|
|
 |
Stryker311 |
+ |
Monday, December 4, 2006 at 8:12 PM
Edited Monday, December 4, 2006 at 8:13 PM IS fucked up. FLORIDA???? No. Florida sucks butt. I hate them so much....I was soooooo mad when I saw the BCS bowl picks, and they picked Florida to go instead of Michigan. Let's look at the stats #2 Florida (11-1) Their one loss? To Auburn (my favorite team behind Fresno) who they were predicted to beat, hmmmm they lost by 10 points. #3 Michigan (11-1) Their one loss? To Ohio State (undisputed best team in the nation from preseason to post season, never lost, never wavered) who they were SUPPOSED to lose to, hmmmm they lost by 3 points. So one team is supposed to kill their opponent, instead, they lose by 10, and the other is supposed to lose and does by a mere field goal, and the first team goes to the championship??? Even a retard could figure out something's wrong. Who's to blame?
The BCS system. It's unfair, perennial favorites such as Cal, Notre Dame, Oklahoma, USC, Florida, Texas are always in the top ten even when they don't deserve to be, just because people love'em While better teams than those get overlooked such as, Boise State (undefeated), Arkansas, Rutgers, Wisconsin, Auburn. None of these teams made it to a BCS bowl game despite having remarkable seasons —Stryker311 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
lexieho |
+ |
Monday, December 4, 2006 at 8:27 PM
Edited Monday, December 4, 2006 at 8:28 PM i like how hair color only comes in platinum blonde and darkish mahogony brown. every color should have a wood name. —lexieho |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
adams_babymomma |
+ |
Monday, December 4, 2006 at 8:30 PM btw my friend wants to try out for the DCC, i told her that shes' not gonna make it becuase she's not hot enough. —adams_babymomma |
|
|
|
|
lexieho |
+ |
Monday, December 4, 2006 at 8:35 PM the one in the very front left [laying downish] looks more retarted thaen the rest and the one to the right of the fat girl is ugly. actually they're all ugly fake fake mcfakemeister. —lexieho |
|
|
|
|
Stryker311 |
+ |
Monday, December 4, 2006 at 8:37 PM
Edited Monday, December 4, 2006 at 8:39 PM 1. Ohio State (65) 12-0 1,625
Best team in the nation, no doubt, deserve to be here. 2. Florida 12-1 1,529
Lost to #9 Auburn, easy schedule, played 1-AA teams (similar to Major league Baseball taking on a Minor-league team) totally undeserved, should be at #4 or 5. 3. Michigan 11-1 1,526
Got ripped off, only loss was to #1 Ohio State. Only reason they were ousted from the Championship is because no one wanted to see a rematch. Pussies. 4. LSU 10-2 1,365
Tough schedule, but still lost to #2 Florida by 13 and to #9 Auburn by 4. Should be higher up, 6 or 7th. 5. USC 10-2 1,182
Lost to two unranked teams; Oregon State and UCLA. On the wrong side of an upset TWICE. Yet they are still in the top 5 and headed to the Rose Bowl. Please kill me. Should be ranked 15 or 16th. Disgusting 6. Louisville 11-1 1,333
Good season only loss was to #16 Rutgers, should be ranked in top 5. Up and coming team, will be good for next few years. 7. Wisconsin 11-1 1,255
GREAT season (My third favorite behind Auburn and Wisconsin) and only loss was to #2 Michigan. Should be ranked in top 5 and should be going to a BCS game. 8. Boise State 12-0 1,097
Great season, undefeated, but it is flawed by it's lack of difficulty. 8 is good for them, going to Fiesta bowl deservedly. 9. Auburn 10-2 1,020
Good season, beat 2 teams in the top 5; #2 Florida AND #4 LSU. Shouldn't a team that beat both the 2nd and 4th best teams be going to a BCS game? You'd think so, but no. Got FUCKED over by the system. Should be ranked 5th or 6th 10. Oklahoma 11-2 1,232
Good season, shouldn't have lost to those 2 teams though, but overall ranked appropriately. 11. Notre Dame 10-2 939
The joke of the year, Notre Dame sucks, they lost to USC and Michigan. Look at all these close games against unranked teams:
vs. Georgia Tech 14-10
vs. Michigan State 40-37
vs. Purdue 35-21
vs. UCLA 20-17 (should have lost this game)
plus they played Army, Navy, AND Air Force. What's wrong? Couldn't get the Coast Guard and the National Guard in there? Why not the Cub Scouts while you're at it? Should be ranked 20th. —Stryker311 |
|
|
|
|
Stryker311 |
+ |
Monday, December 4, 2006 at 8:43 PM
Edited Monday, December 4, 2006 at 8:51 PM The only two teams in the top 12 not going to a BCS bowl? Auburn and Wisconsin. My two favorite teams? Auburn and Wisconsin.
