SUGAR BOWL- Georgia 41 Hawaii 10 - Final

[Nitemare]

Originally posted by: sciencewhiz

Originally posted by: Nitemare
80% of the teams in the major bcs schools have quicker, stronger players than Hawaii. Hawaii went undefeated because they play in the WAC and their non-conference games were against pretty bad teams. The polls need to really put strength of schedule back into the mix as well as margin of victory(should have a cutoff point though).

Hawaii was ranked higher in the BCS computers (which use strength of schedule and ignore MOV) then other computers.

The problem with ignoring the MOV, is that with the limited schedules, it's impossible to get a good ranking. All we know is that Hawaii is better then the best team they played (Boise State, 24th). They could be the best team, or they could be the 23rd best team. When you include MOV and see that Hawaii barely beat a lot of the teams they played, you see it's much closer to the later number.

The problem with using SOS as an individual component is that there is no correlation between SOS and how good a team is. If LSU or Ohio State had played Hawaii's schedule, they would have also been 12-0 and had the same dismal SOS, but would be the same team as they are now. SOS must absolutely be considered by the existing ranking systems, and it is, but putting it back into the formula as a sole component overweights SOS.

SOS should punish teams that choose to play cannon fodder and margin of victory would ensure that if a team squeaks by in most of its games is not going to trump a team that blows out the competition game after game.

I mean come on, a team with a SoS of 75 that actually lost a game vs a team with a SoS of 57 with two losses for the National Championship?

Missouri had 2 losses with a SoS of 38 who only lost to Oklahoma twice...
Georgia had 2 losses with a SoS of 44 who lost both their games early on and likely would not lose them again
Va Tech had 2 losses with a SoS of 52 lost both games early on and gave one of those away, but did beat them convincingly next time around.
LSU has 2 late season losses and nearly lost alot of other games

 

[chuckywang]

Originally posted by: her209

Originally posted by: chuckywang

When two bowls lose host teams, then the bowl losing the number one team may not select a replacement team from the same Conference as the number two team, unless the bowl losing the number two team consents.

The Sugar Bowl could have blocked the Rose Bowl from picking Georgia.

Why didn't the Sugar Bowl pick Tennessee (#2 overall in SEC) over Georgia (#3 overall in SEC)? It sucks either way because of the two-team limit imposed by the BCS.

Tennessee was not BCS eligible as they did not finish in the top 14 of the BCS standings (they finished 16).

 

[erikistired]

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: fisher
hawaii got embarrassed and i loved every minute of it. they shouldn't have been there, and that showed big time. i hope the WAC enjoyed it's moment in the sun, and i hope these weak conferences stop getting into bowls where they clearly do not belong.

go dawgs.

Like the Big 10 in the Rose Bowl? 😕
Have you watched any of Hawaii's games this year?

another example of a weak conference. thanks for contributing.

i watched last nights game, where was this great hawaii team i keep hearing about? they only scored a TD (their only TD) because the JV practice squad was on the field.

 

[Fingolfin269]

Originally posted by: her209

Originally posted by: chuckywang

When two bowls lose host teams, then the bowl losing the number one team may not select a replacement team from the same Conference as the number two team, unless the bowl losing the number two team consents.

The Sugar Bowl could have blocked the Rose Bowl from picking Georgia.

Why didn't the Sugar Bowl pick Tennessee (#2 overall in SEC) over Georgia (#3 overall in SEC)? It sucks either way because of the two-team limit imposed by the BCS.

Heh, as a TN fan I can safely say I am glad we did not get into the Sugar Bowl. Our team is definitely not the #2 team in the SEC. The records definitely do not indicate talent in the conference this year. To me it is more along the lines of LSU, Georgia, Florida, then possibly Tennessee 4th. TN caught a number of breaks along the way to get where they landed in the SEC standings. I guess that mirrors the reality of this season for almost every team though.

 

[slsmnaz]

Originally posted by: her209

Originally posted by: chuckywang

When two bowls lose host teams, then the bowl losing the number one team may not select a replacement team from the same Conference as the number two team, unless the bowl losing the number two team consents.

