XL wrote: Braxton, gotta watch your blind side. That was great to see him just get blown up like that.
Go Michigan. Corey Brown with the touchdown and Ohio State is now up at the end of the half. And you're talking hits, that last one Zach Boren got on Gardner was VICIOUS! Woo baby, go Bucks.
|
On November 25 2012 03:07 Joker XL wrote: Braxton, gotta watch your blind side. That was great to see him just get blown up like that.
Go Michigan. Always fun when the QB gets hit so hard he doesn't WANT to get back up.
|
|
|
|