Does the world hate me?
what do yall think. share your opinions on college football, and I will either refute them or agree with them (most likely refute) —Stryker311 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
anobody |
+ |
Monday, December 4, 2006 at 9:18 PM Don't be insensitive. Maybe she's color blind. —anobody |
|
|
|
|
lexieho |
+ |
Monday, December 4, 2006 at 9:22 PM i don't have my glasses on, i couldn't see it, but i could just assume. —lexieho |
|
|
|
|
bguirk |
+ |
Monday, December 4, 2006 at 9:38 PM
Edited Monday, December 4, 2006 at 9:41 PM #3 Michigan (11-1) Their one loss? To Ohio State (undisputed best team in the nation from preseason to post season, never lost, never wavered) who they were SUPPOSED to lose to, hmmmm they lost by 3 points. I'm surrounded by lemmings saying the same fucking thing and they're all idiots. I love the school, but in Big 10 a conference where 5-6 teams can't even muster above a .500 record (and four teams are below) they don't deserve a second bite at the apple. Consider that last game of the season the BCS playoff. Look at the Pac-10--most of the the schools are in the 7+ wins club. USC is probably going to clean Michigans clock--they play in a MUCH tougher conference. The messed up thing is they have a playoff in basketball and a season that spans two semesters. Why they don't get to do the same thing in football is beyond me. —bguirk |
|
|
|
|
Stryker311 |
+ |
Monday, December 4, 2006 at 9:54 PM I see what you mean by the conferences, and I'll agree, the Pac-10 is a tougher conference (Cal, USC, UCLA, Oregon, Arizona State) in comparison to Big 10 (Ohio State, Michigan, Wisconsin, Penn State, Purdue) but look at IMO the toughest conference the SEC SEC
Florida 7-1 12-1
Arkansas 7-1 10-3
Auburn 6-2 10-2
LSU 6-2 10-2
Tennessee 5-3 9-3
Georgia 4-4 8-4
Kentucky 4-4 7-5
South Carolina 3-5 7-5
Alabama 2-6 6-6
Mississippi 2-6 4-8
Vanderbilt 1-7 4-8
Mississippi St. 1-7 3-9 9/12 teams above .500
and Michigan will clean USC's clock. My prediction, hmmm pass heavy (JD Booty, Jarret) USC will have a good offense, and Michigan has a great offense too (Chad Henne) shoot out, but Michigan will come out on top 34 - 27
—Stryker311 |
|
|
|
|
Stryker311 |
+ |
Monday, December 4, 2006 at 9:57 PM And the reason they don't do a 2 semester season with a championship is its too many games. Football can't have that, too many star players would get injured (Adrian Peterson). I agree with the championship idea, but with the top 16 teams, not 64, so that's only 1-4 more games depending on how far you get. —Stryker311 |
|
|
|
|
anobody |
+ |
Monday, December 4, 2006 at 10:05 PM Is that why there are so few games in the NFL season relative to basketball (or baseball)? Seems as reasonable as anything else I can think of.
