# College Football 2007-2008



## fett527 (Aug 30, 2007)

Been poking my head in here a little bit more lately and started reminiscing about the CF threads of the past and noticed there was not one for this year (at least I didn't see one).  So, even though I'm more active other places I'd like to keep talkin' the college football here.


Games start tonight!!

But...


*GO BUCKS!!!!!!!!!*


----------



## Ranger REG (Aug 31, 2007)

I'm gonna be rooting for my home team, despite the crappy schedule that won't allow one BCS team outside of the conference to challenge them ... cuz they scared. (Thank you, Mr. Herman Frazier!)


----------



## Lewis526 (Aug 31, 2007)

So... Who's going to go undefeated this year?  Who's going to get snubbed by the BCS computers this year?  How many more years will the best teams' fates be in the hands of computer programmers, rather than in their own?


----------



## Alaric_Prympax (Aug 31, 2007)

LSU
GEAUX TIGERS!!!

I can't wait to play USC in the Championship game in New Orleans!

Well I hope were in the game.  We even got a New Mike this year.   

Sadly Mike V passed away.    Very friendly playfull tiger, I always thought there was quite a bit of cub in him his whole life.   I remember visiting him quite a bit, I was at LSU when we got him.


----------



## fett527 (Aug 31, 2007)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> I'm gonna be rooting for my home team, despite the crappy schedule that won't allow one BCS team outside of the conference to challenge them ... cuz they scared. (Thank you, Mr. Herman Frazier!)



May get a Heisman thrown Brennan's way though.


----------



## DCrane1 (Aug 31, 2007)

Personally, I'm picking my alma mater. University of Southern California for both the championship and the Heisman.


----------



## LightPhoenix (Aug 31, 2007)

I don't follow football as much as I do basketball, so my hopes are relatively low - that Syracuse actually not completely suck this year.  There's a lot of hype here, but I think a lot of it is unfounded.  I'd like to see Syracuse win at least five.


----------



## fett527 (Aug 31, 2007)

DCrane1 said:
			
		

> Personally, I'm picking my alma mater. University of Southern California for both the championship and the Heisman.



You really think Booty will win the Heisman?


----------



## freyar (Aug 31, 2007)

Normally, I'd only follow basketball, but my alma mater has been bad the last couple years and then the coach (Skip Prosser) just died of a heart attack.   So I'll have to see if WFU can pull off being the most unlikely BCS bowl team for a second year in a row.


----------



## Dimwhit (Aug 31, 2007)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> I'm gonna be rooting for my home team, despite the crappy schedule that won't allow one BCS team outside of the conference to challenge them ... cuz they scared. (Thank you, Mr. Herman Frazier!)




You know, Ranger...my dream is that Boise and Hawaii go into their showdown at the end of the season with both teams undefeated. That would be sweet.


----------



## fett527 (Aug 31, 2007)

Dimwhit said:
			
		

> You know, Ranger...my dream is that Boise and Hawaii go into their showdown at the end of the season with both teams undefeated. That would be sweet.




I'd stay up to watch it!


----------



## drothgery (Aug 31, 2007)

What I hope to see this year ...

My Orange starting off this season with a win tonight, and begining to claw back to respectability.
A Big East team in the BCS title game, and another strong year for the conference
More bad football from the ACC, just because 
A second Pac 10 team to join USC in the BCS, and a strong year from the conference overall (because due to regional progamming I'm going to see a lot of Pac 10 football anyway)
Someone to crash the BCS. But not Hawaii; I'm sorry they couldn't get a BCS conference opponent, but they didn't get one, so I'll be cheering for Boise when they meet in Hawaii's only actual game this year.
Some improvement from SDSU. Even with only a little local talent, the Aztecs ought to be a mid-major power, not a doormat.


----------



## drothgery (Aug 31, 2007)

fett527 said:
			
		

> You really think Booty will win the Heisman?




I think USC's a better bet to be #1 for the whole regular season than OSU was last year, and Booty's likely to put up better passing numbers than Troy Smith did. And a QB of the #1 team (especially when said school is a very high-profile program like Southern Cal or Ohio State) with good passing numbers is a pretty good bet for the Heisman.


----------



## pogre (Aug 31, 2007)

The upset of the young season last night was I-AA Illinois State University losing to Drake University 27-24.

What is so amazing about that game?
ISU ranked #7 in I-AA with 53 scholarships

Drake 0 (yes zero) scholarships

How does that happen?


----------



## fett527 (Aug 31, 2007)

drothgery said:
			
		

> I think USC's a better bet to be #1 for the whole regular season than OSU was last year, and Booty's likely to put up better passing numbers than Troy Smith did. And a QB of the #1 team (especially when said school is a very high-profile program like Southern Cal or Ohio State) with good passing numbers is a pretty good bet for the Heisman.




I think McFadden will run all over that theory.


----------



## Crothian (Aug 31, 2007)

Booty though won't have as many cool plays as Troy did even though his numbers will be better.  I also agree that the competitions will be tighter for the Heisman.

Lot of the big schools have scrimmages this weekend.  It's quite shameful.


----------



## drothgery (Aug 31, 2007)

fett527 said:
			
		

> I think McFadden will run all over that theory.




... for half a season, but at some point Arkansas will have lost three games and no one will talk about him anymore. Same thing's going to happen to the Slaton/White combo after WVU loses to Louisville and Rutgers. I'm thinking the guy that's going to really push Booty is Brohm, but at the end of the day, the award's chosen by sportswriters and ex-Heisman winners. They aren't going to pick a Louisville guy over a USC guy.


----------



## Ranger REG (Sep 1, 2007)

fett527 said:
			
		

> May get a Heisman thrown Brennan's way though.



I hope you don't mean that literally. He's a passer not a receiver.   

Because of the weak game schedule, my team not only has to get a W for each and every game this season, they gotta "murder" them on the field.


----------



## Ranger REG (Sep 1, 2007)

Dimwhit said:
			
		

> You know, Ranger...my dream is that Boise and Hawaii go into their showdown at the end of the season with both teams undefeated. That would be sweet.



My simple dream is to have Boise State annihilated.


----------



## Crothian (Sep 1, 2007)

Are the Wolverine fans in hiding now?  I had to turn on the game to prove to myself the score was accurate.  How can they be losing to Appalachian state?  I mean it's not even a real state!!!


----------



## freyar (Sep 1, 2007)

Crothian said:
			
		

> Are the Wolverine fans in hiding now?  I had to turn on the game to prove to myself the score was accurate.  How can they be losing to Appalachian state?  I mean it's not even a real state!!!




If you remember the old Dolly Parton TV commercials for the "cowboy-era" railroad outside Boone, NC, you might be amused to know that native Carolinians call App. State "UNC at Tweetsie."


----------



## Dimwhit (Sep 1, 2007)

I can NOT believe Michigan lost that game. AMAZING!!


----------



## drothgery (Sep 1, 2007)

Crothian said:
			
		

> Are the Wolverine fans in hiding now?  I had to turn on the game to prove to myself the score was accurate.  How can they be losing to Appalachian state?  I mean it's not even a real state!!!




It hasn't been even 24 hours, and me and my fellow Orange fans are no longer the most embarassed fans in college football . And Wazzou seems to be moving the ball early on against Wisconsin, so the Big Ten might be down to you guys and just maybe Penn State.


----------



## Dimwhit (Sep 2, 2007)

Man, the Cal offense is looking REALLY good this year.


----------



## Ranger REG (Sep 3, 2007)

Damn the second-string teams. UH could have had a 63-0 shutout.


----------



## Dimwhit (Sep 3, 2007)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> Damn the second-string teams. UH could have had a 63-0 shutout.



 Tell me about it. Boise played as deep as their 4th-string players. Only scored 7 points the second half and allowed a TD.


----------



## nakia (Sep 4, 2007)

My alma mater, Furman University, is a I-AA school in the same conference as App State.  We routinely get beat by them, though we play them tough and reached the national championship game a time or two.

Now I don't feel so bad about loosing to App State all those years. 

Edit: One of my grad schools, Virginia, got beat by 20 by Wyoming.  How does that happen?


----------



## LightPhoenix (Sep 4, 2007)

drothgery said:
			
		

> It hasn't been even 24 hours, and me and my fellow Orange fans are no longer the most embarassed fans in college football . And Wazzou seems to be moving the ball early on against Wisconsin, so the Big Ten might be down to you guys and just maybe Penn State.




Oh, I don't know about that.  If it's so, it's simply because we've sucked for a few years now, and embarassment has faded to a lack of expectation.  We got spanked in that game, and to add insult, we're the only Big East team that lost in Week 1.


----------



## drothgery (Sep 4, 2007)

LightPhoenix said:
			
		

> Oh, I don't know about that.  If it's so, it's simply because we've sucked for a few years now, and embarassment has faded to a lack of expectation.  We got spanked in that game, and to add insult, we're the only Big East team that lost in Week 1.




Eh. The only other team in the conference that played a BCS conference team was UConn. And they played Duke. Myself, I'm not sure getting blown out by UW looks any worse than letting a I-AA team that's not particularly good stay within two touchdowns (like USF did).


----------



## Crothian (Sep 4, 2007)

FSU not looking that good last night.


----------



## Dimwhit (Sep 4, 2007)

Crothian said:
			
		

> FSU not looking that good last night.



