College Football week 14

[Toddzilla]

FWIW, given my opinion that VT was unfailrly overlooked for the title game, nobody and I mean NOBODY got shit on worse than Missouri. Holy crap was that an unbelievable oversight.

[larrymcg421]

Yeah, I hate the idea that losing your conference championship moves you behind a team that you beat head to head to make it to the conference championship. That's happened twice this year (Tennessee, Missouri).

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Really happy to see Mizzou fans supporting the program despite the perceived snub. Mizzou sold out their ticket allotment this morning for the Cotton Bowl in 70 minutes and has requested additional tickets. As much as I hate to admit it, bowl selection often involves how many tickets can be sold in addition to W/L record. The support that Mizzou is showing now may help us down the road to get into better bowl games. It certainly won't hurt.

[Galaxy]

Problem is, the BCS isn't a "selector" for a all the games. The goal is just to select the two "best" teams for the title game, and create a pool for the at-large teams to be selected from. After that, it's up to the bowls, not the BCS.

[Dr. Sak]

Missouri should be mad at the Orange Bowl selection committee. They had the first choice after the Rose took Illinois and the Sugar took Georgia. They took Kansas with that at large choice. I actually thought the Orange Bowl would take WVU and match them up with VT. That would've been a good rivalry game, but against would have locked Missouri out because there is no way the Fiesta would've taken them to play against Oklahoma.

[MizzouRah]

Originally Posted by Toddzilla

FWIW, given my opinion that VT was unfailrly overlooked for the title game, nobody and I mean NOBODY got shit on worse than Missouri. Holy crap was that an unbelievable oversight.

Thanks to you and everyone else who has been saying this. It's nice to know we can rib eachother and still speak logically.

We got screwed BIG TIME!!

[JonInMiddleGA]

A somewhat interesting exercise (and one that I suspect has been engaged in already on some message board somewhere) would be trying to figure out where Missouri would have ended up in the pre-BCS days. Catch is, I guess, that it's a whole different answer if you leave the conference title game in place as opposed to eliminating it.

My guess is though that, if you assume all games remain as played, then they really aren't any worse off today than they would have been if it were pre-BCS. I know in Georgia's case that's obviously true since they wouldn't have been anywhere near the Sugar Bowl if the BCS didn't exist.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

A somewhat interesting exercise (and one that I suspect has been engaged in already on some message board somewhere) would be trying to figure out where Missouri would have ended up in the pre-BCS days. Catch is, I guess, that it's a whole different answer if you leave the conference title game in place as opposed to eliminating it.

My guess is though that, if you assume all games remain as played, then they really aren't any worse off today than they would have been if it were pre-BCS. I know in Georgia's case that's obviously true since they wouldn't have been anywhere near the Sugar Bowl if the BCS didn't exist.

On the other hand, in Pre-Big XII days, they would likely have gone to the Orange Bowl.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by VPI97

Exactly...that's why I've rationalized LSU getting the nod. But don't tell me Oklahoma or USC or any other these other deserve to be ahead of us. They don't.

I don't care if you beat Missouri or you beat UCLA or what...all of you others lost to unranked teams and we didn't. We also beat more winning teams that any other team in the country. It sucks that we were treated like a red headed stepchild in the opinion polls.

While I kind of understand your logic, what I don't understand is "what do you think VaTech got screwed out of?" They are going to a BCS bowl ... they are not playing in the championship game. You agree that they do not deserve to play in the championship game, so ... what is the problem?

[sooner333]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

On the other hand, in Pre-Big XII days, they would likely have gone to the Orange Bowl.

Hard to say. There was a round-robin in that situation and OU would have beat Mizzou. OU went 3-1 against Big 8 teams this season, Missouri went 5-1. OU would get a chance at Nebraska, K-State, and Kansas while Missouri would also play OSU. Either way, OU controls its own destiny for the Orange Bowl in that fact pattern.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by sooner333

Hard to say. There was a round-robin in that situation and OU would have beat Mizzou. OU went 3-1 against Big 8 teams this season, Missouri went 5-1. OU would get a chance at Nebraska, K-State, and Kansas while Missouri would also play OSU. Either way, OU controls its own destiny for the Orange Bowl in that fact pattern.

