2008 College Football In-Season Thread!

[vcjack]

Nov 26, 2008 17:22:14 GMT -5 AustinHoya03 said:

Nov 26, 2008 13:05:22 GMT -5 FormerHoya said:

Austin,


I know you do winners, not spreads, but you mean cover, not win, right? I'm totally with you on the cover (+21.5 depending on where), but outright? Even with the inevitable letdown game, just doesn't seem possible.

I'm picking Baylor. It's out there, but here's why:

1. Not only will this be an inevitable letdown game for Texas Tech, but Baylor (4-7) is going to treat this game as its bowl game. The motivation factor clearly favors Baylor.

2. At the beginning of the season, I watched Baylor play against Wake Forest -- the Bears were terrible. But towards the end of the season, the Green and Gold have played well. Baylor led Nebraska at the half in Lincoln, put a huge scare into Mizzou (the Tigers needed a timely INT and a late FG to win in Waco), and absolutely stomped Texas A&M.

3. What's the problem with all this? Well, the Bears' defense is still terrible, even though the offense has played well. Baylor doesn't have the athletes to go up against Tech's WR corps (expect a big game from Crabtree). And I'm not sure Art Briles will use the right strategy against the Red Raiders -- he needs to move the ball successfully on the ground with Robert Griffin and Jay Finley, eating into Tech's TOP (remember Nebraska did this in Lubbock and took Tech to OT).

So, am I saying Baylor is a lock to win this football game? No, not really. I am saying they've got a shot at winning, and a much better shot than the oddsmakers are giving them. I'll probably be wrong, but I try to make an upset pick or two every week, and this seemed like a good candidate to me.

hifi, I'm picking against 'Bama for the same reasons I picked against Tennesse to begin the season -- the Tide simply fails to impress me. Auburn stinks, but anything can happen in the Iron Bowl.

Well, that came closer than most thought it would be. Still probably think it was wishful thinking on your part


But it has been a good day for rivalry games with Georgia Tech and Alabama breaking long losing streakes against their big rivals and Kansas daggering Mizzou. I don't think its televised here in Chicago but Oregon has a chance to ruin Oregon State's hopes tonight with Jaquizz Rodgers out.

[hoya95]

I'm not hoping for the return of the wishbone and 9-6 college football games, but I do hope college defenses and their coordinators start adjusting to these spread offenses soon. Every time I've flipped on a game today, it has looked like a basketball score. It's fun at first, but then it looks like arena football. It feels a bit ridiculous.
And if Florida plays Oklahoma, I really think Florida could score 100.

[AustinHoya03]

If that clown defense ends up in Miami, I will not watch the game. C'mon Baylor, c'mon 'Pokes, c'mon voters.

[RDF]

Nov 29, 2008 23:51:25 GMT -5 AustinHoya03 said:

If that clown defense ends up in Miami, I will not watch the game. C'mon Baylor, c'mon 'Pokes, c'mon voters.

If Oklahoma gets to the title game in Big XII--they'll score 80 on Missouri's Edited poor defense.

If they play Florida--Florida can score 100 on them--as was stated above. Let's see--Oklahoma can't cover a kick--Florida is lethal on kick/punt returns, Oklahoma can't stop anyone running or passing--Florida won't have to pass--but if they do-they'll be wide open. Florida has speed and will destroy the clown show that is Big XII football--that lack of defense is awful. (outisde of Texas that is--who does play some defense)

For everyone who made fun of Pac 10 in past--why is it "cool" that Big XII teams suck on defense?

USC has given up 86 pts on the SEASON--which Missouri could give up next weekend.

Here's another thing--let's say Oklahoma goes and "Venables" the game up next week if they make it--do you take a team who didn't win their division over a team that won their conference in NC game? It's happened with Big XII in past--and they've provided the only National Title games where non conference champions have advanced--and one was humiliated, the other was a loss from OU to LSU and prevented the REAL title game--USC--ranked #1 in both polls against LSU.

So I say BLEEP Oklahoma--they suck. Let Texas play-they'll take care of Missouri and while I think they'd get beaten by Florida due to not having enough offense-I think it would be a better game due to Muschamp having a clue how to coach and not a turd like Brent Venables.

F-OU

[hoyarooter]

Watched a good chunk of the OU/OSU game tonight, and felt like I was channeling the Pac 10 from years past. It just seemed like a miracle when either team stopped the other at all (although OU was victimized by an incredibly bad blown non-fumble call).

Please, voters, please, keep Texas at No. 2. I was pulling for Baylor today just so this mess could be avoided, and Austin almost pulled it off.

[GIGAFAN99]

This is when we need CBS, ABC or ESPN to cram another "these are the playoffs" reference down our throats. I know I have a little room left in my esophagus, so I think I need another comment from Reece Davis to be sure.

