PDA

View Full Version : American College Football...


mckyle.
Nov 4th, 2007, 01:31 AM
Any fans? :wavey:

Who's your favorite team?

I'm supporting Alabama, but I'm a little depressed since we just lost to LSU. Ugh.

Kansas is going all the way!!!!1111 :hearts:

kiwifan
Nov 4th, 2007, 01:50 AM
My college didn't have a football team (or frats) and back then the only good football team in the entire northeast was Penn State (and its a stretch to say they're in the northeast - ha ha).

When Jimmy Johnson took over as the Dallas Cowboys head coach, I started liking Miami.

I have a weird USC relationship because they let me use the facilities even though I'm not a student so I have goodwill towards them but too many of my friends are Trojans and when they start getting too full of themselves, I secretly root against USC :tape:

I guess I'm more of a "negative fan" in that I root against the Big Ten and the SEC.

I guess I still like The U even though they suck. :shrug:

mckyle.
Nov 4th, 2007, 02:01 AM
Everyone hates the SEC. I mean, we ARE the best. :angel:

I'm so impressed with the Big East this year. They have like 6 really good teams. If I had to rate the major conferences:

SEC
Big Ten
Big East
ACC
Pac-10
Big 12

No offense to the Big 12, but it's really been a down year. I love Kansas, but they shouldn't be the best the Big 12 has to offer.

The SEC is clearly the best conference. Every team (except Ole Miss) is exceptionally good. 11 of 12 teams have a winning record. Heck, Florida is as good as they were last year, but the competition has just gotten too tough and they have three losses!

tterb
Nov 4th, 2007, 03:56 PM
Purdue fan here. Which is tough, because every time we seem on the verge of actually becoming an elite team, something inevitably goes wrong (see: 2003, 2004).

Agree that the SEC is the best conference this year. LSU probably should be the #1 team, but they have a habit of making games way too difficult for themselves. I wouldn't say every team in the SEC is "exceptionally" good, though. Kentucky and S. Carolina were overrated. Good, but not top 10 good. But being overrated is certainly NOT unusual this year (see: Cal, S. Florida, BC, USC, Wisconsin).

Florida and Auburn are the other two SEC teams I think have top 10 talent. Georgia, Tennessee, and Kentucky all seem like 10-20 level teams to me.

People were hating big time on the Big 10 being down earlier this year, but in all honesty, the ACC and the Big 12 are in exactly the same position. And wait for it - Kansas will lose to Missouri. I don't think I've seen an easier schedule than their's from a top 10 team. :shrug:

The Pac-10 needs to shut it - can't believe some of them seriously considered themselves the best conference in the nation. They're good, but not all that. Guess who ND's only win of the season was against? Oh right - @ UCLA. Embarrassing. (Although to be fair, Northwestern from the Big 10 lost to Duke, of all teams. But at least Northwestern isn't turning around and beating the Big 10's "best" teams, like UCLA did by beating Cal.)

Final thought: I might cry if Michigan wins the Big 10 this season. Did they really have to lose to a D-II team before they suddenly realized they actually have talent? Sigh.

John A Roark
Nov 4th, 2007, 10:25 PM
Sorry tterb--
Mind you, being a Husker fan, my credibility may be for sh-- (oh how the mighty have fallen--but at least Dr. Tom's back), but I think the 'Hawks can take the Tigers this year. Impetus is on their side.

eugreene2
Nov 5th, 2007, 12:19 AM
My favorite team upset the #2 team in the land last night. That's right, 'ole Bobby Bowden pulled out some of his magic from yesteryear.

FLORIDA ST. - 27
BOSTON COLL - 17

darrinbaker00
Nov 5th, 2007, 12:25 AM
Sorry tterb--
Mind you, being a Husker fan, my credibility may be for sh-- (oh how the mighty have fallen--but at least Dr. Tom's back), but I think the 'Hawks can take the Tigers this year. Impetus is on their side.
Your lack of credibility has nothing to do with your being a Nebraska Cornhusker fan, my friend. ;)

Black Mamba.
Nov 5th, 2007, 01:10 AM
My Favorite Teams


1. The U- Randy Shannon will right the ship. He got a bunch of recruits coming in next year and if we can fix the QB situation( Freeman and Wright are garbage) we'll be ok

2. LSU

PatM04
Nov 5th, 2007, 04:42 AM
war damn eagle:)

mckyle.
Nov 5th, 2007, 04:49 AM
war damn eagle:)

:barf:

darrinbaker00
Nov 5th, 2007, 05:04 AM
My guys are the perennially underachieving University of California Golden Bears. :bounce:

In The Zone
Nov 5th, 2007, 05:10 AM
My team is always Notre Dame but this year :rolleyes:

So my backup is always Oregon. Initially, it's because green is my favorite color but their offense is always :drool:. It's so much fun. They're going to win the Pac-10 hands down. They just have to hope LSU can lose again which clearly can happen.

Let's go Ducks!

mckyle.
Nov 5th, 2007, 05:16 AM
^^

Sorry that the losers over here at Alabama couldn't beat LSU for you :sobbing:

darrinbaker00
Nov 5th, 2007, 05:19 AM
My team is always Notre Dame but this year :rolleyes:

So my backup is always Oregon. Initially, it's because green is my favorite color but their offense is always :drool:. It's so much fun. They're going to win the Pac-10 hands down. They just have to hope LSU can lose again which clearly can happen.

Let's go Ducks!
September 29, 2007: Cal 31, Oregon 24. We lost three straight after that, of course, but we're still the "And One" on the Ducks' record. ;)

mckyle.
Nov 11th, 2007, 11:23 PM
Ugh. This bullshit makes me mad. Every week the experts say "Kansas is finally going to lose" and yet they are STILL undefeated! I knew they weren't going to be #1 this week, but I was keeping faith that maybe voters would use common sense. Even though they didn't get #1, I thought they would at least get in the top 3. But instead, Oklahoma jumps over them! This is just NOT fair. Kansas has not lost a game this year. They are the only major-conference program still undefeated and yet they still get shafted! And BTW, what the fuck has Oregon done this year? Oh wow! They barely beat a shitty USC team! Woohoo!

tterb
Nov 12th, 2007, 12:24 AM
Ugh. This bullshit makes me mad. Every week the experts say "Kansas is finally going to lose" and yet they are STILL undefeated! I knew they weren't going to be #1 this week, but I was keeping faith that maybe voters would use common sense. Even though they didn't get #1, I thought they would at least get in the top 3. But instead, Oklahoma jumps over them! This is just NOT fair. Kansas has not lost a game this year. They are the only major-conference program still undefeated and yet they still get shafted! And BTW, what the fuck has Oregon done this year? Oh wow! They barely beat a shitty USC team! Woohoo!

