TruffleShuffle

No, because USC actually decided to schedule teams that aren't mediocre at best in their OOC schedule. careful, usc ended up losing to one of those teams that's mediocre at best. and by the way, virginia is bad this year and usc plays syracuse in their OOC in a couple of years. sometimes teams that turn out to be mediocre at best don't look that way when the schedule is drawn up. high-profile teams decide to play a certain non-conference schedule years in advance; sometimes that schedule turns out to be a dud. texas' toughest non-conference game this year was arkansas, who isn't good. granted the big xii is very good this year, especially the south, but there have been years (2005, 2006) when the big xii was just middle of the road, and a non-conference schedule with mediocre arkansas plus the big xii schedule would have been average difficulty at best. texas' toughest non-conference game next year is a home affair against ucla; chances are they won't have to break a sweat in that one. i'd like to see psu play at least two somewhat difficult non-conference games and while they didn't do that this year, they pretty much did what they could by dumping arkansas state and bringing in oregon st. it's not like an oklahoma or florida were sitting around with room on their schedule saying "hey i wonder if someone else wants to play us this year."

apparently he has a generic imitation for non-urban black males. i bet his colin powell sounds a lot like his barack obama and bryant gumbel.

I don't think a bad three games means the team folded under pressure, but that's just me. i think they choked, but that has more to do with HOW they lost than the fact that they lost. ryan dempster has a bad start? could just be bad luck or bad timing. but he walked more guys than he'd walked in any start since the '90s. struggling to throw strikes worse than you've struggled at any point in the last 10 years suggests to me that you're feeling the pressure and not responding well to it. same thing with game 2 - every infielder made an error, including an excellent fielder (lee), a good one (ramirez) and two guys who, while not great defensively, are pretty sure-handed (theriot, derosa). i don't know that it was what piniella did down the stretch, resting guys too much or whatever - i bet you can find lots of good teams that clinched early, gave their guys plenty of rest and then played very well in the playoffs. but i do suspect that piniella had something to do with the team being too tight and too high-strung to perform well in the playoffs.

i think the flyers have reverted back to 2006-07 form. bad defense, lousy power play, spotty goaltending. a sure recipe for success.

yeah that michigan-florida capital one bowl will be no contest.

It'd be justifiable. It wouldn't happen, but it could be justified. All the more reason why we need a playoff. right, i'm just saying that this is the problem with the current system. nobody would be talking about "hey florida has better wins than usc" even though usc's best three wins would be home vs ohio st, home vs oregon, and something like home vs cal or road vs arizona. those are no better than psu's three best wins will be this year. but everyone thought usc was great coming into this year, whereas very few people thought penn state was very good, let alone great. we can play a full college season and people's view would still be affected by their preseason expectations.

st louis cardinals, 2006.

Jason Bay OPS's 70 points less than JD Drew vs. LHP. I still think that most managers would have made that move. Let's just agree that Boston sucks a big one. I'm confident if Boston had up Ted Williams' severed head, he would have ripped a double off the green monster. batting right handed you mean from the batter's box to the left of the catcher? not sure you could call it "right handed" in this scenario.

Jason Bay OPS's 70 points less than JD Drew vs. LHP. I still think that most managers would have made that move. Let's just agree that Boston sucks a big one. I'm confident if Boston had up Ted Williams' severed head, he would have ripped a double off the green monster. i guess we can all say that boston has a horseshoe up their butt, but there's something to be said for a talented team that gets into the playoffs and, despite the pressure and expectations of millions of their fans, they are still able to play the game loose and compete at the same level they competed at during the regular season.

Just an FYI, it's Mississippi that beat Florida and the Rebels also beat Wake Forest (a top 25 team right now). They're not terrible - not good per say, but also not terrible. they didn't beat wake forest.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/fbc08.htm?loc=interstitialskip big ten is #3 conference, sec is #1, big xii is #2. the pac 10 is #5. if usc didn't have that loss against oregon st, would we be having this discussion - should florida be in the national championship game ahead of an undefeated usc?

This is extremely true and I really doubt any of the three make it through without at least one more loss each. The original question, though, was IF all three did win out, who should go to the title game. should or will? If one of the reasons for no playoff is to preserve the sanctity of the regular season, then you have to take the undefeated team(s), right? If Penn State wins out, they should be in. If Penn State has one-loss, they should not get picked over a 1-loss Florida and 1-loss Texas team (if they lose) I tend to think Penn State would go if unbeaten (and it could definitely be justified), but it's also justifiable that Florida would be more deserving - given that they might have three better wins than Penn State would. But they lost a bad Ole Miss team! You can't just overlook their terrible loss. It's not overlooking it. It's putting more weight on three tougher wins than Penn State would have. The loss would definitely justify Penn State over Florida, but wins over Georgia, LSU and Alabama would justify Florida over Penn State. Neither would be a travesty is basically what I'm getting at. yeah but why is neutral field against georgia or home against lsu harder than at ohio state? because you think those teams are better? lsu's schedule consists of wins over app st, horrid north texas, @auburn (who you might have noticed is not good this year), 10 point win at home against mediocre miss st, and then completely pantsed by florida. georgia hasn't been too impressive either. Im guessing because the SEC is far and away better then the Big 10. Its not even close. Florida would have win's against LSU,Georgia and Alabama. Penn State can't match that. you know what else penn st wouldn't have? a home loss against oregon st. or a road loss against a team like purdue. why? because those games are about as tough as a home game against ole miss, and unlike florida, penn state won their games against average teams with ease.

i really wish jd drew had nothing to do with the comeback; as a philadelphia person, it's in my blood to hate that guy.

yes God forbid a team celebrate one of the biggest comebacks in major league playoff history to keep their season alive.

okay well ohio st is ranked ahead of lsu in both polls, so i guess we can't say lsu (home game, no less) is a better win than a road game against ohio st. georgia is 2 spots ahead of ohio st in both polls and that's neutral vs road.

