College Football - Championship Week

[jjgman21]

 

What you just don't realize is that the Big East is talented. You just can't discount them out of hand like that. I would agree 2 years ago because the league was in a mess but these teams are all young that are winning and just going to get better and they got better earlier than expected. If the ACC had the same records as the Big East you would have accepted them as being good, as good as the SEC or Big 10. But yet, the Big East has crushed that conference this year but yet is still considered not on par as the Big 10 and SEC? I see a double standard here.

 

but they aren't good enough right now. sorry, I'm not going to give Louisville props because South Florida might be good in a couple of years.

 

and for pete's sake, how many times does it have to be explained to you that it is not just about the records, it is about who you play. no matter how rosey a picture you try to paint of the conference, the bottom five of the Big East all suck big time, right here, right now, and their non-conference schedule sucks. that's not to say the bottom five of other conferences don't suck, but I'd still take the bottom five of the Big Ten over the bottom five of the 8 team Big East any day of the week.

 

congrats that the Big East beat a few dregs of the ACC and other power conferences. they are still dregs. if the ACC had teams with the BigEast records, it would be teams like Miami, VTech, BC, FSU. teams that have been, you know, good, in the recent past. teams that have quality bowl wins the over the past few years. teams that have great talent, coaching, and facilities.

[CuseCubFan69]

I really don't know how it will shake out either. I just know you've got UM and UF, and both would appear to have similarly legitimate arguments for the title game, so one is going to be bitterly disappointed.

 

And that's the BCS. They keep saying "it gets the best 2 teams at the end" but there's always another ballclub or 2 who could easily be considered one of the best 2.

 

It really just doesn't work. At all.

 

No it doesn't. But on the other hand I don't like 3 or more loss teams getting a shot at the title either.

 

unless it's a Big East team.

 

I wouldn't want a 3 or more loss Big East team to get a shot either. The problem with the loss thing is that you would have teams playing a Wisconsin or Auburn like out of conference schedule and that is why I want these teams to play at least 2 BCS conference teams minimum.

 

what good does that do? you can always line up Kentucky and KState. that proves nothing more than beating SDSU and Bowling Green.

 

Kentucky and Kansas St are good, there's a difference.

 

Good's a relative term. They're both in the bottom half of their conference, 6th or 7th. And they were both bottom feeders when they were scheduled.

 

Kansas St and Miami were bottom feeders when the schedules were made? I don't think so. Kentucky has had their struggles.

[jjgman21]

I really don't know how it will shake out either. I just know you've got UM and UF, and both would appear to have similarly legitimate arguments for the title game, so one is going to be bitterly disappointed.

 

And that's the BCS. They keep saying "it gets the best 2 teams at the end" but there's always another ballclub or 2 who could easily be considered one of the best 2.

 

It really just doesn't work. At all.

 

No it doesn't. But on the other hand I don't like 3 or more loss teams getting a shot at the title either.

 

unless it's a Big East team.

 

I wouldn't want a 3 or more loss Big East team to get a shot either. The problem with the loss thing is that you would have teams playing a Wisconsin or Auburn like out of conference schedule and that is why I want these teams to play at least 2 BCS conference teams minimum.

 

what good does that do? you can always line up Kentucky and KState. that proves nothing more than beating SDSU and Bowling Green.

 

Kentucky and Kansas St are good, there's a difference.

 

Good's a relative term. They're both in the bottom half of their conference, 6th or 7th. And they were both bottom feeders when they were scheduled.

 

no, don't you see. bottom half of the power conference teams suck when used to evaluate the power conferences, but are good when evaluating the Big East.

 

the conference as a whole is great because they beat Kentucky and Kansas State, but Wisconsin beating Purdue and Penn State means nothing.

[Careless]

how do the refs manage to let the play go on that long

[NewUserName]

 

What you just don't realize is that the Big East is talented. You just can't discount them out of hand like that. I would agree 2 years ago because the league was in a mess but these teams are all young that are winning and just going to get better and they got better earlier than expected. If the ACC had the same records as the Big East you would have accepted them as being good, as good as the SEC or Big 10. But yet, the Big East has crushed that conference this year but yet is still considered not on par as the Big 10 and SEC? I see a double standard here.

 

but they aren't good enough right now. sorry, I'm not going to give Louisville props because South Florida might be good in a couple of years.

 

and for pete's sake, how many times does it have to be explained to you that it is not just about the records, it is about who you play. no matter how rosey a picture you try to paint of the conference, the bottom five of the Big East all suck big time, right here, right now, and their non-conference schedule sucks. that's not to say the bottom five of other conferences don't suck, but I'd still take the bottom five of the Big Ten over the bottom five of the 8 team Big East any day of the week.

 

congrats that the Big East beat a few dregs of the ACC and other power conferences. they are still dregs. if the ACC had teams with the BigEast records, it would be teams like Miami, VTech, BC, FSU. teams that have been, you know, good, in the recent past. teams that have quality bowl wins the over the past few years. teams that have great talent, coaching, and facilities.

