NCAA Football Discussion

[Gfunk4life]

Regardless of their schedule, they went undefeated in a season. If the BCS did not add 1 more BCS bowl game this season, Boise St. would've been left out of the BCS games.

agreed.

For bosie state i think it has something to do with their 99th ranked strength of schedule.

what do you want them to do, pay a big school to come to boise St. why would a top 10 team risk a big drop to play boise St if they lost. what if there #2 and they beat boise St and #3 beats #5. # 3 will move up.

playoff!!!!!!!!!! is needed

but im happy with the out come

[L3thal Veteran]

Exactly. No big conference teams want to play Boise St. especially in Boise where they are nearly unbeatable. We'll see how good Boise really is when they play OU.

[costanza007]

Haha the human polls are a joke... unless your team happens to be the one they favor. If Michigan were still second, would everyone still be whining about the polls being wrong? I think not.

As for Wake Forest v Louisville and Oklahoma v Boise State... I'm a college football fan, I want to see crazy matchups like that. I know I'll enjoy it instead of being bitter.

[method]

The reason BSU and Utah are not given the same respect as the big boys is because of the conference they are in. To most people the rest of the WAC doesn't have the competition as the SEC and BIG 10. It doesn't help when they do play the big boys they lose. BSU played Georgia last year and lost 48-13.

Is Florida being voted number one any worse than being 5 in one poll? To me they are equally as bad.

some quotes from some of the voters.

George Lapides, a Memphis sports radio talk host, said he believed Florida would lose to Michigan if the teams were to play. But he jumped the Gators from No. 4 to No. 2, past the Wolverines, after Florida beat Arkansas.

“I liked the idea of a conference champion playing a conference champion,” he said. “I think that’s more appealing than a rematch. I think you try to pick something as appealing as possible.”

“If you look at the Big Ten conference, it is a joke,” Walden said in a telephone interview late last night. He added: “I voted my heart and I voted my strength of what I believe in. In my opinion, Florida is the No. 1 team in the nation.”

Yes. He put Florida ahead of Ohio State because the Big 10 is a "joke". Jim Walden is 0-17 in his coaching career against the Big 10 by the way.

And going the other way:

“They lost one game to the best team in the country,” Perles said in a telephone interview from his home in East Lansing, Mich. “And No. 2, because they’re from the state of Michigan, and I just so happen to live here.”

Edited December 4, 2006 by method

[L3thal Veteran]

That shows how ridiculous it is to have human polls. When you have anything that a human puts his vote on it, it will always be corrupt and unfair.

Who doesn't want to watch a rematch?

Nonetheless, the matchup of USC vs. Michigan should be a classic and Michigan still has a chance to be #1 in the AP and be co-champion just like USC did in 2003.

[method]

florida's only national title came in 1996.......in a REMATCH with FSU!

I wish people wouldn't bring this up. First that was under a different system. Also that wasn't a title game. I guess everyone forgets how Florida won the title. Florida fell to number four after their loss to FSU. Ahead of Florida was ASU and Nebraska. Nebraska lost in the Big 12 championship game, so that knocked them down. That let Florida move up to number three after they won the SEC title game. ASU was forced to play OSU in the Rose Bowl, which allowed Florida to have their rematch against FSU. ASU lost to OSU and that turned the Sugar Bowl into a battle for number 1, which they won. If Arkansas would have won against Florida you could have had an arguement for Michigan playing OSU.

[Subw00fer]

Regardless of their schedule, they went undefeated in a season. If the BCS did not add 1 more BCS bowl game this season, Boise St. would've been left out of the BCS games.

Sorry for my mess-up with Boise St vs OK since it is actually Wake Forest. Either way, learn how to spell...genius.

Anyway....undefeated is a very big accomplishment but they played teams that are equilivalent to high school football. If you put Boise State in the Big 12 or Big 10, they would be a 5-7 team. No one can say with a straight face that conferences such as WAC, Big East or even the PAC10 are nearly as good as the Big Ten, Big 12 or SEC. Maybe if Boise State actually played someone ranked, I might give them more credit but they have no frame of reference.

[Subw00fer]

I'm confused about how Notre Dame got a BCS bid. BroChaos sent me this link: http://www.bcsfootball.org/bcsfb/eligibility . Rule #4 says that ND will get an automatic BCS bowl game if they finish in the top 8, which they didn't (they are #11). So how can the BCS pass on teams like Wisconsin and Auburn and give it to ND?

[costanza007]

Basically Auburn and Wisconsin can't play in BCS bowls because two teams from their conferences are already in BCS bowls. Notre Dame is eligible to be invited because they are in the top 14 BCS teams. See, there are a lot of restrictions in who plays where in these big bowls, but there is still enough leeway to invited at-large teams.

