THE 2007 College Football Thread
11-06-2007, 09:12 AM
#841
Benchwarmer
Originally Posted by hornyleprechaun
The fact is Hawaii could barely beat Louisiana State, and had to go to OT vs. San Jose State. Their opponents have a record far under .500. Have them get paid to fly to Ohio State, USC, Texas, LSU, Auburn, UGA, WVU, OU, Cal, Michigan, and the list could go on.. Even if they lost the game they would have money, and potentially, depending on the outcome, respect from the national media for taking any of those teams to OT, last second play of the game, or just even keeping it close.
Until that happens they don't deserve to be considered for the title game.
Until that happens they don't deserve to be considered for the title game.
Those big boys will never schedule Hawaii, even at home. They are too good to be a creampuff and not good enough where a loss doesn't kill their season. A home loss to Hawaii and you are done. A home victory over Hawaii and that's a non-conference win against a non-BCS school that you were supposed to win anyway.
11-06-2007, 09:16 AM
#843
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: मुंबई, भारत
Posts: 5,746
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by IlliNorge
The NCAA needs to list these teams out in August so their fans don't waste energy going to their games.
11-06-2007, 09:16 AM
#844
Benchwarmer
Originally Posted by Pull_T
So you want to keep the current system but just add on an extra game wit the BCS champ and whatever POS midmajor happens to be undefeated?
11-06-2007, 09:17 AM
#846
Benchwarmer
Originally Posted by Pull_T
If the fans of midmajors go to games because they think their teams have a chance to win the national title, they are stupid.
11-06-2007, 09:30 AM
#848
Карты убийцы
O.k. here's a proposed playoff system:
1) Each team only schedules eight conference games and no out-of-conference games except one game for a rival. Independents, like Notre Dame, well screw you. Join a conference.
2) The champion of each conference begins tournament play against other conference champs. 12 conferences, six games the first week. The team with the best overall record gets a bye going into the final game.
3) Each playoff game still gets named some sort of bowl to secure corporate sponsorship.
1) Each team only schedules eight conference games and no out-of-conference games except one game for a rival. Independents, like Notre Dame, well screw you. Join a conference.
2) The champion of each conference begins tournament play against other conference champs. 12 conferences, six games the first week. The team with the best overall record gets a bye going into the final game.
3) Each playoff game still gets named some sort of bowl to secure corporate sponsorship.
11-06-2007, 09:47 AM
#850
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: मुंबई, भारत
Posts: 5,746
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Professor
O.k. here's a proposed playoff system:
1) Each team only schedules eight conference games and no out-of-conference games except one game for a rival. Independents, like Notre Dame, well screw you. Join a conference.
2) The champion of each conference begins tournament play against other conference champs. 12 conferences, six games the first week. The team with the best overall record gets a bye going into the final game.
3) Each playoff game still gets named some sort of bowl to secure corporate sponsorship.
1) Each team only schedules eight conference games and no out-of-conference games except one game for a rival. Independents, like Notre Dame, well screw you. Join a conference.
2) The champion of each conference begins tournament play against other conference champs. 12 conferences, six games the first week. The team with the best overall record gets a bye going into the final game.
3) Each playoff game still gets named some sort of bowl to secure corporate sponsorship.
- 12 conferences? You planning to add one?
- The 11 conferences currently have varying numbers of members, you going to realign them all to even it out?
- How do you determine a conference champ only playing 8 games in a 12 team league?
- Currently, teams play 12 regular season games...you want to cut that to 9? You're gonna drop about 200 total games just to add in a dozen or so playoff games?
You're ruining a LOT of what makes college football great just to make things fair for Hawaii.
11-06-2007, 09:48 AM
#851
Bent = #1
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by IlliNorge
So you are DQ'ing a team before the season starts because they have a weak schedule. The NCAA needs to list these teams out in August so their fans don't waste energy going to their games.
http://www.ncaa.org/champadmin/ia_fo...st_champs.html
Originally Posted by IlliNorge
Those big boys will never schedule Hawaii, even at home. They are too good to be a creampuff and not good enough where a loss doesn't kill their season. A home loss to Hawaii and you are done. A home victory over Hawaii and that's a non-conference win against a non-BCS school that you were supposed to win anyway.
Scheduling Hawaii would help any of those teams SOS if they won. This is as long as Hawaii wins out.
11-06-2007, 09:50 AM
#852
Bent = #1
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by IlliNorge
Last year's POS sure smelled sweet to the Sooners. How about you schedule all the unbeatens not ranked 1 or 2 to play somebody first, then when they are crushed, play your NC game.