 Good. Once again, they were overrated in the polls.


----------



## nakia (Sep 4, 2007)

Crothian said:
			
		

> FSU not looking that good last night.




Seems they came around in the second half.  I went to bed, so did they start playing better or did Clemson start to suck?


----------



## Dimwhit (Sep 4, 2007)

Anyone see the Coaches Poll? Michigan dropped from 5 all the way to 27. Unbelievable. I figured they'd drop to 16 or 17. Maybe 20. But man, they were harsh.


----------



## Ranger REG (Sep 4, 2007)

Dimwhit said:
			
		

> Anyone see the Coaches Poll?



Link please.


----------



## Dimwhit (Sep 4, 2007)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> Link please.




http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/rankingsindex

The AP put Michigan at 33!


----------



## nakia (Sep 4, 2007)

Dimwhit said:
			
		

> Anyone see the Coaches Poll? Michigan dropped from 5 all the way to 27. Unbelievable. I figured they'd drop to 16 or 17. Maybe 20. But man, they were harsh.




That was a little harsh, I think.  It fails to give App State enough credit.  They are a team that has consistently been good for years, albeit in I-AA.  It was still a huge upset, but putting Michigan that far down basically says "You guys must really suck."


----------



## drothgery (Sep 4, 2007)

nakia said:
			
		

> That was a little harsh, I think.  It fails to give App State enough credit.  They are a team that has consistently been good for years, albeit in I-AA.  It was still a huge upset, but putting Michigan that far down basically says "You guys must really suck."




Not really. There are lots of pretty good teams that aren't in the top 25 in the polls. And any team that lost their season opener to an unranked team (other than just possibly a traditional rival) is going to fall out of the rankings. The only 0-1 team that's ranked at all this week is Tennessee and they played a higher ranked team, were on the road, and were in the game for quite a while.

I mean, there are 120 teams in I-A, err, Division I Bowl Subdivision. Quite a few of the 95 unranked teams are okay. Unless you think App State is a top-20 I-A team -- and I'll grant they're good, but not that good -- then Michigan should drop out of the rankings if they lose their first game to them at home.


----------



## Ranger REG (Sep 5, 2007)

Dimwhit said:
			
		

> http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/rankingsindex
> 
> The AP put Michigan at 33!



Interesting. Prior to this season, AP used to look down on Hawaii while USA Today boost us up. This is quite a reversal.


----------



## Balgus (Sep 5, 2007)

fett527 said:
			
		

> You really think Booty will win the Heisman?



No Way - USC is overrated... and they beat Idaho by 4 TD ... IDAHO !!


----------



## DonTadow (Sep 5, 2007)

Dimwhit said:
			
		

> http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/rankingsindex
> 
> The AP put Michigan at 33!



And thus once again the AP shows what is wrong with the poll system and how inaccurate it is.  Either they were wrong at putting Michigan at #5 or they are wrong now. 

Seeing the game is Michigan really a #33 team. Nah, they rank at least between 15 to 25. I long for the days where these polls mean nothing at the end of the season. 

Thing about it.  The coaches vote, yet if these coaches are doing what they are suppose to be doing, coaching, then they can't possibly accurately evalute every team.  Same with the writers, whom can't possibely follow every team unless your sole beat is college football, and as a newspaper writer, if you are any good you will be covering two or three sports.


----------



## nakia (Sep 5, 2007)

drothgery said:
			
		

> Not really. There are lots of pretty good teams that aren't in the top 25 in the polls. And any team that lost their season opener to an unranked team (other than just possibly a traditional rival) is going to fall out of the rankings. The only 0-1 team that's ranked at all this week is Tennessee and they played a higher ranked team, were on the road, and were in the game for quite a while.
> 
> I mean, there are 120 teams in I-A, err, Division I Bowl Subdivision. Quite a few of the 95 unranked teams are okay. Unless you think App State is a top-20 I-A team -- and I'll grant they're good, but not that good -- then Michigan should drop out of the rankings if they lose their first game to them at home.




Point taken.  Michigan would have dropped out of the top 25 if they had been beaten by, say, Mississippi State.

In a somewhat related note, would/could/should a team like App State move to I-A?  I am not sure how that happens or even if the NCAA would allow it.  The last team I remember doing that was Marshall (which, coincidentally, was also in the Southern Conference and routinely won the I-AA championship).


----------



## Dimwhit (Sep 5, 2007)

nakia said:
			
		

> In a somewhat related note, would/could/should a team like App State move to I-A?  I am not sure how that happens or even if the NCAA would allow it.  The last team I remember doing that was Marshall (which, coincidentally, was also in the Southern Conference and routinely won the I-AA championship).




Boise State moved from 1-AA to 1-A eleven years ago. There's another new 1-A team this year (don't know if they came up from 1-AA though. Happens often enough that it's not unreasonable for App State to do the same.


----------



## drothgery (Sep 5, 2007)

nakia said:
			
		

> In a somewhat related note, would/could/should a team like App State move to I-A?  I am not sure how that happens or even if the NCAA would allow it.  The last team I remember doing that was Marshall (which, coincidentally, was also in the Southern Conference and routinely won the I-AA championship).




Until recently, it wasn't all that difficult (Western Kentucky just did; UConn was probably the most notable after Marshall, and really, in the long run is probably more notable than Marshall though they've had less early success -- the Big East isn't the MAC or C-USA). But they don't have a big enough stadium to meet I-A attendance guidelines even if they sell out every game (though most of the MAC, WAC, C-USA, and Sun Belt don't actually sell enough tickets there, and neither does Duke), and they'd be the sixth I-A school (the 4 ACC schools and East Carolina) in a state that, by national averages, has about enough people to support 2 or 3, and that doesn't really support non-ACC sports. My understanding is that they've talked about it, but for various reasons (it'd be expensive, they probably wouldn't get much help from the NC state government, and it's more fun to be the big fish in a small pond than yet another mid-major) they've declined to move up.


----------



## drothgery (Sep 5, 2007)

Dimwhit said:
			
		

> Boise State moved from 1-AA to 1-A eleven years ago. There's another new 1-A team this year (don't know if they came up from 1-AA though. Happens often enough that it's not unreasonable for App State to do the same.




Western Kentucky. Also worth noting here is that it seems like the NCAA just put a moratorium on schools changing divisions and/or chaning between subdivisions of division I for schools not already in-process.


----------



## nakia (Sep 5, 2007)

drothgery said:
			
		

> Western Kentucky. Also worth noting here is that it seems like the NCAA just put a moratorium on schools changing divisions and/or chaning between subdivisions of division I for schools not already in-process.




Is this a prelude to the Div 1-A playoff, you think?


----------



## drothgery (Sep 5, 2007)

nakia said:
			
		

> Is this a prelude to the Div 1-A playoff, you think?




I'd like to think so, but probably not. I'd guess there are two possible routes to a I-A playoff.

The most likely is a slow slide to a true playoff from the BCS system. This would mean implementing a "plus-one" game in the only rational fashion (a 4-team mini-playoff) in the next round of BCS agreements. Then 5 or ten years later, after seeing that a 4-team playoff isn't the end of the world, and still leaves deserving title contenders out, expanding to 8 teams, and then all the way out to the sixteen that's the minimum I-A really needs.*

The other possiblity is that some organization decides to set up a playoff with the champions of the five 'mid-major' conferences and the best other teams that they can get (if set up right, they could probably get the runner-ups from the Big East and Pac 10 -- as those conferences have bad bowl deals, and the #3 teams from the other BCS conferences), and that eventually public pressure would force big-name schools into the playoffs rather than the bowls.

* There are 120 teams in I-A; if 10% of the teams aren't playoff worthy, there's somthing wrong. Nearly 20% of division I makes the basketball playoffs (65 of 339 teams). MLB's 8 of 30 teams (a little over 25%) is the lowest percentage of playoff teams in American pro sports.


----------



## Dimwhit (Sep 5, 2007)

drothgery said:
			
		

> The other possiblity is that some organization decides to set up a playoff with the champions of the five 'mid-major' conferences and the best other teams that they can get (if set up right, they could probably get the runner-ups from the Big East and Pac 10 -- as those conferences have bad bowl deals, and the #3 teams from the other BCS conferences), and that eventually public pressure would force big-name schools into the playoffs rather than the bowls.




Man, that would be GREAT! I'd love to see the non-BCS conference give the BCS the bird and have their own playoffs. Sure, no Fiesta Bowl for the occasional Boise State/Utah, but it would be exciting. I don't care what anyone says, there's some fun football in the WAC/MAC/C-USA/etc. I'd love to see a mid-major playoff.


----------



## nakia (Sep 6, 2007)

Dimwhit said:
			
		

> Man, that would be GREAT! I'd love to see the non-BCS conference give the BCS the bird and have their own playoffs. Sure, no Fiesta Bowl for the occasional Boise State/Utah, but it would be exciting. I don't care what anyone says, there's some fun football in the WAC/MAC/C-USA/etc. I'd love to see a mid-major playoff.




I think this is a cool idea, but I can see some of the major conference schools not buying in, even if they are #3 school in the conference.  Would South Carolina, say, want to take the risk of getting beaten by Central Michigan on a national stage?  Just look at what happened to Oklahoma?