—anobody |
|
|
|
|
bguirk |
+ |
Monday, December 4, 2006 at 10:13 PM On the playoff thing--you only need an 8 team playoff. Each conference champ gets a berth and then wildcard the other ones in by poll or whatever--at least provide one method to control your destiny (win your conference). By doing this you add 0 games to the schedule for 4 teams (because they already play a bowl game) 1 game for two teams (the losers of the final four) and 2 games for 2 teams (those in the national championship. It's not a huge burden. They could still be done on January 1. and Michigan will clean USC's clock You obviously didn't see the Ball St. game. Ohio is the first decent team they played (Notre Dame was/is a joke). Trust me--depending on the spread the Rosebowl is where to bet your money. —bguirk |
|
|
|
|
MajandraFan |
+ |
Tuesday, December 5, 2006 at 10:39 AM i find that jacking off to some gay porn once every two or three months is much more time efficient than following college football. —MajandraFan |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
bguirk |
+ |
Tuesday, December 5, 2006 at 3:00 PM INSIDER TIP: The Huskies are terrible at football. They spend too much time studying. Your comment belies your youth. You can't blame their current suckitude on hitting the books. When I was an undergrad they actually spent too much time winning championships and getting cash/cars/cell phones from alumni and not hiding it well enough which forced them to give up scholarships. Then their coach spent too much time betting $5,000 on the NCAA tourney which is such a big no no that everyone in an office does it every year. Don't for a moment think that your school or any major school does not have players that rape the other members of the student body while getting away with it, recruit high school players through beer and hookers, or takes the shit load of money that could be going to useful things like actually educating these freaks of nature and builds them clubhouses and workout rooms. Lefty's school actually had football players steal livestock for sexual purposes, beat down a fellow student in a "racial incident," and rack up 6 DUIS all in one season. They're just like the pros. —bguirk |
|
|
|
|
Mikeyfish-In-TF |
+ |
Tuesday, December 5, 2006 at 3:20 PM Your comment belies your youth. You can't blame their current suckitude on hitting the books. Or, she could have been JOKING. —Mikeyfish-In-TF |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
lexieho |
+ |
Tuesday, December 5, 2006 at 3:28 PM yeah. last time i checked this is not the joking companion. keep on topic please. —lexieho |
|
|
|
|
bguirk |
+ |
Tuesday, December 5, 2006 at 3:32 PM
Edited Tuesday, December 5, 2006 at 3:41 PM No girls in the football threads please. That means you drake. This is serious stuff. Or, she could have been JOKING. —Mikeyfish-In-TF
Nathaniel, that's ridiculous. I don't joke.
EVER. —Queen TortillaFactory Cut that out you two. I'm inches away from puking. —bguirk |
|
|
|
|
andrewwagner777 |
+ |
Tuesday, December 5, 2006 at 4:14 PM #3 Michigan (11-1) Their one loss? To Ohio State (undisputed best team in the nation from preseason to post season, never lost, never wavered) who they were SUPPOSED to lose to, hmmmm they lost by 3 points. So Stryker, I don't see quite how it's fair to Ohio State that Michigan would win the entire National Championship if they played in the BCS Title Game & won when they already lost to Ohio State who didn't get anything [besides a trip to the title game by default] for beating them. Also, calling Florida's schedule a 1AA schedule is insulting to them. They probably had the toughest road schedule in the nation, have to play AT Tennessee, AT Auburn, AT Georgie, AT FSU, and AT Georgia. Their home schedule was equally as difficult, having to play LSU, Arkansas, Alabama, and very talented Kentucky & a well coached South Carolina team. They also trounced a decent 8-5 Southern Miss team at home. They only had THREE "gimme" games on their schedule, Vandy, Western Carolina, and UCF. If you look at Ohio State's schedule, they had 6 COUNT 'EM 6 gimme games. They played in a much weaker conference. Same goes for Michigan. They had 6 gimme games [sub Ball State in for BGU on Michigan's schedule]. And by the way, teams under .500 qualify as "gimme games". I'll give you the fact that USC choked & doesn't quite deserve the Rose Bowl.
