College Football 2008 - Page 37
Forum Index > General Games |
![]()
OneOther
United States10774 Posts
| ||
ShadowDrgn
United States2497 Posts
On December 08 2008 18:39 SpiralArchitect wrote: Their only losses were to #11 TCU and # 6 Utah, they had victories over UCLA (59-0 btw) and Washington. Yet they remain way behind in the BCS rankings because they didnt have a strong enough schedule? Pssst, Washington was the undisputed worst team in Div 1-A this year (BYU beat them by 1 point). UCLA and Washington combined for a 4-20 record. Just thought I'd point that out. | ||
![]()
OneOther
United States10774 Posts
I don't know where you get the impression that I am a Sooners fan (because I am not), but they really deserve to play in the national championship. No, not because Big 12 puts in the most funding, but because they had to through the toughest teams. Therefore, it is fair. (BCS obviously its flaws, such as the Texas vs Oklahoma case. I never said it was perfect) Let's talk about BYU as an example. BYU lost to the only good opponents they played - TCU and Utah. They have won against, well, Northern Iowa, UCLA, Washington, Wyoming, Utah State, New Mexico, UNLV, Colorado State, San Diego State, and Air Force. USC lost to Oregon State, but they beat Ohio State, California, and Oregon. Florida lost to Ole Miss, but they beat Alabama, Georgia, LSU, South Florida, Florida State. I hate the fact that all football powerhouses are from SEC and Big 12, but I have accepted it. I have accepted the fact that the winners in each conference play against the most competition in the most fierce atmospheres. I think you should too ![]() BCS creates more weekly intensity and drama. I don't see how you can possibly deny this. Watching all those top 10 teams get upset and #1/#2 teams being replaced every week makes college football what it is. How about seeing an unknown beat a football powerhouse and get a ranking in the BCS? That's awesome as well. Playoff system is bound to take away some of that in the regular season. | ||
MamiyaOtaru
United States1687 Posts
Anyway, I'm still bitter about the year BYU went 14-1 beating Texas A&M along the way but got sent to the Cotton Bowl (where they beat Kansas State and became the first 15 win team in college football history). That season was the reason the BCS made the rule that the top non-BCS team (if ranked 12 or higher) got an auto-bid, which I was happy enough to see Utah take advantage of several years later. They may be rivals, but I'm happy to see someone represent the conference. Maybe this year with Boise getting cold shouldered they'll change the rule to allow more than one non-BCS team. I mean it's not like Boise didn't act like they belonged last time ![]() | ||
Fzero
United States1503 Posts
Remember Kansas last year? Nobody watched that shit. It was a good story, but nobody watched it. | ||
SpiralArchitect
United States2116 Posts
On December 08 2008 19:59 OneOther wrote: By the way, I am not a big fan of SEC or Big 12. But I have to admit the fact that they have the toughest competition out there, and the two teams emerge at the top from those conferences deserve to play in the national championship. I have lived in west coast all my life, so Pac-10 is my conference. What is the true is true, man. Dropping a game in one of those conferences is by far more impressive than going undefeated in some other conference. Let me say this again: I am not a fan of either conference. However, I abide by the level of competition and what each team deserves. I don't know where you get the impression that I am a Sooners fan (because I am not), but they really deserve to play in the national championship. No, not because Big 12 puts in the most funding, but because they had to through the toughest teams. Therefore, it is fair. (BCS obviously its flaws, such as the Texas vs Oklahoma case. I never said it was perfect) Let's talk about BYU as an example. BYU lost to the only good opponents they played - TCU and Utah. They have won against, well, Northern Iowa, UCLA, Washington, Wyoming, Utah State, New Mexico, UNLV, Colorado State, San Diego State, and Air Force. USC lost to Oregon State, but they beat Ohio State, California, and Oregon. Florida lost to Ole Miss, but they beat Alabama, Georgia, LSU, South Florida, Florida State. I hate the fact that all football powerhouses are from SEC and Big 12, but I have accepted it. I have accepted the fact that the winners in each conference play against the most competition in the most fierce atmospheres. I think you should too ![]() BCS creates more weekly intensity and drama. I don't see how you can possibly deny this. Watching all those top 10 teams get upset and #1/#2 teams being replaced every week makes college football what it is. How about seeing an unknown beat a football powerhouse and get a ranking in the BCS? That's awesome as well. Playoff system is bound to take away some of that in the regular season. The biggest difference between us on this issue is you will accept that the BCS is engineered to bring the same teams back every year. I refuse to accept that. BTW I assume you were a Sooners fan since you had shown them support during the season and what not, I should learn to not assume things, it makes an ass out of... me. | ||
SpiralArchitect
United States2116 Posts
On December 08 2008 19:34 ShadowDrgn wrote: Pssst, Washington was the undisputed worst team in Div 1-A this year (BYU beat them by 1 point). UCLA and Washington combined for a 4-20 record. Just thought I'd point that out. UCLA and Washington both started the season ranked higher than BYU and are supposed to be better teams. They are PAC-10 teams and the MWC teams are often judged on how they do against their PAC-10 opponents since the 10 is supposed to be one step up from the MWC. | ||
