College Football - Week of 11/4

[CubColtPacer]

They need to stop talking about all these "1-loss teams". By season's end, there won't be many. ND plays USC, USC plays Cal, Florida may play Auburn in the SEC title game, etc., etc. There won't be a half dozen 1-loss teams vying for the NC

 

It's still possible even with all that though. The OSU-Michigan loser is 1. After that is possibly Texas, Tennessee, Florida-Auburn winner (possibly both if Arkansas beats LSU and goes to the SEC title game), probably at least 1 out of USC/Notre Dame/California, and possibly 2 if USC loses both of those games. That's 4-6 teams right there even after taking into account the teams that play each other. Of course, several of those teams still could get knocked off by other teams. It will be an interesting last few weeks.

[soccer10k]

ESPN.com poll: Should an unbeaten Big East team play in the BCS Championship Game?

 

Right now 58% say yes and 42% say no. The states in which a majority of the people said no are Texas, Louisiana, Arkansas, Alabama, Mississippi, Georgia, Tennessee, Indiana, Michigan and Ohio is split 50-50.

 

Hmm, I wonder why?

 

For the record, my vote is yes. And I do realize that includes Rutgers.

[Andy]

I think 99.9999 percent of people outside of Ohio would be rooting for Rutgers if they somehow got to the national title game. That would be outstanding.

[BleedCubbieBlue81]

Not sure of the exact numbers, so if anyone feels like looking them up, that'd be cool, but they said on ESPN earlier that from this game on, Louisville and West Virginia have the 4th and 5th toughest schedules in the country. Their BCS numbers will get better. Close enough to take out Ohio St. if they lose? That remains to be seen.

[Warpticon]

Not sure of the exact numbers, so if anyone feels like looking them up, that'd be cool, but they said on ESPN earlier that from this game on, Louisville and West Virginia have the 4th and 5th toughest schedules in the country. Their BCS numbers will get better. Close enough to take out Ohio St. if they lose? That remains to be seen.

 

I wonder where South Carolina ranks on that list. They still have Arkansas, Florida, and Clemson to go. They could end up being the best 6-6 team in the nation.

[soccer10k]

Not sure of the exact numbers, so if anyone feels like looking them up, that'd be cool, but they said on ESPN earlier that from this game on, Louisville and West Virginia have the 4th and 5th toughest schedules in the country. Their BCS numbers will get better. Close enough to take out Ohio St. if they lose? That remains to be seen.

 

I think that depends on how badly the OSU/UM loser actually loses. If Louisville ends up undefeated, I think they'll end up in the National Title game. Rutgers? I'm not so sure but this will be moot when Louisville beats Rutgers next week.

[snoodmonger]

I think UL could beat most teams in the country. They would be a very legit title game team, IMO. That offense is good.

[CuseCubFan69]

I see no reason why Louisville should be 3 when they just beat the number 3 team. Why is Michigan ahead of them? I'm sure the good old boys will have either Texas or Florida ahead of them too.

[CubColtPacer]

I see no reason why Louisville should be 3 when they just beat the number 3 team. Why is Michigan ahead of them? I'm sure the good old boys will have either Texas or Florida ahead of them too.

 

Well, Michigan did take out the number 2 team earlier in the season, and WV will be ranked about the same spot as the team that Michigan destroyed on the road. So why does Louisville get to jump ahead of them based on one game again?

 

The thing is, if Louisville gets ranked behind Texas or Florida, I support you completely if you're upset. Why does Louisville automatically go ahead of Michigan though?

 

Because they beat WV at home? Michigan beat ND on the road

Because they beat Miami at home? Michigan beat Wisconsin at home, Penn State on the road and Iowa at home.

 

Those are really the only impact games that either team has played. Michigan has more of them, and they have had more chances to be impressive because of that. Right now, IMO Michigan deserves to be ahead of Louisville. If you think Louisville should be ahead, fine. There certainly are good reasons to argue the other way though.

