Official 2008-2009 College Football Thread

[Heads22]

Contrary to popular belief, it was between three teams in the South for the spot in the Big 12 title game, like Shadows said, not two.

 

[RockRaines]

College football - where you can win every game and not be a champion.

Its a good thing too. Utah and Boise dont deserve to be anywhere near the BCS title game, which is good for college football, because neither of those teams deserve a shot, nor to be called a national champ.

[T R U]

Boise State and Utah both did it a couple years ago AND won their BCS game. And they're both undefeated again this year. I know the standard argument is that "Well, they play in weaker conferences, so they would get killed in a title game", but the problem with the current system is that there's no way to definitely know that's true.

 

Come on man, I don't care if they were undefeated AND won their bowl game..

 

So Boise State has to pull all their trick plays out of their ass to edge OU.. there is zero chance they can then go the next week and beat Florida, and then the next week and beat USC.. and so on

 

It aint gonna happen, and all you do with a playoff in college football is pretty much come down to the same teams who would be fighting for a BCS spot anyways..

 

The reason teams like Utah and Boise State go undefeated and don't get a chance to play for a national title is because they don't play anyone in the regular season

[whitesoxfan101]

Contrary to popular belief, it was between three teams in the South for the spot in the Big 12 title game, like Shadows said, not two.

 

That's true, but when one lost by 6, another by 10, and a third by 45 or whatever it was, people will tend to forget the last one.

[T R U]

That's true, but when one lost by 6, another by 10, and a third by 45 or whatever it was, people will tend to forget the last one.

 

They shouldn't though, because if it was by 1 or 100 its still a 3 way tie anyway you look at it

[RockRaines]

Come on man, I don't care if they were undefeated AND won their bowl game..

 

So Boise State has to pull all their trick plays out of their ass to edge OU.. there is zero chance they can then go the next week and beat Florida, and then the next week and beat USC.. and so on

 

It aint gonna happen, and all you do with a playoff in college football is pretty much come down to the same teams who would be fighting for a BCS spot anyways..

 

The reason teams like Utah and Boise State go undefeated and don't get a chance to play for a national title is because they don't play anyone in the regular season

Exactly. Utah barely got by Michigan for god sakes. Boise St can really cling to their miracle upset of Choke-lahoma, but neither of those teams would survive in the playoff system, so they should be content with their occasional piece of the pie and shut up.

[T R U]

so they should be content with their occasional piece of the pie and shut up.

 

Ide think going undefeated and upsetting one of the bigger teams in a BCS bowl game would mean more to those schools than going undefeated getting the last spot in a playoff, and getting annihilated in round 1

 

[RockRaines]

Ide think going undefeated and upsetting one of the bigger teams in a BCS bowl game would mean more to those schools than going undefeated getting the last spot in a playoff, and getting annihilated in round 1

You'd think.

 

 

I'm all for a playoff system of about 8 or 16 teams, but in the current format is where these smaller schools have a better chance at a higher final ranking IMO. In a playoff system generally the outliers are eliminated.

[caulfield12]

Exactly. Utah barely got by Michigan for god sakes. Boise St can really cling to their miracle upset of Choke-lahoma, but neither of those teams would survive in the playoff system, so they should be content with their occasional piece of the pie and shut up.

 

 

Yes, the fluke Oregon loss that has been acknowledged by the refs, Boise State, losing 3 of the last 4 to TX, losing to Kansas St. in the B12 Championship game and the bad losses to USC and LSU in the NC games have tarnished Stoops' "Big Game Bobby" reputation a bit. They came out flat against WV last year, too, and never recovered.

 

Still, they didn't exactly choke this year coming down the stretch. I don't think we'll see them lose to Missouri either, a team that I don't think has EVER beaten Stoops since he joined the OU program ten years ago.

 

Of all the coaches in college football, there aren't many you'd clearly take ahead of Stoops. Maybe Carroll, but how difficult is it to recruit at USC? Yes, kudos to him for building that storied program back, but it's not without great natural resources to harness. Saban? Well, that guy's still a huge prick to me, no matter what he does in the future. Urban Meyer? Maybe. But he's lost some big games, too. Every coach has...and some games (like MS this year) you find hard to explain. Most of OU's "surprising" losses have come on the road, or against Oklahoma State or TX.

