Posted on 01/03/2005 8:44:12 PM PST by Diddle E. Squat
Auburn beats VA Tech in the Sugar Bowl, 16-13, to finish the season undefeated. 2 days ago Utah whipped Pitt in the Fiesta Bowl to also complete an undefeated season.
USC and Oklahoma play tomorrow night in the bogus national championship game, but in truth, once again no one will know who was the best team this season.
It was a rhetorical question. Cal choked big time. Like OU did last year vs KState
Someone from the weak pac conference calling the big 12 bad is pot, kettle.
Five. Boise State.
Boise v. Utah and Louisville v. Pitt would have been a better set of games than what we got; JMO.
Still, the BCS managed to schedule a game between two unarguably great teams with the first matchup between Heisman Trophy winners in history. And it will have two of the finalists at running back. It may not be a great game on the field, but it sure is on paper.
Agreed.
i called auburn too weak to challenge the winner of tonight's game and pointed out the idiocy of anyone saying the PAC-10 is weak (vs. Big 12 or anyone else) based upon games played and, more importantly, the game yet to be played
the trajectory of Cal's season is more irrelevant than even auburn's and you won't see me ennumerating the reasons for their 'choke' in this forum
nor is it necessary to dissect TX's lackluster performance vs. a MI team that lost 4 in a weak conference
i'm looking forward to tonight's game and acknowledge here and now that, if SC is dominated by OU, the PAC-10 is weaker than the Big 12 at the end of this season
Still, I'm not going to shed any tears for Auburn. Any major college team that schedules The Citadel ought to check what bra size they're wearing under their uniforms. I mean, that's PATHETIC.
I wouldn't mind a longer college season to sort this out to everyone's satisfaction. Heck, we've scratched the entire NHL season and practically nobody has noticed or cares. College football rocks, and I'm looking forward to tonight's game.
College football does rock, and I will be sad when the season ends tonite.
I will be counting the days to when I fly to see the spring practice game at my alma mater.
Still, tonight's game has special significance for me. I was so dumb and stupid when I attended USC in the late 70's and 1980 that I thought national championships were no big deal. I mean, we got them all the time.
I can't believe how naive and retarded I was. You don't get that many chances at it in your lifetime.
"Yeah, I guess the NFL is all screwed up. Not a day goes by that I don't hear chanting by the fans for the NFL to go to a bowl format."
Your assuming that the 'best team' always wins. Of course, you know that isn't true. Nor, does being 'undefeated' means being 'undefeatable'. It's not hard to imagine some 12-0 teams being inferior to some 11-1 or even 10-2 teams.
"You're right. Playing the game won't decide anything. Much better to let the sportswriters vote on it."
While I appreciate your sarcasm, I think, I believe that the 'best team' does not always win. If that's true, then all national championship playoff will provide is good entertainment. Let me ask you this, do you really think that if Auburn played VaTech 10 times, Auburn would win each time?
"But better to be decided in a game than by a vote of people who are "loyal" to their conference and try to vote in a way that "ups" their side either now or in future years."
You're assuming that everything would be decided on the field. What if the 'best' team loses? It happens frequently in college football.
"But good refs know they should not determine the outcome of the game, and the playoff could get good refs."
Good polls could get 'good' voters too.
Dang, 45 minutes until game time and all I can find is threads about al-Zarqawi being arrested for the 28th time.
Under my logic, they aren't the best. (I know, I know, on any given Saturday,,,) but when you agree to decide it "on the field" then you also agree to accept what happens on the field and quite whining. I will, what about you?
Good polls could get 'good' voters too.
I suppose in an imaginary world. But I would bet good impartial refs (backed up with TV replays) could be found in the real world. Sit in the back of the room while a bunch of coaches from different schools try to pick an all league team. It makes Congress look good. There is nothing that can be done to "poll" a team when you are asking the people who know how hard coaches and players have worked for the honor. Everyone has a soft spot for teams they worked with, grew up with, lived near, went to school at.. and these prejudices make it very difficult to set one team over another by balloting. But on the field, everyone has to accept the truth.
