PDA

View Full Version : BCS Standings


TexanSam
11-05-2006, 09:32 PM
Louisville is 3rd and if they stay undefeated, it looks like they will play the winner of Ohio State-Michigan. I'm rooting for them. Hopefully they win it all.

TexansLucky13
11-05-2006, 09:34 PM
Agreed.

Brian Brohm is awesome. Too bad Michael Bush got hurt.....

axman40
11-05-2006, 10:05 PM
Go Rutgers!

:redtowel:

awtysst
11-05-2006, 10:06 PM
Louisville is 3rd and if they stay undefeated, it looks like they will play the winner of Ohio State-Michigan. I'm rooting for them. Hopefully they win it all.

I am not. I would like Ohio State, Louisville, and Michigan to all lose. That way the only unbeaten teams are Rutgers and Boise State. I would love to see how he BCS would handle it if those were the only 2 undefeated lefts!

bah007
11-05-2006, 10:08 PM
I am not. I would like Ohio State, Louisville, and Michigan to all lose. That way the only unbeaten teams are Rutgers and Boise State. I would love to see how he BCS would handle it if those were the only 2 undefeated lefts!

How exactly would the BCS handle it?

It doesnt have a choice. The top 2 teams in the standings would play & those teams would most likely be Texas & Florida.

awtysst
11-05-2006, 10:13 PM
How exactly would the BCS handle it?

It doesnt have a choice. The top 2 teams in the standings would play & those teams would most likely be Texas & Florida.

not neccesarily. If rutgers beats lousiville it will skyrocket up the polls. With no losses and with everyone else with losses they will close the gap. It would be interestign if they got to 1-2.
I dont like the BCS and am cherring for diaster!

bah007
11-05-2006, 10:16 PM
not neccesarily. If rutgers beats lousiville it will skyrocket up the polls. With no losses and with everyone else with losses they will close the gap. It would be interestign if they got to 1-2.
I dont like the BCS and am cherring for diaster!

The BCS is a better system than just having the media choose the teams.

The system isnt perfect? Agreed. But what is the alternative?

Most people hate the computers. But I think that there has to be computers because they are not biased. And this is coming from someone who's favorite team (Texas) is ranked 10th in the computers & 3rd in 4th in the human polls.

TexanSam
11-05-2006, 10:33 PM
The system isnt perfect? Agreed. But what is the alternative?


Playoff


Every other sport, not to mention every other division of collefge football, has a playoff system. Why shouldn't Division 1 have one?

bah007
11-05-2006, 10:39 PM
Playoff


Every other sport, not to mention every other division of collefge football, has a playoff system. Why shouldn't Division 1 have one?

How would it work?

You take the top 8 teams?

What about the team that is ranked #9 in the polls? That team would be just like the team that finishes #3 now.

And now every team plays a 12 game schedule. So the SEC, Big 12, & ACC champs would have to play about 16 games if they wanted to win the playoff. If we did that then the next step would be to just start handing out paychecks cuz they are practically playing an NFL season.

YoungTexanFan
11-05-2006, 10:45 PM
How would it work?

You take the top 8 teams?

What about the team that is ranked #9 in the polls? That team would be just like the team that finishes #3 now.

And now every team plays a 12 game schedule. So the SEC, Big 12, & ACC champs would have to play about 16 games if they wanted to win the playoff. If we did that then the next step would be to just start handing out paychecks cuz they are practically playing an NFL season.

We're not the ones to devise a new system, but it could work along those guidelines. Similar to NBA playoffs IMO. #1 vs #8, #2 vs #7 and so on.

CoastalTexan
11-05-2006, 10:50 PM
D1AA uses 16 teams I'm pretty sure. That way you have 4 weekends of games. There is a way to do it and would be a much bigger success and not a complete waste of time like most of the bowl games.

bah007
11-05-2006, 10:52 PM
D1AA uses 16 teams I'm pretty sure. That way you have 4 weekends of games. There is a way to do it and would be a much bigger success and not a complete waste of time like most of the bowl games.

Ah there it is!

