College Football - Championship Week

[Mephistopheles]

I think Richard Billingsley lives just a few miles north of the Red River.

 

He does. He's a hgue Oklahoma Sooner fan. He never even went to college either. That formula's a joke.

[NCCubFan]

Both columnists in ESPN.com's weekly bowl projections are now projecting North Carolina State as an opponent for Ball State in the Motor City Bowl. Its supposed to be MAC vs. Big 10, but with Ohio State expected to get an at-large BCS bid and everyone else in the Big 10 moving up a rung that would leave them one qualifier short when it comes to the Motor City Bowl.

 

That's the bowl most likely to have the BSU v. BSU game. Rick Chryst the MAC Commish said he is talking to WAC commish and Motor City Bowl guys to get it done but Boise is resisting because they want it to played at their home field (sound scared to me). Both schools are in talks right now and Ball State has already said no to playing it in Boise. It's still unlikely but its really up to a bowl to step up and ignore tie-ins or Boise to quit demanding it be played in Boise.

The Independence Bowl that Andy mentioned previously would be a good fit because both conference tie-ins fell short of having enough teams qualify to fill all of their slots. The game is supposed to be Big 12 vs. SEC, but Colorado (after losing to Nebraska) and Auburn (after losing to Alabama) are both ineligible, leaving both conferences short. From what I've read Ball State is willing to play in a bowl at a neutral site but it's Boise State that's balking (unless it were to play TCU).

Louisiana Tech is most likely going to the Indy Bowl. They're not gonna trade it to travel some place half across the country when they can play 70 miles from home.

 

The bowl can invite who ever they want. Its not Louisiana Tech's to trade.

What CubbieBum said. The bowl chooses the team, the team doesn't choose the bowl. Since the Independence Bowl is supposed to be Big 12 vs. SEC but neither conference had enough qualifiers the bowl selection committee can invite whichever eligible teams they choose. They might choose to invite Louisiana Tech, but it's their decision, not the school's.

[shnsajax]

Ouch

 

Texas Tech quarterback Graham Harrell played with two shattered fingers on his non-throwing hand Saturday in the Red Raiders' victory over Baylor, a source close to Harrell said Sunday night.

 

Big 12 blog

 

ESPN.com's Tim Griffin writes about all things Big 12 in his conference blog.

 

• Blog network

 

The source said Harrell underwent four hours of surgery Sunday on the pinkie and ring fingers on his left hand, with 17 pins and two plates inserted in his hand to heal nine separate breaks. Despite the extent of the injury, suffered in the second quarter, Harrell finished the game against the Bears and is expected to be fine for Tech's bowl game.

[mul21]

Texas is getting screwed. I mean, the one game they lost was the 4th of a stretch where they played 4 teams ranked in the top 11 and lost the last of them at the buzzer. Plus, they beat the team going fron their half of the conference.

 

I hope Mizzou beats OU and Texas plays whoever from the SEC for the title. God I hate the Big 12 rules and the CS.

 

I just saw the SEC/ACC tiebreaker for a situation like this and they use the BCS standings unless the top 2 teams are within 5 spots of each other and then they go to head to head matchups. Makes a lot more sense to me.

 

And just to clarify, I have no dog in the fight.

[Derwood]

if Texas got in, then TTU was "screwed"

[mul21]

if Texas got in, then TTU was "screwed"

 

I have very little sympathy for a team that got beat by 50.

[B]

Both columnists in ESPN.com's weekly bowl projections are now projecting North Carolina State as an opponent for Ball State in the Motor City Bowl. Its supposed to be MAC vs. Big 10, but with Ohio State expected to get an at-large BCS bid and everyone else in the Big 10 moving up a rung that would leave them one qualifier short when it comes to the Motor City Bowl.

 

That's the bowl most likely to have the BSU v. BSU game. Rick Chryst the MAC Commish said he is talking to WAC commish and Motor City Bowl guys to get it done but Boise is resisting because they want it to played at their home field (sound scared to me). Both schools are in talks right now and Ball State has already said no to playing it in Boise. It's still unlikely but its really up to a bowl to step up and ignore tie-ins or Boise to quit demanding it be played in Boise.