 

I really think that Cuse does overrate the Big East. I think you underrate them though. Louisville is a Top 5 team. If you were to put their schedule up against Michigans and Floridas it would hold up. Maybe not as tough but certainly was credible.

[Careless]

oklahoma is now negative in rushing yards

[jjgman21]

 

Good's a relative term. They're both in the bottom half of their conference, 6th or 7th. And they were both bottom feeders when they were scheduled.

 

Kansas St and Miami were bottom feeders when the schedules were made? I don't think so. Kentucky has had their struggles.

 

these are the exact tactics you have to use. what the hell does Miami have to do with this? the discussion was about what good does it do to schedule BCS conference teams for your nonconference games if you are going to schedule the dregs of the conferences. props for scheduling Miami, but the disucssion was about KState and Kentucky.

 

you don't have a dog in this fight, so through a lion into the ring.

[BigSlick]

For as great as the SEC is what is there best non-conference victory this season? Cal I really think part of the SEC's mystique is just that "mystique" They rarely play good non-conference road games. Most of the bowls they play are quasi-home games. I would love to see Florida play Michigan in Chicago on New Years day or LSU vs Penn St in Cleveland.

 

Truth is Florida is going to pass Michigan. I am not saying its right but it is obvious that a majority of College Football pollsters do not want Michigan in the Title game. Sadly OSU is going to thump them by 3 TDs. Louisville would give OSU a better game.

 

Louisville would give them a better game? Louisville has a pathetic defense. It'd probably be a similar game, at least in point differential, the over/under would be about 30 points higher.

 

As a Buckeye fan, I really really really really don't want to see a rematch, because its always hard to beat the same team twice in a year. That, and, its kinda lame that we have to beat them twice in order to win the National Championship. While Michigan would only have to beat OSU once. Why should one game count more than the other one?

 

As a football fan, I recognize that Michigan is almost certainly the second best team in the nation, and probably deserves a shot in the NC game.

 

The simple and most obvious solution would be a playoff structure. The real loss in terms of adding a playoff structure is a loss of that "special" feeling from the regular season. And its not made up, the regular season in College football is incredibly more important than in any other sport. Unfortunately, year in and year out, the postseason continues to cause controversy.

 

If you are going to award a national championship, you must institute a playoff structure. If you just want to have conference champions and bowl games, thats fine. But you can't legitimately declare a team better than another when they don't get a chance to play it out. BCS be damned.

[CuseCubFan69]

I really don't know how it will shake out either. I just know you've got UM and UF, and both would appear to have similarly legitimate arguments for the title game, so one is going to be bitterly disappointed.

 

And that's the BCS. They keep saying "it gets the best 2 teams at the end" but there's always another ballclub or 2 who could easily be considered one of the best 2.

 

It really just doesn't work. At all.

 

No it doesn't. But on the other hand I don't like 3 or more loss teams getting a shot at the title either.

 

unless it's a Big East team.

 

I wouldn't want a 3 or more loss Big East team to get a shot either. The problem with the loss thing is that you would have teams playing a Wisconsin or Auburn like out of conference schedule and that is why I want these teams to play at least 2 BCS conference teams minimum.

 

what good does that do? you can always line up Kentucky and KState. that proves nothing more than beating SDSU and Bowling Green.

 

Kentucky and Kansas St are good, there's a difference.

 

Good's a relative term. They're both in the bottom half of their conference, 6th or 7th. And they were both bottom feeders when they were scheduled.

 

no, don't you see. bottom half of the power conference teams suck when used to evaluate the power conferences, but are good when evaluating the Big East.

 

the conference as a whole is great because they beat Kentucky and Kansas State, but Wisconsin beating Purdue and Penn State means nothing.

 

And Purdues big out of conference wins are Ball St...hmm...sounds familar, Indiana St, and Miami (O). Penn States are Akron, Young St and Temple while getting blown out by ND. Yep...very tough teams to measure yourself.

[FloridaCubbie]

Very Drunk. Very Happy. Can't wait to see the BCS tomorrow where Florida will be again ranked #4. LSU will pass thwem this week for #3. YAY BCS.

 

 

P.S. woooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!

[jjgman21]

 

What you just don't realize is that the Big East is talented. You just can't discount them out of hand like that. I would agree 2 years ago because the league was in a mess but these teams are all young that are winning and just going to get better and they got better earlier than expected. If the ACC had the same records as the Big East you would have accepted them as being good, as good as the SEC or Big 10. But yet, the Big East has crushed that conference this year but yet is still considered not on par as the Big 10 and SEC? I see a double standard here.

 

but they aren't good enough right now. sorry, I'm not going to give Louisville props because South Florida might be good in a couple of years.

 

and for pete's sake, how many times does it have to be explained to you that it is not just about the records, it is about who you play. no matter how rosey a picture you try to paint of the conference, the bottom five of the Big East all suck big time, right here, right now, and their non-conference schedule sucks. that's not to say the bottom five of other conferences don't suck, but I'd still take the bottom five of the Big Ten over the bottom five of the 8 team Big East any day of the week.