You cant take away the bowl games cuz the NCAA banks on those heavy. I dont think they would ever lose them.

kastofsna
11-05-2006, 10:56 PM
i love the BCS and i would hate a playoff. not enough games being played and the games wouldn't have nearly as much significance as they do now. it would totally ruin college football. don't touch it. the BCS is AWESOME.

i'd love to see louisville in the title game. they're good enough to compete with any team in the country just because of brian brohm. they can BEAT any team in the country because of the great players around him.

bah007
11-05-2006, 11:02 PM
i love the BCS and i would hate a playoff. not enough games being played and the games wouldn't have nearly as much significance as they do now. it would totally ruin college football. don't touch it. the BCS is AWESOME.

i'd love to see louisville in the title game. they're good enough to compete with any team in the country just because of brian brohm. they can BEAT any team in the country because of the great players around him.

You are right on.

I think Louisville could give Ohio St quite a game.

They get lost in the shuffle cuz they play in the Big East but they have been a top 15 team for at least the past 5 years.

bah007
11-05-2006, 11:03 PM
The BCS certaintly didnt disappoint last year.

That was the best college football game I have ever seen.

TexansSeminole
11-05-2006, 11:11 PM
louisville better beat rutgers first

kastofsna
11-05-2006, 11:15 PM
based on everything i've seen from both teams, there's plenty of reason to think that louisville will win by at least 3 TD's. easily. they're much better than rutgers in every facet of the game.

Carr Bombed
11-05-2006, 11:26 PM
How would it work?

You take the top 8 teams?

What about the team that is ranked #9 in the polls? That team would be just like the team that finishes #3 now.

And now every team plays a 12 game schedule. So the SEC, Big 12, & ACC champs would have to play about 16 games if they wanted to win the playoff. If we did that then the next step would be to just start handing out paychecks cuz they are practically playing an NFL season.

I've heard the #9 ranked team argument before and don't buy it. I would much rather have the #9 team get shafted than the #3 team in the country, anytime you have a system that crowns two champions by having shared titles is a BROKEN SYSTEM.

Keeping the BCS around has nothing to do with the amount of games teams would have to play, it has to do with the amount of money the schools make with the Bowl system and thats it.

A full month went by from when Texas played Colorado and USC played UCLA until the time they played each other in the title game, theres plenty of room for a playoff system.

Even if you take only the top four teams, thats only one extra game. I would take just the top 4 teams, because how often do you see 5 teams go undefeated in a season, it doesn't happen. All they have to do is take atleast the top 4 teams and shared titles are null and void and completely eliminated, but that would make to much sense and the NCAA isn't about good sense.

I completely wrote them off when they revoked Mike Williams eligibility after a supreme court told him it was legal for him to enter the draft. So Mike hired a agent and legally entered the draft only to have the original decision overturned and then instead of the NCAA stepping in and fixing this unique situation they completely mishandled it. Nothing will ever change until the NCAA officials pull their heads out of their rears.

LORK 88
11-05-2006, 11:31 PM
Playoff


Every other sport, not to mention every other division of collefge football, has a playoff system. Why shouldn't Division 1 have one?
http://www.nflfans.com/x/showthread.php?t=12714

I wrote this last year for Freshman English, the best grade I got for the year too! If yall cant see it, let me know and Ill copy and paste it over here.

Speedy
11-06-2006, 12:55 AM
How would it work?

Bowl Playoff Series (http://p078.ezboard.com/fevilwontwinfrm2.showMessage?topicID=805.topic)

You can't respond there unless you're already a member, so you'll have to leave your take here.

I think this would be bigger than March Madness.

TexansSeminole
11-06-2006, 01:12 AM
based on everything i've seen from both teams, there's plenty of reason to think that louisville will win by at least 3 TD's. easily. they're much better than rutgers in every facet of the game.

Yea but turnovers will kill you against Rutgers. They run and they run well..if you give up the ball, your looking at your defense getting on the field again against a good running attack with Leonard and Rice. They will beat you up...Rice is very much a between the tackles runner...so if Louisville isn't careful, their defense could be in for a long night.

kastofsna
11-06-2006, 06:46 AM
louisville is very good at stopping a traditional running game and pressuing the QB. it's about matchups. WVU can run all over louisville because A) they're ridiculously talented, and B) the lateral speed and movement and option stuff doesn't matchup well with louisville at all. but get in the I-formation, run it up the middle, and i don't expect rice to have the kinda game he's had all year. and louisville IS going to score points, there's no doubt about it. rutgers will have to have long drives and cap them off with TOUCHDOWNS.

