Posted on 11/19/2005 8:39:49 AM PST by MikefromOhio
It's a Great day for some college football!!!
TD Buckeyes!! Troy Smith on the QB keeper.
Go Bucks!!!! Looking good so far!
Incomplete on 4th and 1, Bucks take over on downs.
'Bowl eligibility' is a product on winning six games in a season. And that's a product of your schedule, and in particular your out-of-conference schedule. Teams in the SEC, for example, play nobody out of conference, thus ensuring 3 or 4 wins. Then, they go 3-5 in league and become 'bowl eligible'. Well, what does that prove?
As far as comparing conferences, the Pac-10's 2nd/3rd best team UCLA played the Big 12's 2nd/3rd best team Oklahoma, and it was a 20 point rout for UCLA. And given the Pac-10's 6-1 record in BCS games since 2000 (and virtually all of them were routs), the Pac-10's credibility/competitiveness relative to the rest of the country should not be up for question.
yeah buddy....
I hate seeing guys get injured though, no matter which team
Oklahoma is hardly the 2nd or third best team in the big 12, try the 4th or 5th best team. Either way by your reasoning on ASU, Oklahoma has been racked by injury including THE best running back in the nation Adrian Peterson. And I say once again YOU cannot go by past performances by teams or divisions. College teams change every year and thus every year must be judged differently.
My prediction is the Pac-10 goes 2-3 in bowls, the Big 12 goes 4-4, Sec goes 4-3 and the Big 10 goes 5-2.
"And I say once again YOU cannot go by past performances by teams or divisions."
Well, there is a lot of subjectivity in the rankings which determine bowl games and national titles. And since there is no playoff system, and the leagues don't get to play a lot of games against each other, it's difficult to measure each league. But I'll tell you this. If Texas gets beaten in the national title game, which would be what, the 4th time in 5 years for the Big 12, then it is only fair in future years to question the caliber of an undefeated team coming out of that league, when choosing national title contenders. Hell, it's the same reason that no one gave Utah a chance at the title last year, despite being undefeated. The past performance of their league against other league's teams undermined the credibility of Utah's season, and they never got serious consideration for the national title game. Past performance matters. Obviously, your past performance in THIS season matters. What else is there to go on?
That and the fact that the Utes are part of a non-BCS conference matters just a little.
nevermind....they are toast
I'm not exactly crying about it, since I was pulling for Tech in the game, but Oklahoma should feel entitled to feel robbed.
Did they review either play?
OSU 25, B!tchagain 21. Penn State-Michigan State now on ESPN2.
Mike, I think that 88 yd drive, led by Troy Smith, will go down in Buckeye lore as one of the greatest ever.
Interestingly, that was the drive that didn't happen against Penn State. If you had to pick one game or the other to have a game winning drive, I'd take the one that just happened.
Well, at least it didn't end in a 27-27 tie...;-)
Go Spartans :)
LOL
no crap LOL
I was on hold for 40 minutes after that call....
Wow, isn't that the truth. I'm not sure which mark was worse, the one on the fourth down deflected pass, or the last play touchdown. I can't believe they reviewed both those plays and came up with those rulings. Amazing.
They reviewed both plays, but neither was overturned under the "conclusive" standard. But Tech was given about two extra feet on a 4th down play with about 30 seconds to go, and then the runner was awarded for reaching across the goal line after he was already flat on the ground on the final play of the game. It was most remarkable.
That was a great comeback by the Buckeyes. No doubt about it.
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.