Davydd, both Hart and Henne played apparently without injuries in the App State game. That’s the game we were talking about.

I am not dissing these kids. I always respect excellent players who stay loyal to their teams and don’t bolt for the NFL before their senior years.

Michigan healthy? With Mike Hart and Chad Henne not playing most of the season?

quote:

Originally posted by desertdog

Thanks V, I was just getting ready to point out that very thing. Michigan was healthy, USC was not.

and USC actually still has a title hope, where Michigan wouldn’t have even if they won the big ten. They both shared common 2nd loss (oregon). This would indicate the system is actually working.

quote:

Originally posted by Voyageur

quote:

You want to bring up App St? puhlease, it was an upset. USC lost to Stanford. App St played about as good as anyone on the country. They even received ranking points the next week. Stanford has not received any ranking points all year (I believe).

quote:

. . . but that Stanford loss is simply bad and you can’t rebound from that and go to a National Championship.

Now, Scorereader, I don’t want to pick fights with you after your thoughtful 11/29 response comparing schedules and especially after your acknowledgement that USC "has the biggest cojones in college football when it comes to non-conference play," but you’re wrong about that Stanford loss.

There’s a difference between a game like the USC/Stanford one, where the ‘SC quarterback John David Booty suffered a severe injury to his middle finger on his throwing hand in the 2nd Quarter and a game like the Michigan/App State one, where I don’t believe injuries played a factor. (May be wrong, didn t watch it.)

Admittedly, USC did not play to its full potential in the Stanford game, even before Booty’s injury, but it led until the final minute.

I say if a team gets healthy soon enough to compile a suitable record vis-a-vis the other contenders, I say judge it on its current situation. Don’t make statements that it doesn’t deserve this or that due to injuries that are now healed.

BTW, I did watch 3 Husker games this year. The ‘SC one in Lincoln and the TX and U Colo ones on TV. Give ’em credit, their offense was hella lot better than ND’s. They had some fine players, such as Joe Gatz, Marlon Lucky, and Maurice Purify. Even their transfer quarterback San Keller, who hadn’t played in 2006, was coming along until injured. And, I saw hustle in that defense toward the end.

I’m not wrong about that standford loss. Even if Michigan won the big ten they had no chance to play for the title. (the other loss being Oregon). OSU had guys out, and they didn’t lose to the bottom teams in the Big Ten, they only lost to a very respectable Illinois team.

If you only put weight on late in the year games, then why should anybody play these solid games early in the year? This is what I was talking about in regard to the problem with a playoff system. A playoff system would take away the implications of a huge upset. OSU’s upset was not nearly as brutal as USC’s loss to Stanford. In my book, the system is working better than before when there wasn’t a BCS – the proof is that Michigan’s loss to App St. took them out of any hopes of a National title. USC’s conference loss did not take them out of the equation, it just made it harder. That’s how it should work. In order for USC to overcome that loss a lot of good teams must lose.

LSU has two losses, in order for them to get in, a lot of other teams must lose. OSU was ranked 6th at the end of their regular season. 4 of the teams above them could not hold their position. Why blame OSU’s schedule on that? Those teams lost. Had they won, OSU wouldn’t be in the predicament they’re in.

OSU is 11-1. Any way you shake it, that’s better than 10-2. OSU’s loss was to Illinois who is currently ranked 15. LSU lost to Arkansas and Kentucky who both are currently not ranked.
Oklahoma lost to 2 unranked teams. USC lost to current #18 and non-ranked opponent. Georgia los,25,339192.119,1,28745,140.147.241.133
339310,339192,339192,2007-11-30 16:36:11,RE: College Football 2007″

quote:

Originally posted by Davydd

Interesting everyone thinks the Big 10 had a down year yet 10 of the 11 teams qualified as bowl eligible. Any other conference do as well? I have to admit the Minnesota Gophers did their damndest to ensure that. [:D]

yes, they did qualify, but only a few of them will get bowls. The big ten sort beat on each other, lots of teams with 3 and 4 losses. That equalte to 4-5 conference wins plus non-conference games. Gophers had a rough one, for sure.