It's all about the money for the BCS conferences when it comes to the bowl games. This is one of the major factors holding back a playoff system.
Think about it. 6 BCS conferences have locks into a BCS bowl game. If it gets switched to a playoff system then would they still have locks into that? That means it has to be at least a 8 team playoff. Then we can just add in Hawaii and some other cupcake team.
11-06-2007, 09:57 AM
#853
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: मुंबई, भारत
Posts: 5,746
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by IlliNorge
Last year's POS sure smelled sweet to the Sooners.
And besides, OU was by no means the best team in the country, and in fact, had an off year...prolly had the worst team in Norman since 1999.
If Boise State needed overtime and miracle plays to beat OU, you really wanted to see Florida pound their ass into the ground a week later?
11-06-2007, 10:09 AM
#854
Bent = #1
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by Pull_T
Well, there is a reason that Boise State winning that game was such a huge deal...because it is considered rare that a midmajor be able t beat a good BCS conference school like that.
And besides, OU was by no means the best team in the country, and in fact, had an off year...prolly had the worst team in Norman since 1999.
If Boise State needed overtime and miracle plays to beat OU, you really wanted to see Florida pound their ass into the ground a week later?
And besides, OU was by no means the best team in the country, and in fact, had an off year...prolly had the worst team in Norman since 1999.
If Boise State needed overtime and miracle plays to beat OU, you really wanted to see Florida pound their ass into the ground a week later?
We already saw them pound Ohio State's ass into the ground
11-06-2007, 10:33 AM
#855
Карты убийцы
Originally Posted by Pull_T
Wow...your plan sucks balls...
- 12 conferences? You planning to add one?
- The 11 conferences currently have varying numbers of members, you going to realign them all to even it out?
- How do you determine a conference champ only playing 8 games in a 12 team league?
- Currently, teams play 12 regular season games...you want to cut that to 9? You're gonna drop about 200 total games just to add in a dozen or so playoff games?
You're ruining a LOT of what makes college football great just to make things fair for Hawaii.
- 12 conferences? You planning to add one?
- The 11 conferences currently have varying numbers of members, you going to realign them all to even it out?
- How do you determine a conference champ only playing 8 games in a 12 team league?
- Currently, teams play 12 regular season games...you want to cut that to 9? You're gonna drop about 200 total games just to add in a dozen or so playoff games?
You're ruining a LOT of what makes college football great just to make things fair for Hawaii.
OK Point 4: If your team doesn't make the playoffs, let them schedule crappy non-conference games for the remainder of the season.
Pull T, why does a playoff work for I-AA and not for I-A?
11-06-2007, 10:37 AM
#856
Карты убийцы
Originally Posted by Pull_T
- 12 conferences? You planning to add one?
I left the Independents as their own conference because Notre Dame wouldn't join anything in which they had to compete.
11-06-2007, 10:48 AM
#857
Benchwarmer
Originally Posted by hornyleprechaun
When did Hawaii win a NC or even get any credit for winning a NC? Never.
http://www.ncaa.org/champadmin/ia_fo...st_champs.html
Alabama just scheduled them last year.
Scheduling Hawaii would help any of those teams SOS if they won. This is as long as Hawaii wins out.
http://www.ncaa.org/champadmin/ia_fo...st_champs.html
Alabama just scheduled them last year.
Scheduling Hawaii would help any of those teams SOS if they won. This is as long as Hawaii wins out.
11-06-2007, 10:52 AM
#858
Benchwarmer
Originally Posted by Pull_T
Well, there is a reason that Boise State winning that game was such a huge deal...because it is considered rare that a midmajor be able t beat a good BCS conference school like that.
And besides, OU was by no means the best team in the country, and in fact, had an off year...prolly had the worst team in Norman since 1999.
If Boise State needed overtime and miracle plays to beat OU, you really wanted to see Florida pound their ass into the ground a week later?
And besides, OU was by no means the best team in the country, and in fact, had an off year...prolly had the worst team in Norman since 1999.
If Boise State needed overtime and miracle plays to beat OU, you really wanted to see Florida pound their ass into the ground a week later?
Now that you mention it though, I would rather see Boise State vs. Florida than Wake Forest vs. whoever last year in some BCS bowl.
This year I would rather watch Ohio State vs. Hawaii/Kansas (if undefeated) than Ohio State vs. LSU or Oregon.
11-06-2007, 10:59 AM
#859
Bent = #1
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by Professor
OK Point 4: If your team doesn't make the playoffs, let them schedule crappy non-conference games for the remainder of the season.
Pull T, why does a playoff work for I-AA and not for I-A?