 

congrats that the Big East beat a few dregs of the ACC and other power conferences. they are still dregs. if the ACC had teams with the BigEast records, it would be teams like Miami, VTech, BC, FSU. teams that have been, you know, good, in the recent past. teams that have quality bowl wins the over the past few years. teams that have great talent, coaching, and facilities.

 

I really think that Cuse does overrate the Big East. I think you underrate them though. Louisville is a Top 5 team. If you were to put their schedule up against Michigans and Floridas it would hold up. Maybe not as tough but certainly was credible.

 

Louisville is a good team. not worthy of a shot at the National Championship, but I will not deny that they are a good team. I don't think top 5, but not much behind there. but Louisville and Louisville alone is not what this is all about.

 

I think I rate the Big East right where they belong and bowl season, depending on matchups of course, will prove me right.

[Soul]

 

What you just don't realize is that the Big East is talented. You just can't discount them out of hand like that. I would agree 2 years ago because the league was in a mess but these teams are all young that are winning and just going to get better and they got better earlier than expected. If the ACC had the same records as the Big East you would have accepted them as being good, as good as the SEC or Big 10. But yet, the Big East has crushed that conference this year but yet is still considered not on par as the Big 10 and SEC? I see a double standard here.

 

but they aren't good enough right now. sorry, I'm not going to give Louisville props because South Florida might be good in a couple of years.

 

and for pete's sake, how many times does it have to be explained to you that it is not just about the records, it is about who you play. no matter how rosey a picture you try to paint of the conference, the bottom five of the Big East all suck big time, right here, right now, and their non-conference schedule sucks. that's not to say the bottom five of other conferences don't suck, but I'd still take the bottom five of the Big Ten over the bottom five of the 8 team Big East any day of the week.

 

congrats that the Big East beat a few dregs of the ACC and other power conferences. they are still dregs. if the ACC had teams with the BigEast records, it would be teams like Miami, VTech, BC, FSU. teams that have been, you know, good, in the recent past. teams that have quality bowl wins the over the past few years. teams that have great talent, coaching, and facilities.

 

I really think that Cuse does overrate the Big East. I think you underrate them though. Louisville is a Top 5 team. If you were to put their schedule up against Michigans and Floridas it would hold up. Maybe not as tough but certainly was credible.

 

Yeah, and I want to make it clear that I don't think Louisville, WVU, and Rutgers are bad teams. I just don't think they're on that top level yet, and I'll need to see them beat the best before I put them there. I'm not going to consider them great before they beat the established powers. Call me a good old boy all you want, but unless there's a playoff system I don't see any other way. Can't just hand someone automatic top billing.....they have to earn it somehow.

 

I definitely agree with jig that the mid and bottom of the Big East is just really, really marginal. I strongly suspect those teams would struggle to be at the top of much lesser conferences. And I also strongly suspect a Louisville vs. OSU matchup would be a highway slaughter not worth watching on New Year's day.

[CuseCubFan69]

For as great as the SEC is what is there best non-conference victory this season? Cal I really think part of the SEC's mystique is just that "mystique" They rarely play good non-conference road games. Most of the bowls they play are quasi-home games. I would love to see Florida play Michigan in Chicago on New Years day or LSU vs Penn St in Cleveland.

 

Truth is Florida is going to pass Michigan. I am not saying its right but it is obvious that a majority of College Football pollsters do not want Michigan in the Title game. Sadly OSU is going to thump them by 3 TDs. Louisville would give OSU a better game.

 

Louisville would give them a better game? Louisville has a pathetic defense. It'd probably be a similar game, at least in point differential, the over/under would be about 30 points higher.

 

As a Buckeye fan, I really really really really don't want to see a rematch, because its always hard to beat the same team twice in a year. That, and, its kinda lame that we have to beat them twice in order to win the National Championship. While Michigan would only have to beat OSU once. Why should one game count more than the other one?

 

As a football fan, I recognize that Michigan is almost certainly the second best team in the nation, and probably deserves a shot in the NC game.

 

The simple and most obvious solution would be a playoff structure. The real loss in terms of adding a playoff structure is a loss of that "special" feeling from the regular season. And its not made up, the regular season in College football is incredibly more important than in any other sport. Unfortunately, year in and year out, the postseason continues to cause controversy.

 

If you are going to award a national championship, you must institute a playoff structure. If you just want to have conference champions and bowl games, thats fine. But you can't legitimately declare a team better than another when they don't get a chance to play it out. BCS be damned.

 

The BCS is not helping determine who the best 2 teams are. Louisvilles defense is decent and not as bad as you say it is. Also, when Ohio State opened up their offense they put up a lot of points on Michigan. Many, even the experts, think Louisville has a better offense than Ohio State. Michigan is good but I'm not so sure they are the second best team.

[CuseCubFan69]

 

What you just don't realize is that the Big East is talented. You just can't discount them out of hand like that. I would agree 2 years ago because the league was in a mess but these teams are all young that are winning and just going to get better and they got better earlier than expected. If the ACC had the same records as the Big East you would have accepted them as being good, as good as the SEC or Big 10. But yet, the Big East has crushed that conference this year but yet is still considered not on par as the Big 10 and SEC? I see a double standard here.

