College Football

Off Topic
542

[quote]Nate Dogg wrote:
Just got home from the Florida vs. Kentucky game! I had great seats and it was quite a game.

It was homecoming this week, so we had our homecoming parade yesterday (I was in the parade as a part of my wife’s high school marching band) along with “Gator Growl” (the world’s largest student run pep rally - entertainment show at the football stadium) last night.

It was a blowout after the first quarter when the Gators were up 28-0 after two successive punt blocks that resulted in touchdowns on successive possessions in the first six minutes!

Almost all of the Gators playmakers touched the ball today, but Demps and Rainey got most of the touches this time. Harvin didn’t seem to do as much although he had a few touches along with Brandon James and some of the other receivers.

The Gators have come to play and will be prepared for Georgia next weekend. It will be payback after last year.

I’m watching the Georgia/LSU game right now. I’m pulling for both teams to win for different reasons, but I think the best thing for the Gators is to have Georgia win against LSU and then have the Gators beat Georgia next week. That will help us in the BCS rankings more than if LSU beats Georgia today and then we beat Georgia next week.

I won’t get a chance to see the Penn State vs. Ohio State game tonight since I work at the local haunted house tonight, but I’m pulling for Penn State to get the win![/quote]

Well, you and I were hoping for different things, Nate. I wanted LSU to win so that Alabama’s win over Georgia would look less impressive, thus leading to Alabama’s decline in the rankings, thus leading to USC’s rise.

I was also hoping for a Penn St. loss (even though I like Bauer and Joe Pa) since Penn St. would drop and USC’s win over Ohio St. would look even more impressive (to the computers, at least).

That said, I will be 100% behind Tim “Superman” Tebow and the Gators when they play Georgia. Should be a good game since Georgia is looking more and more like the team we thought they would be at the start of the season. At least I know CBS won’t switch regional coverage on me during that game!

Edit: BTW, Penn St.'s win all but guarantees they will play in the NC. If USC doesn’t get into the NC game (unlikely), then Oregon St. must win the Pac-10, otherwise the Rose Bowl would feature . . . USC v. Ohio St. Great.

543

While I love living in Big XII country, and thus getting most Oklahoma games, I hate hate HATE it when OU is blowing someone out and they switch to another game.

I’ve written drunken emails to the networks about my frustration.

544

FSU still has work to do, but we are still chugging. And not 1 but 2 VaTech qb’s down for the count today…ouch. It was fun to be in the stadium today. I almost felt bad, you could literally see the wind go out of the hokies and their fans when we their second string qb was writhing around in pain.

545

[quote]GetSwole wrote:
FSU still has work to do, but we are still chugging. And not 1 but 2 VaTech qb’s down for the count today…ouch. It was fun to be in the stadium today. I almost felt bad, you could literally see the wind go out of the hokies and their fans when we their second string qb was writhing around in pain.[/quote]

By the way that Shawn Glennon was squirming around on the field, I’d have figured someone shanked him or something. I don’t look forward to playing FSU’s defense later this year.

546

[quote]SSC wrote:
GetSwole wrote:
FSU still has work to do, but we are still chugging. And not 1 but 2 VaTech qb’s down for the count today…ouch. It was fun to be in the stadium today. I almost felt bad, you could literally see the wind go out of the hokies and their fans when we their second string qb was writhing around in pain.

By the way that Shawn Glennon was squirming around on the field, I’d have figured someone shanked him or something. I don’t look forward to playing FSU’s defense later this year.[/quote]

Yeh it was insane. Our defense is fast, especially on the blitz and off the edges this year. Not to mention we’ve been hitting like pile drivers, which is nice to see again.

547

[quote]red04 wrote:
I think “the red sea” in Nebraska started the everyone wear the same color to the stadium trend, way back in the day. That’s not to say that the majority of fans showing to games haven’t been reppin team colors for a long ass time now regardless.

We got nothing on Korean sports fans and their animated cheers though: - YouTube [/quote]

I think some hockey team actually started the white out thing. Supposedly they trademarked the term, so PSU now call it a “whitehouse”.

548

[quote]GetSwole wrote:
SSC wrote:
GetSwole wrote:
FSU still has work to do, but we are still chugging. And not 1 but 2 VaTech qb’s down for the count today…ouch. It was fun to be in the stadium today. I almost felt bad, you could literally see the wind go out of the hokies and their fans when we their second string qb was writhing around in pain.

By the way that Shawn Glennon was squirming around on the field, I’d have figured someone shanked him or something. I don’t look forward to playing FSU’s defense later this year.