Good point. Maybe the Cotton Bowl, then? Of course, back then, going to the Cotton Bowl would have meant something.

[cartman]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

Good point. Maybe the Cotton Bowl, then? Of course, back then, going to the Cotton Bowl would have meant something.

Hopefully it will again soon. Since they are moving the Cotton Bowl to the new Cowboys stadium, they are lobbying to have it added to the BCS rotation. There are rumblings that the BCS isn't happy with the way that having the championship game in the same stadium as one of the four current bowls, and would like to add a seperate 5th site.

[sooner333]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

Good point. Maybe the Cotton Bowl, then? Of course, back then, going to the Cotton Bowl would have meant something.

Cotton Bowl was primarily a SWC thing. I don't know if a Big 8 team ever even went there. It seems like in the old days there were a lot fewer conference affiliations to bowls past a conference champion. Now only one spot is at-large in the whole list, and that at-large spot is reserved for Navy if they qualify (Poinsettia Bowl).

[Pumpy Tudors]

I am inviting all of you to join me in my protest of the current bowl system. It's a piece of shit, and I'm not standing for it anymore. Here's the deal. Do not watch any bowl games until this gets fixed. I'm not talking about throwing out the BCS, and I'm not talking about polls or playoffs.

I want one thing and one thing only: the PetroSun Independence Bowl needs to go back to the name it used from 1990 to 1996, the Poulan Weed-Eater Independence Bowl.

WHO'S WITH ME?

[cartman]

Originally Posted by sooner333

Cotton Bowl was primarily a SWC thing. I don't know if a Big 8 team ever even went there. It seems like in the old days there were a lot fewer conference affiliations to bowls past a conference champion. Now only one spot is at-large in the whole list, and that at-large spot is reserved for Navy if they qualify (Poinsettia Bowl).

I seem to remember Nebraska going one year, but you are right. Usually the other team was Notre Dame or an East Coast school. I can't seem to recall an Pac 8/10 school playing in the Cotton Bowl.

[Pumpy Tudors]

If Wikipedia is right (it's the only source I checked), Colorado went to the Cotton Bowl in the last year of the Big 8 (the 1995 season)

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by cartman

I can't seem to recall an Pac 8/10 school playing in the Cotton Bowl.

It wasn't common, but it happened a few times pre-BCS: Oregon in '96, USC in '95, UCLA in '89 and Oregon in '49. For a long time the Pac-10 only allowed their conference champion to go to bowl games (up until the mid-'70's I believe) so that limited Pac-10 participation to only the Rose Bowl for a few decades.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by Pumpy Tudors

If Wikipedia is right (it's the only source I checked), Colorado went to the Cotton Bowl in the last year of the Big 8 (the 1995 season)

There were maybe 3-4 other instances of Big 8 schools going to the Cotton Bowl, but yeah, not many.

[Klinglerware]

Originally Posted by cartman

Hopefully it will again soon. Since they are moving the Cotton Bowl to the new Cowboys stadium, they are lobbying to have it added to the BCS rotation. There are rumblings that the BCS isn't happy with the way that having the championship game in the same stadium as one of the four current bowls, and would like to add a seperate 5th site.

This could be a fortuitous time for the Cotton Bowl, as there is talk that the BCS powers-that-be may be starting to take at least some forms of the "plus one" model seriously:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/03/sp...3colleges.html

[JW]

Here is an interesting thought for you. LSU and VT were scheduled to play in 2004. VT opted out of that game, as noted below, and the game was rescheduled to 2007. I wonder how this season would have gone differently if that game had been played in 04?

