[College Football] #1 America's Team vs #7 Boone Pickens Toy Train Set [Archive] - Page 2

Major

10-26-2008, 12:19 AM

The reason for conference championships games is revenue. Pure and simple. The Big 10 has not (yet) decided to make that particular cash grab. Maybe when they add a 12th team.

BTW, I do see your point.

I agree they were a cash-grab, but I think they were also a big step towards deciding things on the field as we started getting these big 12-team conferences. The B10 is also (probably coincidentally) the biggest obstacle to the playoffs. The B12, SEC, ACC, and BigEast seem to be all open to it. The Pac10 seems resistant but open to change. The B10 is vehemently against it. Seems to fit right in with their willingness to decide the B10 championship based on what team hasn't won it the longest.

DaDakota

10-26-2008, 12:28 AM

The B10 is vehemently against it. Seems to fit right in with their willingness to decide the B10 championship based on what team hasn't won it the longest.

They are being obtuse...that is not the change we need.

;)

DD

flipmode

10-26-2008, 12:38 AM

props to jason and oSu. beat those dirt burglars and take their BCS bowl, would you? pettigrew, toston, and hunter are MEN and they didn't have to wait till they were 40.

go pokes.

10-26-2008, 01:30 AM

Question:
What happens if Tech beats Texas, but then Oklahoma beats Tech? And assume they all win the rest? All would be one loss teams in a 3-way loss triangle. Who goes to the Big 12 Championship?

Microfridge

10-26-2008, 03:19 AM

Question:
What happens if Tech beats Texas, but then Oklahoma beats Tech? And assume they all win the rest? All would be one loss teams in a 3-way loss triangle. Who goes to the Big 12 Championship?
http://newsok.com/article/3170665

It's fairly complicated.

DPballer

10-26-2008, 03:51 AM

It seems to me anyone that supports a playoff to have things decided on the field would totally support conference championships? The Pac10 is the only major conference that makes sense to not have one, because all the teams actually play each other and decide it on the field.
Well that's exactly what would happen if the Big 12 didn't have a conference championship. Instead, you would have all teams playing each other. It just sucks that the Big 12 championship game can knock teams out of the MNC race or even BCS race for that matter (Mizzou last year).

The Cat, I'm sure know about the complete and utter embarrassing performance by Kansas' defense today. I'm not even worried about that game anymore to be honest. I agree with Pat Forde's article. If we beat Tech, we're going to Miami. Mizzou will romp KU and get another shot at BCS in the Big 12 championship game.

SamCassell

10-26-2008, 05:26 AM

It's fairly complicated.
The rules are complicated, but not their application in that case. In the hypo they've all got identical conference / division / overall records, with their losses to each other. The rules say that the winner of the South would be the team ranked higher in the BCS standings that follow the last game. In that case, my money would be on OU, because a loss to Tech would drop UT more than 2 or 3 spots.

Major

10-26-2008, 08:26 AM

Well that's exactly what would happen if the Big 12 didn't have a conference championship. Instead, you would have all teams playing each other. It just sucks that the Big 12 championship game can knock teams out of the MNC race or even BCS race for that matter (Mizzou last year).

Except there are too many teams in the B12 for that to happen. You can't play 11 conference games - you'd never have the opportunity to play anyone else, and it would be impossible for the conference to recruit around the country or to really see how good it is compared to other leagues. The Pac10 can pull it off because they have 10 teams and play 9 conference games. Even the Big10 (with 11 teams) only plays 8 or 9 conference games, which is why they have their stupid tiebreaker possibilities.

That's why all the 12-team leagues have conference championship games. They all play 8 conference games and then have the CCG to deal with any ties. Yes, the CCG can knock people out of the title game - it can also give teams a huge extra win against a good team to help make the title game. LSU last year got in by winning the SEC title game and leapfrogging Georgia and some other teams to #2. Texas could have in 2001 had they won it after the SEC team lost theirs - without the title games, they had no chance. Okie's dominant win compared to Auburn's close win in the year with the 3 undefeateds helped ensure Okie made it to the title game.