I believe this year USC would be picked nat champ even with a loss say to Cal, (I know they did not lose that one, but they could have, right?) But would that make Auburn or OU the new number one to the voters who have picked USC number one for two years in a row?
Yes, DidSquat, you are right. I am a genius. And those Utes are really impressive. Wooooh! I especially love the defensive schemes that come out of that conference. Really impressive. The Arena League (as the Utes conference should be called) sure can put points on the board against those toughies they play year-in, year-out, week-in, week-out, can't they?
Never mind that they don't put a defense on the field, nobody in that conference does. Basketball scores are lots of fun for people like you who like neato colors and bright, flashing lights.
Yes, SquatEDiddle, the Huskers are anachronisms, has-beens, yesterday's news. Woe is me, what ever shall us Huskers do.
But Nebraska (and Penn State, and Notre Dame, and Florida State, and Alabama, and Washington, and others that have experienced some recent misfortune) have at least one thing your mighty Utes will never have...tradition (it's a word you won't understand, so don't try.) One season like the Utes had, playing University of DiddleESquat et. al., does not make a program, genius. It makes a good year, against virtual nobodies, Bowl victory included. Good for them.
And the nobodies the Huskers played--and beat--in their recent history include such pansies as those mentioned above like Florida, Alabama, Notre Dame, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Florida State, Miami, and just about every other real football team--when that football team was either ranked Number 1 or Number 2. And they did that on many occasions--five of those times for National Championships.
That's pressure. That's a program. They didn't win 'em all, but they came through on many countless occasions in the biggest games on the planet. (Kinda like the Utes! LOL!!!) And the Huskers carry with it the longest streak of winning seasons in college football history (45 straight, through 1999). And even with the last 4 years--huge disappointments at Nebraska of course--their record would be envied by many teams (like the mighty Utes!)
I'm sure the Huskers did it all by avoiding such super programs as the mighty Utes, no doubt! LOL!!!!!
Now go back to being a couch-potato, ESquatDiddle, and find someone who's never been there before, and who actually does give a sh*t about the mighty Utes or Auburn for that matter.
I'm done with you, lad, so STFU. You can spout now if you'd like.
"Under my logic, they aren't the best. (I know, I know, on any given Saturday,,,) but when you agree to decide it "on the field" then you also agree to accept what happens on the field and quite whining. I will, what about you?"
Quite frankly, the only ones 'whinning' are those who dislike the BCS.
The problem I have with a playoff system is that I don't think it will necessarally produce the 'best' team. Nor do I think that being undefeated means you deserve a shot at a title.
"Sit in the back of the room while a bunch of coaches from different schools try to pick an all league team."
Completely understandable. Each coach has a different style offense/defense. Each coach considers some attribues more important than the other coaches. Also, there's probably not a lot of difference once you get past the few very special players. And, that's probably why I'm 'ambivalent' about a playoff. You see, I really don't think that there's a significant difference between the top four or five teams. Sure, there's a difference between the top five and the bottom five of the top twenty, but not much.
"I believe this year USC would be picked nat champ even with a loss say to Cal, (I know they did not lose that one, but they could have, right?) But would that make Auburn or OU the new number one to the voters who have picked USC number one for two years in a row?'
I just don't put that much stock in being undefeated. Maybe USC would still be the best team even if they did lose one or two games. I really don't know. I'm not an expert.
"Dang, 45 minutes until game time and all I can find is threads about al-Zarqawi being arrested for the 28th time."
I think I just saw him being interviewed on ESPN. I believe he was complaining that Holy Jihad Warriors of Iraqi State got passed up for the Orange Bowl. He said they might not have had an undefeated season but they played a pretty tough schedule.
Last Vegas line was Oklahoma favored by one. There is doubt in many minds about the University of Spoiled Children
Not sure which gremlins hijacked your computer or news media. USC was favored by 1 or 1 1/2 all day.
Yeah. USC looks like a bunch of has-beens, don't they? /sarcasm.
Late line.
Originally USC was favored by 3.
A lot of last minute money went to OK.
How can you be a has been untill you have, well, been.
By whom?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.