COLLEGE FOOTBALL 2011

[CamaroSkooter]

Originally Posted by Dr Jkel

...there is so much Alabama hate out there right now. Voters are turned off by the BCS results...

...huh?

Have you looked at the BCS rankings?

The computers (that have no opinions or emotions) put Okie State second and Alabama third. The HUMAN voters in the USA Today and Harris Poll are the ones that wanted the LSU-Alabama re-match.

I just want to state that I have nothing against Alabama. I would actually have preferred to see Okie State play Alabama in the NC Game. A high-powered offense versus an outstanding defense would be a clash that I would pay to see.

But, since LSU stayed undefeated, they get the top spot by default.

I agree that Okie State's loss to Iowa State looks bad on paper, but the game itself was actually very entertaining. And you have to remember, Iowa State beat Iowa in a non-conference game, which is no joke of a team that did beat Michigan .

I kind of feel bad for Iowa State because they're actually a fairly decent team, but everyone is writing them off as if they're nothing during this BCS championship discussion.

[Dr Jkel]

I am more talking about the media talking heads when I made that comment. Dan Patrick said yesterday after he interviewed Trent that he didn't even vote Trent in his top 3....Really? not in the top 3.

Sports talk radio is killing the BCS right now and while I agree that the BCS is screwed up it shouldn't be taken out on Alabama, somehow saying they are not worthy.

I have said many times before I was not in favor of a rematch until others lost.

As a college football fan I would have loved to see either LSU/Bama play OSU for the BCNC and the other play Boise St in the Sugar Bowl. In my opinion Bama lost and if there was another undefeated team then we lose out but there isn't and OSU's loss was worse to me.

As an Alabama fan I am glad we are getting a chance to play for all the marbles. I really do not think you will ever see this again 2 teams from one conference.

Unfortunately the bowl system we have does not put match ups together based on what fans want to see and they do it based off of financial concerns...thus the reason Boise and K-State were not chosen for the Sugar Bowl and VT and Michigan were. It all boils down to money.

[Ladybugsmom]

Originally Posted by Dr Jkel

LSU had 1 more game because they played in the SEC Championship game....Like in years past when the Big 10, Pac 10 and now in the Big 12 where teams do not have a conference championship game.

The rules say to have a conference championship game you must have at least 12 teams in your conference. 20 years ago the SEC decided to have a championship conference game...other conferences have followed because of the revenue it generates.

Thanks! That makes perfect sense now... PAC 12 has a conference championship game now.... I don't like how it's set up though, divided North vs South - it doesn't pit the two best against each other. Really? Did the Bruins even have a chance against the Ducks???

[Dr Jkel]

Originally Posted by Ladybugsmom

Thanks! That makes perfect sense now... PAC 12 has a conference championship game now.... I don't like how it's set up though, divided North vs South - it doesn't pit the two best against each other. Really? Did the Bruins even have a chance against the Ducks???

Well UCLA got there because USC is on probabtion otherwise USC would have played.

Typically conferences divide the amount of teams into two sides and you must win your side. Typically they do not have years like this one in where the two best teams usally play each other. Like in the SEC this year Alabama and LSU should have played in the SEC Championship since they are the two best teams in the SEC but since Georgia won the east division and both Alabama and LSU are in the west is how that worked out.

2009 Alabama and Florida were both undefeated and from different sides so they played......

But I remember a couple of years ago the Big 12 had a big stink of who played in their conference championship...can't remember all the details on that one though but if I remember it had to do with OU and Texas....

[Ladybugsmom]

Originally Posted by Dr Jkel

Unfortunately the bowl system we have does not put match ups together based on what fans want to see and they do it based off of financial concerns...thus the reason Boise and K-State were not chosen for the Sugar Bowl and VT and Michigan were. It all boils down to money.

It does boil down to money - the teams that will draw the biggest crowds get picked. So, it's whoever has the fans that will travel. University of Washington fans, for example... Are the Huskies really good enough to play Baylor? No. (and I'm not saying that JUST because I'm a Cougar fan ) But Husky fans travel, and Baylor is only 3 hours from the Alamo bowl, so between the 2, the stadium will be full. Full stadium = $$$$
Would Boise fans travel to New Orleans? Somebody didn't think so....

[Dr Jkel]

The issue with Boise St is that it is a small school.....their stadium holds 33500 thus the reason NO major university will go there. Why would OSU, OU, Tx, Mich, Ohio St, Alabama or any SEC team go to Boise.