Seriously? Oregon took out Michigan, USC, and Arizona St, all top 25 level teams, and barely lost to a Cal team that is still around top 30 in the BCS.

If you would put a Kansas team with no notable wins whatsoever above an Oregon team with one close loss to a decent team and several wins over good teams, that's fine. But here's the reality - this is Kansas' schedule:

6-4 C Michigan
2-8 SE Louisiana
5-5 Toledo
0-9 FLA INTL
5-5 Kansas St
3-8 Baylor
5-6 Colorado
6-5 Texas A&M
5-6 Nebraska
5-5 Oklahoma St

There are TWO winning teams on there (6-4 C Michigan and 6-5 A&M). And you want to call USC shitty? Granted, they aren't all that, but compared to the teams Kansas is beating, USC looks like the NE Patriots.

Now, being upset about Oklahoma being ranked above them is more legit. Oklahoma's only notable wins are an overrated Texas team, and a good Missouri team. But in the end, who cares? Kansas will get its shot for some credibility against Missouri. Win that, and they'll be able to play Oklahoma and settle that debate for themselves. So any hand-wringing is pretty unnecessary at this point. :shrug:

mckyle.
Nov 12th, 2007, 01:05 AM
Seriously? Oregon took out Michigan, USC, and Arizona St, all top 25 level teams, and barely lost to a Cal team that is still around top 30 in the BCS.

If you would put a Kansas team with no notable wins whatsoever above an Oregon team with one close loss to a decent team and several wins over good teams, that's fine. But here's the reality - this is Kansas' schedule:

6-4 C Michigan
2-8 SE Louisiana
5-5 Toledo
0-9 FLA INTL
5-5 Kansas St
3-8 Baylor
5-6 Colorado
6-5 Texas A&M
5-6 Nebraska
5-5 Oklahoma St

There are TWO winning teams on there (6-4 C Michigan and 6-5 A&M). And you want to call USC shitty? Granted, they aren't all that, but compared to the teams Kansas is beating, USC looks like the NE Patriots.

Now, being upset about Oklahoma being ranked above them is more legit. Oklahoma's only notable wins are an overrated Texas team, and a good Missouri team. But in the end, who cares? Kansas will get its shot for some credibility against Missouri. Win that, and they'll be able to play Oklahoma and settle that debate for themselves. So any hand-wringing is pretty unnecessary at this point. :shrug:

Have you seen the scores of most of the Kansas games? They dominate the other teams. It's not their fault that they have a legit team and nobody wanted to play them. Most major-conference teams play Mickey-Mouse schools for their non-conference games, and the Big 12 is normally one of the strongest conferences. It's not their fault the rest of the Big 12 decided to fall apart. And even though Nebraska is breaking apart by the second, scoring 72 points against them is insane. I don't comprehend how two major-conference teams with one loss can be ahead of another major-conference team with no losses. If they were really the best two teams in the nation, they would've won all their games. Kansas has done their part in winning every game so far. They deserve #1.

tterb
Nov 12th, 2007, 02:42 AM
Have you seen the scores of most of the Kansas games? They dominate the other teams. It's not their fault that they have a legit team and nobody wanted to play them. Most major-conference teams play Mickey-Mouse schools for their non-conference games, and the Big 12 is normally one of the strongest conferences. It's not their fault the rest of the Big 12 decided to fall apart. And even though Nebraska is breaking apart by the second, scoring 72 points against them is insane. I don't comprehend how two major-conference teams with one loss can be ahead of another major-conference team with no losses. If they were really the best two teams in the nation, they would've won all their games. Kansas has done their part in winning every game so far. They deserve #1.
Have YOU actually seen the scores of most of the Kansas games?

Kansas St 30-24
Colorado 19-14
Texas A&M 19-11
Oklahoma St 43-28

Since entering the Big 12 schedule where the teams weren't complete cupcakes, the only teams they've actually "dominated" are an awful Baylor team and a Nebraska team that had lost 4 straight, and given up 40 points to BALL STATE this season already. 76 is impressive, but that defense had given up over 40 points four times before the Kansas game, so I take it with a grain of salt.

If it's all about wins, should Hawaii be a co-#1 along with Kansas? If not, why? Is it because they aren't part of a major conference? But it's not Hawaii's "fault" the rest of the WAC sucks outside of Boise St, the same way it's not Kansas' "fault" their Big 12 competition has been weak so far. But I think you have to balance how well a team appears to be playing with the strength of their competition to determine the rankings. And right now, Kansas' resume is less impressive than LSU or Oregon to most voters, which makes sense.

mckyle.
Nov 12th, 2007, 02:43 AM
Have YOU actually seen the scores of most of the Kansas games?

Kansas St 30-24
Colorado 19-14
Texas A&M 19-11
Oklahoma St 43-28

Since entering the Big 12 schedule where the teams weren't complete cupcakes, the only teams they've actually "dominated" are an awful Baylor team and a Nebraska team that had lost 4 straight, and given up 40 points to BALL STATE this season already. 76 is impressive, but that defense had given up over 40 points four times before the Kansas game, so I take it with a grain of salt.

If it's all about wins, should Hawaii be a co-#1 along with Kansas? If not, why? Is it because they aren't part of a major conference? But it's not Hawaii's "fault" the rest of the WAC sucks outside of Boise St, the same way it's not Kansas' "fault" their Big 12 competition has been weak so far. But I think you have to balance how well a team appears to be playing with the strength of their competition to determine the rankings. And right now, Kansas' resume is less impressive than LSU or Oregon to most voters, which makes sense.