----------



## drothgery (Sep 6, 2007)

nakia said:
			
		

> I think this is a cool idea, but I can see some of the major conference schools not buying in, even if they are #3 school in the conference.  Would South Carolina, say, want to take the risk of getting beaten by Central Michigan on a national stage?  Just look at what happened to Oklahoma?




My guess is that if the 'non-BCS playoffs' offered more money than second and third tier bowls (my guess is that it could offer more than the Big East and Pac 10's second tier bowl, and more than everyone else's third-tier bowl, but nothing close to BCS money -- so if a mid-major champ got a BCS invite, they'd still take it), then South Carolina or Nebraska would take it.


----------



## Crothian (Sep 7, 2007)

Looks like the defenses gave up in this Louisville game.  Almost 50 points scored in the first quarter!!


----------



## Dimwhit (Sep 7, 2007)

Crothian said:
			
		

> Looks like the defenses gave up in this Louisville game.  Almost 50 points scored in the first quarter!!



 Man, make that 73. The pollsters may punish Louisville a bit in the polls after this game, even if they still win. When a Top 10 team lets a team from the Sun Belt conference score 35 in the first half...that's just not good.


----------



## Crothian (Sep 7, 2007)

And it's nice to see Cincy beat up on the PAC 10!!


----------



## Dimwhit (Sep 7, 2007)

Crothian said:
			
		

> And it's nice to see Cincy beat up on the PAC 10!!



 No it's not.


----------



## DaveMage (Sep 7, 2007)

Whoa!  A 2-page thread and not one mention of the National Champions?!

Can't have that...


GO GATORS!


----------



## drothgery (Sep 7, 2007)

Dimwhit said:
			
		

> No it's not.




I've got mixed feelings here. I'm a Big East fan living on the west coast.

Now, as for the UW/Boise game... I usually like cheering for the little guy, but I'm really hoping there's an outside chance UW thumped my Orange because they're good, not because we suck. And a Huskies win would help there.


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Sep 7, 2007)

DaveMage said:
			
		

> Whoa!  A 2-page thread and not one mention of the National Champions?!
> 
> Can't have that...
> 
> ...



 I would have but I just finished a (short) move and such!

So I'll just quote it so its been said twice.


----------



## Crothian (Sep 8, 2007)

This would be a great win for the Ducks if App State hadn't had that upset last weak.  Now it just looks like the Wolverines just suck.


----------



## Dimwhit (Sep 8, 2007)

Boise State is really bumming me out. Their offense is playing WAY too conservative. They just can't score. What a pisser.


----------



## Dimwhit (Sep 8, 2007)




----------



## DaveMage (Sep 9, 2007)

Crothian said:
			
		

> This would be a great win for the Ducks if App State hadn't had that upset last weak.  Now it just looks like the Wolverines just suck.




Amazing collapse of a supposed top 5 team...


----------



## Dimwhit (Sep 9, 2007)

DaveMage said:
			
		

> Amazing collapse of a supposed top 5 team...



 Michigan was way overrated going into this season. As was Notre Dame, as usual. The collapse, while surprising in severity, isn't too shocking.


----------



## Crothian (Sep 9, 2007)

It's easy to say that now.


----------



## Crothian (Sep 9, 2007)

Big Ten went 10-1, not too bad for a conference that's not too good this year.  I wonder when the last time was that Michigan had the sole possession of last place in the conference.


----------



## drothgery (Sep 9, 2007)

Crothian said:
			
		

> Big Ten went 10-1, not too bad for a conference that's not too good this year.  I wonder when the last time was that Michigan had the sole possession of last place in the conference.




Just nitpickery, but no Big Ten games have been played; Michigan has the worst record in among Big Ten teams, but everyone's 0-0 in conference.

Of course, given the state of the Orange, when does basketball season start?


----------



## LightPhoenix (Sep 9, 2007)

drothgery said:
			
		

> Of course, given the state of the Orange, when does basketball season start?




Not soon enough.

I was hoping that they would at least get one TD, or at least hold Iowa off to a couple.  No such luck.  It wouldn't have been so bad if they had won last week, but such is life.

The problem is, and this is an endemic college sports problem IMO, is that once a team goes through really awful patch, like SU, it's extremely difficult to build back up a team.  Conversely, you get teams like USC which are almost guaranteed good players because they have good seasons.  It's a viscious cycle.

For the record, I don't think that's Syracuse's problem, but it's certainly not helping.


----------



## drothgery (Sep 10, 2007)

LightPhoenix said:
			
		

> The problem is, and this is an endemic college sports problem IMO, is that once a team goes through really awful patch, like SU, it's extremely difficult to build back up a team.  Conversely, you get teams like USC which are almost guaranteed good players because they have good seasons.  It's a viscious cycle.




Err... prior to Pete Carroll's second year at USC, the Trojans were in a rather protracted patch of mediocrity where UCLA was the dominant football team in SoCal (and by the late 1990s the center of power in the Pac 10 was clearly in the Pacific Northwest). Not as bad the Greg Robinson-era Orange, but easily as bad as Pasqualoni's post-McNabb teams.


----------



## Krug (Sep 10, 2007)

I'm just waiting for Cal (#10) to break my heart again...


----------



## Ranger REG (Sep 10, 2007)

Well...

That was a close one for UH Warriors (vs. La Tech Bulldogs), 45-44 OT. That team gave UH quite a thrilling game down to the last overtime seconds. Still, UH should have steamrolled La Tech. Then again, this is good road game experience for them.


----------



## LightPhoenix (Sep 10, 2007)

drothgery said:
			
		

> Err... prior to Pete Carroll's second year at USC, the Trojans were in a rather protracted patch of mediocrity where UCLA was the dominant football team in SoCal (and by the late 1990s the center of power in the Pac 10 was clearly in the Pacific Northwest). Not as bad the Greg Robinson-era Orange, but easily as bad as Pasqualoni's post-McNabb teams.




I think Carroll's tenure (which is shorter than I thought, only 2001, wow) showed that what was wrong with USC wasn't players (or recruiting), but coaching.  Once they got a decent coach in there, the team took off.


----------



## diaglo (Sep 10, 2007)

TERPS... undefeated. 2-0


----------



## Dimwhit (Sep 10, 2007)

Krug said:
			
		

> I'm just waiting for Cal (#10) to break my heart again...




Cal is my dark horse pick for the national championship. Not that my pick means anything...


----------



## Crothian (Sep 10, 2007)

diaglo said:
			
		

> TERPS... undefeated. 2-0




If they make it to 3-0 then you'll have something to brag about!!


----------



## nakia (Sep 10, 2007)

Texas A&M takes three overtimes to beat Fresno State.  They can't throw the ball and looks like they have trouble in their secondary.  The option is effective, but all it takes is some linebackers with good lateral speed and that gets taken away.  Here's to fourth in the Big 12, a perpetual 23 ranking, and a bowl loss as usual.

Sorry about the Boise State loss, Dimwhit.  I usually root for you guys, but also like Ty Willingham (I think he got shafted by Notre Dame).


----------



## Dimwhit (Sep 10, 2007)

nakia said:
			
		

> Sorry about the Boise State loss, Dimwhit.  I usually root for you guys, but also like Ty Willingham (I think he got shafted by Notre Dame).




I'm actually over it. They had to lose eventually, and Washington is a good team to lose to. They're on the rise, and it's nice to see.

Might take another year or two to regain any national cred, but we still love our Broncos out here!  And they still have a realistic shot of being 11-1 heading into the Hawaii game at the end of the year.


----------



## Ranger REG (Sep 11, 2007)

Dimwhit said:
			
		

> Might take another year or two to regain any national cred, but we still love our Broncos out here!  *And they still have a realistic shot of being 11-1 heading into the Hawaii game at the end of the year.*



And then 11-2 after the Hawaii game, at least.


----------



## Dimwhit (Sep 11, 2007)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> And then 11-2 after the Hawaii game, at least.



 Heh. Funny... 

Assuming Boise's offense gets on track, that game promises to be a good one, for sure.


----------



## drothgery (Sep 14, 2007)

diaglo said:
			
		

> TERPS... undefeated. 2-0




Nope. 2-1; WVU 31, MD 14. Looks like it was the typical WVU Steve Slaton show.


----------



## HDTVDinner (Sep 16, 2007)

$*!# @&%$ !#*% @*$% @$#$ Urban Myer, and his $&#@ !%^* #@%^ @#$#-#$@& Style points. #$*^ @*#% $*^& #@(^ Tim Tebow. #*@(% $*(@ (#*$% &!@# *#&$& Percy Harvin. And a Big $&#& %&#& &#** @&$ %&#*@ to Phil and Dave. Go $*%& &@*# (@*% Vols.


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Sep 16, 2007)

HDTVDinner said:
			
		

> $*!# @&%$ !#*% @*$% @$#$ Urban Myer, and his $&#@ !%^* #@%^ @#$#-#$@& Style points. #$*^ @*#% $*^& #@(^ Tim Tebow. #*@(% $*(@ (#*$% &!@# *#&$& Percy Harvin. And a Big $&#& %&#& &#** @&$ %&#*@ to Phil and Dave. Go $*%& &@*# (@*% Vols.



 Go.


Gators.


----------



## HDTVDinner (Sep 16, 2007)

You know, Back in the Randy Sanders era, there was a popular message board called www.firerandysanders.com It's actually still around. I have made it my mission, that if Kentucky has a better winning record than the Vols at the end of the season, to start www.hirerandysanders.com


----------



## drothgery (Sep 23, 2007)

After I'd pretty much given up on the football season, the Orange went out and beat Louisville today. Cool.


