BCS Standings

Printable View

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

12-03-2008, 11:59 PM
etothep

Re: BCS Standings

Quote:

Originally Posted by KowboyKoop

I am an Alabama fan. I have no problem with anyone saying that Florida is the favorite on Saturday....but I am simply stunned with the complete lack of respect they have gotten. It seems that everyone just thinks that Florida, OU, Texas, USC and others can simply score on Bama at will and rout them. This thread seems to be just another example. I don't know what Alabama did to make everyone think they aren't on Florida's level......I think it's a matter of people thinking more points = better team.

When Alabama is running the ball, controlling the clock, and dominating the line of scrimmage on Saturday..we'll see what happens. Florida might be the favorite..but there's no way Florida is scoring that many on Bama...yeah, Florida is fast...but oh yeah, so is Alabama's D and their offense holds the ball for so long.....we'll see what happens when Florida gets punched in the mouth. Florida may win...they are definitely as good as advertised...but the lack of respect all season for Bama is just disgusting. Unlike all the others, they've beaten everyone, won close games on the road, dominated ranked teams away from home......not sure what else they possibly could've done this season. Just because their offense is designed to slowly dominate and score and control the ball rather than quickly scoring doesn't make them inferior. They say that defense wins championships for a reason..it's not just a phrase.

To act like UF doesn't have any D is just crazy. Bama's D gives up an entire .8 points per game less than UF's, while allowing a whopping 27.2 more yards per game while UF's D has forced 8 more turnovers (helping them have the top turnover differential in the nation).
12-04-2008, 02:23 AM
OregonDuck1989

Re: BCS Standings

Quote:

Originally Posted by gRYFYN1

Why is everyone always unhappy with any system. the BCS isn't great, sure you can have a playoff and crown a tourney champion, but even that won't always give you the best team. Why does everyone HAVE to have a champion for a amateur sport?

Sure Ball St could play USC and win, but they are not a better team, USC would win that game by 20 points 9 out 10 times.And if there is some miracle scenario people would be happy with a 10-4 Troy team being crowned the best team in CFB??

People complain about the Bowl System, but you know what the problem is ... theres too many bowls, they even had to change the rules a few years ago because there wern't enough bowl Eligible teams (the old rule said you have to have a winning record, now it just not a losing one)

So you entirely believe that NOT even letting teams prove it and letting computers who favor teams with prestigious programs over teams who are actually GOOD ON THE FIELD is better then a playoff?

Yeah Ball State isn't the better team...but they proved they were the better team that day if they beat USC. And that is the point. THEY PROVED IT.

Computers shouldn't decide who is the national champion...teams should. That's the point.

And we're not the ones wanting a champion of an amateur sport...the NCAA does by calling it...uh...the NATIONAL CHAMPION. It's a fake national championship, we, the people WHO WATCH THE SPORT, think its about damn time we start making teams prove it on the field. Not by beating up on Texas State and North Dakota for the first four games of the season then beating (apart from the Big 12 South) a weak conference schedule to play for a national championship.

Let's face it. This isn't 1958. We have an 85 scholarship limit to even teams. If we're going to make teams so even...why do we have a system that supports only certain conferences? The Mountain West can have an argument that they are the second best conference in the country this year. The SEC? Apart from Alabama and Florida...nothing. The Pac-10? Please, the Mountain West is their daddy. The Big East and ACC couldn't even put a 1 loss team in their championship trophies this year.

Shouldn't it be fair?
12-04-2008, 08:42 AM
KowboyKoop

Re: BCS Standings

Quote:

Originally Posted by etothep

To act like UF doesn't have any D is just crazy. Bama's D gives up an entire .8 points per game less than UF's, while allowing a whopping 27.2 more yards per game while UF's D has forced 8 more turnovers (helping them have the top turnover differential in the nation).

Who said Florida doesn't have a D? I was very complementary of Florida in my post. It's others here and pretty much everywhere who inexplicably have Florida hanging 50+ on Bama....
12-04-2008, 08:57 AM
reflections

Re: BCS Standings

Quote:

Originally Posted by gRYFYN1

That sounds a bit homerish .. Joe Pa already said he was planning on being back ... But really this game looks likes a not even close 38-10 game.

Hope you are talking USC 38 Penn State 10.
The Trojans have made a joke out of the Big Ten the past few years. It's Joe Pa's turn to feel it. :)
12-04-2008, 01:17 PM
etothep

Re: BCS Standings

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/footbal...yhoo&type=lgns

Can't Ball St's coach or AD just admit that they're scared of being shown as a fraud team that wouldn't even be a .500 team if they played a real schedule?
12-04-2008, 01:36 PM
KowboyKoop

Re: BCS Standings

Ball St. should've taken that game..but to say they wouldn't be .500 if they played a real schedule or any other insults like that are also a little ridiculous. Pretty much everyone said that about Boise St. before they played Oklahoma and then oops...Oklahoma got beat by Boise St. Ball St. is a damn good team that could beat most teams in football......I'd say a borderline top 10 team.

Definitely not good that they turned down that bid though.....big mistake.
12-04-2008, 01:43 PM
OregonDuck1989

Re: BCS Standings

Agreed they should have not turned down that bid. Boise vs. Ball would have been a good game.

But I don't like having teams who are undefeated not in BCS bowls and having punk ass Ohio State playing in one.