Yeh it was insane. Our defense is fast, especially on the blitz and off the edges this year. Not to mention we’ve been hitting like pile drivers, which is nice to see again. [/quote]

That and Glennon’s a puss.

549

[quote]Rocker3829 wrote:
Most years I’d say not a chance in hell against the SEC(and this is comin from a guy at a school in the ACC), but this year is different. Probably not all em but I’d definitely say Texas, Oklahoma, and maybe Oklahoma State(probably not but can’t deny that offense is playing well) while Missouri, Kansas, and Texas Tech would have a shot but it wouldn’t be likely for those last 3.[/quote]

The ACC is not even playing football this year. Not much different from most years, though.

You need to stick to talking about the shit teams in your shit conference. You obviously know dick about real college football.

550

[quote]rainjack wrote:
Rocker3829 wrote:
Most years I’d say not a chance in hell against the SEC(and this is comin from a guy at a school in the ACC), but this year is different. Probably not all em but I’d definitely say Texas, Oklahoma, and maybe Oklahoma State(probably not but can’t deny that offense is playing well) while Missouri, Kansas, and Texas Tech would have a shot but it wouldn’t be likely for those last 3.

The ACC is not even playing football this year. Not much different from most years, though.

You need to stick to talking about the shit teams in your shit conference. You obviously know dick about real college football. [/quote]

I said nothing bout the ACC being better than the SEC, all I said was coming from a guy who doesn’t really like the SEC but gives them props 90% of the time I’d take the Big 12 over them this year. Get a fuckin grip man! I know the ACC ain’t shit on a national scale and hasn’t been in a good while so don’t attack my conference when everyone including us in the conference know we’ve been down for way too long. The Big 12/SEC debate this year has nothing to do with the ACC, so back off already.

Anyways, if y’all haven’t seen the BCS standings today, Utah, Boise State and TCU (sorry Tulsa fans, even if they win out I don’t think they’ll get in the top 10 of the BCS though I like y’alls team) are gonna be interesting to see where they end up. The only team above Utah that doesn’t really have a “nationally tough” remaining schedule is Penn State, but everyone else has at least one game left on their schedule that is either rivalry game or against tough teams along with conference championship games.

If Utah wins out and wins impressively, we might (and I STRESS the might) have a non-BCS school in the title. Obviously it is gonna take a bunch for that to happen but the possibility is actually there this year.

551

[quote]Rocker3829 wrote:
If Utah wins out and wins impressively, we might (and I STRESS the might) have a non-BCS school in the title. Obviously it is gonna take a bunch for that to happen but the possibility is actually there this year.[/quote]

Not going to happen. They might make it to a BCS bowl, but there would be rioting in the streets if a second tier school leapfrogs real college football teams for a title shot.

552

[quote]Rocker3829 wrote:

I said nothing bout the ACC being better than the SEC, all I said was coming from a guy who doesn’t really like the SEC but gives them props 90% of the time I’d take the Big 12 over them this year. Get a fuckin grip man! I know the ACC ain’t shit on a national scale and hasn’t been in a good while so don’t attack my conference when everyone including us in the conference know we’ve been down for way too long. The Big 12/SEC debate this year has nothing to do with the ACC, so back off already.
[/quote]

Whatever. You write like you are an expert yet you admit you are an ACC guy from the outset. You should get minus 50 points just for admitting any allegiance to that conference, period.

The ACC hasn’t been down for too long. It has always sucked ass. It is a hoop conference that just happens to have FSU in it.

Having an ACC guy talk football is like a Big-12 guy talking hockey.

553

[quote]rainjack wrote:
Rocker3829 wrote:
If Utah wins out and wins impressively, we might (and I STRESS the might) have a non-BCS school in the title. Obviously it is gonna take a bunch for that to happen but the possibility is actually there this year.

Not going to happen. They might make it to a BCS bowl, but there would be rioting in the streets if a second tier school leapfrogs real college football teams for a title shot.

[/quote]

Real college football? What the heck is real college football? What qualifies Utah as second tier? The BCS stacks the deck, creating an uneven playing field, then tries to look down on those who have less.

Utah has already beaten Michigan, on the road. Aren’t they a real college football program? The last time Utah went to a BCS game they waxed Pittsburg, a member of the BCS cartel. Along the way they beat the Aggies, a member of your precious Big 12, pretty badly.

What happened the last time the Techies came to Fort Worth? Here is a quick reminder:

Thanks for stopping by, don’t forget your helmet.
Since 2005 TCU is 5-2 against the Big 12.

Also, it’s been a while, but since the creation of the BCS cartel Tech played a non BCS team in the bowl game in Houston, they got embarrassed.

