College Football Bowl Season Thread

[Vegas Vic]

Originally Posted by timmynausea

My point was that going into the title game, why would you put Missouri ahead of Oklahoma? Nobody would.

Bobby Bowden, Tommy Bowden and Howard Smellsofbourbon, just to name a few.

[Blade6119]

Like i said, because MU only lost twice to a top 10 team. The others, including OU, blew it vs much much worse teams. You cant judge a team on 2 games, but must instead judge their whole body of work. And Mizzou's, which included wins over two teams that went to the BCS and the 2 best losses, is hard to dismiss if you really look back. Who did LSU really beat this year? No one, outside of OSU. Florida lost to michigan, VT lost to kansas. I understand they won the title game, but is it possible that we gave them too much credit for their SEC wins? No doubt its a deep conference, but it appears there werent any other elite teams to challenge them this year, where as Mizzou had 2-3 in the big 12(kansas, OU, and maybe texas after the holiday bowl).

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by JW

Love the hate. Two numbers for all of you.

7-2. SEC bowl record this year. First conference with 7 bowl wins.

To quote fui from collegefootballnews.com:

"While we’re at it, let’s be honest here about all the outpouring of love going to the SEC for its bowl season. Georgia was terrific, no question about it, but every Big Ten bowl team would’ve beaten Hawaii. Every Big Ten bowl team, other than probably Indiana, would’ve beaten UCF (who lost to Mississippi State), a depleted Florida State (who lost to Kentucky) and Colorado (who lost to Alabama). With Arkansas mailing it in after Houston Nutt left and Darren McFadden ready to take his Escalade to the NFL, it probably would’ve lost to all the Big Ten bowl teams but Indiana and Purdue. I’d take Ohio State, Illinois, Wisconsin and Michigan over Clemson, who lost to Auburn."

^^

[Tigercat]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

To quote fui from collegefootballnews.com:

"While we’re at it, let’s be honest here about all the outpouring of love going to the SEC for its bowl season. Georgia was terrific, no question about it, but every Big Ten bowl team would’ve beaten Hawaii. Every Big Ten bowl team, other than probably Indiana, would’ve beaten UCF (who lost to Mississippi State), a depleted Florida State (who lost to Kentucky) and Colorado (who lost to Alabama). With Arkansas mailing it in after Houston Nutt left and Darren McFadden ready to take his Escalade to the NFL, it probably would’ve lost to all the Big Ten bowl teams but Indiana and Purdue. I’d take Ohio State, Illinois, Wisconsin and Michigan over Clemson, who lost to Auburn."

^^

And I could say I would take Auburn over every non SEC team in a bowl game, doesn't make it a reasonable thought just because I typed it. Every Big 10 bowl team but Illinois was close enough to evenly matched to win their games, as was every SEC team. SEC had the better teams that showed up where other conferences teams didn't/usually don't.

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by Tigercat

And I could say I would take Auburn over every non SEC team in a bowl game, doesn't make it a reasonable thought just because I typed it. Every Big 10 bowl team but Illinois was close enough to evenly matched to win their games, as was every SEC team. SEC had the better teams that showed up where other conferences teams didn't/usually don't.

You think Georgia and Hawaii were evenly matched? Kentucky and a Florida State team missing half its players due to academics? UCF in on par with Miss State? Come on, you cant be making that arguement, you and i both know those teams arent even. Arkansas and Mizzou were considered fairly even, and you see how that turned out. Ill give you colorado and alabama, but come on. Florida and Michigan were evenly matched, how did that turn out?

[MJ4H]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

Arkansas and Mizzou were considered fairly even

hahaha

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by MattJones4Heisman

hahaha

Note considered, as i dont think so...but quite a few people around here(arizona) were predicting that Darren McFadden would show Mizzou what an SEC offense looked like.

[MJ4H]

That may be, but no way were they considered even. Some polls Arkansas wasn't even ranked going into the game, others they were #25. Missouri was a legitimate national championship contender.

[Blade6119]

Ill give you the rankings disparity, but i think you would be surprised just how many people thought it would be a coin flip outside of Missouri and Arkansas. Mizzou coming off the embarrassing loss to OU and Arkansas recently taking down LSU really made people question their rankings in my eyes.

[sooner333]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

Like i said, because MU only lost twice to a top 10 team. The others, including OU, blew it vs much much worse teams. You cant judge a team on 2 games, but must instead judge their whole body of work. And Mizzou's, which included wins over two teams that went to the BCS and the 2 best losses, is hard to dismiss if you really look back. Who did LSU really beat this year? No one, outside of OSU. Florida lost to michigan, VT lost to kansas. I understand they won the title game, but is it possible that we gave them too much credit for their SEC wins? No doubt its a deep conference, but it appears there werent any other elite teams to challenge them this year, where as Mizzou had 2-3 in the big 12(kansas, OU, and maybe texas after the holiday bowl).

