College Football

Off Topic
41

[quote]rainjack wrote:
Dustin wrote:
bucknut wrote:
Dustin,

USC’s schedule included only 3 teams with winning records, and only 1 ranked team. That is hardly one of the toughest schedules in the nation.

Going into the season, USC had one of the toughest schedules in the nation. The “experts” made a point to mention it all the time. Cal, Oregon, and Arizona State were all ranked in the top 10 during the season. I think Nebraska was even ranked when USC played them.

I can’t blame USC for the collapse of these teams (Cal and Oregon due to injuries).

I’m no USC fan. In fact, I hate them. My point was that they have a legit argument to play in the title game as any other two-loss team.

Dustin

I don’t think they do. The Pac-10 is on the same level as the WAC. If SoCal has a gripe - Hawaii has an even bigger one.

I don’t know what it is going to take for the talking heads to wake up and realize that the Pac-10 sucks with a capital S.
[/quote]

Exactly. That fact that Dustin actually listened to the talking heads shows he doesn’t know the level of suck of the Pac-10.

Frankly Hawaii and Kansas have a legitimate gripe too.

42

[quote]BigRagoo wrote:
rainjack wrote:
Dustin wrote:
bucknut wrote:
Dustin,

USC’s schedule included only 3 teams with winning records, and only 1 ranked team. That is hardly one of the toughest schedules in the nation.

Going into the season, USC had one of the toughest schedules in the nation. The “experts” made a point to mention it all the time. Cal, Oregon, and Arizona State were all ranked in the top 10 during the season. I think Nebraska was even ranked when USC played them.

I can’t blame USC for the collapse of these teams (Cal and Oregon due to injuries).

I’m no USC fan. In fact, I hate them. My point was that they have a legit argument to play in the title game as any other two-loss team.

Dustin

I don’t think they do. The Pac-10 is on the same level as the WAC. If SoCal has a gripe - Hawaii has an even bigger one.

I don’t know what it is going to take for the talking heads to wake up and realize that the Pac-10 sucks with a capital S.

Exactly. That fact that Dustin actually listened to the talking heads shows he doesn’t know the level of suck of the Pac-10.

Frankly Hawaii and Kansas have a legitimate gripe too. [/quote]

Hawaii and Kansas have legitimate gripes with the system. Georgia did exactly what the system says they are supposed to do and still got screwed.

43

[quote]Ghost22 wrote:
…That is all…

[/quote]

I’m now a tigers fan.

44

Neither Kansas nor The Bulldogs won their conference.

Unless there is a playoff system, schools that can’t win their conference won’t play in the title game.

Texas Tech really effed up the system when they beat UT Norman. UT Norman beats Tech, and you have LSU v. the sooners.

That would be a hell of a game.

45

[quote]rainjack wrote:
Neither Kansas nor The Bulldogs won their conference.

Unless there is a playoff system, schools that can’t win their conference won’t play in the title game.
[/quote]

Nebraska in 2001? Oklahoma in 2003?

46

[quote]tedro wrote:

Good point, it’s not like these kids are spending time practicing before their bowl game or anything, and obviously the D-2 kids must be complete morons, seeing as they spend so much time in the playoffs they mustn’t have time left to spend in the classroom.

[/quote]

You seem to be forgetting two things.

  1. The lower divisions usually have shorter schedules already. Adding a couple of games isn’t too much and it doesn’t go as late in the season. Finishing up your actual season before exams is a big deal. Ever wonder why the bowl games don’t happen until the new year? They are leaving time for exams and a lull in practices and then practicing hard again after christmas.

  2. These athletes are still kids, many of their bodies haven’t fully developed yet and the risk for injury is significantly higher. Playing sixteen games in a season will just end up getting more kids hurt.

Lastly, remeber that these guys that are playing are a bunch of kids. Most of them aren’t going to play in the NFL, they play in college, have fun, and continue on with their lives. There is nothing but pride on the line as far as the students are concerned. It seems that way too many people haven’t fully realized that and get so upset about something that is meant to be enjoyable. Relax. It isn’t that big a deal.

GO WV

47

[quote]bigscarymonster wrote:

You seem to be forgetting two things.

  1. The lower divisions usually have shorter schedules already. Adding a couple of games isn’t too much and it doesn’t go as late in the season.
    [/quote]

I-AA teams typically play 11 games plus up to four playoff games. Division II play 10 or 11 and up to 5 playoff games. Division III also plays 10 or 11 and up to 5 playoff games. Care to recant your statement?

Which bowl games are you referring to? They are still plenty that are played in December. And good luck to you if you really believe Ohio State and LSU are cutting back on practice.

Any proof of this, or are you just making it up?

[quote]
Lastly, remeber that these guys that are playing are a bunch of kids. Most of them aren’t going to play in the NFL, they play in college, have fun, and continue on with their lives. There is nothing but pride on the line as far as the students are concerned. It seems that way too many people haven’t fully realized that and get so upset about something that is meant to be enjoyable. Relax. It isn’t that big a deal.