Pull T, why does a playoff work for I-AA and not for I-A?
There is so much money involved in I-A. People die for CF, especially I-A football. There is a reason I-A football teams have 90k seats in stadiums and I-AA have 20k? Money, fans, sponsorships, tradition.
11-06-2007, 11:01 AM
#860
Bent = #1
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by IlliNorge
What I said is that Hawaii never had a chance this year. I know they've never won in the past.
Right. I know there will be exceptions, but these schools haven't won in the past for a reason. They aren't GREAT football teams, not because they haven't been given a chance, but because they just plain can't compete with the top level schools.
11-06-2007, 11:02 AM
#861
Bent = #1
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by IlliNorge
It's not about what I want to see, it's about giving Boise State what it deserves: a chance to finish the season as #1.
Now that you mention it though, I would rather see Boise State vs. Florida than Wake Forest vs. whoever last year in some BCS bowl.
This year I would rather watch Ohio State vs. Hawaii/Kansas (if undefeated) than Ohio State vs. LSU or Oregon.
Now that you mention it though, I would rather see Boise State vs. Florida than Wake Forest vs. whoever last year in some BCS bowl.
This year I would rather watch Ohio State vs. Hawaii/Kansas (if undefeated) than Ohio State vs. LSU or Oregon.
I dont' think you can group Kansas & Hawaii together in the first place. But why Ohio State vs. Hawaii. That would be boring, being it is a Big 10 team in the first place
It should be Oregon vs. LSU IMO. Those 2 teams have proven themselves, unless Kansas does go undefeated.
11-06-2007, 11:08 AM
#862
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: मुंबई, भारत
Posts: 5,746
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Professor
OK Point 4: If your team doesn't make the playoffs, let them schedule crappy non-conference games for the remainder of the season.
Pull T, why does a playoff work for I-AA and not for I-A?
Pull T, why does a playoff work for I-AA and not for I-A?
And do the playoffs "work" in I-AA...I guess. I don't watch I-AA playoffs or care about them and no one else does either. And I sure as hell don't watch I-AA regular season.
I-A regular season and bowl games are wildly popular...and will remain so assuming they don't fuck it up with awful ideas like your's.
Originally Posted by Professor
I left the Independents as their own conference because Notre Dame wouldn't join anything in which they had to compete.
11-06-2007, 11:15 AM
#863
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: मुंबई, भारत
Posts: 5,746
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by hornyleprechaun
It should be Oregon vs. LSU IMO. Those 2 teams have proven themselves, unless Kansas does go undefeated.
But why, in your opinion, is Oregon clearly your choice over Oklahoma when discussng 1-loss teams? Especially considering Oklahoma has to win a Conference championship game against either Mizzou or Kansas.
I suppose Oregon had a "better loss" against Cal than OU did against Colorado, but with how Cal has faded, the value of that loss is shrinking. And OU would have wins over Texas, Mizzou, and Kansas/Mizzou which stack up well against Oregon's notable win.
11-06-2007, 11:18 AM
#864
Карты убийцы
Originally Posted by Pull_T
You want them to schedule tem on the fly after the playoffs are set? Creates all kind of headaches from how you handle season tickets to time crunch.
And do the playoffs "work" in I-AA...I guess. I don't watch I-AA playoffs or care about them and no one else does either. And I sure as hell don't watch I-AA regular season.
I-A regular season and bowl games are wildly popular...and will remain so assuming they don't fuck it up with awful ideas like your's.
There are only 4 independents. Army, Navy, Notre Dame and Western Kentucky. I guess that you just want to give Notre Dame a free pass into the playoffs? (well, other than this particular year)
And do the playoffs "work" in I-AA...I guess. I don't watch I-AA playoffs or care about them and no one else does either. And I sure as hell don't watch I-AA regular season.
I-A regular season and bowl games are wildly popular...and will remain so assuming they don't fuck it up with awful ideas like your's.
There are only 4 independents. Army, Navy, Notre Dame and Western Kentucky. I guess that you just want to give Notre Dame a free pass into the playoffs? (well, other than this particular year)
Here, have a beer on me and relax. It's only football and ideas to make it better.
11-06-2007, 11:35 AM
#865
Benchwarmer
Originally Posted by hornyleprechaun
I dont' think you can group Kansas & Hawaii together in the first place. But why Ohio State vs. Hawaii. That would be boring, being it is a Big 10 team in the first place
It should be Oregon vs. LSU IMO. Those 2 teams have proven themselves, unless Kansas does go undefeated.
It should be Oregon vs. LSU IMO. Those 2 teams have proven themselves, unless Kansas does go undefeated.
