NCAA Division I Season Thread "Fight On!"

eagle eye

Yeah Jahvid Best is the business based on what I saw today. I don't know what to watch now. I really want to watch Notre Dame get back to winning ways but Florida/Tennessee is very interesting with the way that Lane Kiffin said he would beat them. And then USC versus their former offensive and defensive co-ordinators is another interesting one too.
Later its deffo going to be Texas Tech @ Texas for me, I just have a feeling that we are going to have a shock there even though everyone is pointing to an easy win for the Longhorns. The problem for them is they don't have a ground game and if Tech can get to McCoy its gonna be a real close affair.

davyjose

Sitting in an airport bar in NY, in the bar waiting on my connection, got Notre Dame on the screen to my right, got the Gators on the screen to my left. And free Broadband!!!!

Nine dollar beers are almost worth it.

This is such a novelty for me, I just had to post

Sea Devils

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

They did well to dig it out.

Yeah probably good that they faced a bit of adversity epsecially since their first two games were cakewalks. Puzzled that Best could play three full quarters but be kept out of the 3rd ( Cal were outscored then).

Royal Seahawk

How bout them Huskies.......;)

tallaghtoutlaws

Royal Seahawk wrote: »

How bout them Huskies.......;)

Deary me Aaron Corp was fooking **** dude never got his offense going. Berkley when fit will have no problem getting his spot back. USC were shocking and the Huskies brought it to them and USC crippled under pressure.

Black Swan

Send Corp to the US Marine Corp! Bring back QB Barkley ASAP!

History repeats itself from 2008 regular season? 3rd game loss following Ohio St?
Game 1: 8/30 @ Virginia (W 52-7)
Game 2: 9/13 Ohio State (W 35-3)
Game 3: 9/25 @ Oregon State (L 27-21)...also 1st PAC-10 matchup for USC

2009 regular season compared with above:
Game 1: 9/5 San Jose State (W 56-3)
Ohio State (W 18-15)
Game 3: 9/19 @Washington (L 16-13)...also 1st PAC-10 matchup for USC

Blue_Lagoon wrote: »

If the Trojans defeat the Buckeyes on 12 September, then they will lose one game during this season to the easiest team to beat on their schedule.

Cries in beer!

LuckyLloyd

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Meh, USC's problem will be maintaining focus through their conference schedule - something that has been beyond them the past couple of years.

Sorry Bluey!!

Jaysus, Corp was bleeding awful! The Seattle crowd was incredible, really huge noise all the way throughout; the Husky defense stood up and was counted at key moments; and Locker had a very good game. But still, USC just can't lose that game! It is an indication of the difference between the two sides when there is a three point gap after Washington played way above themselves infront of raucous support, and USC were misfiring in all departments. And yeah, Washington did give LSU a decent game. But come on, losing one of these games every year is beyond carelessness at this point.

In other news, Utah and BYU also lost, taking two BCS busters out of the running early doors (BYU would have been a National Title contender if they won out). Boise beat Fresno on Friday night though.

And finally, Notre Dame somehow won another cracker, though it required a gift of an interception inside the final minute to get there. The offense looks amazing. The defense does not.

tallaghtoutlaws

I said it at the start and will say it again. Berkley was definitely the best choice. They need to get him fit and back in or their season will crumble. Corp wont do jack sh1t for them his calibre is not the same as Berkley or previous USC QBs and it showed last night.

If Cluasen wasnt such a tool I would like ND but it was a cracking game. Also the Tenn/Florida and Texas tech/Texas games were cracking games. Going to crank up my season ticket and watch some other college games now. Now who to watch first.

frostie500

As an open question to USC fans, how good do you actually think your team is?

Barkley's name gets said a lot on message boards everywhere but what do people actually expect a true freshman to achieve? I think its great for the next two/three years that he will have the experience of playing this year but I dont understand how fans can expect a team with either Barkley or Corp as first time starters to win it all and thats the feeling I've got from SC fans who before last night thought a national championship was a distinct possibility.

eagle eye

The rankings are going to be very interesting this week. No change at 1 and 2 but Texas Tech should move up imo after a very good performance in defeat against the Longhorns. Leach made a huge error there with that onside kick in the third quarter. I was very impressed by Potts.