GO WV[/quote]

I’m all for putting the emphasis back on the student instead of the athlete. Creating an unfair system does nothing to help the student. These are two completely different arguements.

48

[quote]rainjack wrote:

I don’t think they do. The Pac-10 is on the same level as the WAC. If SoCal has a gripe - Hawaii has an even bigger one.

I don’t know what it is going to take for the talking heads to wake up and realize that the Pac-10 sucks with a capital S.
[/quote]

C’mon, the PAC 10 is not on the same level as the WAC. You’re just being silly now.

I agree that Hawaii does have a gripe. I also think that USC is just as good as any other two-loss team. We saw what USC were capable of when they were healthy.

And once again, I’m not a PAC-10 supporter at all. I’ve never been a fan of that style of football.

Dustin

49

[quote]BigRagoo wrote:

Exactly. That fact that Dustin actually listened to the talking heads shows he doesn’t know the level of suck of the Pac-10.

Frankly Hawaii and Kansas have a legitimate gripe too. [/quote]

I don’t “listen” to them anymore than you do. I don’t like the PAC-10 and don’t believe their conference is any better than the BIG 12 or SEC. USC, as far as talent level, is probably the top school (arguably). They could line up against LSU, Georgia, OU, or Ohio State and beat them.

Dustin

50

[quote]rainjack wrote:

Texas Tech really effed up the system when they beat UT Norman. UT Norman beats Tech, and you have LSU v. the sooners.

That would be a hell of a game. [/quote]

I agree that OU and LSU would have been great. There is no love lost between Stoops and Miles. The month or so leading up to that game would be priceless with Miles running his mouth, and what not.

One small correction: By calling OU UT Norman, that implies that any athlete from Texas is automatically going to go to Austin to play football. Last I checked, there are a ton of schools in Texas to play football at.

The fact that Texans go north of the border to play ball just shows they recognize a winner.

Dustin

51

[quote]rainjack wrote:
Neither Kansas nor The Bulldogs won their conference.

Unless there is a playoff system, schools that can’t win their conference won’t play in the title game.

Texas Tech really effed up the system when they beat UT Norman. UT Norman beats Tech, and you have LSU v. the sooners.

That would be a hell of a game. [/quote]

I do love watching UT-Norman play, as their star QB from Oklahoma City hands off to their star RB’s from South Carolina and Las Vegas, who run through holes opened up by their FB from Edmond, OK, their blocking TE from Kansas, and their O-Linemen from Colorado, Georgia, Colorado, Michigan, and Ohio. In the redzone, UT-Norman also loves to throw to their star TE from Ardmore, OK. On rare occasions when they have to punt, it’s good to know they have a great long snapper, from Sand Springs, OK, snapping to a great punter, from Arizona.

On Defense, I love watching UT-Norman’s best DT from Oklahoma City, OK keep blockers off their two best LB’s from Las Vegas and Kingfisher, OK, while their three best DB’s, from Lawton, OK and Edmond, OK and Alexandria, LA, blanket receivers.

Since Stoops, from Youngstown, OH, has been at UT-Norman, I’ve had the pleasure of watching two Butkus Awards winners from Fort Gibson, OK and Jenks, OK, an Outland Trophy winner from Lawton, OK, and a Heisman Winner from Tuttle, OK.

Watching UT-Norman QB’s from South Dakota, Georgia, Tuttle, OK, and Oklahoma City deliver 3 more Big XII titles than all of UT-Austin has just been gravy.

However, my proudest moment as a UT-Norman fan came when a QB from South Dakota and LB’s from Jenks, OK and Miami, FL led UT-Norman to the National Championship in 2000.

That was really fun.

52

UT Norman has been called that for years. But I suggest you look at the rosters and see where the plurality of players come from.

Can you say Adrian Peterson?

53

[quote]tGunslinger wrote:
rainjack wrote:
Neither Kansas nor The Bulldogs won their conference.

Unless there is a playoff system, schools that can’t win their conference won’t play in the title game.

Texas Tech really effed up the system when they beat UT Norman. UT Norman beats Tech, and you have LSU v. the sooners.

That would be a hell of a game.

I do love watching UT-Norman play, as their star QB from Oklahoma City hands off to their star RB’s from South Carolina and Las Vegas, who run through holes opened up by their FB from Edmond, OK, their blocking TE from Kansas, and their O-Linemen from Colorado, Georgia, Colorado, Michigan, and Ohio. In the redzone, UT-Norman also loves to throw to their star TE from Ardmore, OK. On rare occasions when they have to punt, it’s good to know they have a great long snapper, from Sand Springs, OK, snapping to a great punter, from Arizona.