If Ohio State goes 12-0 you would bypass them? The only thing Oregon and LSU have proven is that they can lose a game. Nobody has proven that they can beat Hawaii or Kansas.Proof is not on your side in this argument. Tradition, money, schedule, predictions are on your side.
11-06-2007, 11:51 AM
#867
Карты убийцы
Originally Posted by Pull_T
Uhh...ok I guess I am not relaxed. 
When you get to the point of saying "don't fuck it up with awful ideas like your's" you may be a bit defensive.
I never proposed the idea as "mine." I said "a" proposed system. Hell if I could propose a system, I'd be coaching Division I-AA football at Wofford for $200K a year.
11-06-2007, 12:12 PM
#869
Bent = #1
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by Pull_T
We have already discussed how you feel the SEC is so dominant that their 1-loss team is the best one, despite looking awful for a month and a half...so let's not beat that dead horse.
But why, in your opinion, is Oregon clearly your choice over Oklahoma when discussng 1-loss teams? Especially considering Oklahoma has to win a Conference championship game against either Mizzou or Kansas.
I suppose Oregon had a "better loss" against Cal than OU did against Colorado, but with how Cal has faded, the value of that loss is shrinking. And OU would have wins over Texas, Mizzou, and Kansas/Mizzou which stack up well against Oregon's notable win.
But why, in your opinion, is Oregon clearly your choice over Oklahoma when discussng 1-loss teams? Especially considering Oklahoma has to win a Conference championship game against either Mizzou or Kansas.
I suppose Oregon had a "better loss" against Cal than OU did against Colorado, but with how Cal has faded, the value of that loss is shrinking. And OU would have wins over Texas, Mizzou, and Kansas/Mizzou which stack up well against Oregon's notable win.
Oregon would have wins over Cal, USC, Arizona State, & Michigan. I would have to say there schedule is "tougher" IMO. This only happens if Michigan wins the Big 10.
I'm still not convinced that Kansas/Missouri is any good
11-06-2007, 12:21 PM
#870
Bent = #1
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by IlliNorge
If Ohio State goes 12-0 you would bypass them? The only thing Oregon and LSU have proven is that they can lose a game. Nobody has proven that they can beat Hawaii or Kansas.Proof is not on your side in this argument. Tradition, money, schedule, predictions are on your side.
No I never said bypass them, I'd like to see them get embarrassed two years in a row. How have they improved from last year besides losing Gonzalez, Troy Smith, Ginn Jr. & Pittman? They haven't played any good teams either except for their "extremely tough" Big 10 schedule. They did the same stuff last year and were beaten quite easily.
I meant that I think Oregon & LSU would be the best title game. Maybe not the two best teams in the nation, but from the top 5 teams right now they would have the best match up. I still think Auburn is better than LSU, and that LSU isn't the best team from the SEC.
They have gotten shady calls all year, against USC, Auburn & Bama. They have gotten lucky with Les Miles' calls, and the only time his calls failed them was their loss @ UK. I just think the defense that SEC schools have is above the rest. See NC game last year when Ohio State who put 42 on Michigan only put 14 on UF.
I think the Big 12 & Pac 10 are way better than the Big 10. I think OU is better than Ohio State.
11-06-2007, 12:23 PM
#871
Bent = #1
Thread Starter
^ And proof is on my side because Hawaii has never PROVEN they are any good by getting declared the National Champion. If the BCS didn't exist voters would not pick an undefeated Hawaii over a 2 loss BCS conference team, unless Hawaii had shown they could beat that caliber of teams.
11-06-2007, 12:28 PM
#872
Benchwarmer
Originally Posted by hornyleprechaun
^ And proof is on my side because Hawaii has never PROVEN they are any good by getting declared the National Champion. If the BCS didn't exist voters would not pick an undefeated Hawaii over a 2 loss BCS conference team, unless Hawaii had shown they could beat that caliber of teams.
Speaking of this year, do my Illini
have any chance at Ohio State Saturday?
11-06-2007, 01:13 PM
#874
Bent = #1
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by IlliNorge
What does the past have anything to do with 2007? If it mattered Florida would already be sitting in the NC game this year, because they were oh so good last year.
Speaking of this year, do my Illinihave any chance at Ohio State Saturday?
Speaking of this year, do my Illini
have any chance at Ohio State Saturday?@ Ohio State? or @ Illinois?
11-06-2007, 01:26 PM
#876
Bent = #1
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by Pull_T
So you're saying Auburn is the best team in the country? lol
No I never said that. I just feel we are better than LSU. They won on a last second pass, and our team blew up in the 3rd quarter.