The Hurricanes have to be very close if not actually in the top five, its not only their win but the way Florida State spanked BYU. They have really looked impressive and at this stage of the teams I've seen play I fancy them to go all the way to the big game. USC deffo need Barkley back after that performance from Corp.

Ole Miss are are going very well too but I haven't seen them yet. Same with the tide.

tallaghtoutlaws

frostie500 wrote: »

As an open question to USC fans, how good do you actually think your team is?

Barkley's name gets said a lot on message boards everywhere but what do people actually expect a true freshman to achieve? I think its great for the next two/three years that he will have the experience of playing this year but I dont understand how fans can expect a team with either Barkley or Corp as first time starters to win it all and thats the feeling I've got from SC fans who before last night thought a national championship was a distinct possibility.

Well as a non USC fan Berkley has the ability to take them to a National Championship. Maybe not this year in his freshman year but he is already playing like a sophmore/junior. Unlucky with injury. The kid graduated HS early to join up with USC in spring practice and was phenominal in HS. He truly has the ability to be a Heisman winner before he leaves college and do great things in the NFL. As for Corp he is average and USC fans do need to get real right now Championsip should not be a word on their mind.

giddyup

Go Dawgs! Ends a 15 game losing streak. Highest ranked team they've beaten at home since 1981. We had an unseasonably inclement day yesterday so maybe that upset the sunshine boys (and also the reason why I picked going to the Yankess v Ms game over this - bit of a mistake that one).

Hynzie

LSu just about beat Mississippi state. needed a big goal line stand to do it

eagle eye

Oregon stomping all over Cal Bears and VT doing likewise to the Canes. This season is so unpredictable, well apart from the Gators. The way its going today you could see Michigan and Notre Dame in the rankings next week. The Irish play Purdue who only just lost to Oregon and if they beat the Bears and the Irish comfortably take care of Purdue then they have to get serious consideration for votes.

eagle eye

Kentucky were expected to give the flue-ravaged Gators a game, they are down 24 zip after one quarter. Longhorns with another big win too.

Edit: Make 31-0 after one quarter. Gators are just so powerful on both sides of the ball.

eagle eye

Watching Notre Dame now. Clausen suffering for turf toe and came out after the first quarter, in comes Dayne Crist and they start running the ball like I haven't seen the do it in years. I'm loving it.

Sea Devils

Tebow spending the night in hospital. From looking at the replay it looked like a bad concussion but fortunately the Gators have a bye week before taking on LSU so at least he has time to recover.

Surprised with how bad Cal looked especially their QB Riley. Playcalling didn't help either

LuckyLloyd

The finish in the Notre Dame game was so sick. When they got the go ahead TD after McCarthy completely blew his coverage I was sitting there thinking "oh no not again!!". But Clausen showed a whole heap of grit and toughness to lead the offense down the field and bang it in on 4th and goal.

Purdue went into a soft prevent defense too early, and their decision to call a timeout as the clock was running with 25 seconds and Notre Dame having no timeouts left was crazy. Essentially gave Clausen another shot and he took it.

Clausen was visibly hurt throughout the game, hobbling after every play. Pulling him and going to the 'Plan B' running / wildcat offense was definitely the right decision, and it was so satisfying to see us putting up 17 unanswered points with tough, smashmouth football. Tate had a phenomenal game.

Yeah, Purdue are not good. But they were well up for the game, their crowd gave them a ton of help, and with Clausen banged up and Floyd, Allen and Aldridge looking on from the sidelines it was always going to be difficult. We've been on the wrong end of so many games like this over the past 8 years, it felt good to dig one out.

Will be tough next week against Washington, but being at home will help. And hopefully Clausen makes some progress on the toe. The defense is still so liable to concede huge chunks of yardage, but they manned up a lot better on the whole than in previous weeks. A win next week would set it up for the visit of USC...

LuckyLloyd

Sea Devils wrote: »

Tebow spending the night in hospital. From looking at the replay it looked like a bad concussion but fortunately the Gators have a bye week before taking on LSU so at least he has time to recover.

Surprised with how bad Cal looked especially their QB Riley. Playcalling didn't help either

The Tebow hit was shocking. Was not nice to see him throwing up as he was wheeled off the field.

California got beat up in every facet of the game. Begs the question of just how good Oregon are - and by extension, Boise St.