Keep in mind Wisconsin did not have to play Ohio State this year & they likely would've had 2 losses.
Louisville's loss to Rutgers was much like Rutger's loss to Cincinnati. It gave the poll makers an excuse to rank them lower because they saw it as a "SEE? They aren't THAT good" game. —andrewwagner777 |
|
|
|
|
Stryker311 |
+ |
Tuesday, December 5, 2006 at 10:57 PM So Stryker, I don't see quite how it's fair to Ohio State that Michigan would win the entire National Championship if they played in the BCS Title Game & won when they already lost to Ohio State who didn't get anything [besides a trip to the title game by default] for beating them.
Well if Ohio State is so good (they are) they'll have no problem beating Michigan once, twice, or twenty times, right? And it's totally fair if Michigan won (they probably wouldn't) because the championship counts a lot more than a regular season game. If the Packers play the Colts in the regular season and lose by 3, then go on to a rematch in the super bowl, it wouldn't be "fair" for the Packers to win the Lombardi Trophy? your logic is flawed.
Also, calling Florida's schedule a 1AA schedule is insulting to them.
I never said that, I said it was BS of them to play West Carolina a Division I-AA team. No shit they're going to win.
They probably had the toughest road schedule in the nation
Ok, you're right, their schedule was by no means "easy" but it's not the worst, I'd say LSU, Texas, USC had harder, but they did have a tough schedule now that I look at it. And Ohio State's schedule was not easy, they faced and defeated two number 2 ranked teams.
I'll give you the fact that USC choked & doesn't quite deserve the Rose Bowl.
What about Notre Dame? They suck and do not deserve the third best BCS Bowl game, the Sugar Bowl. Ranked #11, that's bs.
Keep in mind Wisconsin did not have to play Ohio State this year & they likely would've had 2 losses.
Okay, fair, but who cares? If any team in the nation played Ohio State and Michigan (including Florida), they would also have 2 losses. My point is, don't you think they deserve to go to a BCS Bowl game? 11 wins, only loss was to Michigan, ranked #6 and they don't get a berth? That pisses me off.
What about my boys at Auburn? You didn't mention them. Did they not get screwed over? Beat LSU AND Florida, ranked 9th, yet no BCS Bowl Berth. Wisconsin and Auburn should get together and kill the BCS Officials.
Louisville's loss to Rutgers was much like Rutger's loss to Cincinnati. It gave the poll makers an excuse to rank them lower because they saw it as a "SEE? They aren't THAT good" game.
I won't argue with you there. But Wisconsin didn't have one of those games, so what's up.
—Stryker311 |
|
|
|
|
bguirk |
+ |
Tuesday, December 5, 2006 at 11:03 PM So exactly why shouldn't there be a playoff again? In what other sport do we let the writers/a computer/the coaches decide on who gets to play for a championship? Completely stupid. Gets dumber every year. NCAA baseball has a playoff. Basketball. NCAA Division II football has a playoff. Freaking women's soccer has a playoff. You could get rid of all the nonsense with a playoff from the top 6 from the 6 BCS conferences and 2 wild card teams. You even call the rounds "bowls" if you want. The end. —bguirk |
|
|
|
|
Stryker311 |
+ |
Tuesday, December 5, 2006 at 11:13 PM
Edited Tuesday, December 5, 2006 at 11:13 PM So exactly why shouldn't there be a playoff again? In what other sport do we let the writers/a computer/the coaches decide on who gets to play for a championship? Completely stupid.
I completely agree with this, I used to be a little skeptical about the idea, but now I think it would work. You could get rid of all the nonsense with a playoff from the top 6 from the 6 BCS conferences and 2 wild card teams.
