Official College Football Thread - Championship Week

[Ksyrup]

ACC gets 2 BCS bids. HA!

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by Matthean

Based on old school ways the human polls were what mattered. Guess who was #2?

Trust me, I have no love for the old school ways either. Any system that picks two teams from 100+ based on an 11-12 game season is absurd.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Is this where I go ahead & predict a double-digit Alabama win, or is that a different thread?

[mauchow]

VT getting in is the biggest joke of the BCS this year. At least you can make an argument for Bama vs LSU. There is no reason for VT in the eyes of the fans. But that's not what this is about, unfortunately..

[Toddzilla]

Wait. VT is ranked higher than Michigan in the BCS. So why it's VT and not Michigan the problem?

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by mauboy1

VT getting in is the biggest joke of the BCS this year. At least you can make an argument for Bama vs LSU. There is no reason for VT in the eyes of the fans. But that's not what this is about, unfortunately..

Bowls have always been about matchups designed to sell tickets and/or make money, that's not exactly anything new (and yes, I realize that you did not say anything contrary to that).

I do think this matchup might provide a slight additional push toward getting the BCS unassociated with anything other than #1 vs #2, although I'm not sure that would have prevented the same matchup in the same bowl (I haven't looked at the selection order & BCS-eligible list and all that jazz).

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Toddzilla

Wait. VT is ranked higher than Michigan in the BCS. So why it's VT and not Michigan the problem?

They're also higher than Michigan in the AP poll as well

[Lathum]

Huskies will face RG III and Baylor in the Alamo Bowl. Pretty excited for that matchup.

[Matthean]

Originally Posted by Toddzilla

Wait. VT is ranked higher than Michigan in the BCS. So why it's VT and not Michigan the problem?

I think the issue is Michigan beat Nebraska and OSU to finish out. VT got embarrassed in their last game.

[Eaglesfan27]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

Well, I'll stop gnashing. Doesn't mean I'll watch, but I won't gnash.

Ditto.

[mauchow]

I see two good BCS games in Stanford vs OSU and Wisconsin vs Oregon.

Games I will watch? Those two and probably the MNCG off and on.

[Matthean]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

They're also higher than Michigan in the AP poll as well

VT 11 and Michigan 12 in USA. Michigan is 13 in AP and VT is 17. VT has only played one ranked team(twice) and has been out scored by 48 points. Michigan at least beat Nebraska.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Matthean

VT 11 and Michigan 12 in USA. Michigan is 13 in AP and VT is 17. VT has only played one ranked team(twice) and has been out scored by 48 points. Michigan at least beat Nebraska.

Hey, I wasn't defending the selection of VT, I was just adding to Toddzilla's point about the BCS poll (to say that it apparently happened with both voters & computers).

edit to add: Michigan 13 and VT 17 is exactly how I have them in my own poll FWIW, so it's not like I disagree with that ranking of them.

[Izulde]

I'm so disgusted right now, I would actually support a college football playoff if one was proposed. Fuck the BCS.

[Matthean]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Hey, I wasn't defending the selection of VT, I was just adding to Toddzilla's point about the BCS poll (to say that it apparently happened with both voters & computers).

edit to add: Michigan 13 and VT 17 is exactly how I have them in my own poll FWIW, so it's not like I disagree with that ranking of them.

You said VT was higher ranked in the AP poll. I was pointing out you were wrong.

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Bowls have always been about matchups designed to sell tickets and/or make money, that's not exactly anything new (and yes, I realize that you did not say anything contrary to that).

I do think this matchup might provide a slight additional push toward getting the BCS unassociated with anything other than #1 vs #2, although I'm not sure that would have prevented the same matchup in the same bowl (I haven't looked at the selection order & BCS-eligible list and all that jazz).

Which will create even more pissing and moaning from the critics, since teams that don't travel like all the current non-AQs and a lot of the Big East and ACC will fall even further down the chain and make less bowl money.

If folks have a problem with a 12-0 Boise State not getting a shot at the title, enjoy the new format, where they get $800K to play in the Humanitarian or Hula Bowl.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

Well, I'll stop gnashing. Doesn't mean I'll watch, but I won't gnash.

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

Oh, you're not the type I was talking about. But this next month is gonna be fun.

Originally Posted by Izulde

I'm so disgusted right now, I would actually support a college football playoff if one was proposed. Fuck the BCS.

Now THAT'S what I'm talkin' 'bout!!!

[kcchief19]

Anecdotal evidence, but if you want a reason why the BCS is killing college football, I'm an example. The moment I saw the title game was a rematch and not LSU-OSU, I flipped the TV over to SNF. I had not interest in hearing the ESPN hacks rationalize why 'Bama gets a second shot at LSU and OSU doesn't get a first shot.

