mrSHEiK124
Lifer
- Mar 6, 2004
- 11,488
- 2
- 0
Originally posted by: SuperSix
My USF Bulls were not the real deal.
I feel your pain
Were you at the game yesterday?
I feel your pain
Were you at the game yesterday?
Again, strength of schedule Isn't everything. They dont just hand the #1 and 2 BCS spots the the toughest schedules, you still have to win games. I know you SEC lovers want to think like that because your conference is tough this year you deserve thc BCS NC bid. But BCS is about teams, not conferences. You cant blame the Big 10 LSU lost to KY, dont blame the Big Ten if Oregon or Oklahoma slips past LSU and gets the NC bid, blame LSU for not being consistent. And you cant blame the Big 10 traditional schedule blockbusters like ND (who plays 3 or 4 Big Ten teams a year) are having worst ever seasons. Schedules are made years in advance, and some years things work out great, others not so. When OSU played ND in '95 and '96, ND was ranked top 5 both years, and OSU enjoyed the nations hardest schedule. But the schedule alone didnt get them into NC games. Maybe you forgot OSU just completed back to back games with Texas? They lost by 2 in a nail biter, then Texas went on to win the National title, then they smoked Texas in Austin the next year, then had to face another #2, (and then another) to finish out the season. Who knew Washington was going to suck this year when they scheduled that game? When OSU won the title in 2002 Washington was one of the strong points of thier schedule. OSU is set to start a home-home with USC next year. Scheduling the winnigest team of this century is hardly "padding the schedule". How many teams had the balls to schedule Texas then USC when both teams were perennial powerhouses?Originally posted by: flxnimprtmscl
Originally posted by: Train
Tougher schedules? sure, but that hardly makes them any better. Both lost to overrated 3 loss teams. Penn State and Wisonsin arent real teams? Thats pretty funny, I'd take either over Kentucky or Cal.Originally posted by: flxnimprtmscl
Fixed. I just did a quick look at the Ohio St. schedule. The teams they've played thus far combined are an impress 47-50. Nice schedule. Rounding out the top 3 LSU and Oregon's opponents have gone 50-34 and 49-32 respectively. See, these two teams have actually played a real schedule
Ohio St isn't going to finish unbeaten, though. Once they actually have to play a real team at Michigan they'll lose.
My bad, Penn State and Wisconsin are powerhouses.
First, Penn State, who has padded their record playing juggernauts like Florida International, Notre Dame, and Buffalo. Yet, they've only managed to go 4-3 in a weak Big 10 so far.
And then there's Wisconsin who's played exactly 1 ranked team all year, who they of course lost to. A loss which pushed them to 3-3 in the weak Big 10.
Dynastic teams to be sure.
On the other hand, Cal and Kentucky have each played, and beaten more ranked teams than Wisconsin and Penn State combined. I get that you're a Big 10 honk but at least try to be objective.
Originally posted by: Train
Again, strength of schedule Isn't everything. They dont just hand the #1 and 2 BCS spots the the toughest schedules, you still have to win games. I know you SEC lovers want to think like that because your conference is tough this year you deserve thc BCS NC bid. But BCS is about teams, not conferences. You cant blame the Big 10 LSU lost to KY, dont blame the Big Ten if Oregon or Oklahoma slips past LSU and gets the NC bid, blame LSU for not being consistent. And you cant blame the Big 10 traditional schedule blockbusters like ND (who plays 3 or 4 Big Ten teams a year) are having worst ever seasons. Schedules are made years in advance, and some years things work out great, others not so. When OSU played ND in '95 and '96, ND was ranked top 5 both years, and OSU enjoyed the nations hardest schedule. But the schedule alone didnt get them into NC games. Maybe you forgot OSU just completed back to back games with Texas? They lost by 2 in a nail biter, then Texas went on to win the National title, then they smoked Texas in Austin the next year, then had to face another #2, (and then another) to finish out the season. Who knew Washington was going to suck this year when they scheduled that game? When OSU won the title in 2002 Washington was one of the strong points of thier schedule. OSU is set to start a home-home with USC next year. Scheduling the winnigest team of this century is hardly "padding the schedule". How many teams had the balls to schedule Texas then USC when both teams were perennial powerhouses?Originally posted by: flxnimprtmscl
Originally posted by: Train
Tougher schedules? sure, but that hardly makes them any better. Both lost to overrated 3 loss teams. Penn State and Wisonsin arent real teams? Thats pretty funny, I'd take either over Kentucky or Cal.Originally posted by: flxnimprtmscl
Fixed. I just did a quick look at the Ohio St. schedule. The teams they've played thus far combined are an impress 47-50. Nice schedule. Rounding out the top 3 LSU and Oregon's opponents have gone 50-34 and 49-32 respectively. See, these two teams have actually played a real schedule
Ohio St isn't going to finish unbeaten, though. Once they actually have to play a real team at Michigan they'll lose.
My bad, Penn State and Wisconsin are powerhouses.
First, Penn State, who has padded their record playing juggernauts like Florida International, Notre Dame, and Buffalo. Yet, they've only managed to go 4-3 in a weak Big 10 so far.