----------



## John Morrow (Sep 23, 2007)

They had the week off but so far so good for Rutgers in the Big East. 

R.U., Rah, Rah;
R.U., Rah, Rah,
Whoo-Rah, Whoo-Rah;
Rutgers Rah

Up Stream Red Team
Red Team Up Stream
Rah, Rah, Rutgers Rah


----------



## Crothian (Sep 23, 2007)

drothgery said:
			
		

> After I'd pretty much given up on the football season, the Orange went out and beat Louisville today. Cool.




that has to make their season right there.


----------



## LightPhoenix (Sep 23, 2007)

Crothian said:
			
		

> that has to make their season right there.




If Louisville had played a decent game, maybe, but the defense was just awful.

That said, hopefully this will be a morale boost for Syracuse that will propel them to some better playing.


----------



## Lewis526 (Sep 24, 2007)

A thoughtful question for everyone, but particularly the SEC fans:

How many losses will the SEC champion have going into the bowl season, and will anything less than undefeated give them a shot at the BCS championship?  (Yeah, Auburn fans, I know what you're thinking, and you'd be preaching to the choir.)

Imagine, for example, that the loser of the LSU - Florida game wins the conference championship game.  Could a one-loss SEC champion go to the BCS title game two years in a row?  Or will that loss be too late in the season for that team to climb back up the rankings?  Or will we have another year when an undefeated champion from the SEC (or any conference, for that matter) loses the postseason popularity contest to two other undefeated teams?

Having to ask these questions makes me really support a playoff system.  The teams deserve to know what they have to do to get their chance.  I'd most prefer to see a playoff between the champions of the 5 "major" conferences plus a few at-large bids, but if it takes a "plus-one" system to phase in a playoff, then I'll support that as well.  Anything that diminishes the influence of the BCS's computer algorithms, or that keeps coaches from thinking they have to grandstand to get voted into the title game, is good for the sport.  NCAA football shouldn't be at the mercy of journalists and computer algorithms.


----------



## drothgery (Sep 24, 2007)

Lewis526 said:
			
		

> A thoughtful question for everyone, but particularly the SEC fans:
> 
> How many losses will the SEC champion have going into the bowl season,




Probably two. My guess is that LSU and Florida each lose a random game to someone else, then split the regular season matchup and the SEC title game. I usually predict the SEC champ will lose two games. It seems a reasonable guess. When you've got a conference where either almost no one bothers to play offense (if you're a Pac 10/Big East fan) or they play great defense (if you're an SEC/Big Ten fan), you get a lot of close games, and when you've got a lot of close games, sometimes you get upsets.



			
				Lewis526 said:
			
		

> and will anything less than undefeated give them a shot at the BCS championship?




It depends what everyone else does. Of the current top 5, Oklahoma's probably got the best chance of going undefeated; right now, it'd be shocking for them to lose a regular season game to anyone other than Texas, and they're going to be decent-sized favorites over Texas.

I think the way to bet is that the SEC champ probably can't jump a BCS conference team with a better record for the title game, but probably will jump one with the same record unless it's Southern Cal. It's pretty likely that if there are two or fewer undefeated BCS conference teams, they will make the title game, even if it's (to pick the most unikely example possible from current major conference unbeatens) UConn and Kansas.

BCS teams that look they could very well go undefeated, but could get jumped by a one-loss SEC / Pac 10 champ (and possibly by a one-loss West Virginia, assuming that they didn't have a head-to-head win):
Boston College or  Clemson from the ACC
Rutgers or South Florida from the Big East 



			
				Lewis526 said:
			
		

> Imagine, for example, that the loser of the LSU - Florida game wins the conference championship game.  Could a one-loss SEC champion go to the BCS title game two years in a row?




More often than not, at least one of the participants in the BCS title game had a loss going in. Matches between two undefeated teams ala USC/Texas 2005 are very, very rare things. I'd guess, all things being equal, the pollsters would break ties among one-loss teams in this order...

1. Southern Cal
2. SEC champ
3. Oklahoma/Texas
4. Ohio State
5. West Virginia
6. non-USC Pac 10 Champ
7. non-Ohio State Big Ten champ
8. ACC champ
9. non-OK/TX Big 12 champ
10. non-WVU Big East champ
11. non-BCS undefetaed team (actually, probably would need a two-loss advantage)



			
				Lewis526 said:
			
		

> Or will we have another year when an undefeated champion from the SEC (or any conference, for that matter) loses the postseason popularity contest to two other undefeated teams?




I'm still not quite sure why SEC fans are so bitter over that. Yeah, Auburn probably should have been there instead of Oklahoma. No, it would not have mattered. Nobody was beating that USC team short of an NFL team. And didn't SC rather convincingly beat down Auburn the year before and the year after?



			
				Lewis526 said:
			
		

> I'd most prefer to see a playoff between the champions of the 5 "major" conferences plus a few at-large bids,




*Six* major conferences. You do remember what happened the last time a Big East team played an SEC team in a BCS game, right? Unless you're talking about kicking the ACC to the curb, then that's alright...


----------



## Lewis526 (Sep 24, 2007)

drothgery said:
			
		

> I'm still not quite sure why SEC fans are so bitter over that. Yeah, Auburn probably should have been there instead of Oklahoma. No, it would not have mattered. Nobody was beating that USC team short of an NFL team. And didn't SC rather convincingly beat down Auburn the year before and the year after?
> 
> ...
> 
> *Six* major conferences. You do remember what happened the last time a Big East team played an SEC team in a BCS game, right? Unless you're talking about kicking the ACC to the curb, then that's alright...




I agree strongly with most of what you said, but I have to reply to the two paragraphs above.

First, and most importantly, I think it's total sophistry to claim that USC was unbeatable in 2004.  Auburn might not have been able to beat them, but no mortal is wise enough to legitimately make the claim without seeing the teams match up on the field.  Hell, USC only beat Stanford by a field goal that year, and Stanford finished the year 4-7.  They also beat UCLA by only 5, and beat Cal by only 6.  Which of those teams was within a touchdown of the NFL?  Why would you give Auburn less chance than them?  Sure, USC beat Auburn 20-0 in '03, but Auburn's much weaker '03 team had four other losses.  (I don't really have the stats memorized - I looked them up on ESPN.    )

How many of us, last year, could've predicted Florida's dominance over Ohio State? Tons of people were saying that it didn't matter who OSU played: the game was just a formality, and OSU was unbeatable.  Ouch.  The fact of the matter is that we can't know unless we see the true contest.  That's all Auburn fans, or Boise State fans, or any of the several shafted schools, wanted.

I might even make the case that USC was stronger in '03, when they beat Auburn in Auburn's weaker season.  That was the year that USC got shafted out of the BCS title game, and had to settle for splitting the title of "champion" with LSU.  The difference between '03 and '04 for USC was that in '03 they lost their one close game, but in '04 they won their several close games.


Second, and much more lightheartedly, I don't mean to kick anybody to the curb.  I just miscounted the "major conferences": SEC, Big Ten, Pac-10, Big East, Big 12, and ACC make 6.  If I'm going to dump on one of those, though, I'd dump the Big 12 before the ACC (no offense to Oklahoma or Texas, but you just don't have much competition right now).


----------



## AnonymousOne (Sep 24, 2007)

Motion that Virginia Tech is terribly overrated?  Being from VA I'm sick of all the moaning over VT.  They have yet to show a consistent bowl performance record.  

EDIT: For the record I am not a UVA student.


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Sep 24, 2007)

Lewis526 said:
			
		

> How many of us, last year, could've predicted Florida's dominance over Ohio State?




Yo.


----------



## Lewis526 (Sep 24, 2007)

Correction: How many of us, last year, [who don't live in Gainesville] could have predicted Florida's dominance over Ohio State?


----------



## Rodrigo Istalindir (Sep 24, 2007)

Lewis526 said:
			
		

> Correction: How many of us, last year, [who don't live in Gainesville] could have predicted Florida's dominance over Ohio State?




Yo!


----------



## drothgery (Sep 24, 2007)

Lewis526 said:
			
		

> Correction: How many of us, last year, [who don't live in Gainesville] could have predicted Florida's dominance over Ohio State?




I sure didn't (heck, I still think that game was something of a fluke). By what we'd seen on the field to date, the most likely outcome seemed to me -- and I think to everyone who wasn't a shameless Florida fan or stuck in the SEC Reality Distortion Field -- that Ohio State would win handily. Only Michigan had even given the Buckeyes a game; the Gators seemed very lucky to be 11-1 (I thought Arkansas was going to beat them in the SEC title game).


----------



## DaveMage (Sep 27, 2007)

The weird thing this year is that the UF offense is *better* than it was last year...yet the defense is not as good as it was last year.

However, we in Gator country expect to win the National Championship again, because, well, we're getting used to winning national championships around here.

(Oh, and yes, we will be playing Ohio State in the championship game again, because it's what we do.)


----------



## Alaric_Prympax (Sep 29, 2007)

Whew! Tough first half for my Tigers.  Couldn't believe they were losing to Tulane! But in the end they pulled it out.

Next week we have the Gator's in Death Valley.

Tiger Bait! Tiger Bait! 