I just don't understand the logic of people who say, Missouri lost twice to a top ten team, then try to demote OU by saying they lost twice to inferior opponents. People forget that OKLAHOMA BEAT MISSOURI...TWICE. They went 1-2 in games against teams in the Big 12 that you said were elite. One game, fine...could be a fluke...twice is a pretty big stretch.

[MJ4H]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

Ill give you the rankings disparity, but i think you would be surprised just how many people thought it would be a coin flip outside of Missouri and Arkansas. Mizzou coming off the embarrassing loss to OU and Arkansas recently taking down LSU really made people question their rankings in my eyes.

Look, I don't dispute that there are morons out there that thought this was an even match-up. I just dispute that the fact that they are out there means these teams were "considered even."

ETA: If that were the case, we could call any two teams "considered even."

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by sooner333

I just don't understand the logic of people who say, Missouri lost twice to a top ten team, then try to demote OU by saying they lost twice to inferior opponents. People forget that OKLAHOMA BEAT MISSOURI...TWICE. They went 1-2 in games against teams in the Big 12 that you said were elite. One game, fine...could be a fluke...twice is a pretty big stretch.

I give you guys credit for beating us twice, dont get me wrong. But Mizzou didnt lose to Colorado or Texas Tech, and in fact we beat them both. Why did LSU go to the title game ahead of USC? Because USC lost to stanford, while LSU's losses were again "acceptable" teams. Thats the reason. Quality of loss is taken into account, and you have to own up to the fact that despite your great wins you guys blew it royally against two average teams. Yay, you won the big ones, but a great team also wins the little ones. I dont think any team really deserved the title this year, and i have no problem with LSU winning it, but i dont think it was like they were the only option.

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by MattJones4Heisman

Look, I don't dispute that there are morons out there that thought this was an even match-up. I just dispute that the fact that they are out there means these teams were "considered even."

ETA: If that were the case, we could call any two teams "considered even."

Ill concede to you that point, well taken.

[sooner333]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

I give you guys credit for beating us twice, dont get me wrong. But Mizzou didnt lose to Colorado or Texas Tech, and in fact we beat them both. Why did LSU go to the title game ahead of USC? Because USC lost to stanford, while LSU's losses were again "acceptable" teams. Thats the reason. Quality of loss is taken into account, and you have to own up to the fact that despite your great wins you guys blew it royally against two average teams. Yay, you won the big ones, but a great team also wins the little ones. I dont think any team really deserved the title this year, and i have no problem with LSU winning it, but i dont think it was like they were the only option.

I bet if USC had beaten LSU instead of Kentucky (thus, improving LSU's quality of losses), they would have gone instead of LSU in spite of their loss to Stanford.

And you're right, there wasn't only one option...but I don't seriously think Missouri belonged.

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by sooner333

I bet if USC had beaten LSU instead of Kentucky (thus, improving LSU's quality of losses), they would have gone instead of LSU in spite of their loss to Stanford.

And you're right, there wasn't only one option...but I don't seriously think Missouri belonged.

That top part doesnt make sense to me, do you mean improving USC's elite wins or LSU elite losses? As it stands, i dont follow you. I think your trying to make an argument of USC beating LSU would allow USC to go ahead of LSU, then sure. In a 1v1 case, a head to head is of course important. But in this situation, with like 7-8 teams all having claims, it becomes much more complicated then simple head to head record.

[sooner333]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

That top part doesnt make sense to me, do you mean improving USC's elite wins or LSU elite losses? As it stands, i dont follow you. I think your trying to make an argument of USC beating LSU would allow USC to go ahead of LSU, then sure. In a 1v1 case, a head to head is of course important. But in this situation, with like 7-8 teams all having claims, it becomes much more complicated then simple head to head record.

Yes, your thoughts of my poorly worded argument were correct. And I see where you are coming from too. I think any system which would have included Missouri would have necessarily needed to include Oklahoma after the season was over.

Missouri got screwed out of the Orange Bowl and that's too bad. Although any sympathy from most people is now gone since Kansas won the game. But you would also think that any system that included Kansas would necessarily have to include Missouri after the Tiger win, corret?

[Blade6119]

I think all 3 deserved to be there, regardless of what happened once they played. The 2 per conference rule is a money rule, not a football rule, and its a stupid one. But its there to ensure money is spread out, and as such it wont be removed. Even if we go to an 8 team playoff, i dont believe it will change. Mizzou, but more importantly the Big 12, got shafted. But thats politics, and mostly irrelevant.

[astrosfan64]

West Virginia deserved to be in that game as much or more then USC or LSU. They lost to a top South Florida team and their rival.

[JW]

While we're at it here, remember that LSU won TWO national championships, the BCS title, and the AP poll. Some consider the AP poll a separate championship, so just remember we won TWO championships.