Back in the good-ole days, your bowl took a conference champ and invited someone else they thought would make a great opponent.

[BroChaos Veteran]

did one of those voters say the big 10 is a joke?

so a conference that has a chance to finish the season 1,2,3 IN THE NATION is a joke? oh please enlighten me. do these guys even watch football? or do they just wear homer glasses?

[I am Reid]

I'm confused about how Notre Dame got a BCS bid. BroChaos sent me this link: http://www.bcsfootball.org/bcsfb/eligibility . Rule #4 says that ND will get an automatic BCS bowl game if they finish in the top 8, which they didn't (they are #11). So how can the BCS pass on teams like Wisconsin and Auburn and give it to ND?

Their is a rule where only two teams per conference Big Ten: Ohio State, Michigan SEC: Flordia, LSU. Yeah its stupid, and i have a feeling that they put it in so Notre Dame could get in. So now instead of seeing wiconsin or auburn in a game they deserve, we get to see the perennial overated powerhouse Notre Dame get blown out in yet another bowl game.

I was really hoping to see notre dame have to play bosie state and get blown out, which would probably happen. But it will still be funny when LSU kills them, but you never know word is that charlie wise is a big game coach and an offensive genius.

He's also a defensive retard

[BroChaos Veteran]

I wish people wouldn't bring this up. First that was under a different system. Also that wasn't a title game. I guess everyone forgets how Florida won the title. Florida fell to number four after their loss to FSU. Ahead of Florida was ASU and Nebraska. Nebraska lost in the Big 12 championship game, so that knocked them down. That let Florida move up to number three after they won the SEC title game. ASU was forced to play OSU in the Rose Bowl, which allowed Florida to have their rematch against FSU. ASU lost to OSU and that turned the Sugar Bowl into a battle for number 1, which they won. If Arkansas would have won against Florida you could have had an arguement for Michigan playing OSU.

so basically you're saying florida lost to FSU, and then later beat FSU in the bowl game to secure the #1 spot.

how is that not a rematch again?

[method]

so basically you're saying florida lost to FSU, and then later beat FSU in the bowl game to secure the #1 spot.

how is that not a rematch again?

yes it's a rematch i never said it wasn't. You were just going down the well Florida had a rematch road which usually leads to that person saying that Michigan should get a rematch or something along those lines. i just cut it off before you went down that path. You can thank me later. :laugh:

And if you would have cheered harder for Arkansas, you could have had your rematch.

[L3thal Veteran]

How do you figure?

Nevermind. Some ass clown wrote that in an article and has retracted the sentence ever since. These idiotic writers are pathetic.

[kak]

did one of those voters say the big 10 is a joke?

so a conference that has a chance to finish the season 1,2,3 IN THE NATION is a joke? oh please enlighten me. do these guys even watch football? or do they just wear homer glasses?

its more like the big 3. send thanks to wisconsin for having a good year. and its ridiculous that tosu didn't play wisconsin. the big 10 is good, but not the best conference.

[I am Reid]

its more like the big 3. send thanks to wisconsin for having a good year. and its ridiculous that tosu didn't play wisconsin. the big 10 is good, but not the best conference.

Yeah ohio state knew that wisconsin was going to go 11-1 so they didnt schedule them 10 years ago when they made the conference schedules. That happens every single year in the big ten, their will be one team who dosnt have to play one of the other teams near the top, and everyone tries to bring that stupid argument up. I cant even count how many times people have tried to use that argument with michigan state, and purdue. That is what happens when their are only 11 teams in the conference. Are you really expecting them to only play two OOC games.

It's their fault they went 11-1 if they had gone 12-0 then you could have room to make an argument, its all on wisconsin to win their games, its not the rest of the big tens fault they lost to michigan.

[kak]

Yeah ohio state knew that wisconsin was going to go 11-1 so they didnt schedule them 10 years ago when they made the conference schedules. That happens every single year in the big ten, their will be one team who dosnt have to play one of the other teams near the top, and everyone tries to bring that stupid argument up. I cant even count how many times people have tried to use that argument with michigan state, and purdue. That is what happens when their are only 11 teams in the conference. Are you really expecting them to only play two OOC games.

It's their fault they went 11-1 if they had gone 12-0 then you could have room to make an argument, its all on wisconsin to win their games, its not the rest of the big tens fault they lost to michigan.

Wait, its a stupid arguement to say that its the conferences fault not to know who is a good team and to blatantly not to schedule them against other good conference teams to boost records? Schedules aren't made 10 years in advance either.