The Sugar Bowl could have blocked the Rose Bowl from picking Georgia.

Why didn't the Sugar Bowl pick Tennessee (#2 overall in SEC) over Georgia (#3 overall in SEC)? It sucks either way because of the two-team limit imposed by the BCS.

Because UGA appeared stronger than UT at the end of the season. UT didn't really deserve a BCS bid and UGA backed into one.

 

[slsmnaz]

Originally posted by: Fingolfin269
TN caught a number of breaks along the way to get where they landed in the SEC standings. I guess that mirrors the reality of this season for almost every team though.

except for the fact they demolished UGA

 

[sciencewhiz]

Originally posted by: Nitemare

Originally posted by: sciencewhiz

Originally posted by: Nitemare
80% of the teams in the major bcs schools have quicker, stronger players than Hawaii. Hawaii went undefeated because they play in the WAC and their non-conference games were against pretty bad teams. The polls need to really put strength of schedule back into the mix as well as margin of victory(should have a cutoff point though).

Hawaii was ranked higher in the BCS computers (which use strength of schedule and ignore MOV) then other computers.

The problem with ignoring the MOV, is that with the limited schedules, it's impossible to get a good ranking. All we know is that Hawaii is better then the best team they played (Boise State, 24th). They could be the best team, or they could be the 23rd best team. When you include MOV and see that Hawaii barely beat a lot of the teams they played, you see it's much closer to the later number.

The problem with using SOS as an individual component is that there is no correlation between SOS and how good a team is. If LSU or Ohio State had played Hawaii's schedule, they would have also been 12-0 and had the same dismal SOS, but would be the same team as they are now. SOS must absolutely be considered by the existing ranking systems, and it is, but putting it back into the formula as a sole component overweights SOS.

SOS should punish teams that choose to play cannon fodder and margin of victory would ensure that if a team squeaks by in most of its games is not going to trump a team that blows out the competition game after game.

I mean come on, a team with a SoS of 75 that actually lost a game vs a team with a SoS of 57 with two losses for the National Championship?

Missouri had 2 losses with a SoS of 38 who only lost to Oklahoma twice...
Georgia had 2 losses with a SoS of 44 who lost both their games early on and likely would not lose them again
Va Tech had 2 losses with a SoS of 52 lost both games early on and gave one of those away, but did beat them convincingly next time around.
LSU has 2 late season losses and nearly lost alot of other games

You realize you made my point for me when you included records with the SOS. SOS on it's own is meaningless.

 

[Nitemare]

Originally posted by: sciencewhiz

Originally posted by: Nitemare

Originally posted by: sciencewhiz

Originally posted by: Nitemare
80% of the teams in the major bcs schools have quicker, stronger players than Hawaii. Hawaii went undefeated because they play in the WAC and their non-conference games were against pretty bad teams. The polls need to really put strength of schedule back into the mix as well as margin of victory(should have a cutoff point though).

Hawaii was ranked higher in the BCS computers (which use strength of schedule and ignore MOV) then other computers.

The problem with ignoring the MOV, is that with the limited schedules, it's impossible to get a good ranking. All we know is that Hawaii is better then the best team they played (Boise State, 24th). They could be the best team, or they could be the 23rd best team. When you include MOV and see that Hawaii barely beat a lot of the teams they played, you see it's much closer to the later number.

The problem with using SOS as an individual component is that there is no correlation between SOS and how good a team is. If LSU or Ohio State had played Hawaii's schedule, they would have also been 12-0 and had the same dismal SOS, but would be the same team as they are now. SOS must absolutely be considered by the existing ranking systems, and it is, but putting it back into the formula as a sole component overweights SOS.

SOS should punish teams that choose to play cannon fodder and margin of victory would ensure that if a team squeaks by in most of its games is not going to trump a team that blows out the competition game after game.

I mean come on, a team with a SoS of 75 that actually lost a game vs a team with a SoS of 57 with two losses for the National Championship?