Hawaii should definitely be #2. I put them at #2 in the ESPN "You Rank 'Em" thing.

tterb
Nov 12th, 2007, 03:32 AM
At least you're consistent, but a Hawaii team that had to go to overtime to beat Louisiana Tech and San Jose State at #2? :lol: Okay.

mckyle.
Nov 12th, 2007, 03:36 AM
They're undefeated. If LSU and Oregon were the best they would have won all their games. You're too hung up on prestige. And that's coming from a Bama fan. ;)

wta_zuperfann
Nov 12th, 2007, 03:51 AM
Serfs of the Turfs

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/11/opinion/11lewis.html?_r=1&ref=opinion&pagewanted=all


excerpt:


College football’s best trick play is its pretense that it has nothing to do with money, that it’s simply an extension of the university’s mission to educate its students. Were the public to view college football as mainly a business, it might start asking questions. For instance: why are these enterprises that have nothing to do with education and everything to do with profits exempt from paying taxes? Or why don’t they pay their employees?

This is maybe the oddest aspect of the college football business. Everyone associated with it is getting rich except the people whose labor creates the value. At this moment there are thousands of big-time college football players, many of whom are black and poor. They perform for the intense pleasure of millions of rabid college football fans, many of whom are rich and white. The world’s most enthusiastic racially integrated marketplace is waiting to happen.




While I enjoy college football, the fact that Division I coaches are paid like professionals is very troubling. To me, coaches should be faculty members and paid no more than a full professor. This is in keeping with the spirit of amateurism.

mckyle.
Nov 12th, 2007, 03:54 AM
^^

That's a good point. Our coach (Saban) was paid a shit load by Bama to leave the NFL :o

tterb
Nov 12th, 2007, 04:01 AM
It's not about prestige. But it's also not as simple as wins alone. If Purdue beats up on teams the level of Minnesota all year, I'm not going to claim they deserve #1.

LSU has beaten VA Tech, Florida, Auburn, Alabama, and S Carolina, with a tight loss to a good Kentucky team. Kansas isn't being punished by not being ranked #1 - they're being placed below two teams who've already proven against top competition how good they are. LSU isn't being placed at #1 due to prestige, but the strength of their resume.

Oh, and as a Purdue fan, I can say I'm in no way, shape, or form blinded by prestige. :tape: Trust me.

mckyle.
Nov 12th, 2007, 04:03 AM
Okey, we'll just have to disagree on what rankings should represent ;)

But LSU beating Alabama isn't a big deal.

We suck :bounce: Yay!!!11

tterb
Nov 12th, 2007, 04:23 AM
Serfs of the Turfs

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/11/opinion/11lewis.html?_r=1&ref=opinion&pagewanted=all


excerpt:


College football’s best trick play is its pretense that it has nothing to do with money, that it’s simply an extension of the university’s mission to educate its students. Were the public to view college football as mainly a business, it might start asking questions. For instance: why are these enterprises that have nothing to do with education and everything to do with profits exempt from paying taxes? Or why don’t they pay their employees?

This is maybe the oddest aspect of the college football business. Everyone associated with it is getting rich except the people whose labor creates the value. At this moment there are thousands of big-time college football players, many of whom are black and poor. They perform for the intense pleasure of millions of rabid college football fans, many of whom are rich and white. The world’s most enthusiastic racially integrated marketplace is waiting to happen.




While I enjoy college football, the fact that Division I coaches are paid like professionals is very troubling. To me, coaches should be faculty members and paid no more than a full professor. This is in keeping with the spirit of amateurism.
Interesting points. Although if this weren't the case, the schadenfreude that is Charlie Weis coaching ND to loss after horrific loss this season woudln't be nearly as delicious. :angel:

Bruno71
Nov 15th, 2007, 07:14 AM
Favorite team: Northwestern, my alma mater. We used to suck but now we're just below average. For the Big 10 anyway. We play the most thrilling nailbiters more consistently than any other program and sometimes win them, hence we're the "Cardiac Cats."

Other favorite teams: Illinois, Wisconsin, Cal, Oregon, Oregon St., VT

Teams I hate: any dynasty, but in order: 1) Notre Dame 2) Ohio State 3) Michigan 4) Miami 5) Florida State 6) Nebraska 7) Oklahoma 8) Alabama (sorry :shrug:) 9) USC 10) Florida

I'm really lovin' this season so far.

Bruno71
Nov 15th, 2007, 07:19 AM
They're undefeated. If LSU and Oregon were the best they would have won all their games. You're too hung up on prestige. And that's coming from a Bama fan. ;)

If Hawaii were good for #2 they'd have not struggled against La Tech, San Jose St or Fresno St. At least Kansas has looked impressive in all their wins.

wta_zuperfann
Nov 15th, 2007, 10:30 PM
I certainly am no fan of Charlie Weis and wonder why Notre Dame has hyped him as some kind of football savior. He is a very poor motivator and cannot get the very best out of his players. On top of all that, he is terribly profane and talks down to the media. None of this reflects very well on ND.

But that's what college football has become today. Instead of improving America's youth, it often panders to moneyed interests in the NFL and prostitutes amateurism. For this I blame the NCAA which allows professionalism in the coaching ranks and promotes commercialization for its own selfish profit.

A few years ago the Kansas City Star ran a series on the NCAA's many faults. Rather than answering the charges, it decided to skip town and moved from Overland Park, KS to Indianapolis.

Luckily for those of us who appreciate the spirit of amateurism, we have Division II and Division III collegiate sports. I often attend these games and they are a genuine delight.

sfselesfan
Nov 15th, 2007, 10:50 PM
My favorite team upset the #2 team in the land last night. That's right, 'ole Bobby Bowden pulled out some of his magic from yesteryear.

FLORIDA ST. - 27
BOSTON COLL - 17

I'm an FSU fan as well. You have great taste.

SF

mckyle.
Nov 16th, 2007, 04:55 AM
:rolls: Overrated, much? You need more than one player to make the championship, Oregon.

mckyle.
Nov 16th, 2007, 04:55 AM
Favorite team: Northwestern, my alma mater. We used to suck but now we're just below average. For the Big 10 anyway. We play the most thrilling nailbiters more consistently than any other program and sometimes win them, hence we're the "Cardiac Cats."

Other favorite teams: Illinois, Wisconsin, Cal, Oregon, Oregon St., VT

Teams I hate: any dynasty, but in order: 1) Notre Dame 2) Ohio State 3) Michigan 4) Miami 5) Florida State 6) Nebraska 7) Oklahoma 8) Alabama (sorry :shrug:) 9) USC 10) Florida

I'm really lovin' this season so far.