My view on it is that if you're supposed to be one of the two best teams in the country, you should be able to handle winning that game. If you lose it, you deserve not to make the national championship. The Big 10 is the only conference to benefit from not having one, and they've only won 1 national title since the BCS was introduced, so it's really not preventing SEC or B12 teams from winning national titles.

Major

10-26-2008, 08:29 AM

The rules are complicated, but not their application in that case. In the hypo they've all got identical conference / division / overall records, with their losses to each other. The rules say that the winner of the South would be the team ranked higher in the BCS standings that follow the last game. In that case, my money would be on OU, because a loss to Tech would drop UT more than 2 or 3 spots.

I think it would depend on how OU and Tech look in their wins over OSU to some extent, and how Texas looks in a loss to Tech. Margin of victories and losses would play a huge role in the polling. Texas would probably have the advantage in the computers by being the only team in the bunch to beat Missouri, the best of the B12 North teams.

BigBenito

10-26-2008, 09:41 AM

leroy

10-26-2008, 11:36 AM

I don't want to see a non-deserving Penn State in the BCS Championship game any more than you. But don't blame the Big 10 for not being greedy like the other conferences.

An 8 team playoff would be the best solution.

Actually, it's the Big 10 and their commissioner that's responsible for their continuing to be no playoff system and why there won't be one for a good long time...

Playoff Plunderer (http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=jo-delany010507&prov=yhoo&type=lgns)

VesceySux

10-26-2008, 11:48 AM

not if Penn State is in the NC game

The Big 10 is a Big Joke this year, and 2 one loss teams from the sec and big 12 should play in NC game.

Better Penn St than Ohio State. At least they're different. I'm sick of overrated OSU hanging around in the NC title game hunt year after year, like cockroaches that just won't die. Yes, the Big 10 is a joke, but if Penn St sucks as much as people say they do, I'm sure they'll drop one their next few games, and balance will be restored in the BCS.

The Cat

10-26-2008, 12:07 PM

Better Penn St than Ohio State. At least they're different. I'm sick of overrated OSU hanging around in the NC title game hunt year after year, like cockroaches that just won't die. Yes, the Big 10 is a joke, but if Penn St sucks as much as people say they do, I'm sure they'll drop one their next few games, and balance will be restored in the BCS.

I don't think you appreciate just how bad the Big 10 is. :) Think about how bad Ohio State is, and then consider that Ohio State beat Michigan State by 28 on the road a week ago, scoring 48 points in the process. Michigan State, at home... is the toughest game Penn State has left.

Penn State is a solid top 15/20 team, who will beat the Ohio State's, Iowa's and Michigan State's of the world. Problem is, they don't have the athletes on either side of the ball to run with the true elite teams. But in the Big 10 , they don't have to beat any of those to go undefeated. I hope you're right and that either Iowa/Michigan State will pull the upset of the season, but it won't prove that Penn State isn't a joke if they don't.

The Cat

10-26-2008, 12:12 PM

Game surprised me, I thought TU was going to crush OkSU at home, especially after how TU treated Missouri.

I also thought OhSU would beat PennState (Joe Pa never wins in Colombus)

TU loses that game in Stillwater. TU doesn't lose number 1, but PSU's victory was more impressive.

What?!?!?!

Penn State's victory was more impressive? Do people still not get just how bad Ohio State is? Penn State had 3 points in the fourth quarter against a horrid Ohio State squad, and had to have an idiotic fumble from a true freshman QB to win the game. Penn State's offense looked every bit as slow and uncreative as their counterparts from Ohio State.

There was nothing about that game, on either side, that looked impressive. Compared to watching Texas/OSU earlier in the day, these two seemed like Sun Belt teams.

The Cat

10-26-2008, 12:28 PM

jasonemilio

10-26-2008, 12:46 PM

I have to say though, our QB (Zac Robinson) disappointed me and a lot of us OSU fans yesterday with his decision making and pocket presence in general. You guys may think he's just an average QB in the Big 12 after that game, but trust me, he still hasn't reached that level he was playing at last year where he passed for over 2800 yards and ran for over 800 (in 11 games too). But boy, did I ever realize why Colt Mccoy truly deserves the Heisman provided his team can keep on winning.