Missouri had 2 losses with a SoS of 38 who only lost to Oklahoma twice...
Georgia had 2 losses with a SoS of 44 who lost both their games early on and likely would not lose them again
Va Tech had 2 losses with a SoS of 52 lost both games early on and gave one of those away, but did beat them convincingly next time around.
LSU has 2 late season losses and nearly lost alot of other games

You realize you made my point for me when you included records with the SOS. SOS on it's own is meaningless.

yeah, but them taking it out means all teams have to do is play a cupcake schedule like Ohio State's and get into a BCS game

 

[dainthomas]

Originally posted by: fisher

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: fisher
hawaii got embarrassed and i loved every minute of it. they shouldn't have been there, and that showed big time. i hope the WAC enjoyed it's moment in the sun, and i hope these weak conferences stop getting into bowls where they clearly do not belong.

go dawgs.

Like the Big 10 in the Rose Bowl? 😕
Have you watched any of Hawaii's games this year?

another example of a weak conference. thanks for contributing.

i watched last nights game, where was this great hawaii team i keep hearing about? they only scored a TD (their only TD) because the JV practice squad was on the field.

Explain again the way Hawaii controls how good the other teams in the WAC are? If Georgia fans are this upset that their team even had to take the field against Hawaii, then I'd hate to have seen how upset they were after getting demolished by Tennessee. I'm surprised there weren't mass suicides.

I found it exciting to see someone other than the same old stagnant group of teams playing in a bowl game. If D1 football insists on continuing the redundant and pointless bowl system, then having new teams continue to gain enough experience to compete at that level is good for the sport. Maybe some people find it exciting to watch USC/LSU/UO/OSU etc beat the crap out of each other EVERY year, but I'm not one of them. This season is hopefully the first small step toward many years of success for UH.

 

[Chryso]

Originally posted by: Nitemare
SOS should punish teams that choose to play cannon fodder and margin of victory would ensure that if a team squeaks by in most of its games is not going to trump a team that blows out the competition game after game.

I mean come on, a team with a SoS of 75 that actually lost a game vs a team with a SoS of 57 with two losses for the National Championship?

Are you talking about LSU? According to this LSU has a SoS of 11.

 

[slsmnaz]

Originally posted by: dainthomas

Explain again the way Hawaii controls how good the other teams in the WAC are?

They don't control their conf but scheduling 2 I-AA teams and the worst PAC-10 team doesn't help their case at all.

 

[dainthomas]

Originally posted by: slsmnaz

Originally posted by: dainthomas

Explain again the way Hawaii controls how good the other teams in the WAC are?

They don't control their conf but scheduling 2 I-AA teams and the worst PAC-10 team doesn't help their case at all.

To be fair, it's probably difficult getting Oklahoma or USC to fly to Hawaii in the middle of the season for a non-conference game. Maybe after the program becomes a bit stronger, but this will take a lot more financial commitment from the university.

 

[sciencewhiz]

Originally posted by: dainthomas

Originally posted by: slsmnaz

Originally posted by: dainthomas

Explain again the way Hawaii controls how good the other teams in the WAC are?

They don't control their conf but scheduling 2 I-AA teams and the worst PAC-10 team doesn't help their case at all.

To be fair, it's probably difficult getting Oklahoma or USC to fly to Hawaii in the middle of the season for a non-conference game. Maybe after the program becomes a bit stronger, but this will take a lot more financial commitment from the university.

USC played @ Hawaii in 2005 and beat them 63-17. Hawaii played @ USC in 2003 and lost 61-32.

This year, Hawaii was looking for teams to play @ Hawaii, and not trying to get any type of home and home. If they had wanted to, they could have scheduled better teams, but chose not to.

 

[Nitemare]

Originally posted by: Chryso

Originally posted by: Nitemare
SOS should punish teams that choose to play cannon fodder and margin of victory would ensure that if a team squeaks by in most of its games is not going to trump a team that blows out the competition game after game.

I mean come on, a team with a SoS of 75 that actually lost a game vs a team with a SoS of 57 with two losses for the National Championship?