Rankings:

Sagarin

AP / USA Today

Still very stupid at this point.

Unbeaten Teams:

Alabama
Florida
Boise St.
Cincinnati
TCU
Houston
South Florida
Kansas
Michigan
Missouri
Wisconsin
Auburn
LSU
Iowa
Texas A&M

Black Swan

I just love the polls! They are like a bouncing football kicked by our terrible punter!
USC: #4 >BONG! #3 >BONG! #12 >BONG! #7

The top 10 ranked teams better lookout for the deadly unranked teams!
#4 Mississippi 10, unranked South Carolina 16
#5 Penn State 10, unranked Iowa 21
#6 Cal 3, unranked Oregon 42

But we can always count on #1 Florida Gators who ran up the score against UTEP 64-7. What's a UTEP? Never heard of one. Is that a university or a trade school that rarely sees daylight being so deep down the shafts? And the Gator QB was knocked unconscious? What? Did those Miners hit him with a shovel?

Blue had a long face after watching the Trojan v Cougars game. Although the defense played grand for the first 55 minutes of game time, taking a break in the last 5 minutes during the 4th allowing the Cougars to score (Blue pauses to take a breath), our offense only played brilliantly in the 1st quarter scoring 3 TDs, and except for the end of 3rd/beginning of 4th fluke (another breath), pretty much enjoyed a long snooze in the grass, only being disturbed by a whole gridiron of holding penalties. USC is not ready this season, even with WunderKid back. Perhaps next season?

eagle eye

It was the Longhorns who played UTEP by the way.

Gators played Kentucky and beat them handy. Personally I think the Gators are far and away the best team this year. I wasn't impressed by USC on offense yesterday.

Black Swan

eagle eye wrote: »

It was the Longhorns who played UTEP by the way.

Of course... I stand corrected! Must of had way too many cool ones last night, and am just beginning to show signs of life in this java house. Still a bit of a fuzz brain now (more so than usual!).

But eagle eye, you missed the most important component of our Trojan offense! Our cheerleaders!:D

eagle eye

Blue_Lagoon wrote: »

Of course... I stand corrected! Must of had way too many cool ones last night, and am just beginning to show signs of life in this java house. Still a bit of a fuzz brain now (more so than usual!).

But eagle eye, you missed the most important component of our Trojan offense! Our cheerleaders!:D

Yes the USC cheerleaders are always ranked no.1.:)

LuckyLloyd

Hitler defends Pete Carrol

Probably the best Downfall skit I've seen.

frostie500

Thought I'd move this away from under the feet of the other college football thread.

How high do people think Boise State will rise in the polls before voters say that "Boise aren't the 'x' best team in the country." Right now Boise are ranked 5th in the polls and lets be honest there probably aren't that many people in Idaho that feel Boise are the fifth best team in college football.

After Utah last year and the controversy that followed(espicially after their Sugar Bowl win) what fate will happen to the mid majors this season?

If Boise win out the rest of their schedule and finish undefeated are voters going to be inclined to look upon them as a legitimate team for the national championship in relation to one loss teams in the SEC or Big 12?

D3PO

a non BCS team will not make the national championship game.

Boise have a soft schedule by default as the WAC is weak (Im an hawaii fan and pay particular attention to the WAC) and to be honest havent done anything in their non conference matchups to try and make their schedule legitimate as a team (Oregan excluded)

the only reason they are so high up the AP pools now is that many of the genuine top 10 teams have lost already and the way Oregan have bounced back since week 1 with back to back wins v ranked opponents.

Boise are clearly the best team in the WAC & arguably the best non BCS team although Utah, TCU & Houston would dispute that heavily.

If they win out they will be BCS busters but no chance of a national championship shot.

Now the sooner they introduce a playoff system in college football the better (Awaits a queue of angry responses)

LuckyLloyd

frostie500 wrote: »

Thought I'd move this away from under the feet of the other college football thread.

How high do people think Boise State will rise in the polls before voters say that "Boise aren't the 'x' best team in the country." Right now Boise are ranked 5th in the polls and lets be honest there probably aren't that many people in Idaho that feel Boise are the fifth best team in college football.

After Utah last year and the controversy that followed(espicially after their Sugar Bowl win) what fate will happen to the mid majors this season?