[CuseCubFan69]

I see no reason why Louisville should be 3 when they just beat the number 3 team. Why is Michigan ahead of them? I'm sure the good old boys will have either Texas or Florida ahead of them too.

 

Well, Michigan did take out the number 2 team earlier in the season, and WV will be ranked about the same spot as the team that Michigan destroyed on the road. So why does Louisville get to jump ahead of them based on one game again?

 

The thing is, if Louisville gets ranked behind Texas or Florida, I support you completely if you're upset. Why does Louisville automatically go ahead of Michigan though?

 

Because they beat WV at home? Michigan beat ND on the road

Because they beat Miami at home? Michigan beat Wisconsin at home, Penn State on the road and Iowa at home.

 

Those are really the only impact games that either team has played. Michigan has more of them, and they have had more chances to be impressive because of that. Right now, IMO Michigan deserves to be ahead of Louisville. If you think Louisville should be ahead, fine. There certainly are good reasons to argue the other way though.

 

I agree with what you wrote but it just makes no sense regarding the "leapfrog" of another team. If you think a team is better than you should rank them as that but just because one team is ahead of them being the reason why they can't move ahead, I just don't agree with that logic, I'm not saying you said this but talking about the polls in particular.

 

The undefeated teams should be at the top and what worries me is if Michigan and Ohio State go to overtime people will want that game to be the BCS Championship game too. If Rutgers runs the table I know they will not play in that game and I think they should if they beat Louisville and WV.

 

This brings me to another pet peeve. The teams with a Championship Game send in a possible 2-5 loss team to the BCS and the team with the best record goes. The Big East will only get 1 team no matter how good the second place team is even if WV wins the rest of their games and ends up 11-1 and Rutgers ends up 10-2.

[CubColtPacer]

I see no reason why Louisville should be 3 when they just beat the number 3 team. Why is Michigan ahead of them? I'm sure the good old boys will have either Texas or Florida ahead of them too.

 

Well, Michigan did take out the number 2 team earlier in the season, and WV will be ranked about the same spot as the team that Michigan destroyed on the road. So why does Louisville get to jump ahead of them based on one game again?

 

The thing is, if Louisville gets ranked behind Texas or Florida, I support you completely if you're upset. Why does Louisville automatically go ahead of Michigan though?

 

Because they beat WV at home? Michigan beat ND on the road

Because they beat Miami at home? Michigan beat Wisconsin at home, Penn State on the road and Iowa at home.

 

Those are really the only impact games that either team has played. Michigan has more of them, and they have had more chances to be impressive because of that. Right now, IMO Michigan deserves to be ahead of Louisville. If you think Louisville should be ahead, fine. There certainly are good reasons to argue the other way though.

 

I agree with what you wrote but it just makes no sense regarding the "leapfrog" of another team. If you think a team is better than you should rank them as that but just because one team is ahead of them being the reason why they can't move ahead, I just don't agree with that logic, I'm not saying you said this but talking about the polls in particular.

 

The undefeated teams should be at the top and what worries me is if Michigan and Ohio State go to overtime people will want that game to be the BCS Championship game too. If Rutgers runs the table I know they will not play in that game and I think they should if they beat Louisville and WV.

 

This brings me to another pet peeve. The teams with a Championship Game send in a possible 2-5 loss team to the BCS and the team with the best record goes. The Big East will only get 1 team no matter how good the second place team is even if WV wins the rest of their games and ends up 11-1 and Rutgers ends up 10-2.

 

I think WV would have a shot to get into a BCS bowl at 11-1. It would really depend on how all the other conferences shook out. There are 4 at-large spots in the BCS. One of those will likely be taken by Notre Dame, and another one will be taken by Boise State. That leaves 2 at-large spots-but remember, for most of these 1 loss teams, that means they will win their automatic conference bid. If Texas stays at 1 loss, that means they would be already be automatically going. The same goes for a team like Florida. The winner of the USC/California game gets the automatic spot, and the loser will have 2 losses. The competition for the 2 at-large spots would be WV, either Auburn or Tennessee (no more than 2 conference schools can make it into the BCS in a year, so both of these teams cannot go along with Florida), and the OSU/Michigan loser.