We have 4 one-loss teams who are 1-point, 1-point, 6-points, and 6-points from being undefeated. Three lost on the road to bowl bound teams. Two lost on the last play from scrimmage. We have a "mid-major" who is undefeated and has 3 top 20 wins.

So who will be 1 and 2 this week? Probably none of those teams. Alabama is undefeated with ONE top 20 win (Georgia) and Oklahoma lost a neutral site game by ten points to one of the teams mentioned above.

Oh but "these are the playoffs." TV said. I believe TV.

[SFHoya99]

Forget "fair."

Who out there doesn't think Florida and Texas are the two best teams? I mean, of people who aren't fans of other tams in the discussion. I'm a Penn State - USC fan and I think Florida-Texas are 1-2 (though USC would hang with either, IMO).

[SirSaxa]

I'm just happy to see Charlie Weis and ND fall flat on their faces.
Weis is NOT a good guy and should not be coaching college kids -- especially at ND.
But then, ND lost their way, forgot who they are (or claim to be) and signed a deal with the Devil.

[GIGAFAN99]

Nov 30, 2008 13:33:56 GMT -5 SFHoya99 said:

Forget "fair."

Who out there doesn't think Florida and Texas are the two best teams? I mean, of people who aren't fans of other tams in the discussion. I'm a Penn State - USC fan and I think Florida-Texas are 1-2 (though USC would hang with either, IMO).

Think about if Texas gets to chew and spit Ohio State in a bowl game because OSU "travels well." Now never mind they scored 9 points against the entire Rose Bowl slate, they could very well be the team the Horns draw if Oklahoma is #2.

So here's a very possible scenario in BCS-world:

Oklahoma beats Florida and wins the national title with one loss.

The Rose Bowl winner (just as in pre-BCS times) has a legitimate one-loss claim as well.

Texas pastes Ohio State which gives them no style points but they might still be the best team.

Utah beats Alabama, stays undefeated, and wonders how its not even in the discussion when it has scalped 'Bama, Oregon State, BYU, and TCU who are all top 25 including a team that was #1 most of the year.

Not all this will happen, but this is where we are right now.

Texas - Ohio State (head shaking)

[AustinHoya03]

OU leads Texas by one vote in the Coaches' Poll, and Texas leads OU by six points in the Harris Poll. This is all going to come down to the computers. The standings should be released on FOX in a few minutes -- I'll update when they come out (so as to save you all the agony of watching Fox NFL coverage to obtain information about CFB).

ON EDIT: #2 OU goes to Kansas City. Go Tigers.

[RDF]

Nov 30, 2008 16:18:45 GMT -5 AustinHoya03 said:

OU leads Texas by one vote in the Coaches' Poll, and Texas leads OU by six points in the Harris Poll. This is all going to come down to the computers. The standings should be released on FOX in a few minutes -- I'll update when they come out (so as to save you all the agony of watching Fox NFL coverage to obtain information about CFB).

ON EDIT: #2 OU goes to Kansas City. Go Tigers.

If Missouri wins the Big XII--it would be biggest upset of season. That team couldn't stop the dwarf Todd Reesing--and USF beat Kansas for goodness sakes.

All I will say about this mess---I think USC's defense is good enough to keep their team in game with anyone. I think Steve Sarkisian is an awful OC that keeps other teams in games--and last night is a great example. If he knew what to do--that game is a 60-70 pt scoring output-but he's awful play caller and has no feel for what works/what doesn't.

Watching Barry Switzer (who is always objective ) explain the BCS was like watching American Politicians explain anything--it was painful, embarrassing and you can tell he didn't even believe what he was saying.

Here's the easy breakdown of what should happen:

1. UF-Bama winner should only be guaranteed the BCS Title game if Bama wins--otherwise it's open for debate simply because the SEC Sucks this year. Now I think Florida is one of the two best teams--but I also think their league stinks.

2. Oklahoma should win against a pitiful Missouri Team

3. Likely setting up Florida's 30-40 pt win over Oklahoma in Miami for title.

4. If Oklahoma loses--then USC if they win over UCLA--which should happen-but with Sarkisian--you never know -- goes to play Florida or Texas. I'd prefer to watch USC-Florida--but Texas wouldn't bother me at all.

5. My reason for putting USC in that scenario--if you win your conference--and your conference plays every team--unlike the Big 10--then you don't need a conference title game--you played it out on field and if you were going to leave UGA out of consideration last year for not winning their division--even though they were best team--you can't put Texas in a year later and have this "system" hold up with any credibility.