If Boise win out the rest of their schedule and finish undefeated are voters going to be inclined to look upon them as a legitimate team for the national championship in relation to one loss teams in the SEC or Big 12?

Thing is, it's something that nobody has to worry about right now, because Texas, Florida and Alabama remain undefeated - and Cincinnati look as if they have a decent (relatively speaking) shot at running the rest of their schedule.

D3PO wrote: »

a non BCS team will not make the national championship game.

Boise have a soft schedule by default as the WAC is weak (Im an hawaii fan and pay particular attention to the WAC) and to be honest havent done anything in their non conference matchups to try and make their schedule legitimate as a team (Oregan excluded)

the only reason they are so high up the AP pools now is that many of the genuine top 10 teams have lost already and the way Oregan have bounced back since week 1 with back to back wins v ranked opponents.

Boise are clearly the best team in the WAC & arguably the best non BCS team although Utah, TCU & Houston would dispute that heavily.

If they win out they will be BCS busters but no chance of a national championship shot.

Now the sooner they introduce a playoff system in college football the better (Awaits a queue of angry responses)

Disagree with you here. I think this is the year that a Boise will go to the championship game if there is only one (or none) BCS teams undefeated at the end of the regular season. Oregon look really legit (great wins over Utah and Cal the past two weeks) and if they finish the season ranked then it will help the perception of Boise hugely.

The general media and fan perception has tilted towards the mid - majors, this season more than ever. There are a number of reasons for that: the consistency of programs like Boise, Utah, BYU and TCU over a period going back over five years; the good top to bottom record of the MWC in non - conference games against mid ranking or lower BCS schools; and:



Also, you say Boise have done nothing to improve their OOC schedule. That isn't true at all!! No-one wants to play them! You will never out recruit Boise in Idaho state, and Boise are a good team that could turn you over, plus it wouldn't be a particularly lucrative proposition from a TV perspective - so the big BCS teams have no interest in committing to a series against them.

Last season, Boise didn't gain their highest ranking until the season was over. The fact that they are already in the top five is incredibly significant. While their remaining schedule is relatively weak, as long as they keep winning through it with ease it will be hard for them to drop. Remember, if you win well, the coaches and Harris polls do not tend to drop you - irrespective of anything else going on. So if Boise win out, they will be poised to move up in the event of a Florida / Texas / Alabama defeat. Boise are now 5th in both:

http://www.harrisinteractive.com/news/newsletters/bcsnews/BCS_Sept_27_2009.pdf


The SEC can only produce one unbeaten team - either Florida or Alabama from their title game. The question then becomes whether Texas or Cincy can win out (or Iowa, or the other unbeaten BCS teams which is highly unlikely). If none of them do, I think Boise get their shot.

This will cause uproar from TV outlets, traditional big team fanbases and sections of the media. And then, the final nail in the coffin of the BCS would be for Boise to get blown out badly by Florida. And we will then get a playoff.

Cincinnati getting into the Championship instead of a one loss SEC team / Texas would also have a similar affect. And I don't think you can leave Cincinnati out, because the Big East would go nuts.

So yeah, go chaos!!

LuckyLloyd

Oh and by the way, Boise St is here to stay as a national power. The question is not 'if' they play in a national title game / playoff series, it's 'when'. They have a really solid recruiting base set up now, a conveyor belt of talent, and great foundations in terms of facilities, coaching, etc. The likes of Utah, BYU and TCU are in good shape as well. The Mid Majors aren't going to dip off the scene. And the longer they hang around, the harder it will be to exclude them from the spoils.

For Houston, it isn't really the case. Most likely, they are enjoying a once off type season (though it will undoubtably aid recruiting this year and next), but the Western Mid Majors are in great shape.

D3PO

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Disagree with you here. I think this is the year that a Boise will go to the championship game if there is only one (or none) BCS teams undefeated at the end of the regular season.

It will never happen FACT. If it was going to happen it would have happened back when Hawaii went undefeated.

Instead LSU got to the national championship with 2 losses under their belts.

Proof positive that a Non BCS team will never get a shot in the current structure.

LuckyLloyd

D3PO wrote: »

It will never happen FACT. If it was going to happen it would have happened back when Hawaii went undefeated.