 

Your best hope then is for either 1)Boise State to lose, which means they won't make the BCS-2)Notre Dame to lose twice, 3)Auburn and Tennessee losing again before the end of the year (which is certainly possible, especially if Auburn makes the SEC title game) or 4) somehow OSU or Michigan losing twice.

 

Any one of those 4 scenarios will send WVU to a BCS bowl game.

[Derwood]

I think Boise St. could run the table and not get a BCS bid (unless they finish in the automatic top 8 ). Other mid-major type conferences have been shut out of the BCS picture simply because advertisers want no part of Boise St. in their game

[CubColtPacer]

I think Boise St. could run the table and not get a BCS bid (unless they finish in the automatic top 8 ). Other mid-major type conferences have been shut out of the BCS picture simply because advertisers want no part of Boise St. in their game

 

The rules have changed this year though. To qualify automatically, Boise State (or any other minor conference team) has to finish in the top 12 of the BCS standings, or if they are in the top 16, but finish ahead of one of the major conference automatic bids they get an automatic bid as well.

 

Boise State is 14th in the BCS right now, and higher than any ACC team (Boston College is right behind them). If Boise State wins out, it is almost certain that they will match one of those two criteria to get an automatic bid to a BCS bowl game.

[CuseCubFan69]

I see no reason why Louisville should be 3 when they just beat the number 3 team. Why is Michigan ahead of them? I'm sure the good old boys will have either Texas or Florida ahead of them too.

 

Well, Michigan did take out the number 2 team earlier in the season, and WV will be ranked about the same spot as the team that Michigan destroyed on the road. So why does Louisville get to jump ahead of them based on one game again?

 

The thing is, if Louisville gets ranked behind Texas or Florida, I support you completely if you're upset. Why does Louisville automatically go ahead of Michigan though?

 

Because they beat WV at home? Michigan beat ND on the road

Because they beat Miami at home? Michigan beat Wisconsin at home, Penn State on the road and Iowa at home.

 

Those are really the only impact games that either team has played. Michigan has more of them, and they have had more chances to be impressive because of that. Right now, IMO Michigan deserves to be ahead of Louisville. If you think Louisville should be ahead, fine. There certainly are good reasons to argue the other way though.

 

I agree with what you wrote but it just makes no sense regarding the "leapfrog" of another team. If you think a team is better than you should rank them as that but just because one team is ahead of them being the reason why they can't move ahead, I just don't agree with that logic, I'm not saying you said this but talking about the polls in particular.

 

The undefeated teams should be at the top and what worries me is if Michigan and Ohio State go to overtime people will want that game to be the BCS Championship game too. If Rutgers runs the table I know they will not play in that game and I think they should if they beat Louisville and WV.

 

This brings me to another pet peeve. The teams with a Championship Game send in a possible 2-5 loss team to the BCS and the team with the best record goes. The Big East will only get 1 team no matter how good the second place team is even if WV wins the rest of their games and ends up 11-1 and Rutgers ends up 10-2.

 

I think WV would have a shot to get into a BCS bowl at 11-1. It would really depend on how all the other conferences shook out. There are 4 at-large spots in the BCS. One of those will likely be taken by Notre Dame, and another one will be taken by Boise State. That leaves 2 at-large spots-but remember, for most of these 1 loss teams, that means they will win their automatic conference bid. If Texas stays at 1 loss, that means they would be already be automatically going. The same goes for a team like Florida. The winner of the USC/California game gets the automatic spot, and the loser will have 2 losses. The competition for the 2 at-large spots would be WV, either Auburn or Tennessee (no more than 2 conference schools can make it into the BCS in a year, so both of these teams cannot go along with Florida), and the OSU/Michigan loser.