I think our defense is one of the best in the nation, and it is more impressive when you consider how young our team is and the injuries we've had. We held McFadden to 43 rushing yards when he put up 321 against South Carolina.
Our offense isn't great, but isn't terrible, but by no means a NC title contender. Our coach even said we weren't capable of winning the NC the way we started the season out.
I just don't think there is a clear cut #1 this year. Like I said OU, LSU, & Oregon are all better than Ohio State this year. I think it's a toss up b/w those 3, and OU will probably get excluded because of their "lack of SOS."
11-07-2007, 08:19 AM
#879
Bent = #1
Thread Starter
Not to beat a dead horse.. but if you look at the sagarin rankings.. Kansas has the 106th SOS in the nation... Also there is a good detailed article showing if the Pac 10 or SEC are stronger. When I get some time today I will setup the SEC vs. Big 12.
To see who would win -- or at least be favored -- The Dash went with the Sagarin Ratings, in part because they're less subjective than the polls and in part because the mere mention of computer rankings makes some of my ESPN.com colleagues break out in hives.
The matchups:
Oregon-LSU: Ducks favored by 0.5 points.
Arizona State-Florida (5): Sun Devils by 1.8.
USC-Auburn (6): Tigers by 0.5.
Cal-Georgia (7): Bulldogs by 2.4.
Oregon State-Alabama (8): Crimson Tide by 4.8.
UCLA-Kentucky (9): Wildcats by 5.9.
Washington-Tennessee (10): Volunteers by 6.6.
Arizona-Arkansas (11): Razorbacks by 9.7.
Washington State-South Carolina (12): Gamecocks by 10.4.
Stanford-Vanderbilt (13): Commodores by 7 -- or a few National Merit Scholars.
The Pac-10 would be favored (by a little) in the top two. The SEC would be favored (by a steadily increasing amount) in the following eight.
Jonathan Ferrey/Getty Images
Dennis Dixon would point to the Pac-10's top two teams having a higher Sagarin ranking than the SEC's top two squads.
So the logical conclusion would be that the Pac-10 is at least as good at the top, and perhaps better, while the SEC separates itself via quality depth.
The matchups:
Oregon-LSU: Ducks favored by 0.5 points.
Arizona State-Florida (5): Sun Devils by 1.8.
USC-Auburn (6): Tigers by 0.5.
Cal-Georgia (7): Bulldogs by 2.4.
Oregon State-Alabama (8): Crimson Tide by 4.8.
UCLA-Kentucky (9): Wildcats by 5.9.
Washington-Tennessee (10): Volunteers by 6.6.
Arizona-Arkansas (11): Razorbacks by 9.7.
Washington State-South Carolina (12): Gamecocks by 10.4.
Stanford-Vanderbilt (13): Commodores by 7 -- or a few National Merit Scholars.
The Pac-10 would be favored (by a little) in the top two. The SEC would be favored (by a steadily increasing amount) in the following eight.
Jonathan Ferrey/Getty Images
Dennis Dixon would point to the Pac-10's top two teams having a higher Sagarin ranking than the SEC's top two squads.
So the logical conclusion would be that the Pac-10 is at least as good at the top, and perhaps better, while the SEC separates itself via quality depth.
11-07-2007, 08:38 AM
#880
Bent = #1
Thread Starter
Bold teams are favored. It's pretty much the same as the SEC vs. Pac 10 matchup. Big 12 is stronger on the top 3, but the SEC is more deep. Although the Big 12 would win a matchup against the Pac 10.
LSU vs. Kansas .5
Florida vs. Oklahoma 4
Auburn vs. Missouri 4
UGA vs. Texas 1.5
Alabama vs. Kstate 4
Kentucky vs. Texas Tech 3.5
Tennessee vs. Oklahoma St. 2.8
Arkansas vs. Colorado 3.5
South Carolina vs. Texas A&M 4.5
Vanderbilt vs. Nebraska 4.5
Miss. State vs. Iowa State 9.1
Ole Miss vs. Baylor 7.4
LSU vs. Kansas .5
Florida vs. Oklahoma 4
Auburn vs. Missouri 4
UGA vs. Texas 1.5
Alabama vs. Kstate 4
Kentucky vs. Texas Tech 3.5
Tennessee vs. Oklahoma St. 2.8
Arkansas vs. Colorado 3.5
South Carolina vs. Texas A&M 4.5
Vanderbilt vs. Nebraska 4.5
Miss. State vs. Iowa State 9.1
Ole Miss vs. Baylor 7.4