Geaux Tigers!


----------



## Crothian (Sep 30, 2007)

Tough week to be in the top 10.  

Anyone know if more Top ten teams have ever lost in a given weekend?


----------



## Dimwhit (Sep 30, 2007)

Crothian said:
			
		

> Tough week to be in the top 10.
> 
> Anyone know if more Top ten teams have ever lost in a given weekend?



 I heard that in Oct 2003 (forget the week), 5 of the Top 10 lost on the same weekend. If Florida or USC loses, that will be tied.

Crazy week. And Wisconsin came close to losing.


----------



## Lewis526 (Sep 30, 2007)

Alaric_Prympax said:
			
		

> Next week we have the Gator's in Death Valley.
> 
> Tiger Bait! Tiger Bait!
> 
> Geaux Tigers!




You're a week late, Alaric.  The Gators were Tiger bait this week.  

On the upside, Gators, losing to Auburn worked out just fine for you last year.


----------



## Alaric_Prympax (Sep 30, 2007)

Lewis526 said:
			
		

> You're a week late, Alaric.  The Gators were Tiger bait this week.





Well there's nothing like two weeks in a row.  I've always enjoyed Fried or Blacken Alligator from the Chimes or Chimes East right here in Baton Rouge.  

Great food and beer there, huge variety of beers form around the world.  If any of you ever visit BR I highly recommend these places.  The Chimes is right next to the North Gates of LSU on Highland Rd. Chimes East is a little ways away on Coursey Blvd, just to let you know; went there on my last B-Day in fact.


----------



## Crothian (Sep 30, 2007)

Dimwhit said:
			
		

> I heard that in Oct 2003 (forget the week), 5 of the Top 10 lost on the same weekend. If Florida or USC loses, that will be tied.
> 
> Crazy week. And Wisconsin came close to losing.




So did USC but the sounds of it.  With 5 of the top 10 losing I have to wonder how high South Florida is going to go.  They may be a true darkhorse team.  They have games they can lose but could really go through it all unbeaten.


----------



## DaveMage (Sep 30, 2007)

Lewis526 said:
			
		

> On the upside, Gators, losing to Auburn worked out just fine for you last year.





It's all part of our secret plan for the National Championship....


----------



## drothgery (Sep 30, 2007)

Crothian said:
			
		

> So did USC but the sounds of it.




Having watched most of that one... I think that may go down as one of the most one-sided 3 point games in the history of college football. UW stayed close because of penalties (some of which were rather dubious) and really flukey plays (a blocked punt, an interception that bounced off the reciever's shoulder pads).


----------



## Crothian (Sep 30, 2007)

With the penalties it sounds like USC kept Washington close.


----------



## Ranger REG (Oct 1, 2007)

So far, so good. UH is moving up in both polls.

Colt Brennan is going to have a field day with reporters and critics about throwing 5 interceptions, though. May hurt his Heisman hope.


----------



## drothgery (Oct 1, 2007)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> So far, so good. UH is moving up in both polls.




Err... others are moving down/out. It's not that UH is really doing anything to deserve moving up.


----------



## Crothian (Oct 1, 2007)

Go South Florida the best team in the Sunshine State!!  Finally a team from there the northerns won't hate!!


----------



## Ranger REG (Oct 1, 2007)

drothgery said:
			
		

> Err... others are moving down/out.



So? They lost their games on the same weekend UH won. Not my problem.

We know that UH _have_ to win all their games, because of the weak game schedule this season, and no BCS team outside of the WAC want to challenge them (at least not while Colt is at UH).


----------



## drothgery (Oct 1, 2007)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> So? They lost their games on the same weekend UH won. Not my problem.




Eh. UH's play (and that of their opponents) to date strongly suggests they'll end up undefeated with two games left, then get stomped by Boise and Washington to close out the season, probably tumbling out of the top 25 with the second loss. There's no more reason to have them in the top 25 now than say, Kansas, Purdue, or UConn (other undefeated teams that have been unimpressive in rolling through soft schedules), except that the Warriors don't run into a decent opponent for a while, whereas the major conference pretenders will in the next week or two.


----------



## Dimwhit (Oct 2, 2007)

drothgery said:
			
		

> Eh. UH's play (and that of their opponents) to date strongly suggests they'll end up undefeated with two games left, then get stomped by Boise and Washington to close out the season




While I really want to believe you, I'm not so sure about Boise. They're not nearly as good this year. Though maybe they will be by then. If Boise wins, it will be a close one.

It would still knock Hawaii out of BCS contention, though. Non-BCS teams have to be undefeated to qualify, without a doubt. Hell, Boise was 22nd in the nation, lost by 10 to Washington, and are now sitting around 40th and not moving much.


----------



## Ranger REG (Oct 2, 2007)

drothgery said:
			
		

> There's no more reason to have them in the top 25 now than say, Kansas, Purdue, or UConn (other undefeated teams that have been unimpressive in rolling through soft schedules), except that the Warriors don't run into a decent opponent for a while, whereas the major conference pretenders will in the next week or two.



Oh, like we were given many options of BCS candidate teams -- other than Boise State -- wanting to play UH this season? I still think they chickened out when Colt decided to stay one more year. I also think Herman Frazier suck as UH AD.

Can't wait for August 30, 2008 (vs. Florida Gators).


----------



## Balgus (Oct 3, 2007)

Looks like Im the only Bruin on these boards.. so I have to support UCLA.  
Still dont understand where the Utah game came from.. but since, UCLA has been strong.  Olson has delievered and teh Bruins cracked the top 25 once again in three of the 4 epsn polls (minus the AP) - I guess losing that badly to an unranked team really hurts... 
Best part is they play Notre Dame this week - who has yet to see a win this year - and if we pound them into the ground, then it will be a good week..... 

Lets just hope they dont pull something out of the arse and lose to them like Utah - that would bury them for good this year.

EDIT - and if they beat Cal(3) next week *keeping my fingers crossed* then Cal will most likely drop into the teens, and UCLA will be right on top of them - prolly around 15.

But I cant help but show some SoCal pride when USC plays Florida Nov 10... I want  to see them get pounded into the stone age... That will make me happy for them beating us in BBall 2 years in a row...


----------



## Lewis526 (Oct 6, 2007)

Dude.  Florida isn't playing Southern California on November 10th.  They're playing South Carolina.


----------



## Crothian (Oct 6, 2007)

And Louisville loses again.  That was certainly unexpected.


----------



## Alaric_Prympax (Oct 7, 2007)

Whew!  A very close one here in Death Valley!  But now LSU is Undoubted #1.  That game shows why SEC Football is the best in the Nation.  Great game, I thought we were going to lose it when UF scored in the third quarter (our #1 defense couldn't stop them    ) but we pulled it through.

Next week a Cat Fight in Kentucky!


----------



## John Morrow (Oct 7, 2007)

Crothian said:
			
		

> And Louisville loses again.  That was certainly unexpected.




Rutgers has been really melting down, too.  They're starting to look like the team from my undergraduate days, which isn't a good thing.  If they keep going the way they're going, they won't beat Louisville this year.


----------



## HDTVDinner (Oct 7, 2007)

WTF? UT destroys UGA And is behind them in both polls?


----------



## Dimwhit (Oct 7, 2007)

HDTVDinner said:
			
		

> WTF? UT destroys UGA And is behind them in both polls?



 The polls are horribly screwed up. Always will be, I suspect.


----------



## HDTVDinner (Oct 7, 2007)

Dimwhit said:
			
		

> The polls are horribly screwed up. Always will be, I suspect.



I would be willing to bet USC, Florida, South Florida, and Boston College would diagree with that.


----------



## Crothian (Oct 7, 2007)

South Florida and BC can't be all that happy.  If teams don't lose they are not going to get a chance to play for a championship.  Florida is basically out of the championship picture and USC has to hope a lot of people lose.  The Championship game is really the only use for the polls.


----------



## Krug (Oct 14, 2007)

I knew Cal would lose. No way they're good enough to be #2. And this team always has a tendency to break alumni's heart; at least it happened earlier rather than later.


----------



## drothgery (Oct 14, 2007)

Krug said:
			
		

> I knew Cal would lose. No way they're good enough to be #2.




You have seen the rest of the current top ten, right? If Cal forced overtime and won vs. Oregon State, they'd probably have been #1, and as near as I can tell, would have deserved the spot. Only South Florida would have had a better resume of the undefeated teams; only Ohio State would have more traditional power cachet.


----------



## Dimwhit (Oct 14, 2007)

Krug said:
			
		

> I knew Cal would lose. No way they're good enough to be #2. And this team always has a tendency to break alumni's heart; at least it happened earlier rather than later.



 They're good enough with Longshore as QB. They didn't have him, and that was the difference. By far.

Ohio State is now probably the most overrated #1 ever...


----------



## useridunavailable (Oct 14, 2007)

I don't think Ohio State's overrated; I think everybody pretty much understands that they're not the best team in the country.  People aren't really like, "ZOMG OSU is teh awesome!!"  They're more like, "Well, who's left without a loss?!?  Anybody?"  *Ohio State raises hand*  "Well, I guess you'll have to do..."


