bukie

I have more of a problem with Illinois getting in and not Mizzou. I don't like these bowl tie ins and it screws up the rest of the system which is bad enough as it is. But Illinois getting in had nothing to do with Missouri. Once Kansas was in, Missouri couldn't get in. Same deal with Florida. Really, the only option better than Illinois that the Rose had was Arizona State, and they weren't about to schedule a conference rematch.

I think the thing nobody is getting here, unfair as it may be, Kansas would've been selected for a BCS spot regardless of whether they would've beaten Missouri or not. They were selected because they are the more attractive team. And they would've only had one loss either way.

I for one welcome Illinois' position as this year's Notre Dame of BCS participants, a team that nobody thinks measures up to the rest, and is universally considered in only because of politics and tradition. First Rose Bowl in 24 years, though!

If it helps, once WVU lost, a Missouri win would've helped Illinois more, so I was rooting for you.

I fully expect Illinois to lose, and I fully expect USC to be favored by 2 TDs. My hope is that Illinois makes the game competitive and has a chance to win in the 4th quarter, just like every game this year.

So now what do the Big 10 teams have to do to look good in bowl season? Win the game at LSU, the game at USC, or the game at Florida?

7: Missouri 9: Florida 12: Arizona State 14: Clemson

Also an off chance that the BCS picks Florida over Georgia if somehow USC or Virginia Tech bumps them from the top 4 of the computers. Not likely, though.

Hey, if Illinois is going to be overmatched regardless, why not in the Rose Bowl?

Illinois at #13 in the polls. Still may not have jumped to top 14 in the BCS standings, as BC and Clemson will also be close.

So, after Hawaii's win, the BCS is going to look like this: BCS Championship: Ohio State vs. (#2) Rose Bowl: (USC) vs. BCS At-Large Orange Bowl: West Virginia vs. (Virginia Tech) Sugar Bowl: (LSU) vs. BCS At-Large Fiesta Bowl: (Oklahoma) vs. BCS At-Large Two of the at-large bids will definitely go to Georgia and Hawaii. Some of those teams are in parentheses because they could still make the championship game, and in that case, likely the second-place team from that conference will play in their spot (USC -> ASU, LSU -> Georgia, Oklahoma->Kansas/Missouri). Also, if Kansas finishes in the top 4 of the BCS, they automatically take an at-large bid which sadly leaves Missouri out in the cold (or the Cotton Bowl). If Kansas doesn't finish in the top 4, I could definitely see Missouri jump into the Sugar Bowl with Hawaii in the Fiesta. Of course, that last Rose Bowl spot is up for debate too. Common opinion is that the Rose Bowl will stick with tradition and pick an Illinois team to maintain Big 10-Pac 10 integrity. Arizona State is not going to be picked for the spot, because nobody is interested in a rematch. Possibly a Missouri or Kansas team if they aren't selected elsewhere, but since they have the first pick of at-larges, they don't have to worry about satisfying the other rules at that point (top 4 at-large or Hawaii). I think Illinois has the best shot at it, not because they necessarily "deserve" it, but because politically it just works out best.

BCS hell would be LSU winning the Sugar, USC winning the Rose, OU winning the Fiesta, WVU winning the Orange, and Georgia winning the BCS championship game. All that happens, THEN who is the best team?

So, BCS picture: Conference champions: - Ohio State - West Virginia - LSU - USC - Virginia Tech - Oklahoma At-large possibilities: - Georgia/Florida - Kansas/Missouri - Hawaii - Arizona State - Illinois - Clemson Basically, 4 spots available for 6 teams. If Georgia and/or Kansas finish in the top 4, they are automatically guaranteed a BCS spot. If Hawaii finishes in the top 12, they are guaranteed a BCS spot. If I were able to ignore current rankings and start over based on who deserves what, I would probably go like the following: 1. OSU - They were simply the most consistent team this year, and only struggled in 2 games. 2. USC - Also only struggled in 2 games, but happened to lose both. 3. LSU - Lost 2 games in 3 OT each. 4. Oklahoma - Won a tough conference, had 2 serious mental lapses 5. Georgia - Possibly even playing better than LSU right now, but didn't even play in the conference championship 6. West Virginia - Different team without White 7. Missouri - Had a good run, but not better than OK 8. Virginia Tech - Probably the weakest conference champion, blown out by LSU 9. Kansas - Put up some impressive scores on some weak teams, really wish they would've played the stronger B-12 teams. 10. Florida - Impressive offensively, tough schedule, definitely the best of the 3-loss teams. 11. Hawaii - Still undefeated, at least for the next couple hours, only impressive win was against Boise State 12. Arizona State - Tied USC in a very competitive Pac-10, but completely outclassed by USC and looks worse now than earlier in the year 13. Illinois - Hey, they can go to the Rose Bowl! Hard to say they really looked impressive in most of their wins, although it's easy to look impressive against Syracuse, Minnesota and Northwestern. But hey, best win of the whole group by beating OSU in OSU. 14. Clemson - Not even the best team in their own division, here mostly by attrition.