Interesting everyone thinks the Big 10 had a down year yet 10 of the 11 teams qualified as bowl eligible. Any other conference do as well? I have to admit the Minnesota Gophers did their damndest to ensure that. [:D]

quote:

You want to bring up App St? puhlease, it was an upset. USC lost to Stanford. App St played about as good as anyone on the country. They even received ranking points the next week. Stanford has not received any ranking points all year (I believe).

quote:

. . . but that Stanford loss is simply bad and you can’t rebound from that and go to a National Championship.

Now, Scorereader, I don’t want to pick fights with you after your thoughtful 11/29 response comparing schedules and especially after your acknowledgement that USC "has the biggest cojones in college football when it comes to non-conference play," but you’re wrong about that Stanford loss.

There’s a difference between a game like the USC/Stanford one, where the ‘SC quarterback John David Booty suffered a severe injury to his middle finger on his throwing hand in the 2nd Quarter and a game like the Michigan/App State one, where I don’t believe injuries played a factor. (May be wrong, didn t watch it.)

Admittedly, USC did not play to its full potential in the Stanford game, even before Booty’s injury, but it led until the final minute.

I say if a team gets healthy soon enough to compile a suitable record vis-a-vis the other contenders, I say judge it on its current situation. Don’t make statements that it doesn’t deserve this or that due to injuries that are now healed.

BTW, I did watch 3 Husker games this year. The ‘SC one in Lincoln and the TX and U Colo ones on TV. Give ’em credit, their offense was hella lot better than ND’s. They had some fine players, such as Joe Gatz, Marlon Lucky, and Maurice Purify. Even their transfer quarterback San Keller, who hadn’t played in 2006, was coming along until injured. And, I saw hustle in that defense toward the end.

quote:

Originally posted by desertdog

quote:

Originally posted by Scorereader

quote:

Originally posted by Voyageur

quote:

.it appears you think a variety of Pac-10 teams can beat OSU. I don’t buy into that

.

The problem is how do we know? OSU had such a weak schedule, but was able to take advantage of a huge flaw in the BCS system that penalizes teams that play strong schedules in order to be #1.

I am not saying that OSU isn’t a good team or maybe even a great one. Just who knows? Its players just didn’t have the chance to show their full potential.

OSU and the Big Ten does not shy away from tough non-conference games.

No one seemed to think Michigan had a weak schedule when they put UDub on their schedule a fews years back.

so. my point is that ALL teams (excluding USC) fill their non-conference schedule with up to one BCS conference school and fills the rest of the non-conference schedule with patsies.

so stop listening to the rhetoric that OSU has had a weak schedule. It’s a falicy. They haven’t, not when you realize that ALL the other BCS conferences do the exact same thing.

Notice you didn’t point out the patsies Ohio State played this year.

And here is their tough schedule for next year:

Sat. 8/30 YOUNGSTOWN STATE TBA
September
Sat. 9/6 OHIO TBA
Sat. 9/13 at USC TBA
Sat. 9/20 TROY TBA
Sat. 9/27 MINNESOTA TBA
October
Sat. 10/4 at Wisconsin TBA
Sat. 10/11 PURDUE TBA
Sat. 10/18 at Mich. St. TBA
Sat. 10/25 PENN STATE TBA
November
Sat. 11/1 Bye
Sat. 11/8 at N’western TBA
Sat. 11/15 at Illinois TBA
Sat. 11/22 MICHIGAN TBA

LOOKS LIKE A PRETTY WEAK NON-CONFERENCE SCHEDULE TO ME…

And what perineal powerhouse did Michigan lose to in the first game of the year?

The point of all of this is that big schools get PAID by the smaller schools to fill their non-conference schedule, it’s a fiscal decision that also gives the teams a chance to "scrimmage" early in the year to get ready for their conference games, since there are no pre-season games. Sometimes it comes back to bite them in the a**, like Appalachian State did to the Wolverines.

A playoff system would give a fair shake to all teams, regardless if they played a weak schedule to start the year or were a lesser team early because of injuries.

AND, we could finally have these East Coast supporters put in their place about the perceived dominance of teams east of the Rockies. Or not. Maybe it would finally vilidate their argument….but I doubt it.