The Independence Bowl that Andy mentioned previously would be a good fit because both conference tie-ins fell short of having enough teams qualify to fill all of their slots. The game is supposed to be Big 12 vs. SEC, but Colorado (after losing to Nebraska) and Auburn (after losing to Alabama) are both ineligible, leaving both conferences short. From what I've read Ball State is willing to play in a bowl at a neutral site but it's Boise State that's balking (unless it were to play TCU).

Louisiana Tech is most likely going to the Indy Bowl. They're not gonna trade it to travel some place half across the country when they can play 70 miles from home.

 

The bowl can invite who ever they want. Its not Louisiana Tech's to trade.

What CubbieBum said. The bowl chooses the team, the team doesn't choose the bowl. Since the Independence Bowl is supposed to be Big 12 vs. SEC but neither conference had enough qualifiers the bowl selection committee can invite whichever eligible teams they choose. They might choose to invite Louisiana Tech, but it's their decision, not the school's.

Yeah, I'm aware of how it works.

 

Louisiana Tech vs. Notre Dame

Edited December 1, 2008 by B

[bukie]

Texas is not getting screwed. By any reasonable measure, Oklahoma has been a better team this year than Texas, if only slightly. Since only one of the teams can participate in the Big 12 championship, that slightly is enough.

 

If anybody is getting screwed, it's USC for not even having a shot at the championship despite playing probably the best football of any team throughout the year.

[mul21]

Texas is not getting screwed. By any reasonable measure, Oklahoma has been a better team this year than Texas, if only slightly. Since only one of the teams can participate in the Big 12 championship, that slightly is enough.

 

If anybody is getting screwed, it's USC for not even having a shot at the championship despite playing probably the best football of any team throughout the year.

 

How do you make this argument when the team that's going instead of them is one they beat head to head on a neutral field?

 

And USC has won against a cupcake Pac-10 schedule and hasn't played very well in a few of their wins. Plus, the B12 schedule has just been ridiculously difficult this year.

Edited December 1, 2008 by mul21

[bukie]

Texas is not getting screwed. By any reasonable measure, Oklahoma has been a better team this year than Texas, if only slightly. Since only one of the teams can participate in the Big 12 championship, that slightly is enough.

 

If anybody is getting screwed, it's USC for not even having a shot at the championship despite playing probably the best football of any team throughout the year.

 

How do you make this argument when the team that's going instead of them is one they beat head to head on a neutral field?

 

Because the season consists of 12 games, not 1. Over those 12 games, Oklahoma has been the better team.

[Derwood]

Texas is not getting screwed. By any reasonable measure, Oklahoma has been a better team this year than Texas, if only slightly. Since only one of the teams can participate in the Big 12 championship, that slightly is enough.

 

If anybody is getting screwed, it's USC for not even having a shot at the championship despite playing probably the best football of any team throughout the year.

 

How do you make this argument when the team that's going instead of them is one they beat head to head on a neutral field?

 

and TTU beat UT, and OU beat TTU, and UT beat OU, and TTU beat UT......

[SouthSideRyan]

How do you make that argument for USC when they lost to an unranked Oregon St. team? Looking at strictly results(which is how it should be), there's little to nothing separating USC and Penn St. Edited December 1, 2008 by SouthSideRyan

[mul21]

Texas is not getting screwed. By any reasonable measure, Oklahoma has been a better team this year than Texas, if only slightly. Since only one of the teams can participate in the Big 12 championship, that slightly is enough.

 

If anybody is getting screwed, it's USC for not even having a shot at the championship despite playing probably the best football of any team throughout the year.

 

How do you make this argument when the team that's going instead of them is one they beat head to head on a neutral field?

 

Because the season consists of 12 games, not 1. Over those 12 games, Oklahoma has been the better team.

 

Re-read my 1st post on this page. I accounted for the whole season.

 

And Derwood, TTU is out of the equation because the got beat by 44 by OU. They aren't in the discussion anymore. It's pretty obvious they aren't as good as either OU or UT.