----------



## Dimwhit (Oct 14, 2007)

useridunavailable said:
			
		

> I don't think Ohio State's overrated; I think everybody pretty much understands that they're not the best team in the country.  People aren't really like, "ZOMG OSU is teh awesome!!"  They're more like, "Well, who's left without a loss?!?  Anybody?"  *Ohio State raises hand*  "Well, I guess you'll have to do..."




But that's sort of the main flaw of the voting system. Why should not having a loss matter? I think there are a few one-loss teams better than anyone else. Why does it have to be an undefeated team at #1?


----------



## drothgery (Oct 14, 2007)

Dimwhit said:
			
		

> But that's sort of the main flaw of the voting system. Why should not having a loss matter? I think there are a few one-loss teams better than anyone else. Why does it have to be an undefeated team at #1?




Because there are no playoffs.


----------



## Crothian (Oct 14, 2007)

Dimwhit said:
			
		

> But that's sort of the main flaw of the voting system. Why should not having a loss matter? I think there are a few one-loss teams better than anyone else. Why does it have to be an undefeated team at #1?




Obviously if they were any good they wouldn't have lost.   

Sure OSU looks over rated at number one but so would any other team this year.  There is not great team out there just a lot of good ones.  But being number one in October means diddly squat.


----------



## Lewis526 (Oct 15, 2007)

I don't think South Florida would look overrated at #1.  They've already beaten Auburn and West Virginia.  And I don't think Ohio State seems terribly overrated in the spot themselves, given the recent losses by everyone else.  Sure, OSU has had a soft schedule so far this season, but I think fans don't realize how hard it is to go out and win every week.  Sustaining a 12-game winning streak is extremely hard, even in the Midwest.  Part of a team's talent is their ability to rise to the challenge consistently.  LSU might have the most talent, or USC might, or someone else, but if they can't deliver it on game day, someone else deserves the top rank.

If Ohio State and South Florida run the table from here, I wouldn't mind them playing for the trophy.  What I'd really like is a playoff, but that would be too rational and fair.  The BCS bigwigs know that controversy sells, and they're milking it for all it's worth.  We can complain all we want, but until we convince them that a playoff system would put more money in their pockets, the computer algorithms and the opinion polls are here to stay.


----------



## Dimwhit (Oct 15, 2007)

Holy hell! Anyone catch that Boise State game? First, Boise didn't deserve the win. For a team with a defense that played as well as they did...I can't believe they had no answers for Nevada.

Still...one hell of an entertaining game. 136 total points! I gained a few gray hairs tonight.


----------



## drothgery (Oct 15, 2007)

Lewis526 said:
			
		

> If Ohio State and South Florida run the table from here, I wouldn't mind them playing for the trophy.  What I'd really like is a playoff, but that would be too rational and fair.  The BCS bigwigs know that controversy sells, and they're milking it for all it's worth.  We can complain all we want, but until we convince them that a playoff system would put more money in their pockets, the computer algorithms and the opinion polls are here to stay.




Oh, it's all but certain that a sixteen team or larger I-A playoff (and possibly even an eight team playoff) would generate more TV and ticket revenue than the bowls (and I mean all of them, not just the BCS bowls), and funnel more back to the colleges. You only need to look at the basketball tournament for proof of that. It'd mean less money for the sites that put on bowls (because bowls outside the playoffs might not be viable, first-round games would almost certainly have to be played at the home site of the higher seed -- and second-round games might need to be, and losing the New Year's weekend date might make planning vacations around bowls more difficult), and the major conferences and Notre Dame would have less control over the money that's out there. But there's not much doubt they'd just be taking smaller pieces of a bigger pie.


----------



## Lewis526 (Oct 15, 2007)

So you think it's more about control (power) than money?  Hmm.  Given the choice, I'd go with the money every time.


----------



## Dimwhit (Nov 18, 2007)

OK Ranger REG. It's your Warriors against my Broncos for the WAC! So what do you think...is Hawaii finally going to beat Boise? I think Boise has been playing more consistently lately. Hawaii's a bit lucky to have beaten Nevada (of course, Boise was lucky to beat them, too). But I don't know...it's in Hawaii. Should be a great game, regardless.

And on another topic: the college football talk has SUCKED this year on ENWorld!!!


----------



## Ranger REG (Nov 18, 2007)

Dimwhit said:
			
		

> OK Ranger REG. It's your Warriors against my Broncos for the WAC! So what do you think...is Hawaii finally going to beat Boise? I think Boise has been playing more consistently lately. Hawaii's a bit lucky to have beaten Nevada (of course, Boise was lucky to beat them, too). But I don't know...it's in Hawaii. Should be a great game, regardless.



I hope so.

Colt didn't play much in Nevada. Probably the coach's decision to keep him off his feet for the upcoming Boise State home game, following the mild concussion he got in the last home game against Fresno State. But that was a big gamble. Second-string QB Tyler Graunke didn't have a great game as the last time he started this season when Colt sprained his ankle. Kicker Dan Kelly is like having Jason Elam back in the roster. He came through in the clutch.

Nevertheless, next Friday's home game will determine #1 and #2 in the WAC.


----------



## drothgery (Nov 18, 2007)

Dimwhit said:
			
		

> And on another topic: the college football talk has SUCKED this year on ENWorld!!!




I think the problem was that they moved the pick-em over to CirvcsMaximus last year (and if they ran one again this year, nobody told me).

Anyway, here's the rundown I posted on another (Big East-centric) board...

[D]a[/D]

*BCS conference/BCS title contender rundown:*

*ACC:* 
No BCS title contenders; title game is BC vs. VT/VA winner
pojected champion: Virginia

*B12: *
BCS title contenders:
Kansas (11-0) - Only team that controls their own destiny in jumping ahead of LSU, as they still have a chance -- albeit by winning two tough games -- to be only BCS unbeaten
Expected final record: 11-1 (loses to MO)

MO (9-1) - Loss by Oregon actually puts them in a very strong position if they win the B12, though I wouldn't rank them above WVU, ASU, or Ohio State (with the same record) if I had a vote.
Expected final record: 11-2 (loses to Oklahoma in Big 12 title game rematch, or Texas if Big 12 title game is not a rematch)

Title game is Oklahoma or Texas (if Texas beats Texas A&M and Oklahoma loses to Oklahoma State) vs. KS/MO winner
Projected champion: Oklahoma

*B10:*
BCS title contender:
Ohio State (11-1) - Losses by Oregon and Oklahoma put them right back in BCS title race, if LSU loses and/or Oklahoma wins B12 despite today's loss.

Champion: Ohio State

*BE:*
BCS title contender:
West Virginia (9-1) - Despite close shave with Cinci, winning out gives them a very real shot at BCS title, under the same circumstances as Ohio State.
Expected final record: 11-1

Projected Champion: West Virginia (should beat UConn next week)

*P10:*
BCS title contender:
Arizona State (9-1) - Tough game with Southern Cal on Thanksgiving which probably is for the Pac 10's title; rivalry game with AZ not a sure thing, but Sun Devils should win that one. Only team outside of LSU and the Big 12 teams with a chance for a marquee win (vs. Southern Cal) before the bowls; my expectation is that if they win out and LSU loses or the B12 South team wins the B12, they'll get in the BCS title game, but I don't think they'll do it.
Expected final record: 10-2 (loses to Southern Cal)

Projected champion: Southern Cal due to tiebreaker edge; Oregon loses at least one of UCLA or Oregon State w/o Dixon

*SEC:*
BCS title contender:
LSU (10-1) - No serious threats before SEC title (LSU has a spot locked up) game on their schedule, but I can't help feeling this team's due to run out of luck soon. Still, will be in BCS top 2 until/unless they do before then.
Expected final record: 11-2 (loses SEC title game)

Projected champion: Georgia (Tenn loses to KY, so Georgia wins SEC East

*Current BCS Bowl Projections* 

BCS Title:  West Virginia (BE) vs. Ohio State (B10) 
Rose: Southern Cal (at-large) vs. LSU (at-large) 
Orange: Virginia (ACC) vs. Arizona State (at-large)
Fiesta: Oklahoma (B12)  vs. Boise State (autobid for being in BCS top 12 or above lowest-ranked BCS conference champ)
Sugar: Georgia (SEC) vs. Kansas (autobid as BCS#3/4)

Assumptions
- LSU will lose the SEC title game, because they're not playing well enough to beat a decent team right now
- Hawaii will lose, and so drop out of top 14
- With projected further losses, Boise probably does make into into top 12 at 11-1
- Without Dixon, Oregon splits final two games
- Southern Cal beats Arizona State
- Oklahoma's QB will be okay next week and for B12 title game
- 11-1 Kansas probably is in BCS top 4


----------



## Ranger REG (Nov 18, 2007)

Gee, how East-centric of you (even if you're just a messenger). :\

Then again, I'm not surprised at all. You mainland folks take us islanders lightly.


----------



## Crothian (Nov 19, 2007)

Hey, I'm hoping the Warriors win out and make a BCS game!!  No one takes Texas Tech seriously either and they upset the Sooners.  In this crazy year I think it would be great to see it happen.

I want to see LSU lose and then have Kansas play WV in the National Championship game.  I think that would be the most entertaining match ups of teams.  I'm happy with OSU going to the Rose Bowl.  Better then I was expecting them to do this year.


----------



## drothgery (Nov 19, 2007)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> Gee, how East-centric of you (even if you're just a messenger). :\
> 
> Then again, I'm not surprised at all. You mainland folks take us islanders lightly.