 

but they aren't good enough right now. sorry, I'm not going to give Louisville props because South Florida might be good in a couple of years.

 

and for pete's sake, how many times does it have to be explained to you that it is not just about the records, it is about who you play. no matter how rosey a picture you try to paint of the conference, the bottom five of the Big East all suck big time, right here, right now, and their non-conference schedule sucks. that's not to say the bottom five of other conferences don't suck, but I'd still take the bottom five of the Big Ten over the bottom five of the 8 team Big East any day of the week.

 

congrats that the Big East beat a few dregs of the ACC and other power conferences. they are still dregs. if the ACC had teams with the BigEast records, it would be teams like Miami, VTech, BC, FSU. teams that have been, you know, good, in the recent past. teams that have quality bowl wins the over the past few years. teams that have great talent, coaching, and facilities.

 

I really think that Cuse does overrate the Big East. I think you underrate them though. Louisville is a Top 5 team. If you were to put their schedule up against Michigans and Floridas it would hold up. Maybe not as tough but certainly was credible.

 

Yeah, and I want to make it clear that I don't think Louisville, WVU, and Rutgers are bad teams. I just don't think they're on that top level yet, and I'll need to see them beat the best before I put them there. I'm not going to consider them great before they beat the established powers. Call me a good old boy all you want, but unless there's a playoff system I don't see any other way. Can't just hand someone automatic top billing.....they have to earn it somehow.

 

I definitely agree with jig that the mid and bottom of the Big East is just really, really marginal. I strongly suspect those teams would struggle to be at the top of much lesser conferences. And I also strongly suspect a Louisville vs. OSU matchup would be a highway slaughter not worth watching on New Year's day.

 

The mid to marginal Big East teams beat the mid to marginal Big Ten teams but yet that proves the Big 10 is better, why?

[jjgman21]

I really don't know how it will shake out either. I just know you've got UM and UF, and both would appear to have similarly legitimate arguments for the title game, so one is going to be bitterly disappointed.

 

And that's the BCS. They keep saying "it gets the best 2 teams at the end" but there's always another ballclub or 2 who could easily be considered one of the best 2.

 

It really just doesn't work. At all.

 

No it doesn't. But on the other hand I don't like 3 or more loss teams getting a shot at the title either.

 

unless it's a Big East team.

 

I wouldn't want a 3 or more loss Big East team to get a shot either. The problem with the loss thing is that you would have teams playing a Wisconsin or Auburn like out of conference schedule and that is why I want these teams to play at least 2 BCS conference teams minimum.

 

what good does that do? you can always line up Kentucky and KState. that proves nothing more than beating SDSU and Bowling Green.

 

Kentucky and Kansas St are good, there's a difference.

 

Good's a relative term. They're both in the bottom half of their conference, 6th or 7th. And they were both bottom feeders when they were scheduled.

 

no, don't you see. bottom half of the power conference teams suck when used to evaluate the power conferences, but are good when evaluating the Big East.

 

the conference as a whole is great because they beat Kentucky and Kansas State, but Wisconsin beating Purdue and Penn State means nothing.

 

And Purdues big out of conference wins are Ball St...hmm...sounds familar, Indiana St, and Miami (O). Penn States are Akron, Young St and Temple while getting blown out by ND. Yep...very tough teams to measure yourself.

 

ah, the shifting the argument technique again. bravo. but I'll play. we were all sooo impressed by Cincinnati's big wins over the Hilltoppers and that same Miami (O) team. and they showed so much spunk getting shallacked by VT and OSU. obviously the Big East is awesome.

 

let me know when you want to argue about this honestly and stop playing seven degrees of Kevin Bacon.

[Soul]

 

What you just don't realize is that the Big East is talented. You just can't discount them out of hand like that. I would agree 2 years ago because the league was in a mess but these teams are all young that are winning and just going to get better and they got better earlier than expected. If the ACC had the same records as the Big East you would have accepted them as being good, as good as the SEC or Big 10. But yet, the Big East has crushed that conference this year but yet is still considered not on par as the Big 10 and SEC? I see a double standard here.

 

but they aren't good enough right now. sorry, I'm not going to give Louisville props because South Florida might be good in a couple of years.

 

and for pete's sake, how many times does it have to be explained to you that it is not just about the records, it is about who you play. no matter how rosey a picture you try to paint of the conference, the bottom five of the Big East all suck big time, right here, right now, and their non-conference schedule sucks. that's not to say the bottom five of other conferences don't suck, but I'd still take the bottom five of the Big Ten over the bottom five of the 8 team Big East any day of the week.

 

congrats that the Big East beat a few dregs of the ACC and other power conferences. they are still dregs. if the ACC had teams with the BigEast records, it would be teams like Miami, VTech, BC, FSU. teams that have been, you know, good, in the recent past. teams that have quality bowl wins the over the past few years. teams that have great talent, coaching, and facilities.

 

I really think that Cuse does overrate the Big East. I think you underrate them though. Louisville is a Top 5 team. If you were to put their schedule up against Michigans and Floridas it would hold up. Maybe not as tough but certainly was credible.