Instead LSU got to the national championship with 2 losses under their belts.

Proof positive that a Non BCS team will never get a shot in the current structure.

lol

Hawaii didn't play a single BCS opponent during that season. They ended the season with a schedule rank of 132 (and that final rank improved on the basis of their BCS opponent!!). And their case was hurt by two < one score wins within the weak conference schedule. And they never broke into the top 10 in any of the polls (or the computer rankings) at any point during the 2007 regular season.

Accept that the facts surrounding Boise St this year are substantially different. And if they do go unbeaten, it comes one year after Utah went unbeaten and beat a one loss SEC team comfortably in their BCS bowl game.

D3PO

Im not disagreeing with that. Hawaii's schedule was soft but but so is Boise's thats exactly my point. When you play in a non BCS conferense your schedule is always going to be considered soft hens eno national recognition.

Hawaii did play 1 ranked team in 2007 before georgia by the way. Incidently it was Boise who were ranked #17

Boise will play 1 ranked Opponent in Oregan who are ranked #16 so not much difference there

Outside of that Boise play 1 D1AA school, 2 MAC opponents and one from C-USA

Hawaii played amongst others a Pac 10 school and 1 from the Mountain West. Ok you could argue they were weak teams from those conferences but there isnt that much of a difference in terms of their schedules.

If you were going to argue for a non BCS team to get a shot by running their schedule it would have to be TCU

they have already beaten 2 ACC schools on the road, and will play BYU & Utah who will both probably be ranked when they play them.

That said they still wont get a sniff.

The fact is pollsters are fickle in the US have a short memory (the golden rule in college football being if your gonna lose lose early) and have no respect for non BCS schools, and despite their being no place for it in rankings prestige and historical sucess plays a big part in the voting. Look at last year. Texas Tech finish with the same big 12 record as the sooner and the longhorns, but they hadnt a hope becaue they are not as fashionable.


Until there is a playoff system in college football I dont see how a genuine national champion can be crowned.

D3PO

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

lol

Hawaii didn't play a single BCS opponent during that season.

They played Washington from the Pac 10 you know that team that just beat USC there a week ago

LuckyLloyd

D3PO wrote: »

They played Washington from the Pac 10 you know that team that just beat USC there a week ago

Sorry yeah, it was scheduled after their conference schedule which is what threw me. Washington finished 2007 4 - 9 and were not bowl eligible. Oregon are going to finish this season well ahead of 4 - 9 and will be traveling to a respectable bowl come December.

LuckyLloyd

D3PO wrote: »

Im not disagreeing with that. Hawaii's schedule was soft but but so is Boise's thats exactly my point. When you play in a non BCS conferense your schedule is always going to be considered soft hens eno national recognition.

They are ranked no.5 right now. They have that national recognition. If they keep winning they are unlikely to drop below five / drop out of the top 10.

D3PO wrote: »

Hawaii did play 1 ranked team in 2007 before georgia by the way. Incidently it was Boise who were ranked #17

Boise didn't finish 2007 ranked, and that is the important part when it comes to who plays in the national title.

D3PO wrote: »

Boise will play 1 ranked Opponent in Oregan who are ranked #16 so not much difference there

Oregon will probably finish ranked in the top 25, and could be in the top 15 / top 10 if they keep playing like they are.

D3PO wrote: »

Outside of that Boise play 1 D1AA school, 2 MAC opponents and one from C-USA

Hawaii played amongst others a Pac 10 school and 1 from the Mountain West. Ok you could argue they were weak teams from those conferences but there isnt that much of a difference in terms of their schedules.

Yeah, but the Oregon game will prove crucial.

D3PO wrote: »

If you were going to argue for a non BCS team to get a shot by running their schedule it would have to be TCU

they have already beaten 2 ACC schools on the road, and will play BYU & Utah who will both probably be ranked when they play them.

That said they still wont get a sniff.

They won't get a sniff, because they won't finish unbeaten. If they do win out, they will be ahead of Boise in the title contention because their rankings will increase if they beat BYU and Utah.

D3PO wrote: »

The fact is pollsters are fickle in the US have a short memory (the golden rule in college football being if your gonna lose lose early) and have no respect for non BCS schools, and despite their being no place for it in rankings prestige and historical sucess plays a big part in the voting. Look at last year. Texas Tech finish with the same big 12 record as the sooner and the longhorns, but they hadnt a hope becaue they are not as fashionable.