Sorry, you guys keep going into overtime or winning by less than a field goal over bad teams.


----------



## drothgery (Nov 19, 2007)

Crothian said:
			
		

> I want to see LSU lose and then have Kansas play WV in the National Championship game.  I think that would be the most entertaining match ups of teams.  I'm happy with OSU going to the Rose Bowl.  Better then I was expecting them to do this year.




Of course, if you want to get into kind of crazy scenarios, it's probably possible to get a 2-loss team in the title game. Everyone except Ohio State, Kansas, and the Boise/Hawaii winner still has an opportunity to lose two games. If that happens, and Missouri beats Kansas handily before falling in the Big 12 title game, then it seems likely that a 2-loss team like USC or Georgia would play Ohio State for all the marbles.


----------



## Ranger REG (Nov 19, 2007)

drothgery said:
			
		

> Sorry, you guys keep going into overtime or winning by less than a field goal over bad teams.



Well, if Stanford and/or USC have the guts to test their mettle against UH, bring it. I mean really, how hard is it to ship their butts over an ocean?

Bring it.


----------



## Dimwhit (Nov 19, 2007)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> Well, if Stanford and/or USC have the guts to test their mettle against UH, bring it. I mean really, how hard is it to ship their butts over an ocean?
> 
> Bring it.



 Don't forget Michigan. Hawaii pretty much begged Michigan to let them come and play for the first game of the season. Michigan declined and scheduled Appalachian State instead. That was a smart move...

It's hard for teams like Boise and Hawaii to get a 1-and-1 matchup with good teams. They just don't want to play them.


----------



## drothgery (Nov 19, 2007)

Dimwhit said:
			
		

> Don't forget Michigan. Hawaii pretty much begged Michigan to let them come and play for the first game of the season. Michigan declined and scheduled Appalachian State instead. That was a smart move...
> 
> It's hard for teams like Boise and Hawaii to get a 1-and-1 matchup with good teams. They just don't want to play them.




True. But if you're not going to get high-quality opposition, you pretty much have to stomp low-quality/mid-level opposition if you want to get any national recognition. Which Boise is pretty much doing (only close games were loss to UW and Nevada basketball score game), and Hawaii is not (triple overtime vs. LA tech, overtime vs. Fresno, two-point win over Nevada, overtime vs. San Jose State).


----------



## Dimwhit (Nov 19, 2007)

drothgery said:
			
		

> True. But if you're not going to get high-quality opposition, you pretty much have to stomp low-quality/mid-level opposition if you want to get any national recognition. Which Boise is pretty much doing (only close games were loss to UW and Nevada basketball score game), and Hawaii is not (triple overtime vs. LA tech, overtime vs. Fresno, two-point win over Nevada, overtime vs. San Jose State).



 I agree. But it's damned tough to do that every game for a season, no matter how good you are. Last year, Boise needed a last-second FG to beat San Jose. And they had another close call or two. Depending on what you consider close. They were tight with Idaho until the last 5 minutes of the game.

I think Hawaii is suffering from their abnormally weak schedule. Boise's was weak last year, but not like Hawaii's this year. It also doesn't help that the bottom half of the WAC sucks REALLY bad this year. I mean, it's terrible. I wish we could scrap a few WAC teams and join the Mountain West or something.


----------



## drothgery (Nov 19, 2007)

Dimwhit said:
			
		

> I think Hawaii is suffering from their abnormally weak schedule. Boise's was weak last year, but not like Hawaii's this year. It also doesn't help that the bottom half of the WAC sucks REALLY bad this year. I mean, it's terrible. I wish we could scrap a few WAC teams and join the Mountain West or something.




I'm half-convinced the only reason something like that hasn't happened is because the MWC doesn't really want to kill the WAC, and with the moratorium on schools moving up to I-A, there's nowhere for the WAC to go for replacements except possibly raiding some of the Texas/Louisiana contingent of CUSA and the Sun Belt. Boise State, Fresno State, and Nevada to the MWC makes a lot of sense on paper. Of course, on paper, BC and Penn State should be in the Big East.


----------



## Dimwhit (Nov 19, 2007)

drothgery said:
			
		

> I'm half-convinced the only reason something like that hasn't happened is because the MWC doesn't really want to kill the WAC, and with the moratorium on schools moving up to I-A, there's nowhere for the WAC to go for replacements except possibly raiding some of the Texas/Louisiana contingent of CUSA and the Sun Belt. Boise State, Fresno State, and Nevada to the MWC makes a lot of sense on paper. Of course, on paper, BC and Penn State should be in the Big East.



 Yeah, that sounds about right. In a perfect world (well, OK, less that perfect, because in a perfect world, Boise would move to an expanded Pac-12), there would be a new conference made up of the best of the WAC and MWC (and maybe a couple others, but they're too far away geographically). Boise, Hawaii, Fresno, Nevada, BYU, Utah, TCU, Air Force and a couple others...that would be a great conference. Actually, I'd probably ditch Hawaii simply because they're too damned far away.

But as it will be a cold day in Hell before that happens, I'll just stick with the even less-likely dream of going to the Pac-10...


----------



## Ranger REG (Nov 20, 2007)

Dimwhit said:
			
		

> I think Hawaii is suffering from their abnormally weak schedule. Boise's was weak last year, but not like Hawaii's this year.



Yeah, I know this is going to haunt us. We've been bugging and criticizing UH AD Herman Frazier (originally hailed from the mainland) to get some good teams to try and beat Colt & Co., who announced foregoing NFL to play one more year at UH. It got to the point where we hardly see him on local sport talk shows these days. Some of us are still calling for his resignation. Anyone in the mainland, you can have Mr. Frazier back.


----------



## fett527 (Nov 23, 2007)

Sorry I started this and then had to bail.  Been a tough year.  Time has not been a luxury for me.

But Bucks in the Rose Bowl- AWESOME!  Better than I thought they'd do.

NC game-  I'm saying LSU v WV

And I gotta root for Hawaii, sorry Dimwhit!


Almost forgot:

*GO BUCKS!!!!!!!!!!!*


----------



## Ranger REG (Nov 24, 2007)

*This Just In...*

UH Warriors defeated BSU Broncos to win WAC Championship, 39-27.

Brennan sets passing TD mark to claim Hawaii's first outright WAC title.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Nov 24, 2007)

I so detest the BCS that I have been rooting against my various teams when they were favored, just to throw a monkey wrench into its system of basing bowl eligibility on something as nebulous as polls & strength of schedule.  I mean, is a 9-2 team really better than another one that is undefeated but lower ranked?  We can't really know until they face each other on the field of play.

For me, this year has been like having a fine tequila in my IV drip!


----------



## Dimwhit (Nov 24, 2007)

fett527 said:
			
		

> Sorry I started this and then had to bail.  Been a tough year.  Time has not been a luxury for me.
> 
> But Bucks in the Rose Bowl- AWESOME!  Better than I thought they'd do.
> 
> ...



 First, no problem rooting for Hawaii. I will be in their BCS game (assuming they get one). Gotta support the WAC! 

As for Ohio State, you realize they'll probably go to the championship game, right? Oklahoma will beat the Kansas/Missouri winner, which will leave West Virginia and Ohio State in the title game. That's assuming West Virginia wins their next two. Crazy year.


----------



## Crothian (Nov 24, 2007)

Dannyalcatraz said:
			
		

> I so detest the BCS that I have been rooting against my various teams when they were favored, just to throw a monkey wrench into its system of basing bowl eligibility on something as nebulous as polls & strength of schedule.  I mean, is a 9-2 team really better than another one that is undefeated but lower ranked?  We can't really know until they face each other on the field of play.
> 
> For me, this year has been like having a fine tequila in my IV drip!




Except we know from years past that this type of controversy has no effect on the BCS.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Nov 25, 2007)

I don't know about that, C.- there was a significant rework of the BCS calculating program a few years ago.

DOWN WITH THE BCS-GIMMIE AN NCAA PLAYOFF SYSTEM!


----------



## Ranger REG (Nov 25, 2007)

Dannyalcatraz said:
			
		

> I so detest the BCS that I have been rooting against my various teams when they were favored, just to throw a monkey wrench into its system of basing bowl eligibility on something as nebulous as polls & strength of schedule.  I mean, is a 9-2 team really better than another one that is undefeated but lower ranked?  We can't really know until they face each other on the field of play.



So true.

Even though Kansas are no longer undefeated (Mizzou handed them their first loss today), I really want UH (the only undefeated team this season ... so far) to play them.

Next: Washington Huskies on December 1.


----------



## Dimwhit (Nov 25, 2007)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> Next: Washington Huskies on December 1.




Hawaii had better not tank that game. Good thing it's a home game.


----------



## drothgery (Nov 25, 2007)

Well, here's my rundown for this week, though I didn't get to watch much due to bad TV situations at my siblings' places this weekend ...

*Current BCS Bowl Projections* 

BCS Title:  West Virginia (BE) vs. Ohio State (B10) 
Rose: Southern Cal (P10) vs. Georgia (at-large) 
Orange: Virginia Tech (ACC) vs. Arizona State (at-large)
Fiesta: Oklahoma (B12)  vs. Hawaii (autobid for being in BCS top 12 or above lowest-ranked BCS conference champ)
Sugar: LSU (SEC) vs. Kansas (autobid as BCS#3/4)

Assumptions
- WVU beats Pitt
- LSU refocuses and wins SEC title game
- Hawaii beats UW
- Oklahoma wins B12 title game
- 11-1 Kansas probably is in BCS top 4

*BCS conference/BCS title contender rundown:*

*ACC:* 
No BCS title contenders.