But now I want to talk about the polls. Here are the new rankings:

USA Today Ranking
Rank Team Record Pts Last Week
1. Texas (58) (8-0) 1522 1
2. Alabama (8-0) 1439 2
3. Penn St. (3) (9-0) 1414 3
4. Oklahoma (7-1) 1265 5
5. Texas Tech (8-0) 1246 6
6. USC (6-1) 1228 4
7. Florida (6-1) 1199 7
8. Georgia (7-1) 1137 9
9. Utah (8-0) 987 12
10. Oklahoma St. (7-1) 972 8
11. Boise St. (7-0) 894 13
12. TCU (8-1) 813 15
13. Ohio St. (7-2) 752 10
14. Missouri (6-2) 740 16
15. LSU (5-2) 573 11
16. Florida St. (6-1) 546 23
17. BYU (7-1) 545 17
18. Tulsa (7-0) 524 19
19. Ball St. (8-0) 445 22
20. Minnesota (7-1) 403 25
21. Michigan St. (7-2) 292 NR
22. North Carolina (6-2) 232 NR
23. South Florida (6-2) 153 14
24. Oregon (6-2) 150 NR
25. Maryland (6-2) 71 NR

Now tell me, how come a one loss USC team (and to a bad team at that) still gets ranked over us? I'm not to be homer or anything, but don't we have a higher Sargarin SOS and plus we lost to a legit #1 team in the coutry, yet we are still ranked below USC? I also think Tech deserves to be ranked higher than OU at this point, simply because they haven't lost a game and did beat a ranked team, albeit an overrated one in Kansas. And Mizzou should be ranked higher than tOSU. Sure they lost two straight games and one of them was to the BEST team in the country. If I'm correct, didn't tOSU got their ass handed to them by USC, who also has one loss?

Major

10-26-2008, 12:52 PM

The other negative to Penn State's win: as usual, the Rose Bowl folks are inconsiderate, illogical assholes. So, assuming Penn State wins out and plays for the MNC, what does that mean? It means the Rose Bowl, out of their bizarre obsession with Big 10/Pac 10 even when the conference champions aren't available, will ruin what should be one of the best games by staging a USC/Ohio State rematch. Of course, Ohio State will likely lose by 40, the same way Illinois did against USC last year.

This is, unfortunately, a problem that's probably going to occur a lot this year. You have 10 total BCS teams, and only 2 per conference. Let's assume the B12 and SEC get two teams each - that's 4. Then you've got the other 4 conference champs. For simplicity, I'll just pick some random teams. We're looking at:

Texas
OU
Florida
Alabama
USC
Penn State
Random crappy Big East Champ
Random crappy ACC Champ
Some BCS Buster from the collection of undefeated minor conference champs
???

There's still a 10th team there. I don't think there's any way you can pick a 2nd team from the Big East or ACC. Meaning you have to pick a second team from the Big 10 or the Pac 10 (or a 2nd BCS Buster). Assuming this crap team and the crappy Big East and ACC champs are spread out, you're looking at 3 crappy bowl games out of the 5.

SWTsig

10-26-2008, 01:13 PM

how in god's name is usc ahead of okie state?

my (realistic) opinion:

Texas
Ala
Penn
Tech
Fla
osu
ou
Ga
usc
utah (wont last long)

VesceySux

10-26-2008, 01:25 PM

Who are the 3 idiots that voted Penn St #1 over Texas and Alabama???

RedRaiderRocket

10-26-2008, 01:40 PM

Now tell me, how come a one loss USC team (and to a bad team at that) still gets ranked over us? I'm not to be homer or anything, but don't we have a higher Sargarin SOS and plus we lost to a legit #1 team in the coutry, yet we are still ranked below USC? I also think Tech deserves to be ranked higher than OU at this point, simply because they haven't lost a game and did beat a ranked team, albeit an overrated one in Kansas. And Mizzou should be ranked higher than tOSU. Sure they lost two straight games and one of them was to the BEST team in the country. If I'm correct, didn't tOSU got their ass handed to them by USC, who also has one loss?

