General Chat / Official College Football Thread 2004

I can tell you exactly how many teams deserve a shot at the national title this year:

- USC
- Oklahoma
- Auburn
- Cal
- Utah
- Texas

Six. The others are well behind and are not contenders. So IMO, an eight team playoff would work well. You might get a dispute over #8 and 9, but really, I doubt it'd be major or make that much of a difference.


Anyway, Cal got screwed IMO. They barely lost to USC, the #1 team, while Texas easily lost to OU. They lost 12-0... only a 12 point loss, but they had no chance in the game.

Too bad for Auburn... I really would have loved a USC/Auburn match. In any case, this is the first time the BCS has had the #1 and #2 teams stay that way throughout the season. Same with the AP and ESPN polls (well, it's the first time they've run the gauntlet in a while). First time more than two teams have gone undefeated.

Anyway, yeah. The system sucks.

But Pyro... BRING IT.

Dang, Cal got screwed over. Very screwed over.

Oh snap.  Virginia Tech won.  WHAT NOW.  HAHA.

Picked to finish 6th in the ACC, and now the champs.

ouch that hurts, but remind me the last time VT was National Champs

Never? I meant ACC champs...

and i ment National Champs , and next year they better do good b/c there will be 2 divisions of the acc

I just bet Corky that OU bests USC. If USC wins I can't post for a week (But I can still post in my team forum and view the NE forums)

So maybe I can be banned 2 years in a row for a bet!

It's only a bet if I put something on the line. And I'm not.

You're just being a moron.

and i ment National Champs 

OH SHIT. Somebody, call the Sugar Bowl committee, Miami got robbed! Never mind the fact that Virginia Tech has the best in-conference and overall record of any team in the ACC and that we're ranked #8 in the BCS standings, the 2004 Miami team is obviously more deserving than the 2004 Virginia Tech team because Miami won a national championship in 1983.

OH SHIT. Somebody, call the Sugar Bowl committee, Miami got robbed! Never mind the fact that Virginia Tech has the best in-conference and overall record of any team in the ACC and that we're ranked #8 in the BCS standings, the 2004 Miami team is obviously more deserving than the 2004 Virginia Tech team because Miami won a national championship in 1983. 

hey we won 2 this century (I count the OSU game as a win)

OH SHIT. Somebody, call the Sugar Bowl committee, Miami got robbed! Never mind the fact that Virginia Tech has the best in-conference and overall record of any team in the ACC and that we're ranked #8 in the BCS standings, the 2004 Miami team is obviously more deserving than the 2004 Virginia Tech team because Miami won a national championship in 1983. 

1987,1989, 1991, 2001 you forgot these


i was trying to find out when VT last they were national champions but this is all i could come up with, correct me if i am wrong in anyway, hell i'll give you the link of where i found this
here

January 4, 2000 - Florida State 46 - Virginia Tech 29

hey we won 2 this century (I count the OSU game as a win)

Pity nobody else does isn't it?

hey we won 2 this century (I count the OSU game as a win)

Yes but you are also illiterate.

Can someone please explain to me why the winner of the Big East is guarunteed a top bowl spot?

I CANNOT BELIEVE HOW BADLY MY TEAM GOT FUCKED.

welll anyway i guess im forced to watch Cal kikc ass instead of have a challenge in the rose bowl .

SP

I CANNOT BELIEVE HOW BADLY MY TEAM GOT FUCKED.

welll anyway i guess im forced to watch Cal kikc ass instead of have a challenge in the rose bowl .

SP

i feel your pain

I CANNOT BELIEVE HOW BADLY MY TEAM GOT FUCKED.

welll anyway i guess im forced to watch Cal kikc ass instead of have a challenge in the rose bowl .

SP

The only reason people are crying bloody murder over Cal is because they were a media darling and carried the #4 spot all year. Texas played a tougher schedule and both had close escapes along with one loss to the top two teams in the nation. The reason Cal got the boot was because of their performance on the last Sat. Cal went out knowing what they had to do, and they let Southern Miss (not a great team) keep it close. Combine that with the fact that USC, Cal's ace in the hole game who they played so well, struggled against UCLA while OU, Texas' only dent in the season, steamrolled their opponent. If you want to be mad, be mad at Cal for allowing voters to question them after the last game.

And Butterfinger, that is a question the whole of America outside of Pittsburg is asking right about now. It is an absolute disgrace and needs to be straightened up fast. I would rather see the conference automatic bids go, then do something where either the top 8 are seeded by the bowls and play, or maybe the top 6 are automatic then the remaining 2 are picked from 9-12 to allow for more appealing match ups.

Matt, Texas got the vote because Mack Brown stooped below his expected level and pleaded for votes. Plain and simple. Yeah, Cal "struggled" a bit, but they destroyed their other opponents. I don't see how Cal can be "worse" than Texas. Their loss against the number one team was a winning loss. They had a great chance to win. The way they played, they probably should have won. Texas, though they only lost by 12 this time, was shut out. There was no doubt they'd lose. They didn't stand a chance. Everything else ranks out pretty evenly IMO... Cal won big in most of their games, while Texas had the close games in their harder schedules. That balances out in my book, because Cal still would have won if they'd played the teams Texas played, only by a closer margin. They ranked in top six in offense and defense (only team in the country there), and they refused to run up the score all season.