I know its Wisconsin's fault for losing. Thanks for letting me know. I'm just pointing out that until the Big 10 puts all of its 'powerhouse' teams against each other in the same year (or year in, year out), then they aren't as competitive as the SEC.. or even the Big East this year lol. UL, WVU, and RU all had to play each other. Explains why all three have at least one loss. Ashame your conferences cheats you out of good games like that.. but saves room for beating up Indiana, Illinois, Minnesota, and other teams at the bottom of the Big 10. Leave out one of the better (if not best, maybe they played a bad game vs UM) and play the entire bottom half. Yeah.. thats a horrible arguement!

[Gfunk4life]

my playoff idea

i was thinking, they should make it that every conf. has a chapionship game, and tell the teams they have to win there conf. or they will not get 1 of 8 spots. i know this will be unlikely, but i think it will work out good.

they would have 8 confs. with 16 div(each confs. will have 2 div.) and 6 teams in each div. so all they will need is a 6 week div. then the 1st week and last week could be no div. games. so 8 weeks and game bye week in the middle after the 4th game. then a bye at the end of the season then the winner of each div. will play for there confs. Championship then each winner will get a playoff spot. so that will be 11 weeks up to the playoffs.

1 vs 8 / 2 vs 7 / 3 vs 6 / 4 vs 5 ( these could just be call playoff bowl games)

winner vs winner / winner vs winner(simi Championship bowl games)

winner vs winner (Championship bowl game)

winner Champion

and only in 14 weeks.

[Subw00fer]

Wait, its a stupid arguement to say that its the conferences fault not to know who is a good team and to blatantly not to schedule them against other good conference teams to boost records? Schedules aren't made 10 years in advance either.

I know its Wisconsin's fault for losing. Thanks for letting me know. I'm just pointing out that until the Big 10 puts all of its 'powerhouse' teams against each other in the same year (or year in, year out), then they aren't as competitive as the SEC.. or even the Big East this year lol. UL, WVU, and RU all had to play each other. Explains why all three have at least one loss. Ashame your conferences cheats you out of good games like that.. but saves room for beating up Indiana, Illinois, Minnesota, and other teams at the bottom of the Big 10. Leave out one of the better (if not best, maybe they played a bad game vs UM) and play the entire bottom half. Yeah.. thats a horrible arguement!

This is too easy of an argument....

Schedules are made a few years in advanced and the Big 10 has to let each team play every team since almost everyone in the conference has been good or semi-good in the past 6 years. Such teams as Michigan St, Northwesten, and even Illinois have had decent seasons in the past few years. Even teams such as PSU and Michigan have had weak seasons in the past years so who knew that. Every team gets to avoid two teams in the Big Ten and sometimes it works in your favor and sometimes it doesn't.

You're agument doesn't hold any water especially because your a fan of the Big East that only has 8 teams. And I think its nice to see Rutgers, Louisville and WVU play each other this year but who knew that Rutgers would even be ranked. Its shear luck to play teams in your conference that are not good or are good that year but OOC games are what drives me insane about most teams. The SEC didn't play one team outside their conference that was ranked. At least the Big Ten beat ND and Texas. I think you can ask almost anyone in sports journalism that the Big East is not a good football conference anymore since it has lost BC, VT and Miami. Therefore you will probably see WVU or an overrated Louisville win that conference year in and year out. If you put someone like Ohio State or even Iowa in that conference, they would easily get 10 wins a year.

People need to realize that each conference in NCAA football differ in strengh. Its a common fact and holds true for any other sport such as the NFL. The problem with college football is that there isn't a playoff system that will weed out the overrated teams in a second round. Do you really think that Louisville vs Wake Forest or Boise St vs OK are truely BCS games? I don't think so and most don't because those teams are way overrated. If they had to play someone like LSU, Michigan, USC or OSU, they would get killed. So why doesn't the BCS put those teams against each other? Easy answer, because it would be a horrible matchup, so those weak teams shouldn't be allowed to play in the BCS.

Like I said before, the BCS reminds me of little league tee-ball. "Its alright little Johnny, just because you can't hit the ball or catch doesn't mean that we wont let you play. We want everyone to get a chance to have some fun."

[method]

This is too easy of an argument....

Schedules are made a few years in advanced and the Big 10 has to let each team play every team since almost everyone in the conference has been good or semi-good in the past 6 years. Such teams as Michigan St, Northwesten, and even Illinois have had decent seasons in the past few years. Even teams such as PSU and Michigan have had weak seasons in the past years so who knew that. Every team gets to avoid two teams in the Big Ten and sometimes it works in your favor and sometimes it doesn't.

