General Chat / BOWL GAMES!

You know I would never even consider implying that Cork. I love all the controversy a few years back when the BCS rankings didn't match the human polls so they were automatically wrong. The humans are just as dumb as the computers most of the time.

Sorry, "implying" should have been "assuming." Dunno how I totally messed that one up.

But my point was what you said. People are generally dumb.

2. OSU winning is part of the whole "0.01% Chance USC gets a part of a split national championship via the AP" plan

That is not an acceptable situation Cork

A friend of mine said earlier that if OSU gets dominated again that they should be banned from National Championship games for the next ten years

But anyways, what do you guys think about Missouri missing out on all the BCS action? While I do think they deserved to get in over Kansas, I feel too indifferent about it to make a true argument for either side.

And for USC vs. Illinois, while I do hope it ends up being a close game, I do fear that we could see a ridiculously one sided matchup...

Would your friends name possibly be "Mark May"
I don't think Missouri should have gotten in, because I don't think they ever deserved to be #1 anyway. Whatever you say about Kansas, they won all their games but one...yes, I know they didn't play anyone...OSU, anyone?? and besides, Missouri looked like crap in that last game against OK

USC and Illinois. I don't think it will be one-sided. I think it will be a good game.

USC vs Illinois can be a trap game; I hope we destroy them, but given how we've played inconsistently this year, I'm scared half to death that we'll end up pretending they're Stanford.

oh admit it....you are afraid that you might lose to Ron Zook the same season you lost to Stanford

GO BUCKEYES!! ...oh, and I dont care how good it would be for the Big Ten, I will NOT be routing for Michigan in their bowl game *cough* becky *cough* (I will of course be routing for Ill and Penn St though)

Yeah I know...my boys think I'm crazy rooting for Michigan during bowl season...but seriously, Big Ten needs to look good this year. Michigan didn't exactly do us any favors losing to Appalachian St.

oh admit it....you are afraid that you might lose to Ron Zook the same season you lost to Stanford

Positively terrified.

http://www.usatoday...._2007/flash.htm

Thats how the coaches voted in the USA Today poll.

Howard Schenelleburger (Flordia Atlantic) should be stripped of his vote...

#1 OSU
#2 Kansas
#3 Hawaii
He stuck USC at #12!!

Same with Bobby Bowden...

OU at #10, but Missouri at #6? Thats just completely illogical...

Don't mind Bowden... he's old. It's not his fault!

5 coaches had Mizzou ranked above OU, 5. Both of the Bowdens did it, don't know if that is some kind of hangover from beating them in the National Championship game a whole 7 years ago. Schenelleburger also had Mizzou above OU, he used to coach at OU and is still a little angry over being fired. That kind of bias should be unacceptable. Because if there is one thing you cannot do on a ballot, is put a team with equal records who lost to the same team twice over the team they lost to. That is just inexcusable.

I like the BCS system, or at least the idea of having some kind of non-playoff system to determine the championship game. My problem is, there needs to be a better human component. There has to be a way to produce a somewhat competent panel of experts who will not be swayed by hype, who will actually watch games, and who will not be lapdogs to whatever the "experts" on ESPN blurt out.

Well, in NCAA Basketball they call that a tournament committee...

That is actually what I think the best system would be. Run the polls all year, run the computers, then give all that data to a selection committee that is comprised of people who know football and watch every game with minimal bias. The committee then deliberates and ranks the top 10 teams. Then out of those top ten, the top 2 play for the title and the committee pairs the other teams (not necessarily in order) as to what the best match ups and stories would be in the other bowl games, being conscience of bowl preferences such as the Rose Bowl.

I think coaches do that kind of crazy voting solely to give those teams a boost in the rankings which they think are not getting a fair shake. Like a coach that is really high on Hawaii, for example, would vote them in the top 3 cause they know they have to put them that high in their own vote in order to get them to say, 10-15 range when all the votes are finally tallied...

So...I saw this guys online blog and he has a conference strengh report which I must say is quite different from what you posted Cork....