This is extremely true and I really doubt any of the three make it through without at least one more loss each. The original question, though, was IF all three did win out, who should go to the title game. should or will? If one of the reasons for no playoff is to preserve the sanctity of the regular season, then you have to take the undefeated team(s), right? If Penn State wins out, they should be in. If Penn State has one-loss, they should not get picked over a 1-loss Florida and 1-loss Texas team (if they lose) I tend to think Penn State would go if unbeaten (and it could definitely be justified), but it's also justifiable that Florida would be more deserving - given that they might have three better wins than Penn State would. But they lost a bad Ole Miss team! You can't just overlook their terrible loss. It's not overlooking it. It's putting more weight on three tougher wins than Penn State would have. The loss would definitely justify Penn State over Florida, but wins over Georgia, LSU and Alabama would justify Florida over Penn State. Neither would be a travesty is basically what I'm getting at. yeah but why is neutral field against georgia or home against lsu harder than at ohio state? because you think those teams are better? lsu's schedule consists of wins over app st, horrid north texas, @auburn (who you might have noticed is not good this year), 10 point win at home against mediocre miss st, and then completely pantsed by florida. georgia hasn't been too impressive either.

if penn st. goes undefeated but alabama and a big xii school also go undefeated, i wouldn't be pissed about penn st. not making the championship game. they play in stronger conferences. it's similar to if we hadn't given up the td with time expired against michigan in 2005; texas and usc were undefeated and were better teams than us. the system sucks, but given the system that's in place, you want the best undefeated teams from the best conferences to play for the championship. however, if penn st wins out and florida goes to the championship game ahead of them, i'll be irate. it's not like florida will have a loss like ou's loss at texas on their resume, where you can say "well they just played a team that's tougher than any team psu played." they lost to friggin ole miss at home; penn st has plenty of games that are tougher than that and if they go undefeated, that'll mean they didn't crap themselves against an average team. If Florida wins out, they would of beat LSU (already), at Georgia, at Vandy, and who ever they play in the SEC championship game. at vandy? winning a night game at wisconsin is just as hard as winning at vandy if not harder. the only reason vandy gets any credit for being good is because they're in the sec; northwestern is in the big ten and has one loss, are we going to give teams big ups for beating them? and by the way, georgia is a neutral field game.

Agreed. If they tried to be creative, it could work. You can still have all of the bowls as normal. Rotate the 4 majors as serving as sort of a national semi final with a +1 game coming from those two semifinals. Put all of the major bowls back on January 1st where they belong with the National Championship coming on that following Sunday/Monday/Tuesday. However it works to give them 7-10 days off. I don't want a big playoff, I just want 4 teams and that is it. you and me both, my friend. my plan is exactly as you have it, make the two semifinals bcs #1 vs bcs #4 and bcs #2 vs bcs #3, then 7 to 10 days later you have the championship game. at worst you extend the season by an extra week for 2 of 119 teams. not a big deal. and i don't see how money/interest would be lost in this scenario... you'll have a ton of interest in the two national semifinal games, and winning the rose/orange/fiesta/sugar bowl is still a prestigious accomplishment even if it's a non-"playoff" game. it's not like they'd be any more "meaningless" than they are now.

if penn st. goes undefeated but alabama and a big xii school also go undefeated, i wouldn't be pissed about penn st. not making the championship game. they play in stronger conferences. it's similar to if we hadn't given up the td with time expired against michigan in 2005; texas and usc were undefeated and were better teams than us. the system sucks, but given the system that's in place, you want the best undefeated teams from the best conferences to play for the championship. however, if penn st wins out and florida goes to the championship game ahead of them, i'll be irate. it's not like florida will have a loss like ou's loss at texas on their resume, where you can say "well they just played a team that's tougher than any team psu played." they lost to friggin ole miss at home; penn st has plenty of games that are tougher than that and if they go undefeated, that'll mean they didn't crap themselves against an average team.

penn state, i would hope. i'm pretty sure that penn state will have a handful of wins tougher than a home game against ole miss. in other news, byu is getting absolutely crushed. they're not playing well, but tcu is very good. the mountain west is probably better than the big east this year. Beating Illinois and Wisconsin is not a big deal. maybe, but losing at home to ole miss IS a big deal.

penn state, i would hope. i'm pretty sure that penn state will have a handful of wins tougher than a home game against ole miss. in other news, byu is getting absolutely crushed. they're not playing well, but tcu is very good. the mountain west is probably better than the big east this year.

anyone planning on watching byu-tcu tonight? should be one of the best non-bcs games of the year.

please let alan trammell on that train. maybe tim raines too.

except by Truffle 2 posts above yours... :wink: I think he was talking about his disease in general. I was referring specifically to being on the road with that illness. It's a real pain in the ass. I'm friends with a guy with juv diabetes and he always has to have a little cooler with him for his insulin if we go on trips or whatever. i was more suggesting that being outside in the hot summer sunshine for all those day games would take more of a toll on a guy who has blood sugar issues than your average baseball player - hence the weaker september numbers over the course of his career.

line is ohio state -3, so michigan state winning should not be a surprise to anyone.