So say Florida and Oklahoma win this weekend.

That would probably put the bowls like this...

Rose Bowl-Penn State vs. USC
Fiesta Bowl-Cincinnati vs. Texas (I believe Fiesta is Big East vs. Big 12? Or in this case best At-Large)
Sugar Bowl-Utah vs. Boston College(Granted they win the ACC)
Orange Bowl-Ohio State vs. Alabama

hmmm...
12-04-2008, 01:50 PM
etothep

Re: BCS Standings

Quote:

Originally Posted by OregonDuck1989

Agreed they should have not turned down that bid. Boise vs. Ball would have been a good game.

But I don't like having teams who are undefeated not in BCS bowls and having punk ass Ohio State playing in one.

So say Florida and Oklahoma win this weekend.

That would probably put the bowls like this...

Rose Bowl-Penn State vs. USC
Fiesta Bowl-Cincinnati vs. Texas (I believe Fiesta is Big East vs. Big 12? Or in this case best At-Large)
Sugar Bowl-Utah vs. Boston College(Granted they win the ACC)
Orange Bowl-Ohio State vs. Alabama

hmmm...

I agree that Ohio State is less deserving than Boise St to play in a BCS game, but that's why Boise St tried to get this game together, to make the bowl as close to a BCS bowl as it could be, and likley higher rated than a bcs bowl featuring Cincy or BC
12-04-2008, 02:00 PM
etothep

Re: BCS Standings

Quote:

Originally Posted by KowboyKoop

Ball St. should've taken that game..but to say they wouldn't be .500 if they played a real schedule or any other insults like that are also a little ridiculous. Pretty much everyone said that about Boise St. before they played Oklahoma and then oops...Oklahoma got beat by Boise St. Ball St. is a damn good team that could beat most teams in football......I'd say a borderline top 10 team.

Definitely not good that they turned down that bid though.....big mistake.

That year Boise St played 7 teams that were at least .500 (including 3 teams with at least 10 wins)...Ball St has played 1 team with 9 wins & after turning down this bowl idea, they likely won't play a team with more than that. Their strength of schedule was 30 spots higher that year than Ball St's is this year. Ball St has a chance to go prove themselves and they simply back down, which tells me they aren't as sure of themselves as they should be

Also, feel free to take a look at this thread (http://forum.sportsmogul.com/showthread.php?t=191179) where I supported both Boise St & Ball St being deserving of a BCS bowl & if there were any playoff system in place that both should be involved in it. However, I'm now much less inclined to back Ball St for this questionable decision
12-04-2008, 03:25 PM
gRYFYN1

Re: BCS Standings

Quote:

Originally Posted by reflections

Hope you are talking USC 38 Penn State 10.
The Trojans have made a joke out of the Big Ten the past few years. It's Joe Pa's turn to feel it. :)

Yes I was, personally I think USC is the best team in the country, the only team that would have a chance beating them 2 out of 3 on a neutral field would be Florida, simply because FLA biggest strength (a running QB) is the one thing that USC can't shut down.
12-04-2008, 03:40 PM
flapper

Re: BCS Standings

I am disappointed that Ball State did not take the offer either. However, not taking the offer does not minimize the problems with the bowls anyway.

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/footbal...v=ap&type=lgns

If you look here at how the teams are determined, the weaker conferences get screwed anyway. I wish Ball State had said yes. This is why I prefer a playoff system.
12-04-2008, 03:42 PM
EVEN11323

Re: BCS Standings

Well, I hope Ball State has fun @ the Motor City Bowl. Even if it would be a home game for Boise State, I think they would have been able to keep it close.
12-04-2008, 03:44 PM
OregonDuck1989

Re: BCS Standings

Quote:

Originally Posted by gRYFYN1

Yes I was, personally I think USC is the best team in the country, the only team that would have a chance beating them 2 out of 3 on a neutral field would be Florida, simply because FLA biggest strength (a running QB) is the one thing that USC can't shut down.

I'm going to have to say Florida is better then USC. Although USC is deeper talent wise. Better D, Better Offense and a tougher conference (though barely). If Florida makes it to the NC I expect them to win it because I do believe their loss to Ole Miss was a fluke and a half.

Also, Tebow is on a whole different level from Mark Sanchez.

USC is one of the best teams in the country...but I wouldn't say THE best. They haven't played anyone since an overrated Ohio State team.
12-04-2008, 03:59 PM
etothep

Re: BCS Standings

Quote:

Originally Posted by OregonDuck1989

I'm going to have to say Florida is better then USC. Although USC is deeper talent wise. Better D, Better Offense and a tougher conference (though barely). If Florida makes it to the NC I expect them to win it because I do believe their loss to Ole Miss was a fluke and a half.

Also, Tebow is on a whole different level from Mark Sanchez.

USC is one of the best teams in the country...but I wouldn't say THE best. They haven't played anyone since an overrated Ohio State team.

Better D referring to UF??

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/fbt08.htm
Strength of Schedule of UF = 28th
Strength of Schedule of USC = 33rd

Looks pretty even to me
12-04-2008, 05:02 PM
EP Hotties

Re: BCS Standings

Maybe people think Florida will score 50 because they've scored at least 40 8 times this season, and in the last 7 games are averaging 53.7! 50 is below average right now for Florida.
I agree, 16-team playoff is the way to go. Honestly, this would be the coolest thing ever. :D

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page