 

Edit: I would bet that if Mizzou and TTU had switched when they played UT that the scores in the games would have ended up similar to what they were. (i.e. UT killing TTU and losing to Mizzou instead of the way it happened)

Edited December 1, 2008 by mul21

[Derwood]

Texas is not getting screwed. By any reasonable measure, Oklahoma has been a better team this year than Texas, if only slightly. Since only one of the teams can participate in the Big 12 championship, that slightly is enough.

 

If anybody is getting screwed, it's USC for not even having a shot at the championship despite playing probably the best football of any team throughout the year.

 

How do you make this argument when the team that's going instead of them is one they beat head to head on a neutral field?

 

Because the season consists of 12 games, not 1. Over those 12 games, Oklahoma has been the better team.

 

Re-read my 1st post on this page. I accounted for the whole season.

 

And Derwood, TTU is out of the equation because the got beat by 44 by OU. They aren't in the discussion anymore. It's pretty obvious they aren't as good as either OU or UT.

 

except that part where they beat Texas

[bukie]

Texas is not getting screwed. By any reasonable measure, Oklahoma has been a better team this year than Texas, if only slightly. Since only one of the teams can participate in the Big 12 championship, that slightly is enough.

 

If anybody is getting screwed, it's USC for not even having a shot at the championship despite playing probably the best football of any team throughout the year.

 

How do you make this argument when the team that's going instead of them is one they beat head to head on a neutral field?

 

Because the season consists of 12 games, not 1. Over those 12 games, Oklahoma has been the better team.

 

Re-read my 1st post on this page. I accounted for the whole season.

 

And Derwood, TTU is out of the equation because the got beat by 44 by OU. They aren't in the discussion anymore. It's pretty obvious they aren't as good as either OU or UT.

 

Edit: I would bet that if Mizzou and TTU had switched when they played UT that the scores in the games would have ended up similar to what they were. (i.e. UT killing TTU and losing to Mizzou instead of the way it happened)

So your argument is that UT wore themselves out in the process of killing Mizzou to the point that they didn't have enough energy to beat TTU? Yeah, not buying it. UT also had a close home victory against an OSU team that was blown out at TTU and lost by 20 at home against OU.

 

Plus, the same arguments anyone makes for Texas can be turned right around to make for Texas Tech were it Texas making the Big 12 championship:

- Beat Texas head-to-head

- Lost to OU because they were worn out from playing four tough games in a row against ranked teams (Kansas, Texas, OSU, Oklahoma) and the results could easily have been different had you switched the order of play.

 

Essentially, the argument for Texas becomes "OU doesn't deserve to go to the Big 12 championship because they beat TTU by too much to keep TTU in consideration."

[bukie]

Pop Quiz question!

 

Of the 8 teams with somewhat reasonable arguments to be in the BCS championship game (Alabama, Florida, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas Tech, USC, Penn State, Utah), which has played the weakest schedule (according to Sagarin)?

 

No cheating. ;)

[rchap24]

Pop Quiz question!

 

Of the 8 teams with somewhat reasonable arguments to be in the BCS championship game (Alabama, Florida, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas Tech, USC, Penn State, Utah), which has played the weakest schedule (according to Sagarin)?

 

No cheating. ;)

 

I'd say USC? PAC-10 sucks this year

[SouthSideRyan]

Bama since the SEC has 2 teams, and they're one of them and they haven't played the other.

[bukie]

Pop Quiz question!

 

Of the 8 teams with somewhat reasonable arguments to be in the BCS championship game (Alabama, Florida, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas Tech, USC, Penn State, Utah), which has played the weakest schedule (according to Sagarin)?

 

No cheating. ;)

 

I'd say USC? PAC-10 sucks this year

USC was 5th of the 8. They played a good non-con schedule (Virginia, Ohio State, ND) to make up for some of the deficiency in the conference. Plus, UCLA hasn't factored into their schedule yet.

[CubinNY]

Pop Quiz question!

 

Of the 8 teams with somewhat reasonable arguments to be in the BCS championship game (Alabama, Florida, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas Tech, USC, Penn State, Utah), which has played the weakest schedule (according to Sagarin)?