Why exactly do you hate dynasties?

NyCPsU
Nov 16th, 2007, 04:58 AM
penn st :rocker2: :p

mckyle.
Nov 16th, 2007, 05:06 AM
penn st :rocker2: :p

I thought y'all were winning the national championship this year?

Your words, not mine... :p

mckyle.
Nov 16th, 2007, 05:28 AM
I'm gonna go ahead and call this one:

If LSU, Kansas, and Oklahoma are all safe after the weekend, Oklahoma will pass Kansas.

I just know it. The coaches and voters can not stand for Kansas, an untraditional "new" powerhouse to be #2 instead of Oklahoma, a traditional football school.

It reminds me of the book I'm reading for English class: The Great Gatsby. Although Daisy loves Gatsby, she never accepts him because he comes from "new" money, while her husband and her name comes from "old" money.

Ugh. It irritates me so... :sad:

Bruno71
Nov 16th, 2007, 09:16 AM
Why exactly do you hate dynasties?

A number of reasons but this is the main one...they have in the past, and even more so now, reminded me of big business monopolies. The bigger names get the better recruits and thus have an unfair competition edge. Doesn't sit right with me. Notre Dame is by far the worst of these offenders, yet somehow can't manage to win a NC anymore with all their advantages.

I'm gonna go ahead and call this one:

If LSU, Kansas, and Oklahoma are all safe after the weekend, Oklahoma will pass Kansas.

I just know it. The coaches and voters can not stand for Kansas, an untraditional "new" powerhouse to be #2 instead of Oklahoma, a traditional football school.

It reminds me of the book I'm reading for English class: The Great Gatsby. Although Daisy loves Gatsby, she never accepts him because he comes from "new" money, while her husband and her name comes from "old" money.

Ugh. It irritates me so... :sad:

KU is #3 in the BCS but aren't they already behind Oklahoma in all the human polls? Beating Iowa St ain't gonna help. If they beat Mizzou, especially if it's handily, they'd probably give Oklahoma a better run for their money in the polls. It's all moot anyway...#2 will in all likelihood be the Big 12 championship game winner.

mckyle.
Nov 16th, 2007, 08:49 PM
A number of reasons but this is the main one...they have in the past, and even more so now, reminded me of big business monopolies. The bigger names get the better recruits and thus have an unfair competition edge. Doesn't sit right with me. Notre Dame is by far the worst of these offenders, yet somehow can't manage to win a NC anymore with all their advantages.


How is it an unfair advantage? The best football players want to play where the most success is at. It's not just dynasties. Kansas isn't a dynasty, but they'll have a good recruiting class next year.

BigB08822
Nov 16th, 2007, 09:10 PM
I don't think it matters where Kansas and Oklahoma are after the next week or even two weeks. What matter is who wins that Big 12 game. The winner of that should be in the National Championship game. All I can say is GEAUX LSU!

In The Zone
Nov 17th, 2007, 12:13 AM
Well. Oregon lost. :sad:

They finally get to # 2 in the BCS and they blow it. The # 2 curse continues. Looks like Kansas will be in that slot for when they play Missouri. Good luck! ;)

Bruno71
Nov 17th, 2007, 06:08 AM
How is it an unfair advantage? The best football players want to play where the most success is at. It's not just dynasties. Kansas isn't a dynasty, but they'll have a good recruiting class next year.

Unless they actually win the NC, they won't recruit in a commensurate fashion to the dynasties. Actually, KU probably wouldn't anyway, because I think more of their attention goes to basketball no matter what. But revisit it in 3 years, KU will be back to mediocre or even bad, I'm almost positive...especially if Mangino finds himself somewhere else.

Look at Kansas State...they had over a decade of almost but not quite becoming elite, but fell right back to their normal place afterwards (OK maybe slightly better, but not nearly a powerhouse anymore).

These teams will never recruit comparably to Nebraska, Oklahoma, or Texas. They may have highly unusually successful years here or there, but will most likely not join the elite. VT & the Florida schools are the only ones I can think of that have joined that level in the last few decades from a lower place.

jonnyroyale_13
Nov 17th, 2007, 06:47 AM
Go Boilers!
Much better hope for Purdue womens basketball.:rocker2:

mckyle.
Nov 18th, 2007, 03:15 AM
Oklahoma :rolls:

Kansas :worship:

Winning all your games so far.

Like a national championship team is supposed to do.

BigB08822
Nov 18th, 2007, 04:31 AM
There goes the idea of an LSU/OK rematch. I predict LSU vs. Kansas in the National Game with LSU pulling it out in a close one.

mckyle.
Nov 18th, 2007, 05:06 AM
There goes the idea of an LSU/OK rematch. I predict LSU vs. Kansas in the National Game with LSU pulling it out in a close one.

Kansas is going all the way ;) I've been calling this since the fifth week of the season. I can feel it :lol:

BigB08822
Nov 18th, 2007, 05:18 AM
The only thing with Kansas is they have their biggest game of the year next week. It is going to be by far their toughest opponent and only their second ranked opponent all season. This will show how good they really are.

mckyle.
Nov 18th, 2007, 05:28 AM
Yeah you're right but it seems like every week people say 'This is the game when Kansas has to prove themselves'

I'm sure they are tired of hearing about it and will blow away Missouri :cool:

Bruno71
Nov 18th, 2007, 05:50 AM
I do think Kansas has something to prove, but from what I've actually seen with my own eyes, they are one very good, tough team that will be very difficult for either Mizzou or Oklahoma to beat. They're solid and strong all-around.