I disagree with this all the way though. That's not fair to teams from the WAC, Mountain, and IA independent. Plus what if the 2 or 3 best teams are from the SEC? For example what if Auburn, LSU, and Florida all have great seasons (such as this season, all 3 are ranked in the top 10) why should only one reach the championship when the top team from say the Big East get in if they're worse then the three SEC teams? My idea is to keep the ranking system, eliminate byes (it's not fair for some teams to have them and some not, so Michigan finishes 2 weeks before Florida), then after week 12 the top 16 ranked all enter a tourney similar to the NCAA Basketball one. (1 vs 16, 2 vs 15 etc) Then even the team who wins the championship will have only played 4 more games, 16 in all, and NFL plays some amount like that, and they survive. —Stryker311 |
|
|
|
|
bguirk |
+ |
Tuesday, December 5, 2006 at 11:30 PM I disagree with this all the way though. That's not fair to teams from the WAC, Mountain, and IA independent. You've got to draw the line somewhere. This woud be a BCS conference championship. If they want in they'd have to join the BCS or be one of the two wildcard teams. IA independent and Mountain schools are division Ia or borderline. Give them their own Ia playoff or something if they don't make the wildcard or make a 4 team playoff for a wildcard berth. We don't let the Globetrotters or the And One team into the NBA playoffs. There is a reason these conferences and associations exist. I'm fine with taking 66-ish teams and telling them "you have a concrete path to a championship. If you let the ranking creep back in too much you lose that. I'd hate to see a year where a Pac-10 doesn't get a team in because the lazy press didn't watch the games because they come on at 10 PM (which they do out here). I couldn't get behind that system. —bguirk |
|
|
|
|
Stryker311 |
+ |
Tuesday, December 5, 2006 at 11:47 PM
Edited Tuesday, December 5, 2006 at 11:47 PM I'd hate to see a year where a Pac-10 doesn't get a team in because the lazy press didn't watch the games because they come on at 10 PM (which they do out here).
Are you kidding me???? The Press lovvvvvvvvvvvvvvvves the Pac-10. Look at USC this year. Look at Cal, Oregon, UCLA's preseason ranking every year. what the hell, don't watch my games IA independent and Mountain schools are division Ia or borderline.
???
Hell no. Teams from those conferences: Notre Dame, TCU, BYU (all ranked) and Navy's pretty good. And the WAC has Hawaii (ranked in top 25) Fresno State (annually ranked), and Boise State (headed to a BCS game). —Stryker311 |
|
|
|
|
bguirk |
+ |
Wednesday, December 6, 2006 at 12:11 AM Are you kidding me???? The Press lovvvvvvvvvvvvvvvves the Pac-10. Look at USC this year. Look at Cal, Oregon, UCLA's preseason ranking every year. what the hell, don't watch my games East Coast bias is real. Oregon still has to buy billboards in Times Square to get noticed. Back in the 80's and 90's the Pac 10 was regularly snubbed for crap teams with comprable records. Now there's so many bowls everyone with 7 wins gets to go, but don't underestimate the East Coast bias. Look how many people think the Knicks "might have a chance" this year. It's been about 10 years since they've had a chance.
Hell no.