 

Your best hope then is for either 1)Boise State to lose, which means they won't make the BCS-2)Notre Dame to lose twice, 3)Auburn and Tennessee losing again before the end of the year (which is certainly possible, especially if Auburn makes the SEC title game) or 4) somehow OSU or Michigan losing twice.

 

Any one of those 4 scenarios will send WVU to a BCS bowl game.

 

Let me ask you this. What happens if Rutgers beats Louisville, WV beats Rutgers. What makes Florida or the winner of the SEC, winner of the Big 12, or the winner of the Pac 10, or Notre Dame if they run the table automatically better than a 1 loss BE team? The Big East team HAS to go undefeated to go while other conferences can have a loss.

[Derwood]

I see no reason why Louisville should be 3 when they just beat the number 3 team. Why is Michigan ahead of them? I'm sure the good old boys will have either Texas or Florida ahead of them too.

 

Well, Michigan did take out the number 2 team earlier in the season, and WV will be ranked about the same spot as the team that Michigan destroyed on the road. So why does Louisville get to jump ahead of them based on one game again?

 

The thing is, if Louisville gets ranked behind Texas or Florida, I support you completely if you're upset. Why does Louisville automatically go ahead of Michigan though?

 

Because they beat WV at home? Michigan beat ND on the road

Because they beat Miami at home? Michigan beat Wisconsin at home, Penn State on the road and Iowa at home.

 

Those are really the only impact games that either team has played. Michigan has more of them, and they have had more chances to be impressive because of that. Right now, IMO Michigan deserves to be ahead of Louisville. If you think Louisville should be ahead, fine. There certainly are good reasons to argue the other way though.

 

I agree with what you wrote but it just makes no sense regarding the "leapfrog" of another team. If you think a team is better than you should rank them as that but just because one team is ahead of them being the reason why they can't move ahead, I just don't agree with that logic, I'm not saying you said this but talking about the polls in particular.

 

The undefeated teams should be at the top and what worries me is if Michigan and Ohio State go to overtime people will want that game to be the BCS Championship game too. If Rutgers runs the table I know they will not play in that game and I think they should if they beat Louisville and WV.

 

This brings me to another pet peeve. The teams with a Championship Game send in a possible 2-5 loss team to the BCS and the team with the best record goes. The Big East will only get 1 team no matter how good the second place team is even if WV wins the rest of their games and ends up 11-1 and Rutgers ends up 10-2.

 

I think WV would have a shot to get into a BCS bowl at 11-1. It would really depend on how all the other conferences shook out. There are 4 at-large spots in the BCS. One of those will likely be taken by Notre Dame, and another one will be taken by Boise State. That leaves 2 at-large spots-but remember, for most of these 1 loss teams, that means they will win their automatic conference bid. If Texas stays at 1 loss, that means they would be already be automatically going. The same goes for a team like Florida. The winner of the USC/California game gets the automatic spot, and the loser will have 2 losses. The competition for the 2 at-large spots would be WV, either Auburn or Tennessee (no more than 2 conference schools can make it into the BCS in a year, so both of these teams cannot go along with Florida), and the OSU/Michigan loser.

 

Your best hope then is for either 1)Boise State to lose, which means they won't make the BCS-2)Notre Dame to lose twice, 3)Auburn and Tennessee losing again before the end of the year (which is certainly possible, especially if Auburn makes the SEC title game) or 4) somehow OSU or Michigan losing twice.

 

Any one of those 4 scenarios will send WVU to a BCS bowl game.

 

Let me ask you this. What happens if Rutgers beats Louisville, WV beats Rutgers. What makes Florida or the winner of the SEC, winner of the Big 12, or the winner of the Pac 10, or Notre Dame if they run the table automatically better than a 1 loss BE team? The Big East team HAS to go undefeated to go while other conferences can have a loss.

 

Because of the preconceived notion that the Big East is weak and the SEC is strong, no matter what the teams in the Big East are proving otherwise.

[CubColtPacer]

I see no reason why Louisville should be 3 when they just beat the number 3 team. Why is Michigan ahead of them? I'm sure the good old boys will have either Texas or Florida ahead of them too.

 

Well, Michigan did take out the number 2 team earlier in the season, and WV will be ranked about the same spot as the team that Michigan destroyed on the road. So why does Louisville get to jump ahead of them based on one game again?

 

The thing is, if Louisville gets ranked behind Texas or Florida, I support you completely if you're upset. Why does Louisville automatically go ahead of Michigan though?

 

Because they beat WV at home? Michigan beat ND on the road

Because they beat Miami at home? Michigan beat Wisconsin at home, Penn State on the road and Iowa at home.

 

Those are really the only impact games that either team has played. Michigan has more of them, and they have had more chances to be impressive because of that. Right now, IMO Michigan deserves to be ahead of Louisville. If you think Louisville should be ahead, fine. There certainly are good reasons to argue the other way though.

 

I agree with what you wrote but it just makes no sense regarding the "leapfrog" of another team. If you think a team is better than you should rank them as that but just because one team is ahead of them being the reason why they can't move ahead, I just don't agree with that logic, I'm not saying you said this but talking about the polls in particular.

 

The undefeated teams should be at the top and what worries me is if Michigan and Ohio State go to overtime people will want that game to be the BCS Championship game too. If Rutgers runs the table I know they will not play in that game and I think they should if they beat Louisville and WV.

 

This brings me to another pet peeve. The teams with a Championship Game send in a possible 2-5 loss team to the BCS and the team with the best record goes. The Big East will only get 1 team no matter how good the second place team is even if WV wins the rest of their games and ends up 11-1 and Rutgers ends up 10-2.

 

I think WV would have a shot to get into a BCS bowl at 11-1. It would really depend on how all the other conferences shook out. There are 4 at-large spots in the BCS. One of those will likely be taken by Notre Dame, and another one will be taken by Boise State. That leaves 2 at-large spots-but remember, for most of these 1 loss teams, that means they will win their automatic conference bid. If Texas stays at 1 loss, that means they would be already be automatically going. The same goes for a team like Florida. The winner of the USC/California game gets the automatic spot, and the loser will have 2 losses. The competition for the 2 at-large spots would be WV, either Auburn or Tennessee (no more than 2 conference schools can make it into the BCS in a year, so both of these teams cannot go along with Florida), and the OSU/Michigan loser.

 

Your best hope then is for either 1)Boise State to lose, which means they won't make the BCS-2)Notre Dame to lose twice, 3)Auburn and Tennessee losing again before the end of the year (which is certainly possible, especially if Auburn makes the SEC title game) or 4) somehow OSU or Michigan losing twice.

 

Any one of those 4 scenarios will send WVU to a BCS bowl game.

 

Let me ask you this. What happens if Rutgers beats Louisville, WV beats Rutgers. What makes Florida or the winner of the SEC, winner of the Big 12, or the winner of the Pac 10, or Notre Dame if they run the table automatically better than a 1 loss BE team? The Big East team HAS to go undefeated to go while other conferences can have a loss.

 

Well, first I want to clarify that what I said in the last post is what would happen, not necessarily what should happen. I was trying to project WV's chances through the lens of the national picture. I will answer your question here though.

 

It's simply the number of quality wins that they have. Florida would have more than any Big East team with Tennessee, LSU, and the SEC title game loser. The best the Big East would have to counter that is Louisville, with wins over WV and Miami.

The Big 12? You could certainly make a case for that Texas has had no more quality wins or played an extremely tough schedule either, and I would have no argument with it. I would put Texas's accomplishments on the same level as the 3 Big East teams at that point.