LORK 88
11-06-2006, 10:08 AM
http://forums.houstontexans.com/showthread.php?p=491129#post491129

its here now

bah007
11-06-2006, 11:04 AM
I've heard the #9 ranked team argument before and don't buy it. I would much rather have the #9 team get shafted than the #3 team in the country, anytime you have a system that crowns two champions by having shared titles is a BROKEN SYSTEM.

Keeping the BCS around has nothing to do with the amount of games teams would have to play, it has to do with the amount of money the schools make with the Bowl system and thats it.

A full month went by from when Texas played Colorado and USC played UCLA until the time they played each other in the title game, theres plenty of room for a playoff system.

Even if you take only the top four teams, thats only one extra game. I would take just the top 4 teams, because how often do you see 5 teams go undefeated in a season, it doesn't happen. All they have to do is take atleast the top 4 teams and shared titles are null and void and completely eliminated, but that would make to much sense and the NCAA isn't about good sense.

I completely wrote them off when they revoked Mike Williams eligibility after a supreme court told him it was legal for him to enter the draft. So Mike hired a agent and legally entered the draft only to have the original decision overturned and then instead of the NCAA stepping in and fixing this unique situation they completely mishandled it. Nothing will ever change until the NCAA officials pull their heads out of their rears.

The BCS crowns only ONE champion.

You get a "shared title" when the media steps in & names their own champion.

Example: LSU wins the BCS national championship but the media likes USC better so they name them the champion. The NCAA doesnt have their own TV show so all anybody knows is that the obsessivly biased media is saying that USC is the champion.

That is why the media is no longer part of the BCS.

They were kicked out & then the very next season we have the championship game we want. Texas vs USC.

The media was the problem. They have an agenda. If the BCS fails this year then I will join your arguement. But if the BCS chooses the right game again then this playoff talk needs to stop.

TexanSam
11-06-2006, 11:15 AM
The media was the problem. They have an agenda. If the BCS fails this year then I will join your arguement. But if the BCS chooses the right game again then this playoff talk needs to stop.

Just because the BCS may get the right game this season doesn't mean it's going to get it right every year. Even if the top 2 teams get in, the playoff talk shouldn't stop. It's just ridiculous that we have computers with numbers such as 0.95318255 and that decides who plays in the BCS championship. Getting it right once doesn't mean it'll get it right every year. I don't think the playoff talk will ever stop, until we get one. Whether it's the 17th team excluded from a playoff system or the 9th team, I would much rather have that controversy than a controversy on who should play in the biggest game of the year.

bah007
11-06-2006, 11:27 AM
Just because the BCS may get the right game this season doesn't mean it's going to get it right every year. Even if the top 2 teams get in, the playoff talk shouldn't stop. It's just ridiculous that we have computers with numbers such as 0.95318255 and that decides who plays in the BCS championship. Getting it right once doesn't mean it'll get it right every year. I don't think the playoff talk will ever stop, until we get one. Whether it's the 17th team excluded from a playoff system or the 9th team, I would much rather have that controversy than a controversy on who should play in the biggest game of the year.

Computers have to be involved. Most people dont like it. But they are unbiased. They dont care if you are Michigan (1st in the computers), Texas (10th), Louisville (3rd), or Rutgers (9th).

Humans still make up 2/3 of the system. It is the HUMAN polls that are holding back undefeated teams like Rutgers (9 in computers, 13 & 14 in human polls).

thunderkyss
11-06-2006, 11:29 AM
The media was the problem. They have an agenda. If the BCS fails this year then I will join your arguement. But if the BCS chooses the right game again then this playoff talk needs to stop.

I vote playoffs....

The best team doesn't always win. College or NFL..... The best team doesn't alway win.