I personally despise the BCS and think it's about "regionalizing" the bowls and I also believe ABC/ESPN sabotages USC a lot in "discussion" so they can get them in Rose Bowl and have great television ratings--as Trojans are best TV Draw there is for them and their Rose Bowl. Florida was going to play in Miami and Texas going to Fiesta is a close travel. It's a clown show of a system and blows.

[GIGAFAN99]

Any way it happens, the system is already screwed this year. Texas had zero home games versus Oklahoma and Texas Tech. Zero. Clearly, this is BCS doomsday when the computer decides a DIVISIONAL WINNER in a league where everyone in the division plays each other.

Georgia didn't win their division legitimately. Here, the same system deciding the national title game is deciding the Big XII title game! That makes no sense! Then let the BCS say the Big XII title game is Oklahoma-Texas again because they're the two top ranked teams in the league.

To say "Oklahoma wins the tiebreaker because it is the highest ranked BCS team in its arbitrarily-divided section of the conference and now moves on to play a team ranked lower than two other teams but that happens to be in the other arbitrary section" is exactly the reasoning that has to be the death of the BCS.

[AustinHoya03]

Nov 30, 2008 16:54:48 GMT -5 RDF said:

If Missouri wins the Big XII--it would be biggest upset of season. That team couldn't stop the dwarf Todd Reesing--and USF beat Kansas for goodness sakes.

2. Oklahoma should win against a pitiful Missouri Team

3. Likely setting up Florida's 30-40 pt win over Oklahoma in Miami for title.

I will of course be rooting for Mizzou next weekend, but I agree there's little hope. The Tigers lost twice to OU last season -- 31-41 in Norman and 38-17 in the Big 12 Championship. I don't have any good reason to think things would be different in '08. The only things giving me hope right now are: 1) The Big 12 Championship Game has a history of bizarre upsets; and 2) If Mizzou's O-line holds OU at all, Maclin should have a big game against OU's defense.

Also, I hate to say it, but I think the National Championship is Florida's to lose this season. Obviously the Gators have business to take care of against the Tide first, but I think they would beat OU (easily), Texas (not as easily), or SC (not as easily). Agree with RDF that Gators-Trojans would be a fun game to watch. Also agree SC has unfairly been left out of the National Title conversation -- when Oregon State upset SC (in Corvallis) it was a big upset, but the Beavers have put together a very nice season and I now view that loss as more or less equal to Texas' loss in Lubbock. Obviously I'll be rooting for Texas to get to Miami over OU or SC, but would much rather watch the Trojans and/or Gators play for the title than the Sooners and/or the Crimson Tide.

[hoya9797]

Nov 30, 2008 13:39:33 GMT -5 SirSaxa said:

I'm just happy to see Charlie Weis and ND fall flat on their faces.
Weis is NOT a good guy and should not be coaching college kids -- especially at ND.
But then, ND lost their way, forgot who they are (or claim to be) and signed a deal with the Devil.

ND has always claimed to be something that they are not. They are no different than any of the other football factories. Winning is all that matters and all that has ever mattered and any claims to the contrary are BS.

[AustinHoya03]

As long as we're piling on the Irish as usual, I thought I'd add this statistical tidbit:

Texas’ success and Notre Dame’s relative incompetence this season has boosted the Longhorns into second place among college football programs with the most victories in program history.

Texas now has 831 wins in 116 seasons, one more than Notre Dame’s 830 wins in 120 seasons.

www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/6136354.html

(NB: That should read "most victories in Division I-A/FBS program history" -- Yale has 854 wins, second only to Michigan's 872.)

[ichirohoya]

I really do not want to appear to be on some sort of anti-USC crusade. They are, I think, a very good football team. In a year in which there don't seem to be any epic teams, being very good may be enough to get a shot at a national title. BUT,

Assuming USC beats UCLA this week, the win-loss record of all of USC's defeated opponents will be 59 wins against 70 losses. To be clear, the combined winning percentage of teams which USC has beaten this year is .457! Granted, the horrible records of Washington (0-11) and Washington St ( 2-11) do not help this any. But still. Good for USC, they beat several mediocre teams, a couple of god-awful teams, and Ohio State. The SEC may not be the world's strongest conference this year. But the Pac-10 is a joke. Washington State came to Honolulu last night and looked like the Bad News Bears. And they aren't even the worst team in that league.

For the record the combined winning percentages of the teams other top teams have knocked off:

Utah= .477 (only counting wins against D-1 opponents)
Boise St= .477 (only counting wins against D-1 opponents)
Alabama= .465
Florida= .558 (only counting wins against D-1 opponents)
Oklahoma= .571 (only counting wins against D-1 opponents) (they beat a 1-AA team which had an impressive 1-11 record though)
Texas= .560
Texas Tech= .519 (Only counting wins against D-1 opponents) (They beat 2 Div 1-AA teams)

Winning percentage doesn't mean all that much, but, credit where credit is due... Florida, Oklahoma and Texas have been beating teams which average out to an overwhelmingly winning record. USC has beaten a schedule which has been weaker in terms of winning percentage than both the Mountain West Champ and the WAC Champ.