That said, the national title will probably be LSU vs. Ohio St. :eek:

mckyle.
Nov 18th, 2007, 04:04 PM
I will puke if Ohio State makes the championship. Until the Big 10 adds another team and plays a conference championship, they shouldn't have a guaranteed BCS spot. The same for the Big East and Pac 10.

mckyle.
Nov 18th, 2007, 04:05 PM
Assuming Kansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma all beat each other, wouldn't West Virginia be in the championship? :eek:

Bruno71
Nov 21st, 2007, 05:43 AM
Assuming Kansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma all beat each other, wouldn't West Virginia be in the championship? :eek:

As long as they don't lose to UConn, probably. Ariz. St. could build a case with wins over USC & Arizona, but WVU would probably be in over the Suckeyes.

cheo23
Nov 21st, 2007, 05:52 AM
Umm Isn't Like VIRGINIA the STrongest football teamm??????

dybbuk
Nov 21st, 2007, 05:59 AM
Ajde Mizzou! :banana:

This is like their first good team in forever, and it's impossible to escape both them and Kansas around here. :help:

mckyle.
Nov 21st, 2007, 05:45 PM
Ajde Mizzou! :banana:

This is like their first good team in forever, and it's impossible to escape both them and Kansas around here. :help:

I can't wait for this game! But it's on at the same time as Alabama/Auburn so I won't get to see much of it...

mckyle.
Nov 23rd, 2007, 11:11 PM
Are-Kansas :banana: LSU is the most over-rated team this year. And if you can't close out games in 3OT then you can't win a NC.

Kansas/Missouri vs. West Virginia in the title game :banana:

Bruno71
Nov 24th, 2007, 10:19 AM
I'm beginning to wonder if any team in all of cfb is national championship worthy. Hopefully KU will prove to be so, or at least Mizzou. I wonder if they shouldn't just let Hawaii play it, the way it's gone.

mckyle.
Nov 24th, 2007, 05:10 PM
Didn't Hawaii destroy Boise? I think they should definitely get a BCS bid, but they are still a few spots away in the rankings.

Just please don't let Ohio State back in the NC :sobbing:

dybbuk
Nov 24th, 2007, 05:23 PM
I can't wait until this stupid game is over. I am so friggin' tired of hearing about "The Game Of The Year!!!!11" :sobbing:

mckyle.
Nov 24th, 2007, 05:25 PM
I can't wait until this stupid game is over. I am so friggin' tired of hearing about "The Game Of The Year!!!!11" :sobbing:

Enjoy it though! These two teams will probably never be good again :p

Jay/Kay

NyCPsU
Nov 24th, 2007, 10:31 PM
omg at the kentucky-tennessee game :worship: 4 over times, almost a 5th :eek:

dybbuk
Nov 25th, 2007, 12:46 AM
Missouri 7 - 0 Kansas

Few seconds to go in the first quarter. Mizzou :dance:

dybbuk
Nov 25th, 2007, 01:08 AM
Missouri 14 - 0 Kansas

9 minutes to go until half time. :D

_Natasha_
Nov 25th, 2007, 01:17 AM
Mizzou is on fire :worship: Lets finish it Tigers :woohoo:

dybbuk
Nov 25th, 2007, 01:18 AM
Mizzou is on fire :worship: Lets finish it Tigers :woohoo:

:rocker:

dybbuk
Nov 25th, 2007, 02:32 AM
Missouri 21 - 7 Kansas

4 minutes until the 4th quarter.

dybbuk
Nov 25th, 2007, 02:39 AM
Missouri 28 - 7 Kansas

Fourth Quarter coming up. Chase :worship:

GrandSlam05
Nov 25th, 2007, 02:39 AM
Missouri scores again. :mad:

mckyle.
Nov 25th, 2007, 03:46 AM
:sobbing:

This is the worst weekend in college football. Ever. Arkansas winning was pretty sweet, but other than that it was trash.

My Poor Kansas :sobbing:
My Poor Kentucky :sobbing:
Alabama :rolleyes: Fuck them. They suck.

dybbuk
Nov 25th, 2007, 03:48 AM
:woohoo: :woohoo:

If you don't live here, you really can't understand how big this is. :lol: Missouri wins it's first Big 12 North title, is a game away from the NC, and this win means Missouri now leads Kansas in their H2H. :D :p

serenafan08
Nov 25th, 2007, 04:52 AM
:woohoo: :woohoo:

If you don't live here, you really can't understand how big this is. :lol: Missouri wins it's first Big 12 North title, is a game away from the NC, and this win means Missouri now leads Kansas in their H2H. :D :p

:rolleyes: Yeah yeah yeah, so what if you won? You had the banner year in football, but wait until basketball!!! KU will exact revenge. It's a miracle that they're 11-1 in football; that's just an added bonus. ROCK CHALK BABY! :yeah:

mckyle.
Nov 25th, 2007, 04:55 AM
yay. five pages and finally some rivalry smack talking. ;)

tterb
Nov 25th, 2007, 05:35 AM
Well, what a shock. Kansas finally plays a good team and loses. :o With the tackling they showed tonight, there's no way they'd have gotten through any other BCS conference with one loss.

Well done, Missouri.

If this season doesn't make the case for an 8 or 12 team playoff, I don't know what else can.

mckyle.
Nov 25th, 2007, 05:45 AM
I think there should be a 16 team play-off.

1. ACC Winner
2. Big East Winner
3. CUSA Winner
4. MAC Winner
5. PAC-10 Winner
6. Sun Belt Winner
7. Big 12 Winner
8. Big 10 Winner
9. MWC Winner
10. SEC Winner
11. WAC Winner
12-16. The five highest-ranked BCS teams not to win their respective conference titles

I have a feeling a play-off system will be implemented soon. Utah, West Virginia, and Boise State nudged the door open. This season completely tore the door down.

NyCPsU
Nov 25th, 2007, 05:51 AM
yea they really do need a playoff system and this season proves it like no other. but at the end of every season everyone says we need a playoff and nothing happens. im convinced it never will. the college presidents, the bowl presidents, and the sponsors all prefer the bowl system because they make so much more money that way. it sucks.

im glad missouri won since i felt kansas was extremely over-rated all year. so many one loss teams now, its tough to say who deserves a spot in the championship.

mckyle.
Nov 25th, 2007, 06:06 AM
So with my system, here is what my line-up would look like (predicting the conference championship winners aswell):

1. West Virginia 11-1
2. Ohio State 11-1
3. Southern California 10-2
4. Louisiana State 11-2
5. Virginia Tech 11-2
6. Oklahoma 11-2
7. Central Florida 10-3
8. Bowling Green 9-4
9. Brigham Young 10-2
10. Troy 9-3
11. Hawaii 12-0
12. Missouri 11-2
13. Kansas 11-1
14. Georgia 10-2
15. Arizona State 10-2
16. Florida 9-3

Seedings would be arranged this way:

The six major conference champions + MAC and CUSA champions will receive top eight seedings. The MAC and CUSA champions were chosen because both conferences had to play a championship game. The winning percentages of these eight schools will be calculated and then properly arranged. If the percentages are tied, the team with the higher BCS ranking gets priority.