This is the key part of where your argument falls down. The current attitude towards the mid majors is more favourable than it has been at any point previous during the last 20 years. Boise, Utah, BYU, Fresno St and TCU have had numerous notable wins over the past seven years on the big stage (either regular season non conference games or Bowl wins). Most importantly, the mid end of the MWC (Nevada, Air Force, etc) and the high end of Conference USA and the MAC have also been holding their own against weaker BCS teams consistently during that period. The MWC has been making a strong case that they are in the same league as the ACC / Big East. And people (coaches / analysts / fans) have started to listen in larger numbers than ever before.

What's past is prologue on this issue.

D3PO wrote: »

Until there is a playoff system in college football I dont see how a genuine national champion can be crowned.

I agree with that, and everything I have mentioned in the above paragraph draws us closer to a playoff becoming a reality.

D3PO

I agree the ducks are a decent team even without Blount. But unless a non BCS school goes and beats a top end big 12 or SEC team and runs their schedule theres no chance of them seeing the national championship.

on a seperate note Id say the Mountain West over recent seasons has been as good in terms of tallent as either the Pac 10 or ACC. This whole commerical scam that is the BCS is a disgrace.

Excellent programs like TCU, Utah, Boise & BYU are suffering as a result.

frostie500

D3PO wrote: »

The fact is pollsters are fickle in the US have a short memory (the golden rule in college football being if your gonna lose lose early) and have no respect for non BCS schools, and despite their being no place for it in rankings prestige and historical sucess plays a big part in the voting. Look at last year. Texas Tech finish with the same big 12 record as the sooner and the longhorns, but they hadnt a hope becaue they are not as fashionable.

Tech didn't lose the Big 12 because of fickle voters, they were played off the field by the Sooners losing 65-21. The Sooners went to the championship game because of the margin of victory against Tech. As a Longhorns fan its not pleasant to write this but even though we beat the Sooners it was viewed by voters that the fact that we lost to Tech and Sooners thrashed them that they were the team that would play for the title.

D3PO

frostie500 wrote: »

Tech didn't lose the Big 12 because of fickle voters, they were played off the field by the Sooners losing 65-21. The Sooners went to the championship game because of the margin of victory against Tech. As a Longhorns fan its not pleasant to write this but even though we beat the Sooners it was viewed by voters that the fact that we lost to Tech and Sooners thrashed them that they were the team that would play for the title.

yes but my point is they each beat each other. you cant say on one hand the sooners deserved it because they hammered texas tech, but then on the other hand say the longhorns didnt deserve it when they beat oaklahoma.

and the biggest farce of the whole thing is. well oaklahoma are better than texas because they hammered texas tech and texas los tagains thtem BUT if they lost the big 12 championship game then texas are better than them.

you cant have your cake and eat it.

anyway i think we are all agreed that the current system just doesnt allow for a credible national championship.

How would you guys see a playoff system working if it were to ever come about ?

D3PO

edited

D3PO

edited

frostie500

D3PO wrote: »

yes but my point is they each beat each other. you cant say on one hand the sooners deserved it because they hammered texas tech, but then on the other hand say the longhorns didnt deserve it when they beat oaklahoma.

and the biggest farce of the whole thing is. well oaklahoma are better than texas because they hammered texas tech and texas lost against them BUT if they lost the big 12 championship game then texas are better than them.

you cant have your cake and eat it.

It was an awful conundrum last year for the Big 12 and for voters, this situation had never arisen before, and to be honest I think the Sooners deserved to play for the title-their body of work over the season was more impressive then tech's and texas'.

The fact that as you say Tech aren't a fashionable choice is correct but last year they weren't as impressive as the sooners and the voters will only give so much of a boast to teams that are 'playing beyond their means' which to be honest is my issue with a mid major coming into the top 5 at this early stage of the season such as Boise. It's tough to move them down when they keep winning but what happens to the one loss teams later in the year.

In relation to the playoff system, I think its great that all college fans can have a row saying that team X deserves to get in and team Y doesnt, I wouldnt want a playoff off 16 teams or whatever though. I like the idea of having the national championship game after the end of the bowls and the top two rated teams play in it.