If it shakes out to a Florida-OU title game-- I really won't be able to complain, they have both beaten at least a few good teams.

[FormerHoya]

Nov 30, 2008 22:00:49 GMT -5 hoya9797 said:

Nov 30, 2008 13:39:33 GMT -5 SirSaxa said:

I'm just happy to see Charlie Weis and ND fall flat on their faces.
Weis is NOT a good guy and should not be coaching college kids -- especially at ND.
But then, ND lost their way, forgot who they are (or claim to be) and signed a deal with the Devil.

ND has always claimed to be something that they are not. They are no different than any of the other football factories. Winning is all that matters and all that has ever mattered and any claims to the contrary are BS.

Just like all the others, except that they don't win and do graduate kids.

Which is it? Is ND a football factory that throws out all other standards? Or is it an irrelevant school with a great history and irrational fanbase that cannot compete in modern college football? Because it can't be both.

Actually, don't answer, no more time should be wasted on ND this year (until they [please please please] make a coaching move).

[hifigator]

This is the concern that I have been voicing for the past couple of weeks. To a man, everyone has told me not to worry about it and it "won't happen." Now someone else is finally getting around to pointing it out:

rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/blog/dr_saturday/post/BCS-Realpolitik-Oklahoma-it-is-but-a-new-route;_ylt=AqU0aJBVy1NX2wKPAosFY44cvrYF?urn=ncaaf,125550


With regards to the human polls, I don't really worry about it a bit. I do think that there was a strong sentiment last week by a lot of voters who thought that voting Oklahoma in, due to a 3 way tie, was in fact unfair to Texas, and they did their part to make that as unlikely as possible. In other words, I think that at least some voters put Texas even higher than they might have otherwise, because of the potential of having two teams with identical records, but have the one that lost the head to head game -- on a neutral field no less -- get snubbed. Either way, I haven't worried too much about that angle, as I would expect that a victory over #1 ranked and undefeated Bama would be impressive enough in their minds. But the computers ... now that's a different story altogether. At least one man thinks that a win by Florida over Bama, whose computer average is "only" #3, won't be eough to vault an idle Texas team that is ranked ahead of us right now.

I don't think it will happen, but it certainly could.

[hoyarooter]

I agree with pretty much everything that was written above about the BCS state of affairs. I've been saying for weeks that Texas and Florida are the two best teams. I want to see that game, but I guess it isn't going to happen. Just a couple of additional points:

1. I'm not on the Alabama bandwagon, but if they beat Florida, I think they will deserve to be in the championship game. I don't think it's going to happen, but if it does, I don't think anyone can justifiably say they are undeserving.

2. I agree with hifi, that it does seem possible - if unlikely - that Florida could beat Alabama and still end up at #3. This would be a bizarre result.

3. I agree wholeheartedly that letting the BCS rating decide the winner of a division of the Big 12 is idiotic, but don't blame the BCS, blame the Big 12 for putting that ridiculous tie breaker in place.

[hifigator]

Here's a follow-up thought: we are all pretty much in agreement, as best as I can tell, that we need a real playoff and that the BCS is an ugly step0child at best. I also agree with the sentiment concerning an unrelated element -- in this case, the BCS rankings -- being the tiebreaking element for a Conference, or in this case, division "Champion." That being said, I don't think that such a decision was made because anyone thought it was "the right or best way to do it." My guess is that the ideology was that there might be a situation where teams from OTHER conferences were in a very close battle with a Big 12 team for a potential spot in the BCS title game. If so, then the Conference would naturally want to do everything it could conceivably do, to have itself represented in the National Title picture. That being said, I am not making excuses or justifying it in anyway.

Shifting gears, now if we are of the opinion that the BCS rankings shouldn't matter squat in such matters, then how should the tie be broken? I heard Mack Brown explaining that if the ACC tiebreakers were implemented this year in the Big 12, then Texas would have won the division. I'm not exactly sure what their rules are, but the bottom line was that Tech would have been eliminated first and then it would have reverted to head-to-head, which would have gone to Texas. But is that really fair? I don't know. I think that so many things are designed to minimize losing early and reward winning late. So I don't think that Oklahoma should be "rewarded" by having their loss minimized at the expense of the very team that it lost to.

I just don't know. I'm almost tempted to consider those silly wildcard tiebreakers that the NFL uses, which eventually get down to point differential within your conference. That seems to reward a running it up mentality, but at this point, that seems like an improvement.

Thoughts?