Championship game: BC vs. VT
pojected champion: Virginia Tech

*B12: *
BCS title contender:

MO (11-1) - Loss by Oregon and LSU almost certainly put them in the BCS title game if they win the B12, though I wouldn't rank them above WVU or Ohio State (with the same record) if I had a vote.
Expected final record: 11-2 (loses to Oklahoma in Big 12 title game rematch)

Championship game: Oklahoma vs. MO
Projected champion: Oklahoma

*B10:*
BCS title contender:
Ohio State (11-1) - Losses by Oregon and LSU put them right back in BCS title race, especially if Oklahoma wins B12.

Champion: Ohio State

*BE:*
BCS title contender:
West Virginia (10-1) - Barring a shcoking loss to Pitt, almost certainly in the BCS title game
Expected final record: 11-1

Champion: West Virginia (should beat Pitt next week)

*P10:*
BCS title contender: None, barring a WVU loss to Pitt (at which point Southern Cal drops into the mix)
Expected final record: 10-2 (loses to Southern Cal)

Projected champion: Southern Cal due to tiebreaker edge vs. ASU

*SEC:*
BCS title contender: None, barring a WVU loss to Pitt (at which point LSU and Georgia drop into the mix)

Championship game: LSU vs. Tenn
Projected champion: LSU (despite loss to Arkansas, should beat Tenn in  SEC title)


----------



## Dimwhit (Nov 25, 2007)

I don't know, droth...I just don't see Arizona State getting the at-large bid.

Especially not after Arizona beats them...


----------



## Crothian (Nov 25, 2007)

I wonder if OSU has a chance against either WV or USC.  Neither is built like the team OSU is built to stop.


----------



## drothgery (Nov 25, 2007)

Dimwhit said:
			
		

> I don't know, droth...I just don't see Arizona State getting the at-large bid.
> 
> Especially not after Arizona beats them...




Well, I don't think Arizona will beat them, in which case it's quite possible that the bowls will have no choice in the matter. If VT beats BC, there won't be a second ACC team in the top 14. There won't be a second Big East team in the top 14 no matter what happens. So if Illinois stays out of the top 14 (meaning there's only one eligible Big Ten team), there's no other option but to take a second SEC team (probably Georgia), a second Big 12 team (Kansas might end up in automatically by virtue of the top 4 rule, otherwise it'd be Missouri), and a second Pac 10 team (which will have to be Arizona State).


----------



## Ranger REG (Nov 26, 2007)

Dimwhit said:
			
		

> Hawaii had better not tank that game. Good thing it's a home game.



I know. That's why I stopped celebrating after Saturday. One more game to go.


----------



## Ranger REG (Dec 2, 2007)

*This Just In...*

Hawaii's come-from-behind victory over Washington, 35-28.



Can you spell "BCS"?

OBTW, good news for WAC. 4 teams (including UH and Boise State) are shoo-in for any bowl game.

Sources
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/recap?gameId=273350062
http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2007/Dec/01/br/br7389206451.html


----------



## Crothian (Dec 2, 2007)

They should play in the championship game.


----------



## drothgery (Dec 2, 2007)

Well, here's my rundown for this week...

*Current BCS Bowl Projections* 

BCS Title:  
will be: LSU (SEC) vs. Ohio State (B10) 
should be: Southern Cal (P10) vs. Ohio State (B10) (Okay, I like the Trojans in the #2 beauty contest)

Rose: 
will be: Southern Cal (P10) vs. Illinois (at-large) 
should be: Arizona State (at-large) vs. Georgia (at-large) (ASU as USC's replacement is very defensible; Illini aren't)

Orange: 
will be: Virginia Tech (ACC) vs. West Virginia (BE)
should be: Virginia Tech (ACC) vs. Kansas (at-large) (One-loss major conference teams should get a BCS bowl)

Fiesta: 
will be: Oklahoma (B12)  vs. Arizona State (at-large)
should be: Oklahoma (B12) vs. Hawaii (WAC/autobid) (Oklahoma vs. Boise was fun last year; lets see what another WAC team can do)

Sugar: 
will be: Georgia (at-large) vs. Hawaii (autobid for being in BCS top 12 or above lowest-ranked BCS conference champ)
should be: LSU (SEC) vs. Illinois (at-large) (just because I like sticking the SEC with the worst possible matchup; Clemson just might also be eligible)

Assumptions
- LSU moves up to #2 with SEC title game win, Missouri loss, and WVU loss
- Georgia stays in the top 4

*BCS conference/BCS title contender rundown:*

*ACC:* 
Virginia Tech (11-2): Blowout loss to LSU probably takes them out of the running, but two-loss BCS conference champs can't be easily dismissed this year.

Champion: Virginia Tech

*B12: *
BCS title contenders:

Oklahoma (11-2): Beat Missouri twice, but lost to Colorado and Texas Tech.

Kansas (11-1): One of only two one-loss BCS conference schools, but didn't play Texas or Oklahoma, and lost only game against a ranked opponent.

Champion: Oklahoma

*B10:*
BCS title contender:
Ohio State (11-1): Lack of marquee non-conference wins, Michigan's collapse, and Ohio State's dominance tends to hide the fact that the Big Ten wasn't all that bad this year; don't be surprised when Buckeyes win the BCS title game.

Champion: Ohio State

*BE:*
BCS title contender:
West Virginia (10-2): Loss to Pitt eliminates 'eers from serious consideration, but really shouldn't; most title contenders have one or two bad losses.

Co-champions: West Virginia and UConn (WVU wins tiebreaker and BCS autobid by virtue of head-to-head win)

*P10:*
BCS title contenders: 
Southern Cal (10-2): Blowout win over ASU won of the most impressive wins by anyone this year (along with the LSU blowout of VT, and Oklahoma's Big 12 title game win) but still has bad loss to Stanford. Still, one of the hottest teams right now.

Arizona State (10-2): No marquee wins, but no one can say they have better losses (to Southern Can and Oregon with Dixon).

Co-Champions: Southern Cal and ASU (Southern Cal wins tiebreaker and BCS autobid by virtue of head-to-head win)

*SEC:*
BCS title contenders: 

LSU (11-2): Has maintained 'best team in the country' cachet despite a long string of narrow wins and overtime losses. I don't get it, but the SEC superiority cult seems likely to send LSU to the title game.

Georgia (10-2): Like USC, one of the hottest team in the country right now, but seems likely to get leapfrogged by one more teams this week despite not playing. Which is perfectly reasonable; Georgia has some very good wins, but has also suffered some really bad losses (not just by okay to bad to teams, but by a lot)

Champion: LSU

*WAC*
BCS title contender:

Hawaii (12-0): In any other year, no team with a schedule as soft as Hawaii's would even get half a glance. But when we're talking about putting two-loss teams in the title game, a team that went undefeated, even on a really bad schedule, deserves at least a look.


----------



## Dimwhit (Dec 2, 2007)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> Hawaii's come-from-behind victory over Washington, 35-28.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Boise is, for some strange reason, looking to go to Hawaii. I think it's largely because the players want to travel, and there are better odds of Hawaii fans showing up to support Boise than Fresno. So Ranger, go to the Hawaii bowl and support my Broncos!!! 

Great that Hawaii won, though. I hope they win their BCS game. A WAC team winning two years in a row would be fantastic.


----------



## Ranger REG (Dec 2, 2007)

Dimwhit said:
			
		

> Boise is, for some strange reason, looking to go to Hawaii. I think it's largely because the players want to travel, and there are better odds of Hawaii fans showing up to support Boise than Fresno. So Ranger, go to the Hawaii bowl and support my Broncos!!!



Yeah, I can stand to wear BLUE. Just don't ask us to paint the turf blue.


----------



## Ranger REG (Dec 2, 2007)

drothgery said:
			
		

> *WAC*
> BCS title contender:
> 
> Hawaii (12-0): In any other year, no team with a schedule as soft as Hawaii's would even get half a glance. But when we're talking about putting two-loss teams in the title game, a team that went undefeated, even on a really bad schedule, deserves at least a look.



Hey, I can repeat my rhetorics about our AD screwing up the schedules and not pitching well enough to more mainland-based Div I teams to come over or even us going over there for more away games. I can repeat my rhetorics that all y'all over on the mainland scared to test your mettle against Colt when he forego the NFL to play for his senior year at UH.

But for now, I'm just going to enjoy the simple fact that we're solely undefeated this season. Only us.

Feel free to try us next season or any seasons after. Don't be scared. Colt won't be with us.


----------



## Dimwhit (Dec 2, 2007)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> But for now, I'm just going to enjoy the simple fact that we're solely undefeated this season. Only us.




Feels good, don't it? Boise was the lone undefeated after Ohio State lost to Florida. It's a nice feeling.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Dec 4, 2007)

Having attended UT, University of Dallas, and Trinity University, I can honestly say I have no personal interest in the bowl game in which Hawai'i's Warriors will be playing.

That said, I hope the Warriors _whup_ the Bulldogs, adding yet another nail to the coffin of the BCS's legitimacy myth.


----------