Hell yes. All conference schools are I-A now--even OSU so we're both wrong. Bottom line is--get rid of the rankings--they're bullshit and they're bad for the West Coast and Mountain schools. The six conferences formed the BCS to promote themselves so each conference who dumps cash into it should get ot play in its tournament. End of story. If the other conferences want in let them send a bus load of hookers to NCAA headquarters to sort things out, but at some point you have to accpet what the old grey haired white dudes have decided. Enough. I'm not even watching football this year. —bguirk |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
greymatters |
+ |
Sunday, December 10, 2006 at 2:11 AM Michigan had their shot and guess what, they lost. I want to see if Florida can do anything. There should still be a playoff system. How hard would it be to take the top eight or top four teams in the country and let them play it out? The bowl games would still live on and still make a lot of money. It's silly. —greymatters |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
greymatters |
+ |
Sunday, December 10, 2006 at 2:36 AM Isn't the game three weeks away? I'm going Florida 28, Ohio State 20. Florida has a good defense and I really hate Ohio State. —greymatters |
|
|
|
|
Stryker311 |
+ |
Sunday, December 10, 2006 at 2:50 AM My Auburn Tigers scored 27 on them. Plus Ohio State's offense is so good, that's why I said 34. Yeah the games are a while away, but there's nothing else going on, so whatever. Michigan > USC
OK > Boise
LSU > ND
Auburn > Nebraska
—Stryker311 |
|
|
|
|
greymatters |
+ |
Sunday, December 10, 2006 at 3:03 AM Auburn was good for a minute, when they could run the ball. Florida was going through growing pains when they faced Auburn. Put me down for everything opposite of your four picks. p.s. I don't follow college football that closely. —greymatters |
|
|
|
|
Stryker311 |
+ |
Monday, January 1, 2007 at 2:22 PM
Edited Monday, January 1, 2007 at 2:26 PM All my teams are winning, I rock.
Cal - 45 TAM - 10
(biggest scoring differential in bowl games this year. Proof enough that Cal [and rutgers] got ripped off?) Hawaii - 41 Arizona - 24 Wisconsin - 17 Arkansas - 14
Rutgers - 37 Kansas State - 10
Auburn - 17 Nebraska - 14
And Michigan is about to spank USC.
Prediction: Michigan - 27
southern cal - 21
—Stryker311 |
|
|
|
|
bguirk |
+ |
Monday, January 1, 2007 at 2:56 PM They're both having trouble scoring 3 to 3 at the top of the 1st. That favors the team with the better running game--so I'll still go with USC--plus these townies that I'm surrounded by need to be taken down a peg or two. —bguirk |
|
|
|
|
Stryker311 |
+ |
Monday, January 1, 2007 at 3:23 PM
Edited Monday, January 1, 2007 at 3:55 PM yeah, but it counts less if you predict after the game starts^ = / I can't believe USC's defense is playing so well, I didn't expect that. —Stryker311 |
|
|
|
|
Mayonnaise |
+ |
Monday, January 1, 2007 at 5:43 PM Mountaineers had a pretty kick-ass win today too. —Mayonnaise |
|
|
|
|
bguirk |
+ |
Monday, January 1, 2007 at 8:09 PM striker--I called the USC win a month ago--don't you remember this: USC is probably going to clean Michigans clock--they play in a MUCH tougher conference. It's in this very thread! Never discount east coast bias and strength of conference in college football rankings. I made $130 off of all the douche bags in this town who believed the hype, but when you play the majority of your games in a conference where 1/2 the teams aren't above .500 and two of them can't even muster 3 wins--it's bad times. The Pac-10 was very tough this year. Big 10 was a bunch of Nancy-boys. Can't wait to gloat while I collect some cash this week. —bguirk |
|
|
|
|
Mancow |
+ |
Tuesday, January 2, 2007 at 6:32 AM The only valid point you can make is that Michigan was overrated. Can't say that overall the Big Ten was bad when Penn State and Wisconsin beat two of the best teams in the SEC, alleged to be the best conference. Talent wise, Ohio State and USC are the two best teams in the country but USC choked twice. Show some love for Boise State. They deserve to be ranked number two, no matter who wins the championship. —Mancow |
|
|
|
|
bguirk |
+ |
Tuesday, January 2, 2007 at 9:10 AM Sorry but no. Wisconsin has a loss to Michigan on their card so they didn't prove they were any better. Penn St. is 5-3 in that same shitty conference. Look at the conference standings--4 Big 10 teams have 2 or fewer conference wins. If 40% of the conference can only beat the worst teams in the conference that is the very definition of a bad conference. The rest of the conference's records get pumped up by the weak teams. If there is more parity in a conference (Pac-10,ACC, Big 12)and a team or two can rise to the top then that's a better indication of a good team and a good conference. Bottom line is the Big 10 Sucks. As for ranking bias, Michigan had a horrible out of conference schedule--Vanderbilt, Ball St., Notre Dame (always overrated), and Central Michigan. So 4 (and they struggle in 2 of those) out of 11 games are bullshit. Furthermore of the 4 other teams in the big 10 that are above .500 in-conference Michigan plays only two of them yet they are ranked #2 for several weeks and an argument is made that they should play Ohio again for #1. This proves a bias in the rankings--call it what you want, East coast bias, big program bias, too many Michigan grads in the press, but it's flat out bias and one of the best arguments for a playoff I can think of. —bguirk |
|
|
|
|
Stryker311 |
+ |
Tuesday, January 2, 2007 at 1:25 PM FUCK BOISE STATE.