 

Yeah, and I want to make it clear that I don't think Louisville, WVU, and Rutgers are bad teams. I just don't think they're on that top level yet, and I'll need to see them beat the best before I put them there. I'm not going to consider them great before they beat the established powers. Call me a good old boy all you want, but unless there's a playoff system I don't see any other way. Can't just hand someone automatic top billing.....they have to earn it somehow.

 

I definitely agree with jig that the mid and bottom of the Big East is just really, really marginal. I strongly suspect those teams would struggle to be at the top of much lesser conferences. And I also strongly suspect a Louisville vs. OSU matchup would be a highway slaughter not worth watching on New Year's day.

 

The mid to marginal Big East teams beat the mid to marginal Big Ten teams but yet that proves the Big 10 is better, why?

 

Because the Big 10 schedule is much tougher, against bigger, more punishing players all year long. I already argued this with you, I'm not going to circle around and around on it.

 

Beat OSU. Beat Florida. Beat USC. Then I'll give the Big East some more credit. That's it.

[CuseCubFan69]

 

What you just don't realize is that the Big East is talented. You just can't discount them out of hand like that. I would agree 2 years ago because the league was in a mess but these teams are all young that are winning and just going to get better and they got better earlier than expected. If the ACC had the same records as the Big East you would have accepted them as being good, as good as the SEC or Big 10. But yet, the Big East has crushed that conference this year but yet is still considered not on par as the Big 10 and SEC? I see a double standard here.

 

but they aren't good enough right now. sorry, I'm not going to give Louisville props because South Florida might be good in a couple of years.

 

and for pete's sake, how many times does it have to be explained to you that it is not just about the records, it is about who you play. no matter how rosey a picture you try to paint of the conference, the bottom five of the Big East all suck big time, right here, right now, and their non-conference schedule sucks. that's not to say the bottom five of other conferences don't suck, but I'd still take the bottom five of the Big Ten over the bottom five of the 8 team Big East any day of the week.

 

congrats that the Big East beat a few dregs of the ACC and other power conferences. they are still dregs. if the ACC had teams with the BigEast records, it would be teams like Miami, VTech, BC, FSU. teams that have been, you know, good, in the recent past. teams that have quality bowl wins the over the past few years. teams that have great talent, coaching, and facilities.

 

I really think that Cuse does overrate the Big East. I think you underrate them though. Louisville is a Top 5 team. If you were to put their schedule up against Michigans and Floridas it would hold up. Maybe not as tough but certainly was credible.

 

Yeah, and I want to make it clear that I don't think Louisville, WVU, and Rutgers are bad teams. I just don't think they're on that top level yet, and I'll need to see them beat the best before I put them there. I'm not going to consider them great before they beat the established powers. Call me a good old boy all you want, but unless there's a playoff system I don't see any other way. Can't just hand someone automatic top billing.....they have to earn it somehow.

 

I definitely agree with jig that the mid and bottom of the Big East is just really, really marginal. I strongly suspect those teams would struggle to be at the top of much lesser conferences. And I also strongly suspect a Louisville vs. OSU matchup would be a highway slaughter not worth watching on New Year's day.

 

The mid to marginal Big East teams beat the mid to marginal Big Ten teams but yet that proves the Big 10 is better, why?

 

Because the Big 10 schedule is much tougher, against bigger, more punishing players all year long. I already argued this with you, I'm not going to circle around and around on it.

 

Beat OSU. Beat Florida. Beat USC. Then I'll give the Big East some more credit. That's it.

 

Who did the Big 10 beat to deseve credit? USC? Florida?

[NewUserName]

 

What you just don't realize is that the Big East is talented. You just can't discount them out of hand like that. I would agree 2 years ago because the league was in a mess but these teams are all young that are winning and just going to get better and they got better earlier than expected. If the ACC had the same records as the Big East you would have accepted them as being good, as good as the SEC or Big 10. But yet, the Big East has crushed that conference this year but yet is still considered not on par as the Big 10 and SEC? I see a double standard here.

 

but they aren't good enough right now. sorry, I'm not going to give Louisville props because South Florida might be good in a couple of years.

 

and for pete's sake, how many times does it have to be explained to you that it is not just about the records, it is about who you play. no matter how rosey a picture you try to paint of the conference, the bottom five of the Big East all suck big time, right here, right now, and their non-conference schedule sucks. that's not to say the bottom five of other conferences don't suck, but I'd still take the bottom five of the Big Ten over the bottom five of the 8 team Big East any day of the week.

 

congrats that the Big East beat a few dregs of the ACC and other power conferences. they are still dregs. if the ACC had teams with the BigEast records, it would be teams like Miami, VTech, BC, FSU. teams that have been, you know, good, in the recent past. teams that have quality bowl wins the over the past few years. teams that have great talent, coaching, and facilities.

 

I really think that Cuse does overrate the Big East. I think you underrate them though. Louisville is a Top 5 team. If you were to put their schedule up against Michigans and Floridas it would hold up. Maybe not as tough but certainly was credible.