I always liked before the BCS when the major bowls were still really important and had their old tie ins(PAC-10 vs Big 10 at the Rose Bowl etc) and i'd like to see a system whereby we went back to those match-ups. I view it that after all the bowls are done there isn't going to be too much disagreement over the two best teams in the nation and they can play out for the championship

LuckyLloyd

D3PO wrote: »

How would you guys see a playoff system working if it were to ever come about ?

Like this.

Frostie, there would still be arguments about who gets into the playoffs, as given the nature of the beast (everyone doesn't play everyone and unbalanced schedules) it will never be possible to be 100% sure about who the best X teams are at the end of a college football season. Particularly when the sport has room for a lot of short - term variance in each individual game.

However, I am much more comfortable with that argument (and any injustice) being related to the fourth / eight team allowed admittance to the main event, than the way things currently are.

D3PO

yeah but I know if it was me Id want to know I deserved winning the title I won. You can only do that by legitimatly letting the teams prove it in a playoff series.

I say 16 team playoff consisting of

Conference winners of big 10, pac 10, big east,

plus divisional winners of big 12, sec, acc,

top independent, (assuming they are bowl eligible) if not becomes a wildcard slot

plus the champions of the mountain west, wac, c-usa, MAC

and i guess you have to give the sun belt a slot :eek:

plus 1 wildcard i.e the highest ranked team in the AP rankings that hasnt already qualified.

needless to say you have to keep bowls in play so that programms that are out of the conference running still have something to play for.

but keep the big 4 bowls for the final 8 round of the playoffs and the bsc championship game for the final

frostie500

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Like this.

Frostie, there would still be arguments about who gets into the playoffs, as given the nature of the beast (everyone doesn't play everyone and unbalanced schedules) it will never be possible to be 100% sure about who the best X teams are at the end of a college football season. Particularly when the sport has room for a lot of short - term variance in each individual game.

I remember reading your post on this earlier and I know that it's similar to one that most fans would enjoy, i just feel that in a situation whereby the Bowl games are only a qualifier to the semis and national championship game devaules a long standing tradition of those game.

The Rose, Sugar and Orange Bowl's have each been running for over 80 years and need to maintain an important position in college football. If a playoff came in like the one that you are suggesting these games would be devalued and could well end up like the current day Cotton Bowl which is something that would dismay most fans.

To be honest that if the reason that I would advocate the plus one game. After the Rose, Orange, Sugar and Fiesta Bowl games it's generally always pretty clear who the top two teams in the nation are and as a result there shouldn't be too much dissenting when the championship game is played as to who should be included. The integrity of the major bowls is still intact after their games are played and thus the organisers can be happy to keep getting major TV deals. To sweeten the deal further the National Championship is played in their stadiums every one in four years.

LuckyLloyd

frostie500 wrote: »

I remember reading your post on this earlier and I know that it's similar to one that most fans would enjoy, i just feel that in a situation whereby the Bowl games are only a qualifier to the semis and national championship game devaules a long standing tradition of those game.

The Rose, Sugar and Orange Bowl's have each been running for over 80 years and need to maintain an important position in college football. If a playoff came in like the one that you are suggesting these games would be devalued and could well end up like the current day Cotton Bowl which is something that would dismay most fans.

Would having those Bowls as a stepping stone to the National Championship not enhance their importance and status if anything?

frostie500 wrote: »

To be honest that if the reason that I would advocate the plus one game. After the Rose, Orange, Sugar and Fiesta Bowl games it's generally always pretty clear who the top two teams in the nation are and as a result there shouldn't be too much dissenting when the championship game is played as to who should be included. The integrity of the major bowls is still intact after their games are played and thus the organisers can be happy to keep getting major TV deals. To sweeten the deal further the National Championship is played in their stadiums every one in four years.

I'd accept that as an improvement over the current system. Though out of interest, in a hypothetical 'plus one' game who would you have seen play for the title in 2008 and 2007?

D3PO

frostie500 wrote: »

The Rose, Sugar and Orange Bowl's have each been running for over 80 years and need to maintain an important position in college football. If a playoff came in like the one that you are suggesting these games would be devalued and could well end up like the current day Cotton Bowl which is something that would dismay most fans.

