College Football 2008 Season Catch-All

*Legion* wrote:

Oklahoma may well be the better team, but Texas losing last-minute to Tech is not nearly enough to drop them beneath a team that they defeated.

I guess our computer overlords think differently.

I wish this could get decided on the field in a playoff. I know you can argue that it WAS decided on the field, and you have a point. I think this situation is just a twisted mess.

Anyone who can look at this year in particular and say the system works is on serious drugs.

*Legion* wrote:

When we add into account that Team A beat Team B, then it's not even an argument anymore.

Exactly. The point here is that in my opinion, flawed and biased that it may be, this whole 3 way tie thing, irregardless of who beat who, where and by how much, is essentially a push. I cite the score differential in the Tech game only to refute the 'but we beat you in head to head' Texas argument, which I realize it does not completely.
It is a 3-way tie for a reason. It is a tie and that's what people seem to be forgetting. Tech has just as much right, based upon those 3 games alone, to play in the 'ship as anyone else.
If that lemma is accepted as true, some other measure of worth must be found. In this case I would sight strength of schedule and win differential.
Yes, the argument is inherently flawed, but so is the one to put Texas in the 'ship.

boogle wrote:

That they defeated in a close game. And that tech team got DEMOLISHED in Norman. If you can't give OU the spot over Texas, how can you give it to Texas when tech beat them? I'm sorry, I heard that argument all night from Herbstreet last night watching the game and its really frustrating.

Easy. It's a simple formula:

Beating Oklahoma > beating Texas Tech

Let's take head-to-head out of it completely.

Team A beat Oklahoma and has 1 loss.

Team B beat Texas Tech and has 1 loss.

Who do I give the edge to? The team that beat the better team.

When we add into account that Team A beat Team B, then it's not even an argument anymore.

The argument that "we slaughtered Tech and Tech beat you, nevermind that you beat us, we slaughtered Tech!" is not a particularly compelling argument.

Texas has the head-to-head edge, and has a win against a team that's still in the top 5. Texas Tech was ranked too highly.

Of course, we could flip this and say, "Team B's only loss is to Texas" and "Team A's only loss is to Tech". That's actually a lot more compelling than trying to claim a proxy win over Texas by virtue of beating Texas Tech.

I wish this could get decided on the field in a playoff. I know you can argue that it WAS decided on the field, and you have a point. I think this situation is just a twisted mess.

Anyone who can look at this year in particular and say the system works is on serious drugs.

Oh, no, I am a massive advocate of playoffs. I hate that poor Boise State is undefeated but stuck at #9. Won't even have the opportunity to see how high they can go.

There is no strongly compelling case for Texas over Oklahoma or Oklahoma over Texas. It's splitting hairs. No matter what, there will be questions. A playoff would mean No Excuses. I like No Excuses.

I actually cheer for situations like this. The only way a playoff will ever come is if people continue to howl about these crappy situations.

As much as I like Texas, if Texas gets the nod and then loses, Oklahoma and Tech fans will crow with, "we should've been there, we would've won!"

Fix it, Obama!

So, how would an eight team playoff help Boise State? Eight teams really are not enough to have a legitimate playoff. I think sixteen, or possibly twelve with a first round bye for the top four seeds might work. But we will still just get different teams whining about their inclusion.

The sad thing is, a playoff would produce an even more ridiculous championship game most of the time. I'd rather just have bowls and let fans argue than try to pretend that a playoff system will actually mean anything.

1. The Big 12 needs to take a LONG long at the SEC's tie breaker rules.

2. The possibility of chaos in the BCS, although a much longer shot than last years wonderful result (I revel in seeing how bad that stupid system can turn out), is still a possibility.

Fun Scenario #1. According to ESPN's Brad Edwards, if Oklahoma loses to Missouri then Texas could end up in the National Championship game. Didn't we do this already with Nebraska several years ago?

Fun Scenario #2. Also according to Brad, if Florida beats Alabama and Oklahoma wins, there is a chance, albeit slight, that Florida will not jump Texas, thus resulting in a Texas-Oklahoma national championship game. I would hate this because anytime the SEC wins it all, all is right with the world, but still, anything to make the BCS red-faced is good in my book, too.