Many LSU fans thought VT dodged LSU in 04 after VT handled LSU pretty easily in the 02 game at Blacksburg, and the game was eagerly awaited and was considered a huge game, even by Tiger Stadium standards. Now I don't think VT dodged LSU, but it is interesting how things worked out. VT got LSU playing its best game all season, and that 48-7 win is what vaulted LSU past VT in the final polls.

http://www.hokiesports.com/football/...132003aab.html

Tech-LSU Football Game to be Played in 2007

October 13, 2003

BLACKSBURG - The Virginia Tech-LSU football game that was scheduled for the 2004 season opener has been moved to 2007, as announced Monday afternoon by both schools.


The move was necessitated when ESPN and Virginia Tech were unable to reach an agreement to schedule a Black Coaches Association (BCA) Classic game for Tech in 2004.


In 2002, when LSU traveled to Virginia Tech, the Tigers were able to play seven home games because the NCAA allowed an additional game on the schedule in that particular year. In 2004, the NCAA will allow teams to play only 11 games, which means Virginia Tech would have had only six home games if it played at Baton Rouge. But ESPN had agreed to schedule a BCA Classic game for the Hokies, which by NCAA rules can be played in addition to the 11-game schedule.


Virginia Tech could have executed the $250,000 buyout in the contract, but instead a move to 2007 was negotiated. After it was clear that Virginia Tech could not play LSU in 2004, the next available playing date for both schools was the 2007 season.


As part of the arrangement to play in 2007, Virginia Tech has agreed to an elevated buyout clause of $350,000.


Virginia Tech Director of Athletics Jim Weaver said the search for a new home opponent for the 2004 season will begin immediately.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Pumpy Tudors

I want one thing and one thing only: the PetroSun Independence Bowl needs to go back to the name it used from 1990 to 1996, the Poulan Weed-Eater Independence Bowl.

WHO'S WITH ME?

Amen! That definitely goes down in history of one of the more cumbersome bowl names ever, even trumping tons of things with "dot com" at the end of them.

SI

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by molson

At least San Francisco's something of a "destination". I live in Boise and I wouldn't want to go to the Humanitarian bowl. It's a nice little city to live in but damn, whenever people tell me they want to visit I say don't bother, let's meet in Vegas.

IDK
We went to see Clemson LaTech a few years back and I was shocked by Boise. Really I wnet for my normal December vacation with VERY LOW expectations, so maybe thats part of it, but it was very nice. This year we play in THE DUMP. No offense to Atlanta but they suck at the bowl. The CNN center pre party is nice and all and the city itslef I guess is decent but it doeenst feel like an event. You have people everywhere who act like the bowlcrowd are in "their" way

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

As much as I hate to admit it, bowl selection always involves how many tickets can be sold opposed to W/L record.

Fixed for ya

[ISiddiqui]

You have people everywhere who act like the bowlcrowd are in "their" way

Because you are.

Go home!

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by Toddzilla

FWIW, given my opinion that VT was unfailrly overlooked for the title game, nobody and I mean NOBODY got shit on worse than Missouri. Holy crap was that an unbelievable oversight.

Arizona State got shafted pretty badly as well, with their only 2 losses coming to USC and an Oregon team pre-dixon injury. Both Kansas and Illinois got real lucky jumping Mizzou and ASU(coming from a Mizzou and ASU fan )

[sooner333]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

Arizona State got shafted pretty badly as well, with their only 2 losses coming to USC and an Oregon team pre-dixon injury. Both Kansas and Illinois got real lucky jumping Mizzou and ASU(coming from a Mizzou and ASU fan )

Maybe shafted by Kansas, but ASU only beat one team currently recieving votes: Oregon State. Doesn't matter who you lost to if you didn't beat anyone in the process. KU didn't beat anyone recieving votes this season though.