554

[quote]Spike9726 wrote:
Also, it’s been a while, but since the creation of the BCS cartel Tech played a non BCS team in the bowl game in Houston, they got embarrassed.[/quote]

The fact that you are picking out selected teams to make the 2nd tier conferences look better is weak.

TCU is not a bad team, but that does not mean they play in a tough conference, which is what I am talking about.

The MWC is not a top tier conference. Were they to play the OU’s the Longhorns, or any number of teams from the SEC on a consistent basis, maybe they would move up in respect.

Utah has played no one. TCU has played no one, except a highly overrated BYU.

However, the MWC is probably a stronger conference top to bottom than either the Big East, or the ACC.

555

[quote]Spike9726 wrote:

Utah has already beaten Michigan, on the road.[/quote]

So did Akron.

I can’t think of many people who think Pitt is really that impressive.

The Aggies currently rank last in the Big 12.

There can be no serious contention that the MWC, Conference USA, etc. is as good or better than most of the BCS conferences (e.g., SEC, Big 12, Big 10, Pac-10).

Therefore, until we have a playoff system, those teams are going to–and should be–left out of the national championship. When you’ve got undefeated and one-loss teams from the major BCS conferences, you’d be crazy to put in an undefeated Utah team. Everyone knows this. Let’s get a playoff and then see what the Utes can do. Until then, it is Fiesta Bowl for you, I’m afraid.

556

[quote]rainjack wrote:
Rocker3829 wrote:

I said nothing bout the ACC being better than the SEC, all I said was coming from a guy who doesn’t really like the SEC but gives them props 90% of the time I’d take the Big 12 over them this year. Get a fuckin grip man! I know the ACC ain’t shit on a national scale and hasn’t been in a good while so don’t attack my conference when everyone including us in the conference know we’ve been down for way too long. The Big 12/SEC debate this year has nothing to do with the ACC, so back off already.

Whatever. You write like you are an expert yet you admit you are an ACC guy from the outset. You should get minus 50 points just for admitting any allegiance to that conference, period.

The ACC hasn’t been down for too long. It has always sucked ass. It is a hoop conference that just happens to have FSU in it.

Having an ACC guy talk football is like a Big-12 guy talking hockey. [/quote]

I know this aint helpin my cause much, but look back during the 80’s when Danny Ford was at my school. That was a Clemson team(In the ACC mind you) who could go toe to toe against anyone back then. Obviously that was a LONG time ago (and I pray my school’s next HC brings back the physical toughness my school has lacked for years) but their was a time. Admitting allegiance to the ACC should dock me points? Are you fuckin serious?! I’m never gonna turn my back on my school or the conference they are in (anyone who DOES turn their back on their team and their conference aint a true football fan) because someone from a different conference says its worthless, even if that conference is better (which most of em are this year I aint denyin that) but do I think the Big 12 is better than the SEC THIS YEAR? You bet your ass I do

557

[quote]eic wrote:
Spike9726 wrote:

Utah has already beaten Michigan, on the road.

So did Akron.

The last time Utah went to a BCS game they waxed Pittsburg, a member of the BCS cartel.

I can’t think of many people who think Pitt is really that impressive.

Along the way they beat the Aggies, a member of your precious Big 12, pretty badly.

The Aggies currently rank last in the Big 12.

There can be no serious contention that the MWC, Conference USA, etc. is as good or better than most of the BCS conferences (e.g., SEC, Big 12, Big 10, Pac-10).

Therefore, until we have a playoff system, those teams are going to–and should be–left out of the national championship. When you’ve got undefeated and one-loss teams from the major BCS conferences, you’d be crazy to put in an undefeated Utah team. Everyone knows this. Let’s get a playoff and then see what the Utes can do. Until then, it is Fiesta Bowl for you, I’m afraid.
[/quote]

The Pac-10 should get some serious consideration as to whether it should even be considered a BCS conference. If they weren’t in a major media market - they would not get any airtime at all.

And I think that is one of the huge reasons there is not a playoff system in D-1.

If the Big-10’s and the Pac-10’s actually had to prove themselves on the field, they would be perennial also-rans.

558

Eic, I will agree with you that Pitt and Texas A&M are not impressive. But in 2004, the year Spike was talking about, Pitt was the Big East Champion and Texas A&M was ranked 22 before losing to Tennessee in the Cotton Bowl.

Also, to say that the Pac-10 is superior to the Mountain West is wrong. I will agree that the Pac-10 has the best team between the two conferences, but their record against the Mountain West is 1-6 this season.