Jayhawker wrote:

So, how would an eight team playoff help Boise State? Eight teams really are not enough to have a legitimate playoff. I think sixteen, or possibly twelve with a first round bye for the top four seeds might work. But we will still just get different teams whining about their inclusion.

The sad thing is, a playoff would produce an even more ridiculous championship game most of the time. I'd rather just have bowls and let fans argue than try to pretend that a playoff system will actually mean anything.

It wouldn't help Boise State, but it would determine a legitimate National Champion. If the #1 team is not really located within the top 8 teams, then the system is screwed up more than can be fixed. If college basketball was not so successful crowing the national champion each and every year, then I would agree with your point. But no one has questioned its outcome. Football does not have the luxury of 4 games a week by a team, so you have to limit it to something. Heck, if we only get the top 4, then that would be okay with me. I think a +1 system would shut most criticism up.

Jayhawker wrote:

So, how would an eight team playoff help Boise State?

It wouldn't. I want a 16 team playoff. But it's a lot easier to expand an existing playoff system than it is to get one started in the first place, so I'll accept any size of playoff bracket to just get the ball rolling.

I think sixteen, or possibly twelve with a first round bye for the top four seeds might work. But we will still just get different teams whining about their inclusion.

Yes, but the further you move the threshold, the weaker those arguments are. Consider March Madness. Of course there are teams that feel slighted for not getting in, but none of those teams actually consider themselves contenders for the championship. A 16 team bracket would cover all realistic title contenders and more. Nobody thinks that #17 in the BCS polls is a legitimate title contender.

By the way legion, OU got the nod.
What I would kill for an OU v. UT national championship.
To be honest, it would just be a lot of hookers.

I wish that college football would either go all the way to a 16 team playoff or go back to the way things were before the BCS.

On the one hand, this is the only division of the only college sport that does not have a playoff. It is nuts to continue to argue against a playoff system for any reason other than the money. And if the NCAA could actually get its act together, I think they could just rake in the dough for rights to a playoff, making the current system appear to be miserly in comparison.

On the other hand, if playoff are not possible for whatever reason, the old way was better than the current system, IMHO. All this system has done is devalue most of the bowl games and cheapen, to an extent, the conferences without removing the need for discussion about who's actually better. So if we don't have a way to delineate a clear champion, then let's go back to where all the bowls were aligned with conferences and they all mattered to some degree, certainly more than they do now.

The BCS is just a half-assed solution.

boogle wrote:

By the way legion, OU got the nod.

Well then I especially hope for them to lose and for Texas and TTech to howl.

*Legion* wrote:
boogle wrote:

By the way legion, OU got the nod.

Well then I especially hope for them to lose and for Texas and TTech to howl.

And I hope for a small Florida win and a UT OU nat. championship.

And I hope for a small Florida win and a UT OU nat. championship.

Again, a team that didn't even win its own conference in the National Championship game? Pure Bulls*it.

karmajay wrote:
And I hope for a small Florida win and a UT OU nat. championship.

Again, a team that didn't even win its own conference in the National Championship game? Pure Bulls*it.

But it could get us a playoff. And great stories to tell.

Not twelve hours after being introduced as the new head coach for the Vols, Lane Kiffen is being accused of recruiting violations...by Steve Spurrier.

USC to wear their red jerseys at the Rose Bowl. The problem with that is that their red jerseys are their home jerseys and despite their history of general dominance in that stadium, it's the home field of UCLA thus making the Trojans the visitors. By rule, USC will be docked one time out per half. This could be either the ballsiest decision I've ever seen in a college football game akin to Namath guaranteeing victory or as dumb like most of Chad Johnson's antics. Plus, there's always 2006 to think of.

buzzvang, any reaction to Tubbs ouster? Not sure Auburn is going to be able to get a better coach/recruiter to replace him. Ivan Maisel has a piece over at ESPN that calls AU out for panicking about Saban being instate.

Rat Boy wrote:

USC to wear their red jerseys at the Rose Bowl. The problem with that is that their red jerseys are their home jerseys and despite their history of general dominance in that stadium, it's the home field of UCLA thus making the Trojans the visitors. By rule, USC will be docked one time out per half. This could be either the ballsiest decision I've ever seen in a college football game akin to Namath guaranteeing victory or as dumb like most of Chad Johnson's antics. Plus, there's always 2006 to think of.