Top 8 Seeds based on my method:

1. West Virginia
2. Ohio State
3. LSU
4. Virginia Tech
5. Oklahoma
6. USC
7. Bowling Green
8. UCF

The other eight teams will be randomly placed into the draw. Teams from the same conference cannot play each other in the first round.

mckyle.
Nov 25th, 2007, 06:06 AM
I went hardcore with this shit :o

I've been thinking about it for a while

NyCPsU
Nov 25th, 2007, 06:15 AM
would never happen though. what do you do with all the stadiums/sponsors for all the bowl games?? i guess you could spread them out between these games but there are still many more bowls that need teams to play and how would it be divided. its never going to happen which sucks.

mckyle.
Nov 25th, 2007, 06:16 AM
I think the teams that didn't make the play-offs could still play their bowls. But maybe every play-off game could have a different sponsor. idk.

mckyle.
Nov 25th, 2007, 06:36 AM
One good thing about a play-off system is that for four weeks you are guaranteed to have a lot of exciting match-ups. So I just did a random draw and these were the first-round games:

West Virginia vs. Florida :eek:
UCF vs. Kansas
Oklahoma vs. Arizona State :eek:
Virginia Tech vs. Missouri :eek:
LSU vs. Hawaii :eek:
USC vs. Troy
Bowling Green vs. Georgia
Ohio State vs. BYU

As you can see, the draw is a little top-heavy :o

Gosh I wish this system was really in place. I must send it to the NCAA :o

Bruno71
Nov 25th, 2007, 11:35 AM
yea they really do need a playoff system and this season proves it like no other. but at the end of every season everyone says we need a playoff and nothing happens. im convinced it never will. the college presidents, the bowl presidents, and the sponsors all prefer the bowl system because they make so much more money that way. it sucks.

im glad missouri won since i felt kansas was extremely over-rated all year. so many one loss teams now, its tough to say who deserves a spot in the championship.

Missouri, West Virginia, Ohio State & Kansas...not that many.

Kansas actually impressed me somewhat tonight, despite playing such a messy first 3 quarters. It just seemed like it wasn't their night.

Please please please beat Yucklahoma, Mizzou.

Oh, and that Kentucky game was a heartbreaker. Tennessee has 9 lives or something.

mckyle.
Nov 25th, 2007, 02:00 PM
And I wanted Georgia to go to the SEC Championships so bad. Not because I hate Tennessee, but because Georgia has the better team and Tennessee has just barely escaped everyone this year.

Bruno71
Nov 25th, 2007, 08:39 PM
And I wanted Georgia to go to the SEC Championships so bad. Not because I hate Tennessee, but because Georgia has the better team and Tennessee has just barely escaped everyone this year.

Wow I thought all Bama fans hated Tennessee. Fulmer is kind of a prick. It definitely seems like UGA has the better team than Tennessee right now, but the scoreboard showed Tennessee obliterating them, so I guess it's the way it is. Hard to ignore them needing 3 straight miracles (South Carolina, Vandy, UK) to get to the SECCG, but I think they actually have a decent shot against LSU.

One of the most annoying thing is how Oregon's offense has gone completely into the tank without Dixon. 0 points against UCLA...and along with Ariz. St. they just hand over the Pac 10 title to USC. Unbelievable.

mckyle.
Nov 25th, 2007, 09:03 PM
Don't get me wrong, I hate Tennessee. But that's not the reason why I'm so mad about them making the SEC championship.

And even though Kansas may have been over-rated, Oregon was even more over-rated. After they beat USC the whole nation was talking about how Oregon was the best team of the season. What a load of crap. They had one player. One player. It wasn't even a team.

wta_zuperfann
Nov 26th, 2007, 01:56 AM
TV coverage of American college sports isn't as much fun as it used to be because the cheerleaders are not shown like they used to be:


http://access.nscpcdn.com/cppops/features/g/gallery_sports_collegecheer/i/57269080.jpg


:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

PatM04
Nov 26th, 2007, 05:40 AM
War eagle:)

mckyle.
Nov 26th, 2007, 05:42 AM
War eagle:)

Go dawgs :)

;)

Bruno71
Nov 28th, 2007, 09:30 PM
Predictions for the final weekend:

Oklahoma 45, Missouri 31. With Bradford in I think Oklahoma outmuscles Mizzou. It's just an overwhelming stage for the Tigers, but they do have the talent to squeak this out if they don't make mistakes and remain aggressive. But it's more likely that Oklahoma can outshoot them.

West Virginia 35, Pittsburgh 17. I think this game will be closer than it should be through the middle of the 3rd quarter, with all the pressue on WVU and the fact that it's a rivalry game. But then WVU's talent will be just too much for a fairly hapless Pitt team.

USC 44, UCLA 7. UCLA will get a lucky defensive TD or punt return TD. They looked horrible against Oregon...Oregon was just even worse. USC steals the Pac 10 from under Oregon & Az St.

LSU 42, Tennessee 40. LSU has something to play for but probably doesn't realize it. They were running on fumes for most of the 2nd half of the year, just trying to get to that national championship game. Now that that won't happen, they probably won't be too fired up. Still, they're just plain better than Tennessee.

Virginia Tech 20, Boston College 17. A repeat of the last defensive struggle, but this time VT should come out on top. It could really go either way the way these teams play though.

dybbuk
Nov 28th, 2007, 09:41 PM
Missouri still has doubters. :ras: :ras: :p

Bruno71
Nov 29th, 2007, 09:18 PM
Missouri still has doubters. :ras: :ras: :p

I would be ecstatic if they won though. Would be happy to be very very wrong. BTW, it's easy to doubt them beating Oklahoma when they lost to them already.

dybbuk
Nov 29th, 2007, 09:20 PM
I would be ecstatic if they won though. Would be happy to be very very wrong. BTW, it's easy to doubt them beating Oklahoma when they lost to them already.