Jason it's all about the hype. The media and coaches loves USC. They are a top named school and will draw great ratings. I watched them yesterday vs. Arizona and they looked really bad. They will make a big deal about their wins against Virginia who at that time was terrible had just lost a core of their big name defensive players, and an overrated Ohio State team without Beanie Wells. I am glad Tech was able to bump them this week, but I am sure it is just trying to hype the Texas vs Tech matchup as much as possible. USC has struggled against 2 unranked scrub Pac-10 teams by losing to Oregon State, and almost losing to Arizona last night. Until there is a playoff this same garbage will happened every year.

dntrwl

10-26-2008, 01:50 PM

Who are the 3 idiots that voted Penn St #1 over Texas and Alabama???
people from Pennyslyvlania

Also, USC being ahead of Georgia, who just romped LSU, and Florida who romped Kentucky...that's just stupidity.

BigBenito

10-26-2008, 02:10 PM

What?!?!?!

Penn State's victory was more impressive? Do people still not get just how bad Ohio State is? Penn State had 3 points in the fourth quarter against a horrid Ohio State squad, and had to have an idiotic fumble from a true freshman QB to win the game. Penn State's offense looked every bit as slow and uncreative as their counterparts from Ohio State.

There was nothing about that game, on either side, that looked impressive. Compared to watching Texas/OSU earlier in the day, these two seemed like Sun Belt teams.
7 point victory on the road vs. 4 point victory at home. Yes, I consider PSU's victory more impressive.

Please enlighten me on how bad the #9 ranked team (now 13) in the nation is. Same team that has only lost 4 times at home since 2002.

It isn't that PSU's victory was amazing, I just don't put much stock in home victories by 4 point margins.

The Cat

10-26-2008, 02:14 PM

leroy

10-26-2008, 02:17 PM

7 point victory on the road vs. 4 point victory at home. Yes, I consider PSU's victory more impressive.

Please enlighten me on how bad the #9 ranked team (now 13) in the nation is. Same team that has only lost 4 times at home since 2002.

It isn't that PSU's victory was amazing, I just don't put much stock in home victories by 4 point margins.

Then you don't watch college football. There was no doubt which was the best game of the day and it wasn't the one played in Ohio. The past means nothing in college football. Who cares what they've done since when? That was a horribly played game. There was nothing impressive about it. Someone had to win and PSU played slightly less craptastic than did the home team.

The UT win was more impressive by far. There is no excuse for anyone giving PSU 1st place votes over the team that was unanimous just a week before and who had beated it's 3rd consecutive top 10 team.

BigBenito

10-26-2008, 02:19 PM

You act as if the two teams were comparable. If Oklahoma State played Ohio State, I'd be shocked if the Buckeyes could stay within 25. Even in Columbus. As far as enlightening you on how bad they are, check any result in 2007 or 2008 when Ohio State played semi-legit competition.
My dream scenario would be a PSU/OK State matchup in a bowl game... but I don't see that happening. (2 favorite teams)

But, I'd pay to see OSU v. OSU as well.

After checking OSU's 07/08 schedule, check out OSU's 07/08 schedule vs. semi-legit competition.

RedRaiderRocket

10-26-2008, 02:22 PM

In a way the Penn state could have been more important than the Texas game based on, Penn State is now a lock to win the big 10. Unless one of the 2 Texas teams goes undefeated and Alabama, Penn State is now a pretty strong lock to go undefeated and play for the national championship. I don't think Penn State or Ohio State would finish in top 4 of the big 12, but that doesn't matter.

BigBenito

10-26-2008, 02:23 PM

Then you don't watch college football. There was no doubt which was the best game of the day and it wasn't the one played in Ohio. The past means nothing in college football. Who cares what they've done since when? That was a horribly played game. There was nothing impressive about it. Someone had to win and PSU played slightly less craptastic than did the home team.

The UT win was more impressive by far. There is no excuse for anyone giving PSU 1st place votes over the team that was unanimous just a week before and who had beated it's 3rd consecutive top 10 team.
Best game and most impressive victory are not the same.

I don't watch college football? Yet you're commenting that the past doesn't matter?!? How do you think the polls work?

And I agree, Texas shouldn't have lost any votes, but I certainly expected PSU to gain on them, and lo and behold... they did.