Hell, they could have one the So. Miss game by 17 instead of 10. It would have been 33-16.... a very impressive score, but they chose not to.

I think Cal got screwed.




Meanwhile... who'd you pick to win the Heisman? I really can't say. Will history be made? If Peterson or Bush win, it will. Leinart had a bad showing at the end but had a better season statistically than Palmer did in 2002. White would be my pick because he lit it up. He'd make history too as only the second guy to win two Heismans. But watch everyone cancel each other out and the award go to the Utah QB.

First off, I am not saying who deserved to go, its just too hard to seperate two teams. And you mentioned Texas' close calls, they had two against some of the weaker teams on their schedule (Kansas and Arkansas), much like Cals' close one against Oregon, so neither team was perfect.

Secondly, Mack Brown did lobby for votes, but no amount of lobbying is going to cause a 66 vote shift, that was the result of the S Miss game. Besides the final score (the extra 7 would have helped), Cal struggled with them for most of the game, and on national tv with all the coaches and voters watching. I think USC and OU's games also factored into, USC struggling and OU dominating might have spoke to the quality of the team's one losses in the eyes of voters.

Any way you knock it someone was going to get left out, its not right for either team to be, but that is why it happened. If Cal had held on then Texas would have been the one on the outside looking in, something they have become very used to. Texas has gotten screwed by the system the last two years, so it is hard to get too angry at them for finally breaking through this year.

The Heisman, its just too close to call. If the season ended after the ND game it would have undeserivably been Leinart, he torched a crappy pass defense and put up yardage that many other less praised QBs have also put up and everyone jumps on his bandwagon. I think that shift we saw was due to the fact that the candidates are all so close performance wise and people are just begging to find something to propel one over the others. So Leinart had the lead going into the last weekend, but then USC struggled and Reggie Bush shined while Leinart was merely pedestrian. Bush impressed alot of voters, but I still don't think he is a viable candidate, just not enough touches despite his game breaking ability. Then OU tore up Colorado in their last game, with both White and Peterson putting up impressive performances. So right now I would say the OU candidates have more momentum becaue voters look so closely at the end of the year, but OU has some biases working against it. People are reluctant to vote White a two time Heisman winner and elevate him to the level of college football legend. People are reluctant to vote Peterson the first freshmen to ever win it. Out of thoes two, I see Peterson's bias as the easier to overcome of the two, because Peterson quite frankly deserves the lable of college football legend if he can continue at this pace. The last finalist, Alex Smith, just doesnt have a chance.

So I see it as a race between Leinart, White, and Peterson, but the winner is simply a toss up at this point. White and Peterson will take votes from each other, and so will Leinart and Bush after Bush's last performance. This is probably going to be one of the closest races in the award's history. For fun's sake though, let me say that my gut says Peterson takes it home.

The others are well behind and are not contenders.

You call Louisville well behind?!?!? Dude, they're at the same level of play Cal is right now, IMO, and I'll tell you why. Both teams are 10-1. Both teams blew the shit out of their smaller opponents. Both teams lost tough games that they could have won, but then let the opponent run loose on them. Both teams have a great QB. And both teams had to come back from behind to be 10-1. So nevermind the fact that Louisville didn't get to a New Years Day bowl, because they got closer to one than Cal did. Damn, the way they're playing now, they deserve a BCS bowl.

So, who's with me that the ol' U of L will win against Boise State in a close one?

Alex Smith may not have a chance, but do you realize if he won there would be an undefeated team with a current Heisman winner NOT EVEN PLAYING FOR THE NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP?!?

Nobody, and I mean nobody, outside of Salt Lake City would even consider suggesting injustice that Utah is not playing for a share of a title this year. There is room to argue Auburn, but Utah doesn't have anything to go off of other than the fact that they didn't lose. Alex Smith won't win, but if he did people would not be concerned that his undefeated Utes aren't playing in the title game, they would just say how great of a player Smith is.

You call Louisville well behind?!?!?  Dude, they're at the same level of play Cal is right now, IMO, and I'll tell you why. Both teams are 10-1. Both teams blew the shit out of their smaller opponents. Both teams lost tough games that they could have won, but then let the opponent run loose on them. Both teams have a great QB. And both teams had to come back from behind to be 10-1. So nevermind the fact that Louisville didn't get to a New Years Day bowl, because they got closer to one than Cal did. Damn, the way they're playing now, they deserve a BCS bowl.

So, who's with me that the ol' U of L will win against Boise State in a close one?

Actually, yeah, you're right. Louisville is on par with Cal and Texas. Though after USC/OU/Auburn, there's a pretty wide gap before you get to Cal/Texas/Utah/Louisville. But yeah, they are an excellent team and IMO better than Utah. If they hadn't dropped that interception, they'd be going to the Fiesta Bowl, and deservingly so.