A game they should have won. Lightning never strikes twice. :p

Bruno71
Nov 30th, 2007, 04:09 AM
A game they should have won. Lightning never strikes twice. :p

Let's hope. It's a program-defining game for Mizzou. It would also likely guarantee a 1st-time national champion, assuming WVU does their part.

NyCPsU
Dec 2nd, 2007, 03:03 AM
just omg.

omg at tonight.
omg at this season.

mckyle.
Dec 2nd, 2007, 03:28 AM
Dear lord just let this fucking season end already :sobbing:

mckyle.
Dec 2nd, 2007, 03:35 AM
Okay, so I'm watching the Mizzou-OU game on ABC and Kirk & Co are talking about how Georgia shouldn't play because they didn't make the SEC Championship. But really, the Big 10 doesn't even play a championship game so that shouldn't even be a factor, considering Georgia is playing like the best team in the country right now, along with USC.

Bruno71
Dec 2nd, 2007, 04:03 AM
The point is, how can they send UGA in over LSU? They just can't.

mckyle.
Dec 2nd, 2007, 04:04 AM
How can they send the big ten over ACC? LSU/Va Tech rematch please.

mckyle.
Dec 2nd, 2007, 04:04 AM
and georgia/lsu never played in the regular season

NyCPsU
Dec 2nd, 2007, 05:16 AM
in a perfect world notre dame would join the big 10 to give us 12 teams, two divisions and a championship game. this will never happen obviously since notre dame makes out ridiculously well financially being an independent. you cant really punish osu for not having a championship game but on the same level you cant punish georgia for not making theirs since they have one to make. that should be factored out. this season is just screwed on so many levels. this season more than any other proves why a playoff system is needed. i really wish theyd consider changing the system, but of course they wont. nothing will ever be official until then.

tterb
Dec 2nd, 2007, 06:52 AM
How can they send the big ten over ACC? LSU/Va Tech rematch please.
Well, by your philosophy earlier this season, the team with the least losses deserves to be there, right?

And honestly, if the Big Ten had two divisions and a championship, would it matter? OSU played all the best teams from the Big Ten this season (Wisconsin, Penn St, Michigan, Illinois), so it's not like they avoided playing any tough competition by not having a championship game.

And a rematch of a 48-7 route should be the national championship? :lol:

The only thing that can possibly be taken away from the results of this season is that there should be a playoff. Any championship game that gets chosen now will be completely arbitrary, because about 10 teams have looked good enough to be the best this season, but all of them have also played poorly enough to lose. How do you judge so many 1 and 2 loss teams when all have played such varying schedules of debatable strength? :shrug:

Bruno71
Dec 2nd, 2007, 07:18 AM
How can they send the big ten over ACC? LSU/Va Tech rematch please.

That's just bias talking. The ACC is no better than the Big 10, judging by their OOC games, the LSU/VT one especially. VT = 2 losses, OSU = 1 loss...and I hate OSU and like VT.

Bruno71
Dec 2nd, 2007, 07:21 AM
in a perfect world notre dame would join the big 10 to give us 12 teams, two divisions and a championship game. this will never happen obviously since notre dame makes out ridiculously well financially being an independent. you cant really punish osu for not having a championship game but on the same level you cant punish georgia for not making theirs since they have one to make. that should be factored out. this season is just screwed on so many levels. this season more than any other proves why a playoff system is needed. i really wish theyd consider changing the system, but of course they wont. nothing will ever be official until then.

Fuck Notre Dame. The Big 10 can take many other great programs to get that conference championship game instead of waiting around for ND like ugly ducklings at a prom. Pitt, Syracuse, Rutgers, Mizzou, Iowa St....there's plenty of possiblities.

kiwifan
Dec 2nd, 2007, 07:23 AM
I missed everything today...

...:haha:...

...starting with "Happy Appy" beating Michigan this has been the most f*cked up College Football Season ever. :lol:

NyCPsU
Dec 2nd, 2007, 02:45 PM
Fuck Notre Dame. The Big 10 can take many other great programs to get that conference championship game instead of waiting around for ND like ugly ducklings at a prom. Pitt, Syracuse, Rutgers, Mizzou, Iowa St....there's plenty of possiblities.

agreed. but like i said "in a perfect world". Notre Dame already plays about half of the Big10 ten teams each year anyways, this year having played Penn St, Michigan, Michigan St and Purdue. It would also be really tough to pull some of those teams from the conferences they are already in, they should just do away with independents altogether.

NyCPsU
Dec 2nd, 2007, 02:55 PM
oh and im most likely going to the alamo bowl this year. :D

mckyle.
Dec 2nd, 2007, 06:38 PM
And a rematch of a 48-7 route should be the national championship? :lol:

I don't want to see another 41-14 route in a Big Ten vs. SEC game either.

mckyle.
Dec 2nd, 2007, 06:54 PM
I don't think LSU deserves to be there either. They were number one on two separate occasions this year and they lost both times. Obviously it wasn't meant for them to be number one.

NyCPsU
Dec 2nd, 2007, 07:20 PM
so its lsu-osu. kind of ridic.

mckyle.
Dec 2nd, 2007, 08:15 PM
I think there should just not be a national champion this year :) No one deserves it.

Cat's Pajamas
Dec 2nd, 2007, 08:23 PM
I would've like to have seen Hawaii in the title game. They were the only team undefeated and everybody else lost 2. They can't help it that they aren't in a BCS conference. The whole system is f-ed up with some conferences not having a title game. It's ridiculous quite frankly and the playoff system needs to be implemented soon. College football is losing credibility because all the bowl system is about is $$$.

Bruno71
Dec 2nd, 2007, 09:26 PM
agreed. but like i said "in a perfect world". Notre Dame already plays about half of the Big10 ten teams each year anyways, this year having played Penn St, Michigan, Michigan St and Purdue. It would also be really tough to pull some of those teams from the conferences they are already in, they should just do away with independents altogether.

Notre Dame in a lot of ways seems like a great fit, but I think when you get down to the nitty-gritty, the mentality at that school is fundamentally different than at the Big 10 schools. They're all about their own thing, and that's fine, but I don't think they'd appreciate conforming to the Big 10's ways, and I doubt the Big 10 will bend over backwards to accomodate them like they'd want (the Big East and possibly the ACC would though). That's one smaller reason why they haven't made overtures to join.