![]()
OneOther
United States10774 Posts
On December 10 2008 05:22 SpiralArchitect wrote: UCLA and Washington both started the season ranked higher than BYU and are supposed to be better teams. They are PAC-10 teams and the MWC teams are often judged on how they do against their PAC-10 opponents since the 10 is supposed to be one step up from the MWC. Is it fair to compare the absolute worst teams in PAC10 with one of the top teams in the MWC? | ||
SpiralArchitect
United States2116 Posts
| ||
zer0das
United States8519 Posts
| ||
![]()
OneOther
United States10774 Posts
On December 10 2008 06:21 SpiralArchitect wrote: No. Thats another reason I hate the BCS, those two games gave us more gusto in the standings than any other game we won this season. If we had beat Utah and TCU then things would have been different, but UCLA and Washington gave BYU their standings. Besides UCLA and Washington arent supposed to be the worst teams in the PAC-10, UCLA especially. This also brings up my least favorite part of college football, the unpredictable nature of a teams year to year strength, but I guess at the same time it is one of my favorite parts of college football and probably why I watch NCAA more than the NFL. aren't you supposed to a fan of less popular conferences like the pac-10? if so, you should know that washington is the absolute worst team (never won a single game) and ucla is right around there at the bottom. washington/washington state/ucla make the worst teams in the pac-10. what do you mean ucla and washington arent "supposed" to be the worst teams in the pac-10? who cares what's "supposed" to happen. reality is reality - they are two of the worst teams in the entire conference. if BYU put up good results against the good teams in their conference, then they would obviously get more respect. however, they lost to both utah/tcu. how in the world would you expect them to be ranked? you don't like the changing nature of a team's year to year strength? aren't you being contradictory because you said multiple times that you don't want to see the same teams in the championship and bowl games every year? oh wait, it's also one of your favorite parts, haha. i am glad you said that. | ||
Signet
United States1718 Posts
On December 11 2008 23:11 zer0das wrote: Wow, I just checked all the bowl games out and what a joke. The BCS ones in particular (the fact that the championship game is probably the most legit of them is a bad sign). So awful. Eh, fwiw three of the BCS games have the potential to be good. Florida/OU, USC/Penn State, and Texas/Ohio State. Yeah OSU could make it a good game if Pryor goes off. Real problem is the other bowls. There's only three matchups that look good to me: TCU/Boise Okla State/Oregon Pittsburgh/Oregon State (great RB matchup) | ||
QuanticHawk
United States32076 Posts
They've got a fucking Congressman from TX who has apparently put something in writing to have the country force them to go to a playoff. WHy the fuck do our elected officials feel the need to waste their time on this shit. | ||
Signet
United States1718 Posts
Whatever, our country is better off when these people are wasting their time. Remember how good the economy was in 1998 when Congress' hands were tied trying to prosecute Bill Clinton? ![]() (half-joking...) | ||
SpiralArchitect
United States2116 Posts
On December 12 2008 01:02 OneOther wrote: aren't you supposed to a fan of less popular conferences like the pac-10? if so, you should know that washington is the absolute worst team (never won a single game) and ucla is right around there at the bottom. washington/washington state/ucla make the worst teams in the pac-10. what do you mean ucla and washington arent "supposed" to be the worst teams in the pac-10? who cares what's "supposed" to happen. reality is reality - they are two of the worst teams in the entire conference. if BYU put up good results against the good teams in their conference, then they would obviously get more respect. however, they lost to both utah/tcu. how in the world would you expect them to be ranked? you don't like the changing nature of a team's year to year strength? aren't you being contradictory because you said multiple times that you don't want to see the same teams in the championship and bowl games every year? oh wait, it's also one of your favorite parts, haha. i am glad you said that. Nono I am not trying to say BYU should be better ranked, sorry I kinda worded that bad. What I meant is that a team like BYU has to win all there games (like Utah has) to even have a chance while teams like Wash and UCLA start the season with a good ranking because the PAC-10 is a more respected conference than MWC. I think BYU is right where they belong after their big losses to TCU and Utah. | ||
il0seonpurpose
Korea (South)5638 Posts
| ||
SpiralArchitect
United States2116 Posts
| ||
Sadist
United States7263 Posts
| ||
![]()
Hot_Bid
Braavos36375 Posts
| ||
Signet
United States1718 Posts
On December 12 2008 07:46 Sadist wrote: The heisman is a joke, Sam Bradford wasnt even mentioned when they lost to texas even though he had 4 td's and 2 ints. It wasnt his fault they lost yet all of a sudden hes out of the running. You could play awesome, but if your team loses its on you which is stupid. Well he's one of the 3 finalists now. Tebow won it last year despite Florida going 9-3 or something. | ||
| ||