 

Yeah, and I want to make it clear that I don't think Louisville, WVU, and Rutgers are bad teams. I just don't think they're on that top level yet, and I'll need to see them beat the best before I put them there. I'm not going to consider them great before they beat the established powers. Call me a good old boy all you want, but unless there's a playoff system I don't see any other way. Can't just hand someone automatic top billing.....they have to earn it somehow.

 

I definitely agree with jig that the mid and bottom of the Big East is just really, really marginal. I strongly suspect those teams would struggle to be at the top of much lesser conferences. And I also strongly suspect a Louisville vs. OSU matchup would be a highway slaughter not worth watching on New Year's day.

 

The mid to marginal Big East teams beat the mid to marginal Big Ten teams but yet that proves the Big 10 is better, why?

 

 

MSU whooped Pitt at Pitt. Iowa beat Syracuse with their 3rd string QB. I dont remember any other Marginal Big East team playing a Marginal Big Ten team. I remember Indiana and Illinois losing but they arent marginal they suck.

[BigSlick]

For as great as the SEC is what is there best non-conference victory this season? Cal I really think part of the SEC's mystique is just that "mystique" They rarely play good non-conference road games. Most of the bowls they play are quasi-home games. I would love to see Florida play Michigan in Chicago on New Years day or LSU vs Penn St in Cleveland.

 

Truth is Florida is going to pass Michigan. I am not saying its right but it is obvious that a majority of College Football pollsters do not want Michigan in the Title game. Sadly OSU is going to thump them by 3 TDs. Louisville would give OSU a better game.

 

Louisville would give them a better game? Louisville has a pathetic defense. It'd probably be a similar game, at least in point differential, the over/under would be about 30 points higher.

 

As a Buckeye fan, I really really really really don't want to see a rematch, because its always hard to beat the same team twice in a year. That, and, its kinda lame that we have to beat them twice in order to win the National Championship. While Michigan would only have to beat OSU once. Why should one game count more than the other one?

 

As a football fan, I recognize that Michigan is almost certainly the second best team in the nation, and probably deserves a shot in the NC game.

 

The simple and most obvious solution would be a playoff structure. The real loss in terms of adding a playoff structure is a loss of that "special" feeling from the regular season. And its not made up, the regular season in College football is incredibly more important than in any other sport. Unfortunately, year in and year out, the postseason continues to cause controversy.

 

If you are going to award a national championship, you must institute a playoff structure. If you just want to have conference champions and bowl games, thats fine. But you can't legitimately declare a team better than another when they don't get a chance to play it out. BCS be damned.

 

The BCS is not helping determine who the best 2 teams are. Louisvilles defense is decent and not as bad as you say it is. Also, when Ohio State opened up their offense they put up a lot of points on Michigan. Many, even the experts, think Louisville has a better offense than Ohio State. Michigan is good but I'm not so sure they are the second best team.

 

While I credit Louisville with attempting to schedule an out of schedule powerhouse...I'm just not all that impressed with them.

 

You can make a better argument for Michigan than Louisville just based on the strength of their losses. Louisville lost to Rutgers, who no one in their right mind would compare to a national championship contender, and Michigan lost to the best team in the nation.

 

And I still hate on the Big East. I don't care what you say, you might say parity, I say mediocrity. West Virginia losing to South Florida? (South Florida is in the Big East? Thats absolutely pathetic) Rutgers losing to Cincinatti?

 

Come on now. Don't compare the Big East to the Big Ten.

[BigSlick]

 

What you just don't realize is that the Big East is talented. You just can't discount them out of hand like that. I would agree 2 years ago because the league was in a mess but these teams are all young that are winning and just going to get better and they got better earlier than expected. If the ACC had the same records as the Big East you would have accepted them as being good, as good as the SEC or Big 10. But yet, the Big East has crushed that conference this year but yet is still considered not on par as the Big 10 and SEC? I see a double standard here.

 

but they aren't good enough right now. sorry, I'm not going to give Louisville props because South Florida might be good in a couple of years.

 

and for pete's sake, how many times does it have to be explained to you that it is not just about the records, it is about who you play. no matter how rosey a picture you try to paint of the conference, the bottom five of the Big East all suck big time, right here, right now, and their non-conference schedule sucks. that's not to say the bottom five of other conferences don't suck, but I'd still take the bottom five of the Big Ten over the bottom five of the 8 team Big East any day of the week.

 

congrats that the Big East beat a few dregs of the ACC and other power conferences. they are still dregs. if the ACC had teams with the BigEast records, it would be teams like Miami, VTech, BC, FSU. teams that have been, you know, good, in the recent past. teams that have quality bowl wins the over the past few years. teams that have great talent, coaching, and facilities.

 

I really think that Cuse does overrate the Big East. I think you underrate them though. Louisville is a Top 5 team. If you were to put their schedule up against Michigans and Floridas it would hold up. Maybe not as tough but certainly was credible.

 

Yeah, and I want to make it clear that I don't think Louisville, WVU, and Rutgers are bad teams. I just don't think they're on that top level yet, and I'll need to see them beat the best before I put them there. I'm not going to consider them great before they beat the established powers. Call me a good old boy all you want, but unless there's a playoff system I don't see any other way. Can't just hand someone automatic top billing.....they have to earn it somehow.