The Steelers weren't the best team in the league last year, not even close. But they are the SuperBowl Champs.

thunderkyss
11-06-2006, 11:32 AM
Computers have to be involved. Most people dont like it. But they are unbiased. They dont care if you are Michigan (1st in the computers), Texas (10th), Louisville (3rd), or Rutgers (9th).

Humans still make up 2/3 of the system. It is the HUMAN polls that are holding back undefeated teams like Rutgers (9 in computers, 13 & 14 in human polls).

If Texas didn't play OhioState until next week, Texas would still be #2.

bah007
11-06-2006, 11:33 AM
If Texas didn't play OhioState until next week, Texas would still be #2.

Because they would be undefeated.

Hookem Horns
11-06-2006, 11:53 AM
Computers have to be involved.

This is why college football is a joke and is 2nd rate to the NFL. Why even play any games at all? Just have both coaches sit down and play Madden each week. Actually, that would be more competitive than having some flawed computer choose teams by stats. If this was done in the NFL, Peyton Manning would have 2 or 3 rings by now.

thunderkyss
11-06-2006, 12:40 PM
Because they would be undefeated.

but would they be a better team?? If they lose in September as opposed to November, wouldn't that be the same team??



This is why college football is a joke and is 2nd rate to the NFL. Why even play any games at all? Just have both coaches sit down and play Madden each week. Actually, that would be more competitive than having some flawed computer choose teams by stats. If this was done in the NFL, Peyton Manning would have 2 or 3 rings by now.

I wonder how the NFL teams would have done using that same computer system. Would they have picked the Steelers to be in the SuperBowl last year??

Would they have picked the Patriots to be in three SuperBowls??

kastofsna
11-06-2006, 12:50 PM
This is why college football is a joke and is 2nd rate to the NFL.
there's nothing college can do to topple the NFL.

Hookem Horns
11-06-2006, 12:55 PM
there's nothing college can do to topple the NFL.

Getting a playoff system would move them a LOT closer.

Haams
11-08-2006, 05:48 PM
I don't see how anybody could argue against a playoff system. You take the top 8 teams, drop the conference championship and take the bowl for a given, you've only added 1 game to the schedule of the top 8 teams. #9 get's shafted? Well they would have gotten shafted from a BCS bowl in the current system. School's don't make money? The top 8 should make helluva money - and the rest could stick to their regular galleryfurniture.com bowls or whatever.

Mostly I get sick of the neverending debate. Heck if anybody came along and beat Texas, Ohio State and Michigan in a row...there would be no debate about champion.

Try this scenario on for size - Say Michigan beats Ohio State, and Texas makes it to the National Championship game where they beat Michigan. Who's our one-loss undisputed champion?

bah007
11-08-2006, 10:27 PM
I don't see how anybody could argue against a playoff system. You take the top 8 teams, drop the conference championship and take the bowl for a given, you've only added 1 game to the schedule of the top 8 teams. #9 get's shafted? Well they would have gotten shafted from a BCS bowl in the current system. School's don't make money? The top 8 should make helluva money - and the rest could stick to their regular galleryfurniture.com bowls or whatever.

Mostly I get sick of the neverending debate. Heck if anybody came along and beat Texas, Ohio State and Michigan in a row...there would be no debate about champion.

Try this scenario on for size - Say Michigan beats Ohio State, and Texas makes it to the National Championship game where they beat Michigan. Who's our one-loss undisputed champion?

Whoever wins the BCS championship is the CHAMPION.

Try this scenario on for size - What if we do the playoff thing.

Texas loses to Ohio St. in the regular season. Michigan beats Ohio St in the regular season.

Then Ohio St beats Michigan in the playoffs & Texas beats Ohio St in the championship game. Who is your one-loss undisputed champion now?

swtbound07
11-09-2006, 04:59 AM
Whoever wins the BCS championship is the CHAMPION.

Try this scenario on for size - What if we do the playoff thing.

Texas loses to Ohio St. in the regular season. Michigan beats Ohio St in the regular season.

Then Ohio St beats Michigan in the playoffs & Texas beats Ohio St in the championship game. Who is your one-loss undisputed champion now?