Are you talking about LSU? According to this LSU has a SoS of 11.

yeah I just did a search for strength of schedule and used the first one, which was from teamrankings.com

CBSSports has LSU's SoS at 26 and Ohio State's at 44...kind of funny that Hawaii is at 118 on this poll.

Every site uses different criteria

 

[Excelsior]

And going back to the Colt Brennan talk...

No this game did not "seriously damage his draft prospects". I don't care how good a QB is...you put him behind Hawaii's oline while facing Georgia's defense and he'll have a shit game. Seriously, this isn't rocket science. Even Tom Brady would've had a crappy game in that situation.

 

[alfa147x]

Originally posted by: Nitemare

Originally posted by: Chryso

Originally posted by: Nitemare
SOS should punish teams that choose to play cannon fodder and margin of victory would ensure that if a team squeaks by in most of its games is not going to trump a team that blows out the competition game after game.

I mean come on, a team with a SoS of 75 that actually lost a game vs a team with a SoS of 57 with two losses for the National Championship?

Are you talking about LSU? According to this LSU has a SoS of 11.

yeah I just did a search for strength of schedule and used the first one, which was from teamrankings.com

CBSSports has LSU's SoS at 26 and Ohio State's at 44...kind of funny that Hawaii is at 118 on this poll.

Every site uses different criteria

That pisses me off

 

[chuckywang]

Originally posted by: sciencewhiz

Originally posted by: dainthomas

Originally posted by: slsmnaz

Originally posted by: dainthomas

Explain again the way Hawaii controls how good the other teams in the WAC are?

They don't control their conf but scheduling 2 I-AA teams and the worst PAC-10 team doesn't help their case at all.

To be fair, it's probably difficult getting Oklahoma or USC to fly to Hawaii in the middle of the season for a non-conference game. Maybe after the program becomes a bit stronger, but this will take a lot more financial commitment from the university.

USC played @ Hawaii in 2005 and beat them 63-17. Hawaii played @ USC in 2003 and lost 61-32.

This year, Hawaii was looking for teams to play @ Hawaii, and not trying to get any type of home and home. If they had wanted to, they could have scheduled better teams, but chose not to.

That's not true at all. They scheduled a game @ Michigan, but at the last minute Michigan backed out by paying Hawaii a hefty sum of money. Hawaii had to scramble to try to get another worthy opponent, but none materialized. That was why they played Charleston Southern. It was a replacement team.

BTW, Michigan scheduled Appalachian St. instead, and we all know how that turned out.

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: chuckywang

Originally posted by: sciencewhiz

Originally posted by: dainthomas

Originally posted by: slsmnaz

Originally posted by: dainthomas

Explain again the way Hawaii controls how good the other teams in the WAC are?

They don't control their conf but scheduling 2 I-AA teams and the worst PAC-10 team doesn't help their case at all.

To be fair, it's probably difficult getting Oklahoma or USC to fly to Hawaii in the middle of the season for a non-conference game. Maybe after the program becomes a bit stronger, but this will take a lot more financial commitment from the university.

USC played @ Hawaii in 2005 and beat them 63-17. Hawaii played @ USC in 2003 and lost 61-32.

This year, Hawaii was looking for teams to play @ Hawaii, and not trying to get any type of home and home. If they had wanted to, they could have scheduled better teams, but chose not to.

That's not true at all. They scheduled a game @ Michigan, but at the last minute Michigan backed out by paying Hawaii a hefty sum of money. Hawaii had to scramble to try to get another worthy opponent, but none materialized. That was why they played Charleston Southern. It was a replacement team.

BTW, Michigan scheduled Appalachian St. instead, and we all know how that turned out.

app state won a national championship and was probably better than every team in at least 2 d1a conferences. if nothing else, at least they didn't lose to stanford.

 

[Wreckem]

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: chuckywang

Originally posted by: sciencewhiz

Originally posted by: dainthomas

Originally posted by: slsmnaz

Originally posted by: dainthomas

Explain again the way Hawaii controls how good the other teams in the WAC are?

They don't control their conf but scheduling 2 I-AA teams and the worst PAC-10 team doesn't help their case at all.