 

I definitely agree with jig that the mid and bottom of the Big East is just really, really marginal. I strongly suspect those teams would struggle to be at the top of much lesser conferences. And I also strongly suspect a Louisville vs. OSU matchup would be a highway slaughter not worth watching on New Year's day.

 

The mid to marginal Big East teams beat the mid to marginal Big Ten teams but yet that proves the Big 10 is better, why?

 

Because the Big 10 schedule is much tougher, against bigger, more punishing players all year long. I already argued this with you, I'm not going to circle around and around on it.

 

Beat OSU. Beat Florida. Beat USC. Then I'll give the Big East some more credit. That's it.

 

Who did the Big 10 beat to deseve credit? USC? Florida?

 

Texas at full strength, ND (hahahaha, I kid)

 

The truth is, you don't play that many powerhouse teams out of conference. First of all, it doesn't help you that much, second of all, you don't play that many OOC games anyway.

[CuseCubFan69]

 

What you just don't realize is that the Big East is talented. You just can't discount them out of hand like that. I would agree 2 years ago because the league was in a mess but these teams are all young that are winning and just going to get better and they got better earlier than expected. If the ACC had the same records as the Big East you would have accepted them as being good, as good as the SEC or Big 10. But yet, the Big East has crushed that conference this year but yet is still considered not on par as the Big 10 and SEC? I see a double standard here.

 

but they aren't good enough right now. sorry, I'm not going to give Louisville props because South Florida might be good in a couple of years.

 

and for pete's sake, how many times does it have to be explained to you that it is not just about the records, it is about who you play. no matter how rosey a picture you try to paint of the conference, the bottom five of the Big East all suck big time, right here, right now, and their non-conference schedule sucks. that's not to say the bottom five of other conferences don't suck, but I'd still take the bottom five of the Big Ten over the bottom five of the 8 team Big East any day of the week.

 

congrats that the Big East beat a few dregs of the ACC and other power conferences. they are still dregs. if the ACC had teams with the BigEast records, it would be teams like Miami, VTech, BC, FSU. teams that have been, you know, good, in the recent past. teams that have quality bowl wins the over the past few years. teams that have great talent, coaching, and facilities.

 

I really think that Cuse does overrate the Big East. I think you underrate them though. Louisville is a Top 5 team. If you were to put their schedule up against Michigans and Floridas it would hold up. Maybe not as tough but certainly was credible.

 

Yeah, and I want to make it clear that I don't think Louisville, WVU, and Rutgers are bad teams. I just don't think they're on that top level yet, and I'll need to see them beat the best before I put them there. I'm not going to consider them great before they beat the established powers. Call me a good old boy all you want, but unless there's a playoff system I don't see any other way. Can't just hand someone automatic top billing.....they have to earn it somehow.

 

I definitely agree with jig that the mid and bottom of the Big East is just really, really marginal. I strongly suspect those teams would struggle to be at the top of much lesser conferences. And I also strongly suspect a Louisville vs. OSU matchup would be a highway slaughter not worth watching on New Year's day.

 

The mid to marginal Big East teams beat the mid to marginal Big Ten teams but yet that proves the Big 10 is better, why?

 

 

MSU whooped Pitt at Pitt. Iowa beat Syracuse with their 3rd string QB. I dont remember any other Marginal Big East team playing a Marginal Big Ten team. I remember Indiana and Illinois losing but they arent marginal they suck.

 

Syracuse and UConn are the 2 worst teams in the Big East and unless they changed conferences Illinois and Indiana still play in the Big 10 and have to play the rest of the Big 10 teams. Pitt was third from the bottom.

[CuseCubFan69]

 

What you just don't realize is that the Big East is talented. You just can't discount them out of hand like that. I would agree 2 years ago because the league was in a mess but these teams are all young that are winning and just going to get better and they got better earlier than expected. If the ACC had the same records as the Big East you would have accepted them as being good, as good as the SEC or Big 10. But yet, the Big East has crushed that conference this year but yet is still considered not on par as the Big 10 and SEC? I see a double standard here.

 

but they aren't good enough right now. sorry, I'm not going to give Louisville props because South Florida might be good in a couple of years.

 

and for pete's sake, how many times does it have to be explained to you that it is not just about the records, it is about who you play. no matter how rosey a picture you try to paint of the conference, the bottom five of the Big East all suck big time, right here, right now, and their non-conference schedule sucks. that's not to say the bottom five of other conferences don't suck, but I'd still take the bottom five of the Big Ten over the bottom five of the 8 team Big East any day of the week.

 

congrats that the Big East beat a few dregs of the ACC and other power conferences. they are still dregs. if the ACC had teams with the BigEast records, it would be teams like Miami, VTech, BC, FSU. teams that have been, you know, good, in the recent past. teams that have quality bowl wins the over the past few years. teams that have great talent, coaching, and facilities.

 

I really think that Cuse does overrate the Big East. I think you underrate them though. Louisville is a Top 5 team. If you were to put their schedule up against Michigans and Floridas it would hold up. Maybe not as tough but certainly was credible.