On Defense, I love watching UT-Norman’s best DT from Oklahoma City, OK keep blockers off their two best LB’s from Las Vegas and Kingfisher, OK, while their three best DB’s, from Lawton, OK and Edmond, OK and Alexandria, LA, blanket receivers.

Since Stoops, from Youngstown, OH, has been at UT-Norman, I’ve had the pleasure of watching two Butkus Awards winners from Fort Gibson, OK and Jenks, OK, an Outland Trophy winner from Lawton, OK, and a Heisman Winner from Tuttle, OK.

Watching UT-Norman QB’s from South Dakota, Georgia, Tuttle, OK, and Oklahoma City deliver 3 more Big XII titles than all of UT-Austin has just been gravy.

However, my proudest moment as a UT-Norman fan came when a QB from South Dakota and LB’s from Jenks, OK and Miami, FL led UT-Norman to the National Championship in 2000.

That was really fun.[/quote]

Not as much fun as it was knowing that you took that much time to try to prove me wrong.

Okies…

54

[quote]rainjack wrote:
UT Norman has been called that for years. But I suggest you look at the rosters and see where the plurality of players come from.

Can you say Adrian Peterson? [/quote]

As a Sooner fan, I’ll agree with our large Texas crop of players (OU has 46 players from Texas, while Texas has 0 players from Oklahoma), but as you know, there is no shortage of Texas players to go around, and UT, Tex A, and TT get their fair share. Heck, even Baylor, Houston, and Rice have some Texas studs on their team.

In that case, in my opinion, it comes down to recruiting, and who can bring in the best kids.

Either way…

BOOMER SOONER!!!

55

[quote]tedro wrote:
bigscarymonster wrote:

You seem to be forgetting two things.

  1. The lower divisions usually have shorter schedules already. Adding a couple of games isn’t too much and it doesn’t go as late in the season.

I-AA teams typically play 11 games plus up to four playoff games. Division II play 10 or 11 and up to 5 playoff games. Division III also plays 10 or 11 and up to 5 playoff games. Care to recant your statement?
[/quote]

Sure.

The earliest bowl game is Dec. 20, most likely after exams. All the BCS bowls are in january.

I choose to believe most coaches have some sense of responsibility to their kids as students. Whether it is true or not, I don’t know.

Are you seriously asking me if I have any proof that kids that haven’t reached the end of puberty are as fully developed physically as those that have?

That is why I didn’t put it with the numbers.

56

Here’s a “UT-Norman” fans perspective from the Border War sitting on the puke orange side of the Cotton Bowl.

It’s funny watching horn fans throw fits in the stands as their team (or Gods gift to the world as they see it) loses.

I work with a handful of texans and I can only tolerate so much of their self proclaimed superiority since, of course, they are from texas.

Dustin

57

[quote]bigscarymonster wrote:

I choose to believe most coaches have some sense of responsibility to their kids as students. Whether it is true or not, I don’t know.
[/quote]

I have my doubts, but obviously neither of us is qualified to answer this question in certainty, so for now we will have to agree to disagree.

No, not at all. I am asking you if you have proof that this leads to injury. Obviously not all of the kids have reached the end of puberty, but some have. This is one major problem I have with recruiting and walk-on programs, but that’s another topic for another day.

58

[quote]Dustin wrote:
Here’s a “UT-Norman” fans perspective from the Border War sitting on the puke orange side of the Cotton Bowl.

It’s funny watching horn fans throw fits in the stands as their team (or Gods gift to the world as they see it) loses.

I work with a handful of texans and I can only tolerate so much of their self proclaimed superiority since, of course, they are from texas.

Dustin[/quote]

I won’t disagree about the t-sippers. I pray for an earthquake every year when you and tu play. The only game I can remember pulling for tu in my 43 years of college football was when they played USC a couple of years ago.

Even then I had to take several showers to stop feeling so dirty.

59

[quote]rainjack wrote:
UT Norman has been called that for years. But I suggest you look at the rosters and see where the plurality of players come from.

Can you say Adrian Peterson? [/quote]

It’s no secret that OU recruits a lot of Texas players. The Dallas metro has more population than the entire state of Oklahoma; OU’d be stupid not to recruit Texas.

That said, it does seem to be a secret that most of OU’s star players are not Texans. There have been more All-Americans under Stoops that hailed from Oklahoma than from Texas.

For every AD, you have a Dan Cody. For every Tommie Harris, a Jamaal Brown.

60

[quote]rainjack wrote:

I won’t disagree about the t-sippers. I pray for an earthquake every year when you and tu play. The only game I can remember pulling for tu in my 43 years of college football was when they played USC a couple of years ago.

Even then I had to take several showers to stop feeling so dirty. [/quote]

Wow, same with me. That was the first and only time I’ll ever root for Texas.

I have a fun-loving hatred for the horns, if that’s possible. For example, I’d never want to see them go on probation or get the death penalty because it’s fun to see my Sooners play them. USC on the other hand, I can’t wish enough bad things on that program.

Dustin