Don't get angry w/ me, because the system is flawed. Maybe you should watch less games and figure out how the people rank teams.

The Cat

10-26-2008, 02:43 PM

And I agree, Texas shouldn't have lost any votes, but I certainly expected PSU to gain on them, and lo and behold... they did

What are you talking about? Last week, Texas had 1,625 points to Penn State's 1,506 -- a difference of 119. This week, Texas has 1,625 points to Penn State's 1,503 -- a difference of 122. Texas gained on Penn State.

VesceySux

10-26-2008, 02:44 PM

7 point victory on the road vs. 4 point victory at home. Yes, I consider PSU's victory more impressive.

C'mon, this is ridiculous. Do you consider Virginia's 24-17 road victory at #18 Georgia Tech more impressive than UT's measly 4-point victory at home, too? I mean, after all, Georgia Tech was undefeated at home this year prior to yesterday. :rolleyes:

Texas faced a #7/#8 Oklahoma State team that had the 6th best scoring offense in the country (#6 in the nation in rushing and #58 in passing), the #4 QB in the country (based on RAT), and the #6 rusher in Hunter. The Horns won by 4.

Penn St faced a #10 OSU team that had the #67 scoring offense (#106 in passing and #43 in rushing), a ridiculously lowly rated passer (below #100), and the #39 rusher in Wells. The Lions won by 7.

Bassfly

10-26-2008, 02:45 PM

I certainly expected PSU to gain on them, and lo and behold... they did.

Don't get angry w/ me, because the system is flawed. Maybe you should watch less games and figure out how the people rank teams.

penn state lost ground in the AP poll, and gained 1 point in the coaches poll.

it was pretty obvious by your first post in this thread you dont know much about college fball and was just baiting.

NIKEstrad

10-26-2008, 02:53 PM

penn state lost ground in the AP poll, and gained 1 point in the coaches poll.

it was pretty obvious by your [BigBenito's] post in this thread you dont know much about college fball and was just baiting.

You mean the #1 ranked team doesn't actually go by TU?

Hypothetical for BigBenito -- If UT punches in a meaningless touchdown on 4th and inches with 30 seconds to go and wins by 11 instead of 4, would that have made their win "more impressive" than Penn State's?

BigBenito

10-26-2008, 02:54 PM

C'mon, this is ridiculous. Do you consider Virginia's 24-17 road victory at #18 Georgia Tech more impressive than UT's measly 4-point victory at home, too? I mean, after all, Georgia Tech was undefeated at home this year prior to yesterday. :rolleyes:

Texas faced a #7/#8 Oklahoma State team that had the 6th best scoring offense in the country (#6 in the nation in rushing and #58 in passing), the #4 QB in the country (based on RAT), and the #6 rusher in Hunter. The Horns won by 4.

Penn St faced a #10 OSU team that had the #67 scoring offense (#106 in passing and #43 in rushing), a ridiculously lowly rated passer (below #100), and the #39 rusher in Wells. The Lions won by 7.
No, I don't.

What are you talking about? Last week, Texas had 1,625 points to Penn State's 1,506 -- a difference of 119. This week, Texas has 1,625 points to Penn State's 1,503 -- a difference of 122. Texas gained on Penn State.
I quoted what I was talking about in my response, but I'll repost it here for you!

There is no excuse for anyone giving PSU 1st place votes over the team that was unanimous just a week before and who had beated it's 3rd consecutive top 10 team.

VesceySux

10-26-2008, 02:56 PM

No, I don't.

So, why not? After all, by your logic, point spread and venue location are clearly more important than anything else.

BigBenito

10-26-2008, 02:58 PM

You mean the #1 ranked team doesn't actually go by TU?

Hypothetical for BigBenito -- If UT punches in a meaningless touchdown on 4th and inches with 30 seconds to go and wins by 11 instead of 4, would that have made their win "more impressive" than Penn State's?
Yes, actually it would.

4 point = loss if played in stillwater.

VesceySux

10-26-2008, 03:05 PM

You mean the #1 ranked team doesn't actually go by TU?

Ugh, I didn't even notice this. Why am I wasting time with an obvious hater?