Rainjack, if the Mountain West is better than the ACC and Big East, why would you consider them to be a second tier conference if the ACC and Big East are supposedly first tier conferences. I know you are probably going to comeback and say that the SEC and Big 12 are the only first tier conferences, and I will agree with you that they are the best conferences this year. The thing that ticks me off, though, is that the other four BCS conferences don’t have to prove anything and still get treated like royalty. I know they have history, but the thing that should matter is the present.

Also, your treatment of Rocker 3829 was unnecessary. Just because he likes the ACC doesn’t mean he doesn’t know anything about football. That is the equivalent of saying Mike Leach, Mark Mangino, Paul Johnson, and Charlie Weiss don’t know anything about football because they didn’t play it in college.

If Utah were to be the only undefeated team left, I think they deserve a shot to play in the title game. Nobody should even argue if they are ranked in the top 2 of the BCS.

559

Pac-10 IS garbage, sans USC most years. Money/bowl sponsorships IS the reason that college has no playoff system.

Utah plays second tier ball, I’m tired of hearing about them, BYU, and Ball State…give me a damn break.

I would support moving FSU to another conference. (SEC would be awesome.)

ACC IS weaker than usual…but the powers that be only really breathed life into by putting FSU there and our Miami rivalry helps raise the level of play a bit. Other than that…I gotta say I’m not a fan of us being there.

560

[quote]rainjack wrote:
Spike9726 wrote:
Also, it’s been a while, but since the creation of the BCS cartel Tech played a non BCS team in the bowl game in Houston, they got embarrassed.

The fact that you are picking out selected teams to make the 2nd tier conferences look better is weak.

TCU is not a bad team, but that does not mean they play in a tough conference, which is what I am talking about.

The MWC is not a top tier conference. Were they to play the OU’s the Longhorns, or any number of teams from the SEC on a consistent basis, maybe they would move up in respect.

Utah has played no one. TCU has played no one, except a highly overrated BYU.

However, the MWC is probably a stronger conference top to bottom than either the Big East, or the ACC.
[/quote]

The only reason I singled out Utah, is because you said they don’t deserve a shot at the title. Otherwise I never would have responded. I threw in TCU because that is my team, and frankly I’m tired of listening to this second tier drivel.

TCU has played 2 teams in the top 10, and has beaten one of them. In the last 4 years we’ve played OU, UT, Tech, Iowa State (they had 1 good year) and OU. They’ve beaten OU in Norman, ISU in a bowl, and Tech. They led UT at the half last year before getting blown away in the second half.

They can only play the teams that will schedule them, and the schedules are written so far in advance it is hard to tell how good they will be (See Northwestern, and Arizona for instance). This year Arkansas backed out of a trip to Ft Worth and we had to fill in the mighty Lumberjacks of Stephen F Austin.

Often our bowl tie ins force us to play a less known opponant (Colorado State, Boise, Northern Illinois, Cougar High, etc). A lot of the big name schools are hesitant to travel to Ft Worth, or Salt Lake City for that matter, when they might lose in front of a smaller crowd. It’s too easy for them to play a home game against Louisiana Lafayette.

This is a big part of why I want to abolish the BCS and have a huge playoff system. Let’s settle this on the field. The BCS is just an exclusionary scheme to make sure that big name, over rated schools like Notre Dame and Florida State get to play in big payout bowl games while TCU is relegated to playing Wyoming and Northern Illinois.

Surely you don’t consider Michigan noone. What was their rank at the start of the year? BTW that was the Toledo Rockets that just beat them, not the Akron Zips.

561

You guys are judging the Pac 10 by its (lack of) strength the past couple years and that is a mistake.

The fact is that the BCS conferences (save the Big East) represent major D1 universities that have the money, tradition, and commitment to winning. I’m sorry, but Utah, Colorado State, TCU, etc. will never be as high in the minds of young recruits as playing for a team like UCLA, Cal, USC, or Oregon.

If you look at the landscape of college football, there is a tendency for teams in southern parts of the United States to do well. I think there are two explanations for this:

  1. Save Ohio, the hotbeds of high school football tend to be in southern states: Texas, California, and Florida. Recruiting will always be easier for schools that are in or near those states/regions.

  2. When choosing a place to play, most 18-year-old guys want to go to a place where the chicks are not only hot, but not covered up by sweaters 9 months out of the year. So, again, there is an advantage to playing at major universities in California, Texas, and the South.

All I’m saying is that whether a conference should be a BCS conference or not should not be judged based on a few “down years,” it should be based on their history of excellence and overall potential to field solid teams.

A conference like the Mountain West never has been and probably never will field teams of the caliber that the Pac-10 has throughout history. That’s all I’m saying.