I don't think LSU deserves to be there either. They were number one on two separate occasions this year and they lost both times. Obviously it wasn't meant for them to be number one.

I can't argue with that logic, however, I can make similar arguments against any team in the nation. Was UGA meant to be #1 after being blown out by Tennessee, losing to a 6-6 team, and not winning their division's representation rights in the SECCG? Was VT meant to be #1 after being completely dismantled by LSU in their only weighty non-conference game on a national stage? Or after coughing up a game to BC leading 10-0 with 3 minutes left, at home? Was Kansas meant to be #1 after losing on the biggest of stages to the only team worth mentioning that they played? Don't even start me on USC...losing to Stanford is an automatic no-no. I could see a great argument for Oklahoma, but their losses are no better than LSU's and their top-notch wins are fewer.

I would've like to have seen Hawaii in the title game. They were the only team undefeated and everybody else lost 2. They can't help it that they aren't in a BCS conference. The whole system is f-ed up with some conferences not having a title game. It's ridiculous quite frankly and the playoff system needs to be implemented soon. College football is losing credibility because all the bowl system is about is $$$.

I have to wonder about Hawaii. They can look so mediocre at times (SJSU, La Tech, Washington), but then they just seem to win anyway. I doubt they'd make the finals of a playoff system, but they at least deserve their shot. Still, they really have no great wins..remember, Boise lost convincingly to the same last-place Pac 10 Washington team that Hawaii just barely scraped by.

mckyle.
Dec 2nd, 2007, 10:09 PM
I like these predictions that some ESPN guy made:

Allstate BCS National Championship Game
Ohio State (Big Ten champ) vs. LSU (SEC champ)

The Rose Bowl Game Presented by Citi
USC (Pac-10 champ) vs. Illinois (at-large)

Allstate Sugar Bowl
Georgia (at-large) vs. Hawaii (at-large)

FedEx Orange Bowl
Virginia Tech (ACC champ) vs. Kansas (at-large)

Tostitos Fiesta Bowl
Oklahoma (Big 12 champ) vs. West Virginia (Big East champ)

mckyle.
Dec 2nd, 2007, 10:10 PM
^^ Maybe there should just be five national champions this year :)

NyCPsU
Dec 2nd, 2007, 11:31 PM
the only bowl i care about is the alamo this year. and a lot of people have lost interest it seems. there will be no definitive number one. especially if lsu beats osu we are going to have just a whole bunch of 2 loss teams. its so dumb.

serenafan08
Dec 3rd, 2007, 02:07 AM
I think it's hilarious that KU got a BCS bowl bid ahead of MU. Looks like another year of MIZZERY for the Tigers!! ROCK CHALK BABY! :bounce:

mckyle.
Dec 3rd, 2007, 02:16 AM
It's really not fair to Missouri but I guess it looks better to have one-loss Kansas in over two-loss Missouri.

Bruno71
Dec 3rd, 2007, 02:22 AM
I think it's hilarious that KU got a BCS bowl bid ahead of MU. Looks like another year of MIZZERY for the Tigers!! ROCK CHALK BABY! :bounce:

Not only KU, but Illinois who they also beat. Still, it's a great season for Missouri...they're young and they can do it again next year.

mckyle.
Dec 3rd, 2007, 02:32 AM
Alabama in the Independence Bowl :bounce:

National Champions bitch!!!!!1111

tterb
Dec 3rd, 2007, 03:55 AM
Poor Missouri. Pretty big slap in the face.

serenafan08
Dec 3rd, 2007, 04:01 AM
Not only KU, but Illinois who they also beat. Still, it's a great season for Missouri...they're young and they can do it again next year.

Yeah, MU will be good again. KU can earn some vindication for this season by having a great season next year, because the schedule is much tougher. So they can prove all the naysayers wrong by doing well again, and I wouldn't mind them playing MU for the North title again! Even though we lost, that game was fun. Hopefully it will become a tradition! :bounce:

Bruno71
Dec 4th, 2007, 02:35 AM
Alabama in the Independence Bowl :bounce:

National Champions bitch!!!!!1111

That bowl should've taken Louisiana-Monroe instead. Sorry, I just had to. :tape:

mckyle.
Dec 4th, 2007, 07:10 AM
That bowl should've taken Louisiana-Monroe instead. Sorry, I just had to. :tape:

So are you saying that Alabama should then replace Tennessee in the Outback Bowl, since they destroyed them 41-17 ;)

Yeah, we sucked in our first year with a new coach, but we still killed the Ole Vols :bounce:

Bruno71
Dec 5th, 2007, 02:59 AM
So are you saying that Alabama should then replace Tennessee in the Outback Bowl, since they destroyed them 41-17 ;)

Yeah, we sucked in our first year with a new coach, but we still killed the Ole Vols :bounce:
Hmm, no, logically Louisiana-Monroe should be in line for the Outback Bowl over Alabama & Tennessee too. Or should that be Troy, who beat La.-Monroe? Florida Atlantic?

For the supposedly biggest, strongest, toughest conference in the land, the SEC sure flubbed it non-conference outside of one game (LSU--->VT).

mckyle.
Dec 5th, 2007, 03:18 AM
Hmm, no, logically Louisiana-Monroe should be in line for the Outback Bowl over Alabama & Tennessee too. Or should that be Troy, who beat La.-Monroe? Florida Atlantic?

For the supposedly biggest, strongest, toughest conference in the land, the SEC sure flubbed it non-conference outside of one game (LSU--->VT).

shaddup :ras: no major conference teams play major non-conference games. occasionally they do for early-season drama, but not a lot of times. alabama always has at least one embarrassing loss per season ;) and don't hate on Troy. they're amazing :hearts:

Bruno71
Dec 5th, 2007, 06:46 AM
shaddup :ras: no major conference teams play major non-conference games. occasionally they do for early-season drama, but not a lot of times. alabama always has at least one embarrassing loss per season ;) and don't hate on Troy. they're amazing :hearts:

Then why is everyone so on the Big 10's case for being weak if no conference plays major non-conference games? The SEC had a bunch of major-ish pairings (USF-Auburn, Tenn-Cal, Bama-FSU, UF-FSU)...they just didn't win most of them.