And then there's Wisconsin who's played exactly 1 ranked team all year, who they of course lost to. A loss which pushed them to 3-3 in the weak Big 10.
Dynastic teams to be sure.
On the other hand, Cal and Kentucky have each played, and beaten more ranked teams than Wisconsin and Penn State combined. I get that you're a Big 10 honk but at least try to be objective.
:thumbsup: Well said. It all comes down to how shitty the ranking system is to begin with. How can you rank 3 teams when Team A beats Team B, Team B beats Team C, and Team C beats Team A? Which is exactly what is happening all over college football this year in all the conferences.
Thanks for the history lesson, but this thread is about the 11/04/2007 BCS standings.
By your logic Hawaii, with the absolute worst schedule in FBS, deserves to be in the NC as much as Ohio State if they go undefeated. Difficulty of schedule has to come in to play somewhere. There's more to football than wins and losses, that's why 6-3 Florida is ranked 15 and 6-3 Central Florida isn't even receiving votes.
I didnt say it wasnt important, I said "it isn't everything"
And it does, the voters definetly consider it, as do the computers
Sure, but a win is still a win, and a loss is still a loss.
Gee no way, I thought all 3 loss teams were equal!
You are just all over the place. You seem to be very agreeable to logic when certain scenarios are presented, but then you complain and complain whenever a Big 10 team with a decent record but no quality wins is disrespected (and I don't just mean this thread).
Was there a point when I wasn't using logic? I'm sure you would have pointed that out already if I did.
Osu will win out and the big 10's lack of speed will be shown when either Lsu or Oregon embarrasses them like Florida did last year, the layoff they will have between the end of season and NC wont help either
Originally posted by: touchmyichi
Originally posted by: Juno
Originally posted by: SuperSix
My USF Bulls were not the real deal.
so were my rutgers.
so were my bears
Oh well, Quack quack! *hops on Oregon bandwagon*
A few problems-
- How is Florida so high? I know the SEC is competitive, but come on 3 losses is 3 losses.
- Michigan lost 39-7 at home and got beat by a I-AA school (a team who has racked up losses in even I-AA play this year). If pollsters are going to take the entire season into account, this should certainly be weighed very negatively. USC (lost to stanford, but was actually competitive against Oregon at Oregon), Uconn, texas and hawaii should all be higher.
- I agree w/ someone else here, ASU should be above BC. ASU had a much more difficult game.
Besides that, I think I agree with 1-7, everything looks about right there.
topend I-aa teams often show up in the 40's and 50's in the bcs computers, and app state is one of those teams. If anything a lose to stanford should count much more harshly and a loss to app state.
Kansas certainly has a chance.
Right now, they trail Oregon and LSU by 2 to 2.5 human poll positions. They gain 1 automatically by beating Oklahoma. They also win some of the Big 12 vote by beating Missouri in the last game of the season. I think all in all, that equals 1.5 poll positions. Therefore, they need 1 additional human poll position (or 2 computer poll positions).
For the computers, they will move up to no worse then 4th in all computers, and possibly higher. There is a strong possibility that they will pass Oregon, since Kansas's remaining schedule is much harder then Oregon. That gives them 1-1.5 computer poll positions.
If they keep winning big( like the Nebraska game), there is no doubt that they can make up the difference in the human polls and be #2. If they win close, LSU probably remains #2, but barely.
There is also the possibility that if it is close between LSU and Kansas in the last vote, some voters will vote Kansas ahead purely because they are undefeated.
I'm hoping that we see some more of this crazy stuff (upsets, teams with easy schedules, etc.), and eventually we'll get a college playoff.
:roll: Maybe we should just vote for a champion and not bother playing these games.
At minimum the top 4 ranked teams should have a playoff for the national champion title.
:roll: Maybe we should just vote for a champion and not bother playing these games.
At minimum the top 4 ranked teams should have a playoff for the national champion title.
OSU is the underdog this year for sure, no matter who they face in the BCS game. Which they probably prefer. Last time they were a huge underdog in the BCS game they won, and under dogs have won something like 5 of the last 6, or is it 6 of the last 8? not sure.
If LSU holds on to the #2 spot, the best thing OSU can hope for is the media's continued praise for LSU. Having the game in the Sugar bowl makes it even better.
In Sagarin's ELO Chess (the one used for the BCS) there are 82 Div 1-AA and Div II teams that rank ahead of the worst 1-A team (Utah State). There are 2 that rate in the top 25 (ND State, 14th and Northern Iowa, 10th)
Northern Iowa is ranked ahead of Hawaii (and ND state is right behind Hawaii) in his MOV ratings as well.
Yeah. Its been rathing amusing the last two years to watch the media (read: ESPN) spend so much air time blowing their load off on USC and Ohio State only to have them lose. Maybe they've learned their lesson this year. Although I doubt anyone actually gives their hosts any credibility anymore...
you think Texas beat USC coz they were the underdog?, its coz Vince played an unbelievable game which went right to the wire, Ohio State got beat coz they couldn't match Florida in any aspect of the game, being underdog or media hyping had nothing to do with it
Missouri will not be in the NC game unless LSU and possibly Oregon lose. Kansas has the advantage of being undefeated, Missouri does not.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter