jjgman21

read the fricken thread, punkass

not if you have a great defense. Penn State has one of the 10 best defenses in the country. But they're 55th in offense and 72nd in turnover margin, and all of their good offensive performances came against bad teams. typically a top 10 defense in the country is enough to get you ranked no matter how bad your offense is. that's a little difficult when you play four teams that are better than you overall and you don't pull any of them out. typically a team with a top ten D gets into the top 25. Auburn's offense has proven to be only marginally better, their defense only marginally better. yet they find themselves sitting at what, #10? after getting smoked by a generall uninspiring Georgia team two weeks ago? c'mon man. the difference between those two teams are slight. certainly the difference is not one at #10 and one not rated whatsoever.

As is the put an inferior team in the title game argument. Inferior by what criteria? records? game resumes? Florida's terrible play 6 of the last 7 games? Florida wouldn't even be in this position if South Carolina could kick a fricking extra point or a field goal. :x And Michigan wouldnt even be in this position if the refs in the Auburn game could make a call correctly. I don't think they're exactly the same thing. you don't know how the Auburn-Florida game would have come out without the controversial call fo which you speak. the SC game, you know exactly how the game comes out if SC makes that field goal.

didnt michigan put up like 14 points against 3-9 BSU? They had a downstretch earlier. Michigan lead BSU 31-12 late in the third and let them back into the game. I posit that Tennessee is severely overrated, Penn State severely underrated. and not that Wisconsin played anybody, but I'm not exactly impressed with the resume of LSU or Auburn either. the resumes are pretty much equal, until you consider how UM won their games and how Florida won their games. Florida always scrambling, UM always rolling. Why is Penn State underrated? Because all four of their losses came to good teams? That doesn't change the fact that they didn't beat anybody. If anything, I would call Penn State overrated. 14th rated in total defense even though they faced four of the top 11 in the country is pretty damn difficult to accomplish.

didnt michigan put up like 14 points against 3-9 BSU? They had a downstretch earlier. Michigan lead BSU 31-12 late in the third and let them back into the game. I posit that Tennessee is severely overrated, Penn State severely underrated. and not that Wisconsin played anybody, but I'm not exactly impressed with the resume of LSU or Auburn either. the resumes are pretty much equal, until you consider how UM won their games and how Florida won their games. Florida always scrambling, UM always rolling.

As is the put an inferior team in the title game argument. Inferior by what criteria? records? game resumes? Florida's terrible play 6 of the last 7 games?

As is the put an inferior team in the title game argument. As is the "Michigan is the better team and deserves to play for the national championship even though there's no evidence of this" argument that's incredibly lame. both as an argument in general and because there's plenty of evidence that Michigan is the second best team in the county and until the voters completely changed the way they vote, everybody agreed UM was better.

oh, it's on Warp. I don't like the Badgers chances. their D is much more geared to stopping the pass. maybe they can stack the box and stuff McFadden and let Dick do nothing.

Am I the only one who totally disagreed with the announcers in that it was a bad decision to go to Berrian there? He was one on one and getting separation. The throw was bad, the wind didn't help, and Berrian not contesting the pick more didn't either, but I didn't think it was a bad decision as they kept trying to say. It was Grossman's vision on that play. Clark was wide open on and he was right in the line of sight of Rex. Why throw a pass that deep in these conditions is beyond me. he also had a wide open Bernard Berrian streaking down the sideline. it was a bad ball, not a bad decision.

that was intentional grounding. he never left the tackle box.

jjgman; it is not about the Cubs "bending over backwards and let the player control the decisions" it's about comfort. Here is his stats for Soriano at each spot of the lineup since 2004: http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/splits?statsId=6154&type=batting3 If you can read it as I can, it clearly shows Soriano is MORE comfortable hitting leadoff then any other spot in the lineup. So it's not that the Cubs are "bending over" to Soriano, it just that they know a HAPPY Soriano in a LEADOFF spot, is a more productive and a better player then Soriano is any other lineup spot. Now, if Soriano sturggles, I could see the Cubs moving Soriano to the #3 spot in front of Lee and Ramirez, to get him going, again, but again...Soriano is the leadoff hitter,and NOT because they promised him, the stats show he is better in the leadoff hitters spot. now calculate that Soriano had the same stats hitting in the five or six hole last year instead of leadoff and put this myth to bed. Soriano posted a 190/267/419 line in 105 ABs out of the leadoff spot last year. He had 29 ABs in the 5 hole and was very good, but it's still only 29 ABs. my point is that if you take out the stats from his best year, where he happened to bat leadoff, his stats are the same whether in the 1, 5, 6, or 7 hole.