TEXAS. See...playoffs make you not have to think.

kastofsna
11-09-2006, 07:42 AM
here's how the BCS games shape up in my opinion:

Orange Bowl: Wake Forest vs. Auburn
Sugar Bowl: Florida vs. Notre Dame
Fiesta Bowl: Texas vs. Boise State
Rose Bowl: Cal vs. Michigan

Championship: Ohio State vs. Louisville

all pretty good games to me. or at least INTERESTING.

Haams
11-09-2006, 08:14 AM
Whoever wins the BCS championship is the CHAMPION.

Try this scenario on for size - What if we do the playoff thing.

Texas loses to Ohio St. in the regular season. Michigan beats Ohio St in the regular season.

Then Ohio St beats Michigan in the playoffs & Texas beats Ohio St in the championship game. Who is your one-loss undisputed champion now?

Seeing as how Texas would have to beat what, Louissiville then Auburn, then Ohio State - I don't think it would leave much doubt as to a champ.

Main thing is I think there are a few teams most seasons who deserve a shot at the title. Just because Michigan (or Texas) lose to Ohio State in the season doesn't mean they aren't the second best team. With a playoff you take out the guessing, take out the stat grinding computers, take out media influence and just let the kids play. Sure, the best team might not always make the big game - but the champ will always have to beat three top 8 teams in a row.

Speedy
11-09-2006, 06:39 PM
Whoever wins the BCS championship is the CHAMPION.

Try this scenario on for size - What if we do the playoff thing.

Texas loses to Ohio St. in the regular season. Michigan beats Ohio St in the regular season.

Then Ohio St beats Michigan in the playoffs & Texas beats Ohio St in the championship game. Who is your one-loss undisputed champion now?Well, then let's just scrap March Madness too and make that like the BCS. Then we can call it March Mundane.:yawn:

A poll that decides on only 2 teams to play for your sports championship, when the people who vote in the poll have biased opinions factored into their vote (i.e. Louisville getting votes anywhere from 2nd to 9th) is just half a step less stupid than the way it used to be when the polls just picked one team and that was it. Not even a one game playoff like their is now.

The BCS is retarded. That can't be stressed enough.

kastofsna
11-09-2006, 07:39 PM
the BCS is so beautiful. solved all of the problems we had before the BCS. simple as that. :)

Speedy
11-09-2006, 08:15 PM
the BCS is so beautiful. solved all of the problems we had before the BCS. simple as that. :)
That was a joke right? It's exactly like it was before except that it picks 2 teams now instead of one.

kastofsna
11-09-2006, 08:23 PM
and that's what it was made to do. thus....it works. perfectly, in fact. it's never picked less or more than 2 teams. flawless. i love it.

run-david-run
11-09-2006, 09:52 PM
I think its sad that the main proponent of the BCS is money. The only real reason it is still around is that it makes colleges money and university presidents care about that way more then who should be the undisputed champion. I would love to see a playoff, not just because it would eliminate all the guessing and eliminate the situation in which a game in Week 2 determines your season, but because of the great games it would offer. I would love to see UT play Florida, Ohio State play Auburn, USC play Michigan and so forth. Instead of one great matchup, like the Rose Bowl last year, we would get a bunch of really good games between the best teams in college

Haams
11-10-2006, 08:35 AM
... I would love to see UT play Florida, Ohio State play Auburn, USC play Michigan and so forth. Instead of one great matchup, like the Rose Bowl last year, we would get a bunch of really good games between the best teams in college

yep

Speedy
11-10-2006, 11:28 PM
I think its sad that the main proponent of the BCS is money. The only real reason it is still around is that it makes colleges money and university presidents care about that way more then who should be the undisputed champion. I would love to see a playoff, not just because it would eliminate all the guessing and eliminate the situation in which a game in Week 2 determines your season, but because of the great games it would offer. I would love to see UT play Florida, Ohio State play Auburn, USC play Michigan and so forth. Instead of one great matchup, like the Rose Bowl last year, we would get a bunch of really good games between the best teams in collegeAnd the stupid part is, there would be MORE MONEY with a playoff system. A 16 team playoff would be bigger than March Madness.

TexanSam
11-10-2006, 11:43 PM
And the stupid part is, there would be MORE MONEY with a playoff system. A 16 team playoff would be bigger than March Madness.

Exactly. I steal Charlie Palillo's point of view on this (from 790) and he basically says that March Madness is one of the most talked about events, water cooler stuff. People make their own ballots, there's office pots, etc... Can you imagine the same thing in December or January? Give me a good argument as to why we shouldn't have a playoff and I can give you ten as to why we should.

kastofsna
11-11-2006, 09:31 AM
And the stupid part is, there would be MORE MONEY with a playoff system. A 16 team playoff would be bigger than March Madness.
and longer.

Speedy
11-11-2006, 12:53 PM
and longer.First round starts Dec. 7-9, Thu-Sat. 2nd round the following weekend Fri. Sat Dec. 15-16, Semis Sat. Dec. 23, Champinship game Monday night, January 8.

And the teams in the championship don't have a 5 week gap between their last game and the championship.

And we get meaningful college football in December.

How anyone can support a "vote only 2 in" system is beyond me.

run-david-run
11-11-2006, 03:40 PM
Looks like Auburn is officialy out of it. Florida stugguling with South Carolina. With every week that goes by, UT looks like a better shot to get in to the title game.

HoustonFan
11-11-2006, 05:14 PM
Who cares???!!!! I guess if you're an alum or student of one of these schools you do. But whatever.

I think a playoff is much better than the mess now.

Carr Bombed
11-11-2006, 05:30 PM
Regardless if Florida wins or not they need to drop, they flat out suck. Steve S. owns them.....Texas would smeer the field with them. I'm not impressed with their defense or offense.

run-david-run
11-11-2006, 05:33 PM
Regardless if Florida wins or not they need to drop, they flat out suck. Steve S. owns themthey look pretty bad, at home, to a 5-4 South Carolina team.

awtysst
11-11-2006, 05:58 PM
Florida ekes out a small victory agianst 5-4(now 5-5 S. Carolina). I realize the SEC is tough but the 3 BCS ranked team should have won more convincingly.
Now Texas needs to beat down Kansas State. At 6-4. Kansas State looks like a stronger opponent than S. Carolina. So if UT can beta down KState, they should move to 3 in the BCS.

awtysst
11-11-2006, 10:45 PM
The BCS just had a HUGE shakeup. Texas, Cali, and Auburn all lose. All three are essentially out of the Natl championship at this point. Florida survived, USC looks to rise.

Runner
11-11-2006, 10:50 PM
So is the champioship game going to be the winners of OSU/MI and USC/ND? FL/ARK too.

There are going to be some big games in the next couple of weeks.

sixfour
11-12-2006, 12:04 AM
louisville should still be in the mix, imo

Runner
11-12-2006, 12:21 AM
Maybe they should just postpone the OSU/MI game to January.

Carr Bombed
11-12-2006, 12:41 AM
louisville should still be in the mix, imo
Louisville doesn't deserve to be in the mix, they lost straight up. Texas lost because their QB was taken out.

Teams remaining

USC
ND
Flordia

I'll take ND

and hope Texas gets a great match up in a bowl game..........Texas, USC rematch......that would be awesome

kastofsna
11-12-2006, 12:46 AM
Louisville doesn't deserve to be in the mix, they lost straight up. Texas lost because their QB was taken out.
that's pretty absurd.

Carr Bombed
11-12-2006, 08:57 AM
that's pretty absurd.

How........ Louisville lost to RUTGERS.....again Louisville lost to RUTGERS, playing in a crappy conference, with no injuries, they are done

Texans86
11-12-2006, 09:43 AM
How........ Louisville lost to RUTGERS.....again Louisville lost to RUTGERS, playing in a crappy conference, with no injuries, they are done

Simply because a team has been bad in the past does not mean they are bad now. Rutgers deserves credit where credit is due, and I for one think if they win out, they should have a shot at the National Championship. I also think if Boise State wins out, and for some reason the winner of the OSU/Michigan game loses (I don't know if either of them plays for a conference title or not, could be a moot point), then Boise State should play for the title.

If there were only two teams left in division 1-A football with unblemmished records, they should go at it to decide who gets all the marbles. And if Boise State, Rutgers and OSU/Mich winner all stay undefeated, then there should be a situation like 3 years ago when USC split the National Title. It's only fair.