DD

Yes, they played three patsies. Just like all the other teams I pointed out. That was my point. They played the same type of schedule all the other top teams from other conferences play. The Big Ten is down this year, but look, if you don’t take care of things in your own conference, you’re out. Everyone thought the Big East was weak and then WV crushed Georgia (SEC Champ). Two losses is two losses. You want to bring up App St? puhlease, it was an upset. USC lost to Stanford. App St played about as good as ,25,339192.114,1,28745,140.147.241.132
339305,339192,339192,2007-11-30 12:51:17,RE: College Football 2007″

I stand corrected. A the BCS title game still does not have to be played by conference champions. I thought they put that rule in this year. Apparently, they did not. So, Georgia still has a chance, but points being what they are, LSU could rise above them with a win vs. TN. Plus, I’m doubting WV will lose. Also, since Georgia is idle this week, a USC win over UCLA will hop them over Georgia too. But, hope is not all lost for Georgia as I had thought.

Scorereader, I am sure that you know more than myself about the possibilities but I have attached an article that indicates that they do have a chance to be in the BCS championship.

You indicatd that there is abslutely no chance but the Athens newspaper believes differently.

http://onlineathens.com/stories/113007/football_20071130069.shtml

Paul E. Smith
Knoxville, TN

quote:

Originally posted by Sundancer7

quote:

Originally posted by Scorereader

quote:

Originally posted by buffetbuster

desertdog-
I agree that USC is playing extremely well right now, but the team that would get my vote for currently playing the best would be the Georgia Bulldogs. And even though they are not in the SEC Championship game, they still have a (very) outside shot of making it to the BCS Championship game.

Georgia has absolutely no shot of playing in the BCS championship game. A team must be a conference champion to play in the BCS game. Since Georgia is not in the SEC title game, they cannot win the SEC, therefore, they cannot be in the BCS Championship.

The odd thing is that if both Mizzou and WV lose their final game, the #1 and #2 ranked teams will not meet for the Championship.

Scorereader, I believe you may be mistaken. Georgia is now #4 on the BCS and have a outside chance of playing for the national
championship if a couple of teams lose this weekend. I have attached BCS ratings for your review.

I am not a Georgia fan and the VOLS beat them soundly but they are where they are.

Incidentally, I have rarely watched a Nebraska game since Osborne left.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/ncaa/polls/bcs/

Paul E. Smith
Knoxville, TN

Paul,
in order to play in the BCS Championship the team MUST be a conference champion. Georgia will not be a conference champion, therefore, no matter their ranking, they have no shot of playing in the BCS Championship, them’s the rules.
Kansas has no shot either.
~John

quote:

Originally posted by Scorereader

quote:

Originally posted by buffetbuster

desertdog-
I agree that USC is playing extremely well right now, but the team that would get my vote for currently playing the best would be the Georgia Bulldogs. And even though they are not in the SEC Championship game, they still have a (very) outside shot of making it to the BCS Championship game.

Georgia has absolutely no shot of playing in the BCS championship game. A team must be a conference champion to play in the BCS game. Since Georgia is not in the SEC title game, they cannot win the SEC, therefore, they cannot be in the BCS Championship.

The odd thing is that if both Mizzou and WV lose their final game, the #1 and #2 ranked teams will not meet for the Championship.

Scorereader, I believe you may be mistaken. Georgia is now #4 on the BCS and have a outside chance of playing for the national
championship if a couple of teams lose this weekend. I have attached BCS ratings for your review.

I am not a Georgia fan and the VOLS beat them soundly but they are where they are.

Incidentally, I have rarely watched a Nebraska game since Osborne left.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/ncaa/polls/bcs/

Paul E. Smith
Knoxville, TN

Scorereader-
Thanks for the info. I know that after Nebraska made it to the Championship game despite getting killed by Colorado and not being in the Big 12 title game a few years ago, they talked about making that a requirement. I’m glad to hear that they did.

Paul-
When I was eating dinner in the Shaker Village, the two women at the table next to me were getting constant updates of the overtime on their phone. I’m not a fan of being on the cellphone during dinner, but since I wanted to know the score, I was willing to make an exception!