Edited December 1, 2008 by caulfield12

[RockRaines]

Yes, the fluke Oregon loss that has been acknowledged by the refs, Boise State, losing 3 of the last 4 to TX, losing to Kansas St. in the B12 Championship game and the bad losses to USC and LSU in the NC games have tarnished Stoops' "Big Game Bobby" reputation a bit. They came out flat against WV last year, too, and never recovered.

 

Still, they didn't exactly choke this year coming down the stretch. I don't think we'll see them lose to Missouri either, a team that I don't think has EVER beaten Stoops since he joined the OU program ten years ago.

 

Of all the coaches in college football, there aren't many you'd clearly take ahead of Stoops. Maybe Carroll, but how difficult is it to recruit at USC? Yes, kudos to him for building that storied program back, but it's not without great natural resources to harness. Saban? Well, that guy's still a huge prick to me, no matter what he does in the future. Urban Meyer? Maybe. But he's lost some big games, too. Every coach has...and some games (like MS this year) you find hard to explain. Most of OU's "surprising" losses have come on the road, or against Oklahoma State or TX.

Ah, I wasnt really harping on Stoops, I was just making a point about the also-rans in college football. I think he's a great coach. My own favorite coach Tressell has had his share of big game let downs and I still wouldnt want another coach in America to be on the sidelines for the Buckeyes.

[Heads22]

That's true, but when one lost by 6, another by 10, and a third by 45 or whatever it was, people will tend to forget the last one.

 

It's just that all you hear is that Texas should be in the Big 12 title game by virtue of their win over OU. And they should.....if it was a two way tie. But it wasn't.

[IlliniKrush]

It's the 5th tiebreaker. 5th. Link

 

Find me a better way to determine this tie. Point differential? Yeck.

 

Also, funny thing that I'm hoping happens. Mizzou beats OU in the Big 12 game somehow. Argue how Texas goes in ahead of Tech. It would happen, but that's a pathetic argument to make.

The BCS isn't meant to break ties in conferences before all games have been played, it's meant to get #1 and #2 together. Blaming the BCS is ignorant.

 

You'd think.

 

 

I'm all for a playoff system of about 8 or 16 teams, but in the current format is where these smaller schools have a better chance at a higher final ranking IMO. In a playoff system generally the outliers are eliminated.

16 teams? God no. The college football regular season is epic, 16 teams would make it close to pointless.

[whitesoxbrian]

Come on man, I don't care if they were undefeated AND won their bowl game..

 

So Boise State has to pull all their trick plays out of their ass to edge OU.. there is zero chance they can then go the next week and beat Florida, and then the next week and beat USC.. and so on

 

It aint gonna happen, and all you do with a playoff in college football is pretty much come down to the same teams who would be fighting for a BCS spot anyways..

 

The reason teams like Utah and Boise State go undefeated and don't get a chance to play for a national title is because they don't play anyone in the regular season

George Mason did it against great competition in March Madness. Why can't Boise do it in a NCAA football playoff?

[danman31]

The BCS isn't meant to break ties in conferences before all games have been played, it's meant to get #1 and #2 together. Blaming the BCS is ignorant.

I'm not blaming the BCS. The BCS got it right. Oklahoma has the best resume of the 3 and they are in the lead spot for the national title game. I'm just saying the tie was so deadlocked that there really is no way to determine that tie without it being something stupid/insignificant. If this tie happened in the ACC or SEC it would also go to the BCS. There simply is no 'good' way to break this tie off the field.

 

Big 12 teams playing for a spot in the national title game are 4-5 in the Big 12 title game.

[IlliniKrush]

I'm not blaming the BCS. The BCS got it right. Oklahoma has the best resume of the 3 and they are in the lead spot for the national title game. I'm just saying the tie was so deadlocked that there really is no way to determine that tie without it being something stupid/insignificant. If this tie happened in the ACC or SEC it would also go to the BCS. There simply is no 'good' way to break this tie off the field.

 

Big 12 teams playing for a spot in the national title game are 4-5 in the Big 12 title game.