FUCK BOISE STATE.
FUCK BOISE STATE. —Stryker311 |
|
|
|
|
shortwave5205 |
+ |
Tuesday, January 2, 2007 at 3:36 PM The Fiesta Bowl with BSU and OU was the best game of the entire 2006 season!. Better than Michigan / OSU. More exciting, more play, more heart, more coaching, AND the underdog wins. Trick plays are fun and having them beat the giant is even better. That BSU coach should get a chance at a bigger school, if he wants it. I thought the BSU success was related to a blue field, but they outplayed a powerhouse on a neutral pitch. WOW How could anybody not enjoy seeing BSU win? —shortwave5205 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
catloaf |
+ |
Wednesday, January 3, 2007 at 3:01 AM Louisville for the win! *self high-five* like i even care, i don't even watch bowling... —catloaf |
|
|
|
|
Mancow |
+ |
Thursday, January 4, 2007 at 5:39 AM Bguirk, why are you such a Big Ten hater? I agree that the bottom of the league is dreck, but OSU, Michigan, and Wisconsin are all legit top 10 teams. The SEC may have more good teams and their bad teams aren't as bad, but their top three teams (Florida, LSU, Arkansas) aren't any better. The Pac 10 only has one decent team (USC) since Cal underachieved this year. —Mancow |
|
|
|
|
Mancow |
+ |
Thursday, January 4, 2007 at 8:12 AM In addition, your so-called good conferences (Pac 10, Big 12, ACC) have done horribly in the bowl games. Parity doesn't mean shit when every team is bad. —Mancow |
|
|
|
|
bguirk |
+ |
Thursday, January 4, 2007 at 9:43 AM I am a big 10 hater for a few reasons. The first one is that I go to Michigan and I'm surrounded by the unfounded hype. Even though the football realist in me hates them, I still pull for them to win. Another is that I grew up a Pac-10 guy. I started watching division I college football when people thought there wasn't good football played out there despite UW having a monster (although completely bought and paid for) program for years and I still have a chip on my shoulder. Whenever a pac-10 school is on the bubble for playing for a national championship with a big 10 school guess which one gets the nod and which one has to go to the fight for third place. I've seen in happen 4 times now and it's jut arbitrary and lame. I just also got a nice football education growing up and going to good division II/Ia games every weekend with my Dad and I know what to watch for--I knew Michigan were mediocre during the Notre Dame game yet they just continued to shoot up in the standings. I went to the Ball St. game and they completely almost fucked that one up yet suffered no pain in their ranking. Your point about evenness not necessarily making parity is granted, but the Big 10 this year is so bottom heavy that it's a special case. If congress hadn't taken away my access to internet sports wagering, I'd put down a nice sum on OSU getting upset. Not so much because I know Florida is good, but because I know OSU made their name in an unusually bad year for the big 10. All I really want is a playoff--this back room old boys network of bowl games is a joke for anyone who likes sports in general. The basketball season goes from November until late March--no reason the football season can't go over two semesters. 80% of my gripes go away if we have an 8 (or 16) team playoff for the title. Your other point about how the other conferences aren't doing well in their bowl games is sort of true, but since between the big 10, big 12 ect ect you've got most of the important schools, that just shows there's not a real dominant conference this year.