Have to say, as an Illini fan, I really was only hoping for one of these outcomes, not all of them.

If all this puts Illinois in the Rose Bowl, it'll be their first since 1984, third-longest drought in the conference (Indiana, Minnesota)

Of course, the issue at hand is right now that if ASU or Hawaii loses, there may not be a choice left, and Illinois would have to go to a BCS bowl. Of course, Clemson probably sneaks into the top 14 also if either loses.

Yeah, even Illinois hater Bukie seems to think so. I'd just like to know how they are better than Illinois. SSR provided a game by game breakdown of both teams and it looks like Illinois has the slight edge over USF. USF's best win was against a Pat White-less West Virginia team. And then of course they lost 3 games in a row. I'm sorry, but good teams don't lose 3 games in a row. As far as the whole Juice in the NFL deal, he's going to have to learn how to throw the ball with more touch on his passes. If he can improve his accuracy his final two years in college, I think he'll be drafted in a later round. USF did play a tougher schedule, has a better OOC win in Auburn, had comparable losses (they were in every game, and didn't drop a game to a team as bad as Iowa), and was actually capable of blitzing teams out that didn't play in 1-AA (Louisville, Syracuse, UCF). Illinois only really blew out one "quality" team in Northwestern. It's not clear-cut, for sure, but an argument can be made. An argument better than "lol they aren't even ranked".

Yeah, even Illinois hater Bukie seems to think so. Tempered expectations helps me be happier about their success and less annoyed when they fail.

I'm still looking where he's justifying his selection for the Giants as a breakout season, unless "They lose their best hitter on the worst slugging team in the league" is his justification for the Giants' "breakout season"

Hey now, Juice passes just as well as LaDainian Tomlinson, and he's in the NFL. ;) well the question is who is a better QB if their legs were broken: Juice Williams or Darren McFadden? Answer: Darren McFadden. Yeah Juice is an NFL Stud no doubt! I could see an NFL team taking a flyer on him and trying to convert him to WR/RB like Randle El, but that rarely works out as is. If he magically plays all next year as well as he played against Ohio State (most of the reason Illinois made them look so bad was that Ohio State basically ganged up on the run game and dared Juice to beat him...90% of the time, good plan), then he's suddenly a pro prospect QB. The likelihood of that, though, is slim to none. I'd enjoy watching Illinois in the national championship that year, though.

Hey now, Juice passes just as well as LaDainian Tomlinson, and he's in the NFL. ;)

Yes, I would say South Florida is better than Illinois. USF merely managed to lose all 3 of their games in a row to drop off the human polls' radar. Florida, USC, West Virginia and Ohio State are also better teams than Illinois. Personally, I'm just glad they are in the discussion this year. I still don't think they get blown out by whoever they play.

West Viriginia has been more impressive against a tougher schedule than Ohio State. I have no problem being one of the two 1-loss representatives in a bowl. Missouri has also played a tougher schedule than Ohio State, but I'm not sure Missouri is a better team than Oklahoma.

Which definition of technical do you want to use to be appeased semantically? They are both 1st, 2nd or 3rd in every poll. Computer average is 1st and 3rd. If you want to go as far as a pure points predictor, at worst they would both be top 10 teams.

I also don't get the perception that Illinois is going to get drilled. Technically, they played 2 of the top 3 teams, basically dominated one of them the entire game, and lost to the other on a goal-line interception when driving for the winning TD. Lose? Sure, they can lose. Anyone can lose. But Illinois hasn't gotten drilled yet.