To be fair, it's probably difficult getting Oklahoma or USC to fly to Hawaii in the middle of the season for a non-conference game. Maybe after the program becomes a bit stronger, but this will take a lot more financial commitment from the university.

USC played @ Hawaii in 2005 and beat them 63-17. Hawaii played @ USC in 2003 and lost 61-32.

This year, Hawaii was looking for teams to play @ Hawaii, and not trying to get any type of home and home. If they had wanted to, they could have scheduled better teams, but chose not to.

That's not true at all. They scheduled a game @ Michigan, but at the last minute Michigan backed out by paying Hawaii a hefty sum of money. Hawaii had to scramble to try to get another worthy opponent, but none materialized. That was why they played Charleston Southern. It was a replacement team.

BTW, Michigan scheduled Appalachian St. instead, and we all know how that turned out.

app state won a national championship and was probably better than every team in at least 2 d1a conferences. if nothing else, at least they didn't lose to stanford.

They have three back to back to back DIAA National Titles, they've lost one game in three years IIRC. They are better than a lot of DI schools.

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: BigJelly

Originally posted by: Excelsior

Originally posted by: BigJelly

Originally posted by: alfa147x
why are the announcers whining .... UGH pissing me off :|

eh w\e interception !

that announcer needs to STFU

HI demanded a BCS bowl and Georgia is giving them what they wanted.

The announcer just refuses to acknowledge that HI didn't deserve to be in a BCS bowl. HI deserves the beat down they are getting.
As far as the cheap shot: the refs didn't blow the whistle until the Georgia guys was slamming the guy down--if anything the ref is responsible for the HI guy getting clocked.

When the hell did Hawaii demand a BCS bowl?

The BCS standings had them at 10. They didn't demand that, it just happened. 😕

Did you not watch the Bosie State or Washington game vs Hawaii?
They were chanting "BCS."
Or listen to the WAC coaches and other WAC people talk about the "injustice" if they didn't get a BCS bid.

The final polls should put HI out of the top 25--where they belong. They played the easiest schedule all of division I (ca. 50 division II schools hard harder schedules). Some of their wins went to overtime a couple of times and they barely beat the worst team in the pac 10--washington. They played a true top 25 team and got destroyed. This should, if the pollsters want to do their job and not pander, get HI out of the top 25.

i'd like to see that 50 d2 schools stats, i go to a d2 school, and outside of the top 15-20 teams, its all junk.

if you say d-1aa teams, then you are right on the money, since alot of them are probably better than hawaii themselves.

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

Originally posted by: chuckywang

Originally posted by: sciencewhiz

Originally posted by: dainthomas

Originally posted by: slsmnaz

Originally posted by: dainthomas

Explain again the way Hawaii controls how good the other teams in the WAC are?

They don't control their conf but scheduling 2 I-AA teams and the worst PAC-10 team doesn't help their case at all.

To be fair, it's probably difficult getting Oklahoma or USC to fly to Hawaii in the middle of the season for a non-conference game. Maybe after the program becomes a bit stronger, but this will take a lot more financial commitment from the university.

USC played @ Hawaii in 2005 and beat them 63-17. Hawaii played @ USC in 2003 and lost 61-32.

This year, Hawaii was looking for teams to play @ Hawaii, and not trying to get any type of home and home. If they had wanted to, they could have scheduled better teams, but chose not to.

That's not true at all. They scheduled a game @ Michigan, but at the last minute Michigan backed out by paying Hawaii a hefty sum of money. Hawaii had to scramble to try to get another worthy opponent, but none materialized. That was why they played Charleston Southern. It was a replacement team.

BTW, Michigan scheduled Appalachian St. instead, and we all know how that turned out.

There was one other team that backed out on UH too. I think it was Ol' Miss. Washington wound up being a last minute addition to the schedule. Who knew they were going to suck that bad? At the beginning of the season lots of folks were talking about UW being a much improved team. Michigan would have been a great game for them too.

The Hawaii AD (Herm Frazier) got a total rash of shit for the schedule this year. The schedule wasn't finalized until July because they couldn't find anyone to play. (College schedules are usually mapped out years in advance) Part of the problem was teams backing out and the other part was Herm procrastinating. Jack ass. Anyway, the net result was the schedule we had.