Now lets not take away from what the Utes did v Bama last year but Bama didnt look up for it at all. you could argue that these bowls are already devalued as many of the teams reaching them feel deflated that they arent playing in the national game already.

at least using them as final 8 games you are gauranteed fire in the bellys of all teams playing in them.

frostie500

D3PO wrote: »

Now lets not take away from what the Utes did v Bama last year but Bama didnt look up for it at all. you could argue that these bowls are already devalued as many of the teams reaching them feel deflated that they arent playing in the national game already.

at least using them as final 8 games you are gauranteed fire in the bellys of all teams playing in them.

Long term if these games become quater finals to you think that the tv contracts will be for the same money? You need to be able to give the bowl organisers a carrot to change because they wont change to improve college football they'll only change if its for their own betterment.

frostie500

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Though out of interest, in a hypothetical 'plus one' game who would you have seen play for the title in 2008 and 2007?

Not entirely certain I have this right but here goes!

I picked a probable winner from these games taking into account how teams did in their bowl games that year, thats not really up for discussion its the point of what would have transpired for the national championship

The historic alliances are shown and as far as I know are correct

Rose PAC-10 vs BIG TEN
07 USC vs Ohio State

---

USC 11-2
06 USC vs Ohio State

---

USC 11-2
Sugar SEC vs at large
07 LSU vs Michigan (at large)

---

LSU 11-2
06 Florida vs Notre Dame (at large)

---

Florida 13-1
Fiesta WAC vs 2nd BIG 12/SEC
07 Hawaii vs Georgia

---

Georgia 11 -2
06 Boise vs LSU

---

LSU 11-2
Orange Big East vs Big 12
07 West Virginia vs Oklahoma

---

W Virginia 12-2
06 Louisville vs Oklahoma

---

Oklahoma 12-2

National Championship with the post season rankings of 1 vs 2
07 LSU vs Georgia
06 Florida vs LSU

I don't think that there would have been too much consternation if these teams played for the national championship in those years, and by playing out the bowl games with something on the line there wouldn't be the issue of some teams not giving 100% as said against Bama last year in the Sugar Bowl.

frostie500

crap, already noticed the issue with 06 and LSU! I meant to have them in place of Texas in the Fiesta Bowl and beating Boise

eagle eye

I'm just looking at some of the rankings and the one thing that annoys me is how low Michigan are ranked. Ok they haven't played the best teams, but they beat Notre Dame and they are 4-0.

Now bear with me for a moment here. Oregon are ranked 16 right now and are 3-1. The just about beat Purdue in their second game and that was in Oregon, Purdue lost by the very same two points at home to the Irish on Saturday, which has to be considered a better performance than Oregon's performance against the same team. Ergo Michigan who remain unbeaten and beat Notre Dame should be considered a better team than Oregon at this point.
Cal were found out this week and will be thumped when they face USC, of that I have no doubt.

Now Boise beat Oregon but I contend that Michigan are every bit as good if not better than Boise.

Personally I think that both Michigan and Notre Dame are not getting a fair ranking here. For me Notre Dame are top 20 and Michigan are top 10.

LuckyLloyd

eagle eye wrote: »

I'm just looking at some of the rankings and the one thing that annoys me is how low Michigan are ranked. Ok they haven't played the best teams, but they beat Notre Dame and they are 4-0.

Now bear with me for a moment here. Oregon are ranked 16 right now and are 3-1. The just about beat Purdue in their second game and that was in Oregon, Purdue lost by the very same two points at home to the Irish on Saturday, which has to be considered a better performance than Oregon's performance against the same team. Ergo Michigan who remain unbeaten and beat Notre Dame should be considered a better team than Oregon at this point.
Cal were found out this week and will be thumped when they face USC, of that I have no doubt.

Now Boise beat Oregon but I contend that Michigan are every bit as good if not better than Boise.

Personally I think that both Michigan and Notre Dame are not getting a fair ranking here. For me Notre Dame are top 20 and Michigan are top 10.

No chance! As a Notre Dame die hard I honestly do not believe we are a top 35 team right now. Michigan ran very well against us in the Big House, and have played poor teams apart from that. Both teams will lose at least two more games before the end of the regular season, and probably end up in a bowl game above and beyond their talent level, losing it also.