But now that I see the rest of the BCS bowls ... puke. I don't have a problem with the Rose Bowl -- those teams won and and it's tradition. I can stomach the Orange Bowl too -- it's not an attractive game, but those teams won. And OSU vs Stanford has potential to be the best game of the bowl season.

But the Sugar Bowl? No chance I'm watching that -- it will just make me too pissed to watch that. I know the Sugar Bowl can pick any teams they want to sell tickets and that's what the BCS is designed to do after matching 1 vs 2. But the third-best team in the Big Ten ... in a year when the Big Ten sucked? And the same with Va Tech -- the ACC was weak as well.

K-State and Boise deserved those slots more. Hell, Arkansas, South Carolina and TCU deserved them more too, but they are not eligible under the stupid BCS rules.

So the BCS is making me not want to watch a bowl game ... whereas if we had a playoff it would be riveting this year.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by Lathum

Huskies will face RG III and Baylor in the Alamo Bowl. Pretty excited for that matchup.

Yeah, should be a fun one. Obviously our defense has struggled this year which doesn't bode well for facing RG3, but Baylor's defense has been even worse - I'd expect Polk & Price to have big games. Bet the over on this one...

[dawgfan]

Dola - I have zero interest in watching the SEC-fest. I would have watched LSU-Oklahoma St, but not this rematch.

[Matthean]

The Sugar should have been BSU vs. KSU and would have been fun as hell.

[Matthean]

I also think match ups should be factored on the fun as hell scale as well. Let's make Baylor vs. Michigan happen and try to see which announcer stands by what QB as being the most exciting in college football.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

Dola - I have zero interest in watching the SEC-fest. I would have watched LSU-Oklahoma St, but not this rematch.

Look on the bright side: the SEC's undefeated record (7-0) in BCS National Championship Games will finally be tarnished. *shurg*

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by kcchief19

So the BCS is making me not want to watch a bowl game

Presumably you didn't watch them before the BCS either then.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

Look on the bright side: the SEC's undefeated record (7-0) in BCS National Championship Games will finally be tarnished. *shurg*

It's not even so much SEC fatigue as it is my belief that Oklahoma State:

- Has a better resume this year, and
- Would provide a more entertaining game

[jbergey22]

Oh well...

Stanford/OKlahoma St should be a nice matchup and Im sure once people cool down a bit they will tune in and watch Alabama/LSU part deuce. Ducks/Wisky looks like a solid matchup as well. I cant complain too much.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Check me, see if I've got this correct.

Top 2 - #1 LSU & #2 Alabama locked
Conf champs - #15 Clemson, #22 West Virginia, #10 Wisconsin, #5 Oregon, #3 Oklahoma State
Conf runner up at #4 overall - #4 Stanford

That's 8 teams, with 2 slots remaining

#6 Arkansas & #9 South Carolina ineligible
#7 Boise, #8 Kansas State, #11 Va Tech, #12 Baylor , #13 Michigan, and #14 Oklahoma all at-large options

From there we got ...
NCS - LSU vs Alabama
Rose - Wisconsin vs Oregon (automatics)
Orange- Clemson (auto) vs TBD
Fiesta - Oklahoma State (auto) vs TBD
Sugar - TBD vs TBD

And from there, based on selection order
(January 2012 games: Fiesta, Sugar, Orange)

Sugar replacement pick = Michigan or VT
Fiesta at-large = Stanford
Sugar at-large = Michigan or VT
Orange at-large = West Virginia (required since they had auto-bid)

Yes?

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Matthean

VT 11 and Michigan 12 in USA. Michigan is 13 in AP and VT is 17. VT has only played one ranked team(twice) and has been out scored by 48 points. Michigan at least beat Nebraska.

The picks have nothing to do with on the field performance and everything to do with who makes the company that runs that bowl more money.

Most meaningful regular season in any sport!

[MJ4H]

[Matthean]

I don't think BSU was an option since they didn't win their conference.

[cartman]

Originally Posted by Matthean

I don't think BSU was an option since they didn't win their conference.

They didn't qualify for an auto-bid because they didn't win their conference, but they were available to be chosen for an at-large berth.

[RainMaker]

If Oklahoma State was named Texas or just Oklahoma, they'd be in the title game.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by HiFiRevival

Before the BCS they didn't lie about putting together a National Championship game. Now they do and OSU was clearly the more qualified team for the game.

LOL. Anybody who believes that* either needs remedial help with college football & should not be allowed to watch without that (or at least a responsible adult) present or serious psychotherapy. Or both.