[k0ruptr]

what a humble guy

Hawaii’s Team Concept
By Pete Thamel

Tags: Colt Brennan, Hawaii, Karl Benson, Western Athletic Conference

Faithful readers of The Quad all know what Hawaii quarterback Colt Brennan thinks of his receivers, who are affectionately known as The Dread Heads. So after Hawaii completed its 12-0 season on Saturday, Brennan pulled aside Karl Benson, the commissioner of the Western Athletic Conference Commissioner, and asked if he could give one more shout out to his receivers and his offensive line.
So in an unprecedented move, the W.A.C. is naming Hawaii’s offense the “Offensive Unit of the Year” in recognition of a group that racked up 6,351 yards this season and leads the country in scoring with 46.2 points per game. Brennan’s receivers — Jason Rivers, Davone Bess, Ryan Grice-Mullen and C.J. Hawthorne — distinguished themselves as one of the country’s top units.
Here’s the skinny from Benson: “Colt asked me in the locker room after the Washington game on Saturday night that if he was selected the player of the year, was there a way the W.A.C. could share the award with his boys. Once again, Colt impressed me with his unselfishness, and I told him I would do what I could. On the flight back to the mainland, I thought of this way to pay tribute to Colt and these four great receivers for the season each had and how they each contributed to the Warriors’ perfect 12-0 regular season.”

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by sooner333

Maybe shafted by Kansas, but ASU only beat one team currently recieving votes: Oregon State. Doesn't matter who you lost to if you didn't beat anyone in the process. KU didn't beat anyone recieving votes this season though.

Ill let CFN do my arguing for me:

http://cfn.scout.com/2/707647.html

Outrage No. 1: Illinois in a BCS bowl, Missouri outside the candy store looking in. Let me get this straight: Missouri goes 11-2, Illinois 9-3. The Tigers play in a tougher league, win their division, and oh, get this--they beat the Fighting Illini head-to-head on a neutral field. And Illinois gets the huge prize while Missouri has to wake up very early to play the Cotton Bowl on New Year's morning in Dallas. Gee, this really enhances the process.

Outrage No. 2: Missouri out of a BCS bowl, Kansas in a BCS bowl. Let me get this straight: Missouri whips Kansas head to head, wins its division, and loses its two games against mighty Oklahoma (whom Kansas didn't have to play in the Big XII; the Jayhawks also avoided Texas and Texas Tech in league play). Kansas gets rewarded for losing to Missouri. Missouri gets punished for beating Kansas, because the Tigers--as a result of that win--put themselves in position to lose to Oklahoma for a second time. Crazy.

Outrage No. 3: Three-loss Illinois in a BCS bowl, two-loss Arizona State locked outside the palace. Arizona State plays in a tougher league, lost to USC and Oregon (with Dennis Dixon before the injury), and beat legitimate non-conference opponents. Illinois coughed up a bad loss to Iowa. Had Ron Zook's men beaten Missouri, we wouldn't be having this conversation. But if "Ifs and Buts Were Candy and Nuts, We'd All Have a Very Merry Christmas." Three-loss teams have no business whatsoever in the BCS bowls, unless there's a five-alarm, red-alert emergency going on. Bonus question here: how can Arizona State, with two losses, watch as one-loss (but resume-thin) Kansas enters the BCS on one side, while three-loss Illinois gets in on the other side. Really fair, guys. Really fair. Nice going, Mike Slive.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

Bonus question here: how can Arizona State, with two losses, watch as one-loss (but resume-thin) Kansas enters the BCS on one side, while three-loss Illinois gets in on the other side.

How? Because the bowls wanted Kansas & Illinois more than they wanted ASU & UM.

And that's not a decision Mike Slive makes.

[Warhammer]

Mizzou got screwed because the BCS only allows two teams from any one conference in the system. The BCS bowls had to take OU, and chose KU ahead of Mizzou. In the case of Illinois, the Rose Bowl held to their Big-10/Pac-10 tradition.

People knew that ASU was a paper tiger and had two real games on the schedule. They wound up losing those two games. Not saying I agree with it, but I understand it.

[Buccaneer]

Originally Posted by k0ruptr

what a humble guy

What a crock full of shit. That's worse than some of the PR crap that comes from Britney.