—bguirk |
|
|
|
|
Stryker311 |
+ |
Thursday, January 4, 2007 at 10:25 PM How could anybody not enjoy seeing BSU win? I didn't enjoy seeing my favorite team's rival win. 
The SEC may have more good teams and their bad teams aren't as bad, but their top three teams (Florida, LSU, Arkansas Auburn —Stryker311 |
|
|
|
|
Mancow |
+ |
Friday, January 5, 2007 at 6:51 AM As a person from the West Coast who got his undergraduate degree from a certain Big Ten school in Evanston, I am fully aware of the differences between the Pac 10 and Big 10. Football just means a lot more to people in the Midwest. They plan an entire weekend around a game whereas people show up at USC games just to be seen. I still don't understand how this can cloud your perception of your own school's football team. I never thought that the Wolverines would finish the season undefeated, but mostly due to Lloyd Carr's conservative play calling not their personnel. As much as people love USC now, any team that does not show up every week is not a great team. —Mancow |
|
|
|
|
bguirk |
+ |
Monday, January 8, 2007 at 8:10 PM I know it's only the 3rd and all and I'm jinxing myself by typing out my thoughts but what the hell....I FUCKING TOLD YOU SO!!!!!!!! If congress hadn't taken away my access to internet sports wagering, I'd put down a nice sum on OSU getting upset. Not so much because I know Florida is good, but because I know OSU made their name in an unusually bad year for the big 10. I only had $5 on this game, but I'll buy myself a coffee and a high quality muffin with all my winnings and think of all the haters in this thread while I eat it. —bguirk |
|
|
|
|
sillygilly25 |
+ |
Monday, January 8, 2007 at 9:39 PM Congrats to Florida! National Champs even though nobody thought they should be in the title game. Ohio State forgot how to play football or something.
—sillygilly25 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
anobody |
+ |
Monday, January 8, 2007 at 10:14 PM About 10 of my relatives from Ohio are in town - they've gotta be in a great mood. —anobody |
|
|
|
|
Stryker311 |
+ |
Monday, January 8, 2007 at 11:10 PM Well, Florida won, so that means.....Auburn is the best team in the land, for being the only team to beat them! —Stryker311 |
|
|
|
|
Mancow |
+ |
Tuesday, January 9, 2007 at 9:05 AM Why are you so happy that Florida won? Will there be anything more unbearable than obnoxious Gator fans with two national championships under their belt? Ohio State was not ready for primetime and got totally outclassed and outcoached. —Mancow |
|
|
|
|
bguirk |
+ |
Tuesday, January 9, 2007 at 12:58 PM This just demonstrates the stupidity of having a national playoff based on a computer/coaches/hacks opinions of past performance. College teams get better from practice to practice let alone game to game. If we did baseball this way, the Atlanta Braves would have 12 MLB titles by now. Just start doinga playoff already. I love the atmosphere of college football games, hate the whole ranking crap. —bguirk |
|
|
|
|
OneNutAaron |
+ |
Tuesday, January 9, 2007 at 9:40 PM Dude! Wisconsin got screwed! Only #7 in the final polls? WTF? The AP had them at #5, but either way, they should have been higher. Two teams in the top 5 have two losses! That's crazy unfair! I realize strength of schedule and all that bullshit, but seriously, a Big 10 team going 12-1 and only being seventh? —OneNutAaron |
|
|
|
|
bguirk |
+ |
Tuesday, January 9, 2007 at 10:15 PM I realize strength of schedule and all that bullshit, but seriously, a Big 10 team going 12-1 and only being seventh? I could do the math for you, but they lose to Michigan and Michigan loses to USC. Hence, the low ranking. Yadda yadda yadda, big 10 sucked this year blah blah blah playoff. —bguirk |
|
|
|
|
Stryker311 |
+ |
Wednesday, January 10, 2007 at 12:17 AM Wisconsin did get screwed, they beat Arkansas, from the beloved SEC. —Stryker311 |
|