The same is in reverse...Boise St wants 75% of the gate if they go on the road...Really 75%...so if they did come to Alabama that holds 101,000 they want 75% of the gate but their stadium holds 33500....yeah ok.

Even when Alabama played Utah 80% of the stadium was filled with Alabama fans. Utah gave back tickets they could not sell.

Smaller schools WANT but can't deliver.......thus the reason they are smaller schools. Most major universities have a large student population in 2010 they had 19000 students vs Alabama has 32000.........

[CamaroSkooter]

Originally Posted by Dr Jkel

But I remember a couple of years ago the Big 12 had a big stink of who played in their conference championship...can't remember all the details on that one though but if I remember it had to do with OU and Texas....

I pretty much agree with everything you've said. The "who's loss was worse" argument is going to butt heads with the "Alabama already had their chance" argument every time

And to sum up what you said about the Big12's conundrum in 2008, Texas beat OU, who beat Texas Tech, who beat Texas. All three teams ended up with only one loss in a three-way tie.

Because Texas' win over OU was earlier in the season than their loss to Tech, the BCS put OU ranked higher. And, at the time, Big12's tie-breaker was who had a higher BCS ranking. There was no caveat of "if the two schools are within 5 spots of each other in the BCS rankings" like there is in most of the conferences now.

It was just a fluke year, and OU went on to win the Big12 championship against Missouri, but then fold like a lawn chair against Florida in the National Championship game

[PonyMan]

Originally Posted by Dr Jkel

Now for the Heisman finalist.

I say a former Texas High School player will win!!!

[Dr Jkel]

Originally Posted by CamaroSkooter

I pretty much agree with everything you've said. The "who's loss was worse" argument is going to butt heads with the "Alabama already had their chance" argument every time

And to sum up what you said about the Big12's conundrum in 2008, Texas beat OU, who beat Texas Tech, who beat Texas. All three teams ended up with only one loss in a three-way tie.

Because Texas' win over OU was earlier in the season than their loss to Tech, the BCS put OU ranked higher. And, at the time, Big12's tie-breaker was who had a higher BCS ranking. There was no caveat of "if the two schools are within 5 spots of each other in the BCS rankings" like there is in most of the conferences now.

It was just a fluke year, and OU went on to win the Big12 championship against Missouri, but then fold like a lawn chair against Florida in the National Championship game

You are right about everyone having an oponion for their teams but kinda like 2008 for ya'll this is kind of a fluke year. I really don't think the BCS founders envisioned these type of things happening and thus never made a plan if they did. Now they do not want to admit that the system is flawed.

Everyone says that they should be a conference champion.....OK Lets say if teh Big 12 and SEC were down and say the BIG EAST was up even this year it went by BCS ranking and WV made it being ranked what 23rd........They either need to make some provisions like the top 8 make a BCS bowl regardless but then the conference aligence would be shot.

Best case scenario is top 4 play , 1 vs 4 and 2 vs 3 then the winners play one week later. The BCS could still have their bowls for the schools how didn't make it. They could also rotate the site of the Championship game like they do for the Superbowl and the Championship site would be determined years in advance.

[CamaroSkooter]

I like the idea of a playoff. Leave it all on the field.

But then the pro-BCS people start acting like they're concerned for the players' health

[GTAHVIT]

Originally Posted by CamaroSkooter

I like the idea of a playoff. Leave it all on the field.

But then the pro-BCS people start acting like they're concerned for the players' health

this

[PonyMan]

Originally Posted by Dr Jkel

there is so much Alabama hate out there right now.

No hate coming from here! From day one this year, I have said that LSU is the team to beat. So far no team has proved my prediction wrong. So, if the Tide fails again.....the BCSNCG was a big waste. If the Tide's blind Squirrel manages to find a nut and wins in a close one.....LSU is still the BCSNC, or we have co-champs, another waste. I just think watching one of the nations top total offensive teams/OSU trying to score on the nations best defenses would have been way more exciting to watch! Good luck to all teams!!!!

[Dr Jkel]

you know the funny thing about college football is that there always seems to be something going on with it...kinda like this year and the BCS, 2004 when Auburn went undefeated, 2008 when Texas got hosed on numbers and I an realtively sure that this will not be the last time that contraversy arises over things like this.

You are correct about the player safety argument...some will complain. But someone always complains no matter what you do.

I looked at alot of the other bowl match ups and they really don't make alot of sense. OSU vs Stanford will be good but OSU is gonna kill them, just like Oregon did.

[CamaroSkooter]

Texas got Cal.

Anyone know if Cal is any good this year? They're in the PAC-64, right?