Carr Bombed
11-12-2006, 09:48 AM
When did I say Rutgers didn't deserve a chance to play for a title? I agree, but the system we have now, says they don't deserve a chance and they can't, which is why it has to change.

Bull
Crap
System

kastofsna
11-12-2006, 10:44 AM
Bull
Crap
System
man, that is SO clever!

torontooilfan
11-12-2006, 11:15 AM
The way the BCS standings are now, the Michigan/OSU loser may actually still be in line to play for the BCS Championship.

sixfour
11-12-2006, 11:58 AM
Louisville doesn't deserve to be in the mix, they lost straight up. Texas lost because their QB was taken out.

Teams remaining

USC
ND
Flordia

I'll take ND

and hope Texas gets a great match up in a bowl game..........Texas, USC rematch......that would be awesome

louisville lost their starting running back for the season and the starting quaterback for some games!

any losing team can come up with excuses, fact or not still excuses.

Speedy
11-12-2006, 11:59 AM
Louisville doesn't deserve to be in the mix, they lost straight up. Texas lost because their QB was taken out.Waaaah!!!

kastofsna
11-12-2006, 01:06 PM
here's the USA Today poll:

1. Ohio State (62) 11-0 1,574
2. Michigan (1) 11-0 1,513
3. Florida 9-1 1,381
4. USC 8-1 1,373
5. Notre Dame 9-1 1,273
6. Arkansas 9-1 1,248
7. West Virginia 8-1 1,113
8. Rutgers 9-0 1,082
9. LSU 8-2 1,054
10. Wisconsin 10-1 928
11. Texas 9-2 927
12. Louisville 8-1 884
13. Boise State 10-0 830
14. Wake Forest 9-1 724
15. Auburn 9-2 721
16. Oklahoma 8-2 711
17. California 8-2 580
18. Georgia Tech 8-2 566
19. Virginia Tech 8-2 420
20. Boston College 8-2 384
21. Maryland 8-2 325
22. Nebraska 8-3 228
23. Tennessee 7-3 213
24. Brigham Young 8-2 116
25. Clemson 8-3 94

Carr Bombed
11-12-2006, 01:26 PM
Waaaah!!!

Must be a aggie fan

Everything I said is the truth.......Snead sucks

Carr Bombed
11-12-2006, 01:29 PM
louisville lost their starting running back for the season and the starting quaterback for some games!

any losing team can come up with excuses, fact or not still excuses.

Louisville had over 100 yards rushing in the game, they lost to Rutgers because of their defense couldn't stop the run.

They lost, they were overrated, they are done as is Texas

kastofsna
11-12-2006, 01:39 PM
actually louisville lost because of greg schiano's incredible 2nd half adjustments on defense.

sixfour
11-12-2006, 01:57 PM
Louisville had over 100 yards rushing in the game, they lost to Rutgers because of their defense couldn't stop the run.

They lost, they were overrated, they are done as is Texas

at least u admit ut is done and i'll say overrated as well

Carr Bombed
11-12-2006, 04:35 PM
actually louisville lost because of greg schiano's incredible 2nd half adjustments on defense.

Louisville also lost because they let Rutgers run their way back into the game.

kastofsna
11-12-2006, 05:20 PM
Louisville also lost because they let Rutgers run their way back into the game.
okie dokie. WVU ran all over louisville too, but they lost handily. why? because they couldn't stop brohm. rutgers forced tons of mistakes and 3 and outs, and guess what? they won. 1+1=2

kastofsna
11-14-2006, 02:11 PM
rutgers can sneak into the nat'l championship pretty easy. all that has to happen:

1: Cal beats USC
2: USC beats Notre Dame
3: Arkansas beats Florida

if that happens, you'll see Rutgers in the championship game. the reason it won't be arkansas is because the computers have arkansas ranked NINTH while they have rutgers ranked SECOND. and here's how i'd see the entire BCS shaking out if those things happen, as well as some other standard wins/losses:

Sugar Bowl: Arkansas vs. Louisville
Rose Bowl: Michigan vs. Cal
Orange Bowl: Wake Forest vs. Florida
Fiesta Bowl: Texas vs. Boise State