[k0ruptr]

Originally Posted by Buccaneer

What a crock full of shit. That's worse than some of the PR crap that comes from Britney.

wait, what? you really don't think that is being humble, or you don't think it really happened?

[Buccaneer]

Damn, I forgot the stupid smiley again. Seems like the Ravens are turning me into a pyscho Schmidty.

[k0ruptr]

lol. oh ok

[Buccaneer]

Originally Posted by k0ruptr

wait, what? you really don't think that is being humble, or you don't think it really happened?

Seriously. Don't believe everything you read, esp. when they are feeding sunshine to Rainbow syncophants at this time. They would tell you he walked on the ocean and you would believe it.

[k0ruptr]

Originally Posted by Buccaneer

Seriously. Don't believe everything you read, esp. when they are feeding sunshine to Rainbow syncophants at this time. They would tell you he walked on the ocean and you would believe it.

lol. seriously, I've heard a ton of his interviews, this is how he feels, hes not an arrogant ass like a lot of BCS QBs

[k0ruptr]

Originally Posted by k0ruptr

lol. seriously, I've heard a ton of his interviews, this is how he feels, hes not an arrogant ass like a lot of BCS QBs

besides I know his cousins, I used to smoke weed with them. so its all good

[Young Drachma]

Even if it's not true, it's a nice lie.

[k0ruptr]

I think the fact that the WAC actually did it makes it not a lie.

[Swaggs]

Final coaches votes revealed: http://www.usatoday.com/sports/graph...2007/flash.htm

Among the more interesting items:
--Bob Stoops apparently thinks that LSU is the 6th best team in the nation and that 3 of the top 4 teams in the nation reside in the B12.
--Big10/11 coaches went out of their way to make sure that Illinois made the BCS. Brett Bielema, Ron Zook, and Mark Dantonio all had them ranked #9. Those three, along with Lloyd Carr and Joe Tiller were the only ones that had them ranked in the top 12.
--Bobby Bowden either loves his son a lot or his wife fills out his bracket, as he has Clemson much higher than any other coach does.
--I'm still trying to figure out how Auburn is ranked well above South Florida.

[Vegas Vic]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

Final coaches votes revealed: http://www.usatoday.com/sports/graph...2007/flash.htm

Among the more interesting items:

Bobby Bowden ranked Oklahoma 10th and Missouri 6th.

[Leonidas]

Normally I like the Rose Bowl going with the traditional Big 10 Pac 10 game, but it really doesn't work right this year. First off it totally takes the Big 10 out of alignment with it's bowl games. Now a number 2 is playing a number 1 in the Rose Bowl and this trickles down to all the Big 10 bowl games where they are now playing a team at one level higher than they should. Illinois should be playing Florida instead. It would be a much better matchup for them. So now if the Big 10 loses more than they win everyone will say, "See, the Big 1o sucks," when in fact the truth will be the Rose Bowl screwed up their bowl commitments.

What the Rose Bowl should have had, and what maybe would have been the very best bowl game this year would be USC-Oklahoma. That would be a fabulous old school matchup. Oh well.

[Dr. Sak]

Originally Posted by Leonidas

What the Rose Bowl should have had, and what maybe would have been the very best bowl game this year would be USC-Oklahoma. That would be a fabulous old school matchup. Oh well.

That wasn't possible since the Big 12 champ goes to the Fiesta Bowl.

[Klinglerware]

Originally Posted by Leonidas

Normally I like the Rose Bowl going with the traditional Big 10 Pac 10 game, but it really doesn't work right this year. First off it totally takes the Big 10 out of alignment with it's bowl games. Now a number 2 is playing a number 1 in the Rose Bowl and this trickles down to all the Big 10 bowl games where they are now playing a team at one level higher than they should. Illinois should be playing Florida instead. It would be a much better matchup for them. So now if the Big 10 loses more than they win everyone will say, "See, the Big 1o sucks," when in fact the truth will be the Rose Bowl screwed up their bowl commitments.