Air Langhi

10-26-2008, 03:07 PM

The big 10 is terrible. Penn state would lose by 20 to any of the top teams in the big 12. The QB play was not good, without turnover would the score have been? That 3 yards and a cloud of dust offense just doesn't fly anymore.

gucci888

10-26-2008, 03:07 PM

Yes, actually it would.

4 point = loss if played in stillwater.

"Maybe you should watch less games and figure out how the people rank teams."

I don't think teams get ranked by how many points they won or lost by and then predicting what would have happend if they played in another venue.

BigBenito

10-26-2008, 03:08 PM

So, why not? After all, by your logic, point spread and venue location are clearly more important than anything else.
We're comparing 3 @ 9, w/ 3 NEVER winning at 9.

compared to 7 @ 1, w/ 7 NEVER winning vs. 1 home or away.

so, yes, 3 winning by a larger margin than 1 at home, is more important than Virginia beating GT again (Virginia has won 4 of the last 5 meetings between the two teams.)

NIKEstrad

10-26-2008, 03:10 PM

Yes, actually it would.

4 point = loss if played in stillwater.

Huh? :confused:

According to whom? Do you have any basis for saying this? Most handicappers say home field advantage is worth 3 points.

Did 3 suddenly become greater than 4?

Besides, if you saw the game, you would have seen that play was essentially a punt. It was a "let's roll Colt out of the pocket, away from any defenders, and not even give ourselves a .000001 chance of a fumble or INT."

If a strategy to preserve a win with 30 seconds to go makes up your mind as to how impressive a win is, this is pointless. Whether UT won by 4 or 11, they played at a significantly higher level than either Ohio State or Penn State. They just happened to be playing an opponent who also was playing at a level significantly higher than those fraudulent Big 10 schools.

A_3PO

10-26-2008, 03:37 PM

Actually, it's the Big 10 and their commissioner that's responsible for their continuing to be no playoff system and why there won't be one for a good long time...

Playoff Plunderer (http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=jo-delany010507&prov=yhoo&type=lgns)
From this, he's responsible there is no BCS playoff system. It doesn't address why the Big 10 doesn't have a championship game.

junglerules

10-26-2008, 03:45 PM

A lot of people have already spoken for me, but just an abbreviated version....

Penn State sucks ass. It's tough to win in Columbus, but not when you are playing an average offense with a very young QB. But, putting up only 13 points on that team was not very impressive at all.

Oklahoma State may still be behind USC, but don't worry too much about it. The Cowboys will still get their shots at OU and Tech, which could allow them to pass up a USC team that has no great teams left on its schedule. Lots of football left, and some teams will knock each other off. (For instance, the rejuvenated Florida and Georgia teams battle next Saturday, and one will take a second loss.)

A LOT of praise is starting to come the Red Raiders way...and I'm okay with that. I'm starting to like Texas' chances even more of recharging and going out to Lubbock with a chip on their shoulder as they try to finish off the gauntlet. It'll be tough, but I think Tech presents fewer problems than Okie State in terms of offensive balance. We'll see, but I think that if Texas is healthy, I'm feeling okay about their chances in Lubbock.

leroy

10-26-2008, 04:31 PM

From this, he's responsible there is no BCS playoff system. It doesn't address why the Big 10 doesn't have a championship game.

In that case, I believe there is a requirement that you have 12 teams in the conference before a championship game will be approved. That's why the ACC was almost forced to take BC with VT and Miami...they wanted a championship game and needed to get to 12.

Jim Delany is still a jackass and a primary reason there is no playoff system.

DPballer

10-27-2008, 12:57 AM

BigBenito

10-27-2008, 07:39 AM

LOL everybody point and laugh at this loser! LOL @ "TU". Did you confuse THE University of Texas with Tulsa?
meh, I do the same for KU and UK.

But, it's fine. I get to make some jokes about this thread at the office w/ some fellow pokes.

I don't think I've even heard cowboy fans argue so vehemently about the validity of their own team.

The 'game over' argument was cat's 'look at osu's record vs. semi legitmate teams over the last 2 years'. w/out obviously knowing a thing about okstate's record over the same time period.