I sincerely hope this gives UCLA enough juice to beat them. Please UCLA. Please.

boogle wrote:
Rat Boy wrote:

USC to wear their red jerseys at the Rose Bowl. The problem with that is that their red jerseys are their home jerseys and despite their history of general dominance in that stadium, it's the home field of UCLA thus making the Trojans the visitors. By rule, USC will be docked one time out per half. This could be either the ballsiest decision I've ever seen in a college football game akin to Namath guaranteeing victory or as dumb like most of Chad Johnson's antics. Plus, there's always 2006 to think of.

I sincerely hope this gives UCLA enough juice to beat them. Please UCLA. Please.

I'd really like to see USC run out of time trying to set up for a FG to win.

I admit, I'm worried about this Saturday's game... but I also haven't been this excited to watch it unfold in a very long time. Roll Tide.

Grumpicus wrote:

I admit, I'm worried about this Saturday's game... but I also haven't been this excited to watch it unfold in a very long time. Roll Tide.

Roll tide indeed. Rather see them win than Tebow.
Also, I feel an Alabama/OU championship would be cool.

Pete Carroll has been trying to bring the tradition of both teams wearing their home jerseys for several years now. He spoke with Neuheisel shortly after he got the UCLA gig about doing this, and he reportedly agreed. Additionally, the UCLA coach has stated that he will call a time out at the beginning of the game to even the playing field, in support of the tradition. A clarification on the rule states that one time out is charged at the beginning of the game, not one per half.

USC and UCLA wore home jerseys for the annual rivalry game, regardless of location, from 1957 to 1982.

Is it just me or does the ref at the Alabama - Florida game look psychotic?

Edit: So if Oklahoma loses, how screwed up will things get?

Rat Boy wrote:

Is it just me or does the ref at the Alabama - Florida game look psychotic?

Edit: So if Oklahoma loses, how screwed up will things get?

I don't know, but i'm hoping they will, just for the added utter chaos it will engender, and getting to watch every coach in the top 10 not named Urban Meyer lobbying to get their teams into the game.

Ref at Big 12 Championship Game said rather than wrote:

Try!

Try not! Do...or do not; there is no try.

I have to admit that as much as I hoped otherwise the SECCG score turned out right about where I expected it to. I only wish now is that the Sugar Bowl could be Alabama vs. Texas... but that ain't gonna happen.

Grumpicus wrote:

I have to admit that as much as I hoped otherwise the SECCG score turned out right about where I expected it to. I only wish now is that the Sugar Bowl could be Alabama vs. Texas... but that ain't gonna happen.

Never thought about that. That would be an incredible bowl series. FL-OK, AL-TX, USC-Penn St. Couldn't hope for three better games (potentially) than that.

sheared wrote:
Grumpicus wrote:

I have to admit that as much as I hoped otherwise the SECCG score turned out right about where I expected it to. I only wish now is that the Sugar Bowl could be Alabama vs. Texas... but that ain't gonna happen.

Never thought about that. That would be an incredible bowl series. FL-OK, AL-TX, USC-Penn St. Couldn't hope for three better games (potentially) than that.

Won't happen, though. Fiesta will get first pick to replace OU and are 99% likely to takes Texas. Sugar gets second pick to replace FL and are 99% likely to take AL. Most are saying Fiesta = TX vs. Ohio State and Sugar = AL vs. Utah

Grumpicus wrote:
sheared wrote:
Grumpicus wrote:

I have to admit that as much as I hoped otherwise the SECCG score turned out right about where I expected it to. I only wish now is that the Sugar Bowl could be Alabama vs. Texas... but that ain't gonna happen.

Never thought about that. That would be an incredible bowl series. FL-OK, AL-TX, USC-Penn St. Couldn't hope for three better games (potentially) than that.

Won't happen, though. Fiesta will get first pick to replace OU and are 99% likely to takes Texas. Sugar gets second pick to replace FL and are 99% likely to take AL. Most are saying Fiesta = TX vs. Ohio State and Sugar = AL vs. Utah

As always I want Ohio State to get crushed (Damn Big 10), but those games just sound meh. Wonder who Tech gets?

Think they'll be any surprises in the BCS games?

karmajay wrote:

Think they'll be any surprises in the BCS games? :)

The surprise would be Texas fans not bitching about going to the Fiesta Bowl while Oklahoma goes to the BCS title game.