Fair enough. I've heard people blaming the BCS, which is completely pointless. And yeah, you have to break it somehow. This way to break it essentially used the voters, and they say Oklahoma.

[whitesoxfan101]

I have a big problem with the BCS being the tiebreaker because it's based on the polls and computers, which both take out of conference results/opponents into account obviously as they are included in the full body of work, and that has NOTHING to do with a conference season or who should be a conference champion.

[CrimsonWeltall]

Its a good thing too. Utah and Boise dont deserve to be anywhere near the BCS title game, which is good for college football, because neither of those teams deserve a shot, nor to be called a national champ.

 

If those teams are going to be automatically disqualified from winning the championship before the season even starts, then they shouldn't be considered Division 1.

[Palehosefan]

I have a big problem with the BCS being the tiebreaker because it's based on the polls and computers, which both take out of conference results/opponents into account obviously as they are included in the full body of work, and that has NOTHING to do with a conference season or who should be a conference champion.

 

I think he was just saying it's the Big 12's fault for having the BCS as a tiebreaker. Which is true, but I'm not sure what else they could do. I WISH they would use the graduation rates as a tiebreaker, that would make the most sense. But alas...

 

 

 

As for Utah not being worthy, I have to disagree there. Utah destroyed BYU, beat TCU, and beat Oregon State. They are better than any ACC or Big East team this year. I think they are in the proper place ranking wise this year, somewhere around 7-10.

[danman31]

I have a big problem with the BCS being the tiebreaker because it's based on the polls and computers, which both take out of conference results/opponents into account obviously as they are included in the full body of work, and that has NOTHING to do with a conference season or who should be a conference champion.

I'm sick of hearing this b****ing about the BCS tiebreaker. Pick a better one or shut up. They all suck at this point.

[whitesoxfan101]

I'm sick of hearing this b****ing about the BCS tiebreaker. Pick a better one or shut up. They all suck at this point.

 

In-conference SOS. It's not fair either as you can't control the schedule, but at least you are using something within league play to determine who advances.

[zenryan]

atleast they didnt flip a coin as the tiebreaker....

[caulfield12]

In-conference SOS. It's not fair either as you can't control the schedule, but at least you are using something within league play to determine who advances.

 

 

Well, then OU would have had no benefit at all to play and beat Cincy and TCU. Essentially then, the only fair way would be eliminating all but 1-2 non-conference games/cupcakes and playing full home and away league schedules.

 

Every team would just schedule the Sister of the Poor and the Washington Generals if the SOS didn't matter to the computers in the end, which it did...especially rebalancing the final weekend.

[whitesoxfan101]

Well, then OU would have had no benefit at all to play and beat Cincy and TCU. Essentially then, the only fair way would be eliminating all but 1-2 non-conference games/cupcakes and playing full home and away league schedules.

 

Every team would just schedule the Sister of the Poor and the Washington Generals if the SOS didn't matter to the computers in the end, which it did...especially rebalancing the final weekend.

 

You schedule a stronger OOC slate in order to get favor with the computers to get into a BCS bowl or the natonal title game, but it shouldn't determine who wins a conference. Oklahoma shouldn't win the Big 12 South because they played TCU and Cincinnati IMO.

Edited December 2, 2008 by whitesoxfan101

[T R U]

George Mason did it against great competition in March Madness. Why can't Boise do it in a NCAA football playoff?

 

You cant compare basketball to football..

 

A non BCS conference school would never get to the final four of a CFB Tourny

[T R U]

You schedule a stronger OOC slate in order to get favor with the computers to get into a BCS bowl or the natonal title game, but it shouldn't determine who wins a conference. Oklahoma shouldn't win the Big 12 South because they played TCU and Cincinnati IMO.

 

Theres just no way to do it

 

And it really pisses me off that everyone has thrown Texas Tech away in these discussions.. I listened to ESPN Radio all day and all it was, was Texas and OU talk.. not once did anyone mention Texas Tech

 

They finished 11-1 (7-1) too, how come there is no argument for them? Why is it that Texas got hosed and they should be going instead of OU? Tech beat them, yet, I don't hear anyone talking about them..

 

And im not talking about the BCS convo because obviously they were too far back (Which is also BS because they are penalized for losing last), but for other scenarios no one is even bringing them up..