 

No cheating. ;)

 

I'd say USC? PAC-10 sucks this year

USC was 5th of the 8. They played a good non-con schedule (Virginia, Ohio State, ND) to make up for some of the deficiency in the conference. Plus, UCLA hasn't factored into their schedule yet.

I'm going to say Alabama.

[rchap24]

Pop Quiz question!

 

Of the 8 teams with somewhat reasonable arguments to be in the BCS championship game (Alabama, Florida, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas Tech, USC, Penn State, Utah), which has played the weakest schedule (according to Sagarin)?

 

No cheating. ;)

 

I'd say USC? PAC-10 sucks this year

USC was 5th of the 8. They played a good non-con schedule (Virginia, Ohio State, ND) to make up for some of the deficiency in the conference. Plus, UCLA hasn't factored into their schedule yet.

 

Bama is also a good choice...By the way how did ND help out USC non-conference by the way?

[bukie]

Pop Quiz question!

 

Of the 8 teams with somewhat reasonable arguments to be in the BCS championship game (Alabama, Florida, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas Tech, USC, Penn State, Utah), which has played the weakest schedule (according to Sagarin)?

 

No cheating. ;)

 

I'd say USC? PAC-10 sucks this year

USC was 5th of the 8. They played a good non-con schedule (Virginia, Ohio State, ND) to make up for some of the deficiency in the conference. Plus, UCLA hasn't factored into their schedule yet.

I'm going to say Alabama.

Correct. Alabama checks in at the 73rd toughest schedule in the country as of right now, due to an overall lousy non-con schedule (although Clemson was supposed to be good, so tough to fault them for that), and a comparatively weak SEC West (where Ole Miss was clearly the second-best team, and LSU, Auburn, Arkansas and Miss State were all either 3-5 or 2-6 in conference). Their best win on the year, by far, was their 41-30 win at Georgia, but that was a long time ago, too.

 

Of course, the SEC championship game this week will certainly vault them over Utah. Just thought it was interesting to see it at this point, though.

[bukie]

Pop Quiz question!

 

Of the 8 teams with somewhat reasonable arguments to be in the BCS championship game (Alabama, Florida, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas Tech, USC, Penn State, Utah), which has played the weakest schedule (according to Sagarin)?

 

No cheating. ;)

 

I'd say USC? PAC-10 sucks this year

USC was 5th of the 8. They played a good non-con schedule (Virginia, Ohio State, ND) to make up for some of the deficiency in the conference. Plus, UCLA hasn't factored into their schedule yet.

 

Bama is also a good choice...By the way how did ND help out USC non-conference by the way?

Err, ND finished 6-6. That's not bad for the worst team in your non-con schedule. ND was USC's "patsy". Compared to other teams' non-con patsies, USC's non-con schedule was far and away tougher.

[rchap24]

Pop Quiz question!

 

Of the 8 teams with somewhat reasonable arguments to be in the BCS championship game (Alabama, Florida, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas Tech, USC, Penn State, Utah), which has played the weakest schedule (according to Sagarin)?

 

No cheating. ;)

 

I'd say USC? PAC-10 sucks this year

USC was 5th of the 8. They played a good non-con schedule (Virginia, Ohio State, ND) to make up for some of the deficiency in the conference. Plus, UCLA hasn't factored into their schedule yet.

I'm going to say Alabama.

Correct. Alabama checks in at the 73rd toughest schedule in the country as of right now, due to an overall lousy non-con schedule (although Clemson was supposed to be good, so tough to fault them for that), and a comparatively weak SEC West (where Ole Miss was clearly the second-best team, and LSU, Auburn, Arkansas and Miss State were all either 3-5 or 2-6 in conference). Their best win on the year, by far, was their 41-30 win at Georgia, but that was a long time ago, too.

 

Of course, the SEC championship game this week will certainly vault them over Utah. Just thought it was interesting to see it at this point, though.

 

yea, but I don't think that's going to happen like you said with there schedule Georgia was the only big win they had early in the season. Florida has dominated every team they've played since the Ole Miss upset and besides the Auburn game last week Bama hasn't really won the other conference games handly

[SouthSideRyan]

RedFlash isn't going to like this.