The winner of the Pac 10? If it's USC and they have 1 loss, that means they will have beaten Arkansas, Nebraska, California, Oregon, and Notre Dame. If it's Cal, I think the BE has much more of a case-because Cal would only have victories over USC and Oregon, which is about the same level as a team like Louisville with wins over again WV and Miami.

Notre Dame would have wins over Georgia Tech, Penn State, and USC. That would put them a little better than anything the BE has to offer, although not by all that much.

[TruffleShuffle]

Let me ask you this. What happens if Rutgers beats Louisville, WV beats Rutgers. What makes Florida or the winner of the SEC, winner of the Big 12, or the winner of the Pac 10, or Notre Dame if they run the table automatically better than a 1 loss BE team? The Big East team HAS to go undefeated to go while other conferences can have a loss.

 

That's because the Big East sucks as a football conference.

[CuseCubFan69]

Let me ask you this. What happens if Rutgers beats Louisville, WV beats Rutgers. What makes Florida or the winner of the SEC, winner of the Big 12, or the winner of the Pac 10, or Notre Dame if they run the table automatically better than a 1 loss BE team? The Big East team HAS to go undefeated to go while other conferences can have a loss.

 

Because of the preconceived notion that the Big East is weak and the SEC is strong, no matter what the teams in the Big East are proving otherwise.

 

It's like the stupid preseason polls during the season. I'm not saying the Big East is the best but it's just as good as any major conference. I was listening to Mike and Mike and they were saying since Miami and the others left everyone assumes the conference is weak and they just brush it off. It's like we have to wait for 4 to 5 years for them to prove they belong while IMO they already have. This conference has 2 losing teams out of 8 or 75% of the teams in it. No other conference can say that.

[CuseCubFan69]

Let me ask you this. What happens if Rutgers beats Louisville, WV beats Rutgers. What makes Florida or the winner of the SEC, winner of the Big 12, or the winner of the Pac 10, or Notre Dame if they run the table automatically better than a 1 loss BE team? The Big East team HAS to go undefeated to go while other conferences can have a loss.

 

That's because the Big East sucks as a football conference.

 

If Penn State were in it they'd be the strongest team in it. Why, because they'd be on the bottom holding all the other teams up in the standings!

[TruffleShuffle]

Let me ask you this. What happens if Rutgers beats Louisville, WV beats Rutgers. What makes Florida or the winner of the SEC, winner of the Big 12, or the winner of the Pac 10, or Notre Dame if they run the table automatically better than a 1 loss BE team? The Big East team HAS to go undefeated to go while other conferences can have a loss.

 

Because of the preconceived notion that the Big East is weak and the SEC is strong, no matter what the teams in the Big East are proving otherwise.

 

It's like the stupid preseason polls during the season. I'm not saying the Big East is the best but it's just as good as any major conference. I was listening to Mike and Mike and they were saying since Miami and the others left everyone assumes the conference is weak and they just brush it off. It's like we have to wait for 4 to 5 years for them to prove they belong while IMO they already have. This conference has 2 losing teams out of 8 or 75% of the teams in it. No other conference can say that.

 

I think almost everyone else on this board would disagree with this.

[TruffleShuffle]

Let me ask you this. What happens if Rutgers beats Louisville, WV beats Rutgers. What makes Florida or the winner of the SEC, winner of the Big 12, or the winner of the Pac 10, or Notre Dame if they run the table automatically better than a 1 loss BE team? The Big East team HAS to go undefeated to go while other conferences can have a loss.

 

That's because the Big East sucks as a football conference.

 

If Penn State were in it they'd be the strongest team in it. Why, because they'd be on the bottom holding all the other teams up in the standings!

 

Yeah I bet. It'd be really tough to run the gauntlet like Rutgers, Pitt and West Virginia have done this year.

[CuseCubFan69]

Let me ask you this. What happens if Rutgers beats Louisville, WV beats Rutgers. What makes Florida or the winner of the SEC, winner of the Big 12, or the winner of the Pac 10, or Notre Dame if they run the table automatically better than a 1 loss BE team? The Big East team HAS to go undefeated to go while other conferences can have a loss.