*the possible exception of someone on the Cowboys payroll who is at least being paid to say something that silly.

[Galaxy]

Pathetic and a yawn-fest. All I have to say.

[Matthean]

Originally Posted by DeToxRox

Took this from another site but it's a good synopsis of the one loss teams

Looking at the list, Missouri drops off for the first grouping. Putting Louisiana-Lafayette and Tulsa as part of your resume is kind of head shaking. Might as well put 'Bama beating GSU on 'Bama's resume.

[JonInMiddleGA]

On a related note, was just looking back to the Bowl Coalition and the Bowl Alliance. Funny to think that this really got started back in 1992. Anybody under 40 has now spent as much time under some 1v2 formula as they did under the old conference-tied system.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

If Oklahoma State was named Texas or just Oklahoma, they'd be in the title game.

Ain't that the truth. Just sad. I doubt I'll watch the National Championship Game.

Also sad that since January 1 is on a Sunday, in order not to compete with the NFL the Bowl Games are going to be on January 2 instead .

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by Matthean

Looking at the list, Missouri drops off for the first grouping. Putting Louisiana-Lafayette and Tulsa as part of your resume is kind of head shaking. Might as well put 'Bama beating GSU on 'Bama's resume.

Tulsa is a decent team.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

If Oklahoma State was named Texas or just Oklahoma, they'd be in the title game.

I think you are incorrect again.

Oklahoma St lost to Iowa State. They win that game and they are in. Blame it on that loss not some conspiracy to make fans unhappy.

[cartman]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

LOL. Anybody who believes that* either needs remedial help with college football & should not be allowed to watch without that (or at least a responsible adult) present or serious psychotherapy. Or both.

*the possible exception of someone on the Cowboys payroll who is at least being paid to say something that silly.

There were 86 thousands of a point (.0086) separating Alabama and Oklahoma State.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Also sad that since January 1 is on a Sunday, in order not to compete with the NFL the Bowl Games are going to be on January 2 instead .

But that's almost always been the case with college bowl games.

Just looking at the Sugar Bowl history -- which I happened to have open in Wiki already -- it was on the 2nd in 1939, 50, 56, 61, 67, 78, 84, and 89 (just counting years prior to the BC/BA/BCS era). And for 72-75 it was on Dec 31st.

The Rose Bowl has a similar history of playing on Jan 2nd when needed as well.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by cartman

There were 86 thousands of a point (.0086) separating Alabama and Oklahoma State.

Which is a flaw of the system, no way it should have been that close, but that's the shortcoming of having the computer component.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

Oklahoma St lost to Iowa State. They win that game and they are in. Blame it on that loss not some conspiracy to make fans unhappy.

Don't go bringing reality into things, the whining bitches are on a roll.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

I think you are incorrect again.

Oklahoma St lost to Iowa State. They win that game and they are in. Blame it on that loss not some conspiracy to make fans unhappy.

And Alabama lost to LSU and didn't play many quality opponents.

Your argument didn't seem to matter when Florida got in with a loss to Ole Miss. Or LSU got in with a loss to Florida in 2003 in Baton Rouge.

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

I think you are incorrect again.

Oklahoma St lost to Iowa State. They win that game and they are in. Blame it on that loss not some conspiracy to make fans unhappy.

I don't think it's a conspiracy, but it's just reputation. If the resumes were reversed, do you really think OSU would be getting a rematch title shot instead of Alabama?

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Don't go bringing reality into things, the whining bitches are on a roll.

How dare we question the integrity of a system that decides participants based on TV ratings and how their fans travel.

[cartman]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Which is a flaw of the system, no way it should have been that close, but that's the shortcoming of having the computer component.

Even if you take out the computers, the gap between #3 OSU and #4 Stanford is 3 times the gap between #2 Alabama and #3 OSU. And the gap between #3 and #4 is about the same as between #1 and #2 without the computers.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

And Alabama lost to LSU and didn't play many quality opponents.

Your argument didn't seem to matter when Florida got in with a loss to Ole Miss. Or LSU got in with a loss to Florida in 2003 in Baton Rouge.

Oklahoma was behind Alabama when they lost to Texas Tech in the BCS standings. Clearly they werent being favored then. At some point Oklahoma would have had to pick up a lot of votes from the voters like what happened with Oklahoma State.

Also, An SEC team(LSU) was the team that was screwed in 2004. It goes differently each year.

Fine you hate the system I understand. But making comments that arent true followed by a smiley face dont make you right

[Matthean]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

Tulsa is a decent team.

47-14, 59-33, 41-21, 48-16. Those are the scores of the four teams they played with a pulse. All of them were losses.