bukie

No need to be mean to dew.

Apparently the league adjusted to Hill by....psyching him out into throwing wildly?

Not if they tie.

I'm just saying that I think PSU struggles less against OSU at home in this case. Either way, it was the only close game PSU has played this year didnt i tell you guys the third week of the season to watch out for penn state? i dont think ive ever said penn state wasnt good. i dont think they matchup well against USC or Florida (no one really does), but Ive said I think they can beat the top Big XII teams. Again, I havent really been saying the Big Ten is down this year either...its not. The down side to the Big Ten is there really isn't a distinction between the 3rd best team and the 8th best team. So, though there are probably only two top 25 teams, there are 8 top 40-45 teams. Although, since MSU actually pulled out that victory Saturday, maybe they are the third best team. Well, that, and Michigan really blows.

What sucks for Texas is if they still make the Big XII championship game, are ranked #3 (behind #1 Alabama and #2 Penn State) they will face #10-15 Missouri and will win. No one will be all that impressed with the win. They already knew they would beat Missouri (who has been exposed quite a bit of late and may even stumble before then). If Florida's sitting there at #4 and kicks Alabama's ass like they're supposed to, they take out the #1 team in impressive fashion and will in all probability jump Texas. I agree completly, I think Texas needs to have a decent little cushion over Florida going into the Championship Weekend to have a shot. Pretty much all of the tie-breaker scenarios favor Texas should Tech lose one game, so I think they still have a good shot to get in. Unless we have only two undefeated teams at the end of the regular season the BCS is primed to take another very large hit this year, Texas might just be one of the sacrificial lambs. I'm almost rooting for what would be the most disastrous BCS result ever: an undefeated Penn State not playing in a championship game, while 1-loss Big 12 and SEC champions do. PSU then beats a 1-loss USC in a meaningless Rose Bowl.

I don't doubt that the Big 12 is the best conference this year, but what is the Big 12's best non-conference win? There's got to be something better than Missouri over Illinois, right?

Ouch, they left too much time on the clock... ;)

actually if texas scores here and then kicks the extra point, and it ends up being a one point longhorn win, then the red raiders should not receive a loss, since the extra point doesn't really count for anything and the game is really tied and going to overtime. man, this is so confusing all close games should just be tossed out, a win is the same as a loss, a loss is the same as a win only blowouts will count in mephball i'm okay with that, penn state only has one non-win (ohio st game) No, that counts, since Ohio State had no business being in that game. Ole Miss is 2 plays away from being undefeated, though, and it was a miracle Florida didn't make a 2-point extra point to beat them.

Or, more simply, a system that attempts to be objective based merely on point differential is hugely flawed in a sport where point differential is meaningless to the championship format in place, and you only get a 9-game sample size. It's a lot more subjective to debate how good a team is than an objective point differential system, just as it's a lot more subjective than wins and losses.

That's not the point though, which is apparently what you are failing to understand. Whether or not they are accurate is completely irrelevant. What matters is that they, well, matter. That is the incentive, and that is what makes the argument as to what team is the best largely subjective.

Actually, in all BCS-accepted computer ratings, all that matters is winning and losing. How much a team won or lost by doesn't matter at all. Of course, that only covers 1/3 of the actual BCS rankings. The other 2/3 are covered by a coaches poll, in which what conference a team plays in matters about as much as how well a team plays in its games, and both of which matter far less than winning or losing a game. The other third? The Harris poll, which might actually be the rating which depends on scoring the most, as it's designed to be a statistically broad representation of the entire NCAA. It's still people voting, which is far less objective than running the numbers. So, in essence, a team's sole goal in a year is to make the championship game. To do that, all that really matters is to win every game. Whether a team wins 13-6 or 45-3, all that matters to conference standings and computer ratings is whether or not it was a W or an L. Conservatively, 90% of what matters to the other 2/3 of the BCS ratings is whether or not it was a W or an L. Which, really, means that for all intents and purposes all that a team should be concerned with in a game is a W or an L, since that's what will determine who plays for the championship, and who is watching. As to how that affects which team is actually better or worse, to take a sole sample of scoring differences is inherently flawed as a model, since that is not the goal of any team. Sure, better teams are more apt to win by a greater margin, and blowout wins and close losses are better signs of a good team than close wins and blowout losses, but beyond a one point victory, it really doesn't matter to a college team in the grand scheme of things, so there's absolutely no incentive to run up any score.

It's a shame Florida played a perfect game up to that missed PAT, which would have won them the game...

Yep, basically 6 interchangeable teams in the Big Ten this year after PSU and OSU.

Illinois with a huge defensive (yes, really) play to make it essentially a 5-score game, the way it's going. EDIT: Which just furthers the idea that teams 3-8 in the Big Ten are largely interchangeable from week to week.

Who's the dumbass(es) who voted OSU not in last? Pity fans.

The Bears do have 3 games remaining against the top two pass defenses in the NFL, but Kyle did pretty well against the #6 defense (Minnesota, 2 TDs, 0 INT, 114.5 rating) and struggled a bit against the #4 defense (Philly, 3 TD, 2 INT, 75.6 rating).

Just out of curiosity, how do you figure Northwestern, Minnesota and Iowa are "clearly" better than Ole Miss? They very well may be better, but I'm just curious how you come to the "clearly" idea. The same way he figured Purdue and UM were clearly worse. Most any indicator will tell you that Purdue and UM are worse than Ole Miss. Scarily enough, Sagarin has UM as the worst team in the Big Ten, behind Indiana.

Just out of curiosity, how do you figure Northwestern, Minnesota and Iowa are "clearly" better than Ole Miss? They very well may be better, but I'm just curious how you come to the "clearly" idea. I'm looking statistically, comparing the computer rankings I know about. Minnesota, Northwestern and Iowa are in the 15-25 range in general on all of them (NW being the lowest at 30 in the Sagarin predictor). Illinois, Ole Miss and Wisconsin are in the 35-50 range in general on all of them (Illinois being the highest at 29 in the Sagarin predictor). It fluctuates a lot week to week, due to the necessarily low sample size of 7 to 9 games for everyone, but right now there's a clear difference. Being an Illinois fan, I would like to think they are a better team than Minnesota or Northwestern, but that hasn't been the case for the great majority of the year (aside from 3 quarters at Michigan and the Indiana clinic). I liken Illinois and Wisconsin as the most similar Big Ten teams to Ole Miss. Sure, they're capable of beating good teams, but for the great majority of the year, they haven't shown that capability.

The thing I found most interesting about last night's NBA action: The Knicks won at home, scored 120 points, and neither Marbury nor Curry played a single minute.

Also, if we're seriously doing the "Ole Miss in the Big Ten" comparison, there are clearly six Big Ten teams better than Ole Miss right now: Penn State, Ohio State, Michigan State, Minnesota, Iowa, Northwestern. Illinois/Wisconsin are in the same field, Illinois maybe a little better, Wisconsin maybe a little worse. Purdue, Indiana, Michigan are clearly worse. So, in the bottom half of the conference for sure, possibly bottom third.

actually i would like to do this, let's see your comparison of team top to bottom of each conference - like rank each team in one conference from best to worst, and compare it with the team in the same spot from the other conference. Someone does that already. It's called the Sagarin conference ratings. He does two, one where the rating is weighted more to the middle teams of the conference and one where each spot in the conference is equally weighted. In the first, it goes Big XII, Big Ten, ACC, SEC, Pac 10, Big East. In the second, it goes Big XII, Big Ten, SEC, ACC, Pac 10, Big East.

He can post up better than Hinrich.

So, which is more likely now, that the Bears give the Lions their first win, or the Bears give the Titans their first loss? :)

I've been wondering for years what the Big Ten could do to make their basketball exciting, and there it is.

That ad definitely makes me hope they limit Forte's carries.