SEC - Best overall OOC win rate, 2 BCS teams, and 9 bowl teams.
Big 10 - Best big-boy win rate, 2 BCS teams, and 7 bowl teams.
Pac 10 - Over .500 big-boy win rate, 1 BCS team, and 6 bowl teams.
Big 12 - Strong overall OOC win rate, 2 BCS teams, and 8 bowl teams.
ACC - .500 big-boy win rate, 1 BCS team, and 8 bowl teams.
Big East - Strong overall OOC win rate, 1 BCS team, and 5 bowl teams.

What exactly is big-boy win rate?

There is no way the Big 10 is bigger than the Pac 10 this year, or the Big XII for that matter. The top Big 10 teams in order are Ohio State (11-1), Illinois (9-3), Michigan (8-4), and Wisconsin (9-3).

The #2 Big 10 team lost to the #3 Big XII team Missouri. The #3 Big 10 team lost to the #4 Pac 10 team Oregon.

The top 4 teams of the Big XII have better records. Oklahoma (11-2), Kansas (11-1), Missouri (11-2), and Texas (9-3). That is three 11 win teams. Also, only two of the top four in the Big 10 managed to go undefeated in out of conference play, none of the top 4 teams from the Big XII lost an out of conference game.

I would much rather play Illinois or Michigan right now than Kansas, Missouri, Arizona State, or Oregon (if Dixon is healthy).

Here is the link to the blog...I don't know what he means by big boy...

http://montaraventures.com/blog/

Nothing really matters now anyway...its how we all shake out in the bowls. Hopefully the Big 10 will do better than last year

I think big boy means conference record against other BCS conference schools.

^^ Yeah, that's a tad misleading in that it looks at it strictly from an objective but skewed view--bowl teams and BCS teams don't necessarily add up to strong overall conference.

I still need to get to my "end of the regular season review," but as it turned out, the Pac 10 ended up weaker than it was in the middle of the season, while the Big 10 might be better than I thought (but definitely not by much). The weakest conference might very well be the ACC, and the Big 12 is still just top heavy--except Kansas's reputation has gone down for me (no longer elite, they're merely 'very good').

Anyway, yeah, stay tuned for a long post sometime in the near future.

I still need to get to my "end of the regular season review," but as it turned out, the Pac 10 ended up weaker than it was in the middle of the season, while the Big 10 might be better than I thought (but definitely not by much). The weakest conference might very well be the ACC, and the Big 12 is still just top heavy--except Kansas's reputation has gone down for me (no longer elite, they're merely 'very good').

While the ACC is definitely weak, I have to defend them here. They are definitely stronger than the Big East, but of course, they are definitely not among the ranks of the SEC, Pac-10, Big 10, and Big 12.

The main reason the Pac-10 ended weaker is cause Dennis Dixon got hurt if you ask me

Are they? The ACC has Boston College and Virginia Tech as contenders, and Virginia as a good school. The Big East has WVU, Cincinatti, South Florida, Rutgers, Connecticut, and Louisville (which really, REALLY underperformed this year due to no defense, but still) that can at the very least compete with the top four of any other conference. Some better than others, but still, that's six quality teams. So I think it's definitely debatable.

The main reason the Pac-10 ended weaker is cause Dennis Dixon got hurt if you ask me

You're absolutely right.

---

On a side note, this has been, by far, the most successful season sports thread in NE history. I do appreciate the discussion everyone's been putting in. Possibly because more people at NE are in college now, so it hits closer to the heart.

On a side note, this has been, by far, the most successful season sports thread in NE history. I do appreciate the discussion everyone's been putting in. Possibly because more people at NE are in college now, so it hits closer to the heart.

Every other year it was just me and you arguing back and forth about whose team was better. Unfortunately, your team settled that one convincingly a few years ago. Buy hey, next year is looking good for both of us... I wouldn't mind another shot.

Don't forget OSU..we only had three starting seniors this year...we were rebuilding for next year

I have to disagree with you Pyro on your reasoning that the Big 10 is not as good as the Pac 10 or the Big 12. In conference records don't mean much when you have more patsy teams in your conference and I think the Big 12 has the most of those. Pac 10 and Big 10 are close, I'm looking to see how the bowls play out. And your comment about you would rather play Illinois or Michigan than Kansas or Arizona St...that was just downright funny.

A strong conference doesn't just have strong teams, it doesn't have a lot of weak teams. We are talking about playing these teams year in year out, not just one game one time. Big 10 really only has one sucky team anymore - Minnesota. Can you say that about the Big 12?