You're agument doesn't hold any water especially because your a fan of the Big East that only has 8 teams. And I think its nice to see Rutgers, Louisville and WVU play each other this year but who knew that Rutgers would even be ranked. Its shear luck to play teams in your conference that are not good or are good that year but OOC games are what drives me insane about most teams. The SEC didn't play one team outside their conference that was ranked. At least the Big Ten beat ND and Texas. I think you can ask almost anyone in sports journalism that the Big East is not a good football conference anymore since it has lost BC, VT and Miami. Therefore you will probably see WVU or an overrated Louisville win that conference year in and year out. If you put someone like Ohio State or even Iowa in that conference, they would easily get 10 wins a year.

People need to realize that each conference in NCAA football differ in strengh. Its a common fact and holds true for any other sport such as the NFL. The problem with college football is that there isn't a playoff system that will weed out the overrated teams in a second round. Do you really think that Louisville vs Wake Forest or Boise St vs OK are truely BCS games? I don't think so and most don't because those teams are way overrated. If they had to play someone like LSU, Michigan, USC or OSU, they would get killed. So why doesn't the BCS put those teams against each other? Easy answer, because it would be a horrible matchup, so those weak teams shouldn't be allowed to play in the BCS.

Like I said before, the BCS reminds me of little league tee-ball. "Its alright little Johnny, just because you can't hit the ball or catch doesn't mean that we wont let you play. We want everyone to get a chance to have some fun."

What would help the BIg Ten is if they added another conference game like the Pac-10. That would lessen the chance of 2 teams not playing each other.

The SEC did play teams that were ranked. SEC teams played USC, GA Tech, WVU, Michigan, and Cal. If it weren't for a couple teams having bad seasons it would have been more. Most college teams played 3 creampuffs and 1 tough game. So I don't know why you are picking on the SEC. The problem with college football is the presidents of the universities that are against a playoff system. They for some unknown reason are stuck on bowl games as the sole answer to a national championship. Another problem is the fans wanting some tournament similar to college basketball. Some fans want a big tournament which is unrealistic. In my opinion, 8 teams would be the perfect number of teams.

[method]

Good powerful argument. If your aunt had testicles, she'd be your uncle.

Ah you're just mad because she turned you down. :p

[costanza007]

The SEC didn't play one team outside their conference that was ranked.

Soo... USC, Louisville, Wake Forest, West Virginia, Cal, and Michigan don't count as ranked teams that the SEC played out of conference.

I guess we also can't help it that the SEC played Arizona and Washington State, two Pac10 teams that aren't good enough to be ranked.

:whistle:

[Subw00fer]

Soo... USC, Louisville, Wake Forest, West Virginia, Cal, and Michigan don't count as ranked teams that the SEC played out of conference.

I guess we also can't help it that the SEC played Arizona and Washington State, two Pac10 teams that aren't good enough to be ranked.

:whistle:

My fault. I meant to say that most of the teams that the SEC played outside of their conference were not that good (besides when Ark played USC). That is besides my point that I made in the post on the other page. I repect the Big 12, Big 10, SEC and ACC (not this year) conferences since they have good teams unlike others. My post was moreso about how bad Big East and WAC and PAC conferences are and how the BCS is a total joke

[Gfunk4life]

the WAC is real bad this year :( poor fresno st still cant beat the dang broncos

:| :|

omg my fav. NFL team gets killed by the broncos and now fresno St cant beat the broncos. isnt that great for me.

just watch next year fresno st will make a run for the top 10, watch out bosie st the dogs will be back

___________________________________

with a playoff teams will become more even, if a HS player cames out of fresno (lets just say a player that all the big schools want) so now he said he is thinking of 2 school fresno st and USC what school is he more likely to pick. USC, why go to fresno St, 12-0 will not get them in the BCS game. but a 10-2 with USC may get them in the main bowl game

[ECEGatorTuro]

The SEC did play teams that were ranked. SEC teams played USC, GA Tech, WVU, Michigan, and Cal. If it weren't for a couple teams having bad seasons it would have been more. Most college teams played 3 creampuffs and 1 tough game. So I don't know why you are picking on the SEC. The problem with college football is the presidents of the universities that are against a playoff system. They for some unknown reason are stuck on bowl games as the sole answer to a national championship. Another problem is the fans wanting some tournament similar to college basketball. Some fans want a big tournament which is unrealistic. In my opinion, 8 teams would be the perfect number of teams.

Because the bowl games pay out money to the schools that accept a bid to the game. For example, Florida and Ohio State get about $14-$17 million dollars just for playing the BCS Championship Game this year. The other major bowls get less than that but it is still in the millions. Why would college presidents give us the cash cow that is the BCS?

Don't get me wrong, I would love for it to die a horrible death but it probably won't happen for a while unfortunately...