All that said, their non-conferece schedule for next year looks pretty sweet. At Florida, Weber State, at Oregon State, Washington State, Cincinnati...

Maybe Weber is a cream puff but the rest of that schedule is all big-boy football teams. Should be fun.

 

[Svnla]

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

app state won a national championship and was probably better than every team in at least 2 d1a conferences. if nothing else, at least they didn't lose to stanfordat home with a backup quarterback (Stanford) that started his first game and to an 20+ points underdog opponent

Fixed.

Now USC and their fans are talking about slit/divide titles like their "co-championship" in 2003....LOL....where were they in 2004 with Auburn with very exact record? Talk about hipocripes.

 

[kalster]

Originally posted by: Svnla

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

app state won a national championship and was probably better than every team in at least 2 d1a conferences. if nothing else, at least they didn't lose to stanfordat home with a backup quarterback (Stanford) that started his first game and to an 20+ points underdog opponent

Fixed.

Now USC and their fans are talking about slit/divide titles like their "co-championship" in 2003....LOL....where were they in 2004 with Auburn with very exact record? Talk about hipocripes.

heh, usc doesn't deserve a split NC this year, they did win it in 2003, computers kept them out that year and AP was part of the bcs system that year and ap voted them the best team (if you want to know how good usc was that year, look at the score of lsu/ou in 2003 (21-14, and look at the score of usc/ou in the nc game the next year , the same ou team + Adrian peterson, 55-17)

and actually stanford was 40 point underdog, i blame the collapse on louisiana product booty 😉

 

[Nitemare]

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: chuckywang

Originally posted by: sciencewhiz

Originally posted by: dainthomas

Originally posted by: slsmnaz

Originally posted by: dainthomas

Explain again the way Hawaii controls how good the other teams in the WAC are?

They don't control their conf but scheduling 2 I-AA teams and the worst PAC-10 team doesn't help their case at all.

To be fair, it's probably difficult getting Oklahoma or USC to fly to Hawaii in the middle of the season for a non-conference game. Maybe after the program becomes a bit stronger, but this will take a lot more financial commitment from the university.

USC played @ Hawaii in 2005 and beat them 63-17. Hawaii played @ USC in 2003 and lost 61-32.

This year, Hawaii was looking for teams to play @ Hawaii, and not trying to get any type of home and home. If they had wanted to, they could have scheduled better teams, but chose not to.

That's not true at all. They scheduled a game @ Michigan, but at the last minute Michigan backed out by paying Hawaii a hefty sum of money. Hawaii had to scramble to try to get another worthy opponent, but none materialized. That was why they played Charleston Southern. It was a replacement team.

BTW, Michigan scheduled Appalachian St. instead, and we all know how that turned out.

app state won a national championship and was probably better than every team in at least 2 d1a conferences. if nothing else, at least they didn't lose to stanford.

they lost to wofford and georgemason i think though

 

[Alkaline5]

Originally posted by: kalster

Originally posted by: Svnla

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

app state won a national championship and was probably better than every team in at least 2 d1a conferences. if nothing else, at least they didn't lose to stanfordat home with a backup quarterback (Stanford) that started his first game and to an 20+ points underdog opponent

Fixed.

Now USC and their fans are talking about slit/divide titles like their "co-championship" in 2003....LOL....where were they in 2004 with Auburn with very exact record? Talk about hipocripes.

heh, usc doesn't deserve a split NC this year, they did win it in 2003, computers kept them out that year and AP was part of the bcs system that year and ap voted them the best team (if you want to know how good usc was that year, look at the score of lsu/ou in 2003 (21-14, and look at the score of usc/ou in the nc game the next year , the same ou team + Adrian peterson, 55-17)

and actually stanford was 40 point underdog, i blame the collapse on louisiana product booty 😉

The coaching staff deserves some credit for allowing him to play with a newly broken finger. After about the second or third interception most people would realize his accuracy was severely impaired.