What the Rose Bowl should have had, and what maybe would have been the very best bowl game this year would be USC-Oklahoma. That would be a fabulous old school matchup. Oh well.

The Rose Bowl traditionally hasn't given a crap about stuff like that. Look at how long it spurned the Bowl Alliance/BCS...

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by Klinglerware

The Rose Bowl traditionally hasn't given a crap about stuff like that. Look at how long it spurned the Bowl Alliance/BCS...

The Big Ten doesn't care, either. I think they're satisfied enough with their reputation that a poor bowl record isn't going to intimidate them -- they'd rather just take the extra BCS money. And it happens to a couple conferences every season anyway, and almost always affects the Citrus and Outback Bowls.

[cartman]

Originally Posted by Klinglerware

The Rose Bowl traditionally hasn't given a crap about stuff like that. Look at how long it spurned the Bowl Alliance/BCS...

Which is sad, because Texas-Michigan and Texas-USC were great Rose Bowl games.

[dawgfan]

I'm with Bucc on the bowl/BCS issue. Screw the BCS system, return to the traditional bowl matchups. For those that crave more "resolution" to the question of a national champion, institute the "+1" idea - play all the bowl games, return all the New Year's Day bowls to January 1st, and then after the bowls have concluded convene an NCAA committee to pick the top-2 teams to play a college "super-bowl" game.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

play all the bowl games, return all the New Year's Day bowls to January 1st, and then after the bowls have concluded convene an NCAA committee to pick the top-2 teams to play a college "super-bowl" game.

I'm going to guess that none of the D1 coaches involved would be crazy about playing a national title +1 game with less than a week to prepare for it.

So, depending upon how the calendar falls for Jan 1, you could be looking at January 15th for the +1 game and that not only rolls over into a new semester but goes even deeper into the NFL playoff calendar (which I know they've tried to avoid doing in the past, although they're on the first weekend now I guess).

[Klinglerware]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

I'm with Bucc on the bowl/BCS issue. Screw the BCS system, return to the traditional bowl matchups. For those that crave more "resolution" to the question of a national champion, institute the "+1" idea - play all the bowl games, return all the New Year's Day bowls to January 1st, and then after the bowls have concluded convene an NCAA committee to pick the top-2 teams to play a college "super-bowl" game.

+1 on +1

Like I've said before. Playing a full complement of bowl games gives both the voters and the computers more data points to judge who should be 1 and 2. At this stage, they are all OOC games between the best schools in every conference--so you could make a better determination as to relative conference strengths.

I can see the argument that some bowl results are tainted by one team caring less than the other (usually because of deflation from not being selected for a better bowl). But on the other hand, (a) levels of focus can vary during the regular season anyway, and (b) perhaps teams will play better since more would be at stake--remember that the national championship game would be entirely incremental from a revenue standpoint, and since most conferences share bowl revenue, that should incent schools even at the lower bowl tiers to help get a fellow school into the championship game.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by Leonidas

What the Rose Bowl should have had, and what maybe would have been the very best bowl game this year would be USC-Oklahoma. That would be a fabulous old school matchup. Oh well.

I think Ohio State-USC would be a great matchup.

I think the traditional matchups would be:

Rose: Ohio State-USC
Fiesta: Oklahoma State-Arizona State
Orange: Virginia Tech-West Virginia
Sugar: LSU-probably Missouri

Those would be better matchups than what we have, I think.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

I think Ohio State-USC would be a great matchup.

I think the traditional matchups would be:

Rose: Ohio State-USC
Fiesta: Oklahoma State-Arizona State
Orange: Virginia Tech-West Virginia
Sugar: LSU-probably Missouri

Those would be better matchups than what we have, I think.

To coin a phrase ... not so fast there my friend.

Depends on when you set the "tradition" benchmark I guess but if the Big 12 is the successor to the Big 8, then Oklahoma would have probably headed to the Orange as that relationship was longer than the one the bowl has with the ACC.