 

Because of the preconceived notion that the Big East is weak and the SEC is strong, no matter what the teams in the Big East are proving otherwise.

 

It's like the stupid preseason polls during the season. I'm not saying the Big East is the best but it's just as good as any major conference. I was listening to Mike and Mike and they were saying since Miami and the others left everyone assumes the conference is weak and they just brush it off. It's like we have to wait for 4 to 5 years for them to prove they belong while IMO they already have. This conference has 2 losing teams out of 8 or 75% of the teams in it. No other conference can say that.

 

I think almost everyone else on this board would disagree with this.

 

And that's why the good ole boys stay on the top. It's funny how so many here use all kinds of numbers when they talk about baseball but when it comes to college football they go right back with traditional powers. Kind of Hendryesk.

[CuseCubFan69]

Let me ask you this. What happens if Rutgers beats Louisville, WV beats Rutgers. What makes Florida or the winner of the SEC, winner of the Big 12, or the winner of the Pac 10, or Notre Dame if they run the table automatically better than a 1 loss BE team? The Big East team HAS to go undefeated to go while other conferences can have a loss.

 

That's because the Big East sucks as a football conference.

 

If Penn State were in it they'd be the strongest team in it. Why, because they'd be on the bottom holding all the other teams up in the standings!

 

Yeah I bet. It'd be really tough to run the gauntlet like Rutgers, Pitt and West Virginia have done this year.

 

Let me know when your team crosses the 50 yard line so we can celebrate.

[CubColtPacer]

Let me ask you this. What happens if Rutgers beats Louisville, WV beats Rutgers. What makes Florida or the winner of the SEC, winner of the Big 12, or the winner of the Pac 10, or Notre Dame if they run the table automatically better than a 1 loss BE team? The Big East team HAS to go undefeated to go while other conferences can have a loss.

 

Because of the preconceived notion that the Big East is weak and the SEC is strong, no matter what the teams in the Big East are proving otherwise.

 

It's like the stupid preseason polls during the season. I'm not saying the Big East is the best but it's just as good as any major conference. I was listening to Mike and Mike and they were saying since Miami and the others left everyone assumes the conference is weak and they just brush it off. It's like we have to wait for 4 to 5 years for them to prove they belong while IMO they already have. This conference has 2 losing teams out of 8 or 75% of the teams in it. No other conference can say that.

 

That's partially because the BE plays less conference games though. For example, the SEC has 8 of the 12 teams with a winning record. Most teams in the SEC have played 5-6 conference games already, while the BE has played 3-4. Two of the SEC teams, Kentucky and Vanderbilt, if they had only played 3-4 conference games so far, they would also be over .500, which would put the SEC at 10 of 12 teams over .500. As teams play their conference season, it becomes harder and harder for a large percentage of the conference to stay above .500-because if teams at the top are staying close to undefeated, then teams have to be losing to them and hurting their records.

 

The BE certainly is not weak. It's just very much an unknown quanity right now, and the bowl games will be a good indicator where the BE is this year.

[TruffleShuffle]

Let me ask you this. What happens if Rutgers beats Louisville, WV beats Rutgers. What makes Florida or the winner of the SEC, winner of the Big 12, or the winner of the Pac 10, or Notre Dame if they run the table automatically better than a 1 loss BE team? The Big East team HAS to go undefeated to go while other conferences can have a loss.

 

That's because the Big East sucks as a football conference.

 

If Penn State were in it they'd be the strongest team in it. Why, because they'd be on the bottom holding all the other teams up in the standings!

 

Yeah I bet. It'd be really tough to run the gauntlet like Rutgers, Pitt and West Virginia have done this year.

 

Let me know when your team crosses the 50 yard line so we can celebrate.

 

3 losses - @Notre Dame, @Ohio State, home versus Michigan. How many Big East teams don't have three losses if they play all three of those games?