Most years when there are rematches, they're a rematch from something that happened much earlier in the year - not a rematch of the last game that each team played. In that case, why don't we send Boise State or Louisville to the national championship game? They have 0 and 1 loss, respectively. my point about the conference is the Nat. Champ. should be the two best teams, regardless of whether and when those two might have played each other before or what conference they are from

Am I the only one who totally disagreed with the announcers in that it was a bad decision to go to Berrian there? He was one on one and getting separation. The throw was bad, the wind didn't help, and Berrian not contesting the pick more didn't either, but I didn't think it was a bad decision as they kept trying to say. no. I and others agree with you 100%.

It's not dribble. I'm guessing you might feel differently if you weren't a Michigan fan. I absolutely hate Michigan but thing they should go the National Championship. call me weird, I just think the two best teams should play for the National Championship and the decision shouldn't come down to a media created desire to not have a repeat game in the NC. repeats have happened several times over the past few years and it was never an issue before. A lot of people - myself included - don't want a rematch either. Michigan had their chance to beat Ohio State in the last game they played. They lost. I'd like to see Florida, a one-loss team from what's probably the best conference in college football, get their shot at Ohio State. it's about 50/50. had the media not made so much of it these past few weeks. I don't think anybody even contemplates it. like I said though. repeats have happened all the time and nobody said anything about it before. why now? and why the sudden change in philosophy by the voters? they're obviosly just responding to the 'no repeat' sentiment that has taken over the discussion. also, who cares about what conference they come from. Michigan has only one loss too. I personally think a rematch would be incredibly compelling. no Bo Schembechler distration, neutral field. damn that would be a good game. but no, it will be a boring game decided about half way through the second quarter.

It's not dribble. I'm guessing you might feel differently if you weren't a Michigan fan. I absolutely hate Michigan but thing they should go the National Championship. call me weird, I just think the two best teams should play for the National Championship and the decision shouldn't come down to a media created desire to not have a repeat game in the NC. repeats have happened several times over the past few years and it was never an issue before.

just like watching a non-Cubs Fox broadcast, Buck going out of his way to disparage a Chicago team.

jjgman; it is not about the Cubs "bending over backwards and let the player control the decisions" it's about comfort. Here is his stats for Soriano at each spot of the lineup since 2004: http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/splits?statsId=6154&type=batting3 If you can read it as I can, it clearly shows Soriano is MORE comfortable hitting leadoff then any other spot in the lineup. So it's not that the Cubs are "bending over" to Soriano, it just that they know a HAPPY Soriano in a LEADOFF spot, is a more productive and a better player then Soriano is any other lineup spot. Now, if Soriano sturggles, I could see the Cubs moving Soriano to the #3 spot in front of Lee and Ramirez, to get him going, again, but again...Soriano is the leadoff hitter,and NOT because they promised him, the stats show he is better in the leadoff hitters spot. now calculate that Soriano had the same stats hitting in the five or six hole last year instead of leadoff and put this myth to bed.

that was late Hunter.

excellent summarty. now on his pass blocking and receiving abilities...

TJ would give Emmitt Smith a run for his money. on Dancing with the Stars.

TJ just stands there.

as Tenn beats Indy and the Patriots are trailing the Lions. correction. NE ties it up

Wale

WVU front seven: DE: 6-3, 250 DE: 6-4, 290 NT: 6-4, 295 LB: 6-1, 245 LB: 6-1, 215 LB: 6-2, 225 LB: 6-2, 230 Wisconsin front seven: DE: 6-2, 260 DE: 6-6, 234 DT: 6-4, 282 DT: 6-5, 311 LB: 6-2, 214 LB: 6-2, 220 LB: 6-2, 232 Wow, those look pretty similar don't they. Are you going to call Wisconsin's front seven "skinny assed" now too? if it makes you feel special, why not Wisconsin's front seven is skinny assed. happy?

again the O-line wiggling all over the place and not getting called.