National Championship: Ohio State vs. Rutgers

bah007
11-14-2006, 02:30 PM
rutgers can sneak into the nat'l championship pretty easy. all that has to happen:

1: Cal beats USC
2: USC beats Notre Dame
3: Arkansas beats Florida

if that happens, you'll see Rutgers in the championship game. the reason it won't be arkansas is because the computers have arkansas ranked NINTH while they have rutgers ranked SECOND. and here's how i'd see the entire BCS shaking out if those things happen, as well as some other standard wins/losses:

Sugar Bowl: Arkansas vs. Louisville
Rose Bowl: Michigan vs. Cal
Orange Bowl: Wake Forest vs. Florida
Fiesta Bowl: Texas vs. Boise State

National Championship: Ohio State vs. Rutgers

If Notre Dame stayed in the top 12 then they would be in a BCS bowl.

They always get picked when they qualify, whether they deserve it or not.

kastofsna
11-14-2006, 02:34 PM
If Notre Dame stayed in the top 12 then they would be in a BCS bowl.

They always get picked when they qualify, whether they deserve it or not.
yup, i actually came back to this thread to change that...boise state would be left out. here's what we'd have:

Sugar Bowl: Arkansas vs. Louisville
Rose Bowl: Michigan vs. Cal
Orange Bowl: Wake Forest vs. Florida
Fiesta Bowl: Texas vs. Notre Dame

National Championship: Ohio State vs. Rutgers

TexansLucky13
11-14-2006, 02:38 PM
National Championship: Ohio State vs. Rutgers

That one would be a snoozer. Ohio State would obliterate Rutgers.

kastofsna
11-14-2006, 02:42 PM
no one would "obliterate" rutgers. that defense is too good and fast and they're too well-coached.

bah007
11-14-2006, 02:45 PM
no one would "obliterate" rutgers. that defense is too good and fast and they're too well-coached.

Ditto.

Just cuz they play in the Big East doesnt mean they suck.

TexansLucky13
11-14-2006, 02:48 PM
We'll see. Wanna put a avatar bet down for it? I am willing to bet that OSU would beat them by at least 21 points.

Man up.

kastofsna
11-14-2006, 02:49 PM
if that scenario actually plays out, i'll be happy to make a bet.

TexansLucky13
11-14-2006, 02:54 PM
I'm sorry... but Ohio State is just on a completely different level than Rutgers. OSU has swept all of their opponents this year, including this MBs beloved Longhorns.

kastofsna
11-14-2006, 02:56 PM
i tend to agree with you. but that doesn't mean they'd blow out rutgers. as i said, rutgers is just too well-coached, and that defense is beastly.

TexanSam
11-14-2006, 04:09 PM
yup, i actually came back to this thread to change that...boise state would be left out. here's what we'd have:

Sugar Bowl: Arkansas vs. Louisville
Rose Bowl: Michigan vs. Cal
Orange Bowl: Wake Forest vs. Florida
Fiesta Bowl: Texas vs. Notre Dame

National Championship: Ohio State vs. Rutgers

Boise St is in the top 12 in the BcS right now though. Is there a rule that if both qualify, one has to be left out?

bah007
11-14-2006, 05:01 PM
Boise St is in the top 12 in the BcS right now though. Is there a rule that if both qualify, one has to be left out?

The Bowl committees would select a 3 loss Notre Dame over a 1 loss Michigan if both were in the top 12.

The committees will select Notre Dame NO MATTER WHAT as long as they qualify.

kastofsna
11-14-2006, 05:09 PM
Boise St is in the top 12 in the BCS right now though. Is there a rule that if both qualify, one has to be left out?
there's only so many spots. with cal winning the pac-10 and wake forest winning the ACC, there's 2 spots right there for teams that didn't finish in the top 12.

Smokedawg
11-14-2006, 06:55 PM
i tend to agree with you. but that doesn't mean they'd blow out rutgers. as i said, rutgers is just too well-coached, and that defense is beastly.

I think Rutgers could actually beat Ohio St. Nothing about Ohio St. impresses me , they haven't played a great defence at all, and rutgers is pretty stout on D.