 

Yeah, and I want to make it clear that I don't think Louisville, WVU, and Rutgers are bad teams. I just don't think they're on that top level yet, and I'll need to see them beat the best before I put them there. I'm not going to consider them great before they beat the established powers. Call me a good old boy all you want, but unless there's a playoff system I don't see any other way. Can't just hand someone automatic top billing.....they have to earn it somehow.

 

I definitely agree with jig that the mid and bottom of the Big East is just really, really marginal. I strongly suspect those teams would struggle to be at the top of much lesser conferences. And I also strongly suspect a Louisville vs. OSU matchup would be a highway slaughter not worth watching on New Year's day.

 

The mid to marginal Big East teams beat the mid to marginal Big Ten teams but yet that proves the Big 10 is better, why?

 

Because the Big 10 schedule is much tougher, against bigger, more punishing players all year long. I already argued this with you, I'm not going to circle around and around on it.

 

Beat OSU. Beat Florida. Beat USC. Then I'll give the Big East some more credit. That's it.

 

Who did the Big 10 beat to deseve credit? USC? Florida?

 

Texas at full strength, ND (hahahaha, I kid)

 

The truth is, you don't play that many powerhouse teams out of conference. First of all, it doesn't help you that much, second of all, you don't play that many OOC games anyway.

 

You're right but yet the Big East has to prove they belong while the others get a free pass along with an extra loss to get a chance to play in the Championship.

[NewUserName]

For as great as the SEC is what is there best non-conference victory this season? Cal I really think part of the SEC's mystique is just that "mystique" They rarely play good non-conference road games. Most of the bowls they play are quasi-home games. I would love to see Florida play Michigan in Chicago on New Years day or LSU vs Penn St in Cleveland.

 

Truth is Florida is going to pass Michigan. I am not saying its right but it is obvious that a majority of College Football pollsters do not want Michigan in the Title game. Sadly OSU is going to thump them by 3 TDs. Louisville would give OSU a better game.

 

Louisville would give them a better game? Louisville has a pathetic defense. It'd probably be a similar game, at least in point differential, the over/under would be about 30 points higher.

 

As a Buckeye fan, I really really really really don't want to see a rematch, because its always hard to beat the same team twice in a year. That, and, its kinda lame that we have to beat them twice in order to win the National Championship. While Michigan would only have to beat OSU once. Why should one game count more than the other one?

 

As a football fan, I recognize that Michigan is almost certainly the second best team in the nation, and probably deserves a shot in the NC game.

 

The simple and most obvious solution would be a playoff structure. The real loss in terms of adding a playoff structure is a loss of that "special" feeling from the regular season. And its not made up, the regular season in College football is incredibly more important than in any other sport. Unfortunately, year in and year out, the postseason continues to cause controversy.

 

If you are going to award a national championship, you must institute a playoff structure. If you just want to have conference champions and bowl games, thats fine. But you can't legitimately declare a team better than another when they don't get a chance to play it out. BCS be damned.

 

The BCS is not helping determine who the best 2 teams are. Louisvilles defense is decent and not as bad as you say it is. Also, when Ohio State opened up their offense they put up a lot of points on Michigan. Many, even the experts, think Louisville has a better offense than Ohio State. Michigan is good but I'm not so sure they are the second best team.

 

I hope Louisville wins there BCS game if they get in. I really hope they play Florida or LSU. Somehow I think Florida is going to the Championship game to get whooped and LSU is going to get ND in the Sugar so Louisville would probably get Wake Forest. Which is sad because Louisville wont get any respect for that game at all. I dont think they have a better offense than OSU though.

[Soul]

Michigan has the benefit of having other top teams in conference most years. They also take on ND many years, as they did this season. Sometimes they schedule USC -- and it's usually a great game.

 

OSU took on Texas, the national champs and romped when they were ranked #2. They beat Michigan, a top 5 team at the time.

 

USC plays many top teams, both in conference and out.

 

The SEC is a top 25 war week in and week out.

 

I'm sorry that the Big East doesn't have that history of being a top conference in football. But unfortunately, that does mean they will have to reach out and play their way in to that status. Right now, they aren't doing it.

[jjgman21]

 

MSU whooped Pitt at Pitt. Iowa beat Syracuse with their 3rd string QB. I dont remember any other Marginal Big East team playing a Marginal Big Ten team. I remember Indiana and Illinois losing but they arent marginal they suck.

 

that's because

 

a. there are no marginal teams in the Big East. there is one really good team, two good teams, and crap.

 

and

 

b. he just made up this point. there were few games between the two conferences, and their result says nothing about the two conferences.

 

 

pick your winners Cubs

 

OSU-Louisville

UM-WVU/Rutgers

UW-Rutgers/WVU

South Florida-Penn State

 

I'll even cut out the middle ground

 

Cincy-Iowa

Pitt-Northwestern

UConn-MSU

Syracuse-Illinois

 

pick your winners.

 

cut out two bowl eligible team and an 'up-and-coming getting better faster than anyone expected' Indiana team from the middle of the Big Ten, and the Big Ten still wins 6-7 of those games, five under a worst case scenerio.