And all the arguments about whether or not LSU deserved it or not, well, they're fun to read.

[MJ4H]

Originally Posted by JW

While we're at it here, remember that LSU won TWO national championships, the BCS title, and the AP poll. Some consider the AP poll a separate championship, so just remember we won TWO championships.

And all the arguments about whether or not LSU deserved it or not, well, they're fun to read.

I would go more with painful than fun.

[KWhit]

Originally Posted by astrosfan64

West Virginia deserved to be in that game as much or more then USC or LSU. They lost to a top South Florida team and their rival.

A top South Florida team??!??!?!!?

Come on.

[mckerney]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

I’d take Ohio State, Illinois, Wisconsin and Michigan over Clemson, who lost to Auburn."

I'd only take Ohio State and Michigan over Clemson.

[CU Tiger]

Im gonna stir up a shit storm, but....

Illinois probably beats Clemson
Michigan gives them a greeat game and it comes down to the wire. Michigan probably wins because Clemosn gets out coached. Thee rest i dont think are that close honestly. Based solely on style of play and
strength vs. weakness I believe Clemson could beat OSU by 10. Wisconsin, really?

We havent stopped a mobile Qb all year and it is a large reason Auburn won that game. Hence my thoughts on illinois.

Oh well Davis is going pro and it looks like merling will announce tomorrow. It sucks we will only return 17 starters instead of 19....

Im looking forward to neext season.
its been fun guys

[astrosfan64]

Originally Posted by KWhit

A top South Florida team??!??!?!!?

Come on.

At that time South Florida was playing great football. Need I remind everyone that they went into AUBURN the oh so tough SEC and beat them.

[MJ4H]

I thought South Florida was ranked in the top 5 for at least a little bit, too.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by MattJones4Heisman

I thought South Florida was ranked in the top 5 for at least a little bit, too.

#2 at one point, iirc. Didn't last, tho...

SI

[Vegas Vic]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

#2 at one point, iirc. Didn't last, tho...
SI

No, it didn't last, but it fits in with the selective amnesia that people have in regard to this weird season. South Florida beats Auburn at Auburn, then falls apart in the second half of the season. Oklahoma beats Missouri twice, then gets blown out by West Virginia. Georgia gets blown out by Tennessee and doesn't even win their division, then finishes strong. LSU has two losses and five games that go down to the final possession of the game, and they win the national championship.

You almost need Rod Serling's voice to recap all of this stuff.

[JW]

Well, Vic, Les Miles said it might have been divine intervention.

But the reason I'm posting is to link an interesting article about OSU's meltdown in the title game. Remember Harry Coleman of LSU said OSU didn't fight back like an SEC team would have. Well, don't be too unkind to Harry because he doesn't have much experience playing against non-SEC teams, and besides, it looks like one reason OSU didn't fight back was that they were too busy fighting themselves. Looks like a pretty talented team just melted down:


http://www.daytondailynews.com/o/con...re_fighti.html

OSU’s Meltdown:: “Guys were fighting with other guys”
By Tom Archdeacon | Tuesday, January 8, 2008, 09:09 AM

NEW ORLEANS — It was nearly an hour after the national championship game — a game in which Louisiana State embarrassed Ohio State, 38-24 — and as Alex Boone tromped across the Superdome field from the OSU dressing room to the team bus, he still wasn’t over the meltdown he had witnessed among some of his teammates.

A meltdown he — and some other Buckeyes — said happened on the field, on the sidelines and even in the dressing room.

“I couldn’t believe that guys were fighting with other guys, this isn’t a barroom.” the massive junior tackle said. “You don’t need to be fighting with your own teammates. We were here to play football, Some guys didn’t get that though. But that’s not Ohio State football.

“Everyone was fighting with each other and I’m like, ‘Calm down. It’s okay. It’s half time.’ But everyone’s like, ‘This is your fault,’ and then ‘No, this is your fault.’ I was like ‘Calm down, we got a half to go.’ But some guys panicked like the game was over.”

In truth, it was.

The Bucks trailed by 14 at the half and lost by the same margin, though they were down by more than that through much of the second half and only a late score made things look far more respectable than they were.

Ohio State lost its second national title game in a row — and its ninth straight bowl game to an SEC team — for a lot of reasons:

Stupid penalties — including a numbing five personal fouls — costly turnovers and certainly, LSU’s superior play. The Tigers were a better team.

The most surprising thing, though, was the Bucks’ mental collapse that everybody from Boone to linebackers Larry Grant and James Laurinaitis talked about afterward.

“You’ve got to be able to control your emotions in a big game like this,” said Laurinaitis, who, along with a BCS-record 18 tackles against the Tigers, had a costly face mask penalty. “We didn’t do that at all tonight. We did a lot of things we shouldn’t have.”

Grant agreed: “Our mind got where it shouldn’t have been and It cost us the game.”