dew1679666265

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. I agree that this system is very flawed and lends itself to far more debate than we would have with a playoff. My preconception before the season was that USC was better than Penn State. That being said, neither has a very impressive schedule as things look right now (save wins over OSU) and neither would have wins like Florida's wins over Bama and Georgia (going back to our hypothetical). So ultimately, I could see the justification in Florida jumping either. That said, though, I agree that most wouldn't agree with me.

Drew Brees is the best QB in the league right now. Rivers has more yards per pass attempt, more touchdowns, and less interceptions. How is Brees better? Brees basically matches Rivers in everything. Brees has more yards. Brees has done all this without Colston and Shockey. Rivers still has LT, Gates, Chambers, Jackson around him. Brees these past weeks had... David Patten, Billy Miller, and Lance Moore. Brees has more yards largely because the Saints throw the ball downfield more. Rivers throws more short yardage passes as opposed to Brees throwing it vertically more often.

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. My bad, they almost did and should have. Still though, a win over Florida and near win over Wake is not the sign of a terrible team.

It'd be justifiable. It wouldn't happen, but it could be justified. All the more reason why we need a playoff.

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.

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. Dammit, beaten. Teetering on the edge = Ohio St. #11. Top 15 in a not at all arbitrary cutoff kinda way = #13 LSU Oh, it's very arbitrary, I don't deny that. I've already admitted numerous times that the hypothetical we're talking about now would never happen (I think all of PSU, Florida and Texas will lose a game or more this year - with Florida the most likely to have multiple losses). Right this very moment, though, Florida's got a tougher schedule than Penn State and would have won the SEC title by beating a (likely) top 5 Alabama team that slaughtered Clemons (average) and Georgia (top 10).

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 a good point, and all three teams have had massive beatdowns (Florida over LSU, USC over Ohio State and Alabama over Georgia). I'll agree that it's too early to make a final judgement on whether PSU or Florida should be in. As of right now it would be justifiable for either to make it, though honestly, Bama has a better argument than Florida does. That's why we have six games left to play.

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. I'm going primarily off of the polls right now. Obviously they are very, very flawed and you make a good point that we don't know exactly how good teams like Ohio State, LSU and Georgia are right now (hence why I'm going mostly off the polls with this argument). Things could change drastically by the end of the year (and I think they will), but right now there are three teams in the top 15 that Florida would have beaten if they win out and the lone top 15 win for Penn State right now is teetering on the edge (Ohio State). Again, things could - and likely will - change, but as of right now I think the polls are our best information to go off.

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? That's the problem, Penn State would have wins comparable to the mid-level wins for Florida. If Ohio State loses another game or two, there won't be a team in the top 15 (save possibly Michigan State) that Penn State will have beaten. Florida has three of those (as of now) - as well as a possible win over a top 5 team (Alabama). And it's still better than any win Penn State will have.

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.

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. I could handle that or a similar setup as a compromise.

Agreed. If they tried to be creative, it could work. using the bowls as a playoff wouldn't change the financial situation Again, are you sure about the money dropoff? I doubt that it would be huge myself. I believe that if the NCAA sanctioned a playoff, that the money would work the same as the NCAA basketball tournament. In other words, instead of the individual schools getting multi-million dollar paydays, all money from the playoffs would be equally distributed amongst EVERY NCAA school. Would it have to be set up that way? It may be the only way to get enough support to push it through, but the idea itself seems a bit silly to me. I don't expect a playoff system to happen, but purely for the on-field issues, it'd be a huge improvement over these ridiculous polls.

Agreed. If they tried to be creative, it could work. using the bowls as a playoff wouldn't change the financial situation Again, are you sure about the money dropoff? I doubt that it would be huge myself.

You sure the money dropoff would be significant? I tend to question that it would be huge, but have no numbers to back it up. Do you?

Agreed. If they tried to be creative, it could work.

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. Oh I do too. Every year though I do hope for BCS disaster, though that could backfire on me this year. I do however think its very possible that one of either Bama or Florida will finish with only 1 loss. Just like I think its very possible that out of Texas, OU, Mizzou, Texas Tech, and Oklahoma State one of those teams could finish with only 1 loss. OU could finish with 1 loss and not make the Big 12 title game. I don't think chaos is enough to force a playoff. Especially when it happens no more than once every five years tops (the last being Auburn getting mercilessly screwed in 04 so that OU could get demolished). I do hope for BCS chaos, though. Just in case.

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. One of the two teams would feel screwed, which is the reason for the desire for a playoff system. the only people who desire the playoff system are the fans, media, and maybe 1/2 the coaches. The universities and NCAA want nothing to do with it. The NCAA and universities want nothing to do with it because the current system is raking in the cash - no other reason. And there is a very slowly growing number of university presidents and ADs who want it. Last year (or the year before) the UGA president sent a letter to NCAA bigwigs attempting to get a playoff instituted.

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. One of the two teams would feel screwed, which is the reason for the desire for a playoff system.

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.

Texas and Florida should go, in my opinion. Texas should be a no-doubter, but I think Florida ought to be a pretty sure thing too. The Ole Miss loss looks bad, but wouldn't be much, if any worse than USC's loss to Oregon State. Florida also will have better wins than either USC or Penn State. There's a very good chance that Penn State would get the nod, though. The Big Ten isn't especially good this year, but it's still no easy task to make it through unbeaten. Florida might be a little more deserving because of their superior wins, but I wouldn't pitch a fit about either making it (I definitely wouldn't complain about Florida getting passed over though :D ). How would we compare wins Big 12 wins over Mizzou, OU, Tech, OSU to SEC wins over Bama, LSU, and Georgia. Honestly I think Florida's schedule is weaker than Texas, but I might be biased. All seven team will have been in the top 10 at some point in the season. I think there is a strong case that those two conference champions should play against each other for the national title, but possible neither conference will even have a representative in the title game should Penn State go undefeated and USC have only 1 loss. There's no doubt Texas has a stronger resume right now than Florida. And the likelihood is that the margin will remain throughout the year. My point was that while Penn State wouldn't have a loss, Florida might have three better wins than the Nittany Lions. And it would be a travesty (though not surprising) if USC made it into the title game over 1-loss Texas and Florida. The resumes of the latter two are much better than Florida's.

[-X I don't believe you. There's no way something that sensible and logical exists. After all, there's certainly nothing wrong with the current system . . . [-(

Well, so much for that trade. McCargo fails his physical and goes back to the Bills. Ouch, that sucks. Joseph Addai will also be out 2-4 weeks - not a good week for Colt fans so far. At least Bob Sanders should be back soon. . . No Addai and no Sanders should greatly help us out, but the Colts are still a very good team even without them. That offense looked almost back to normal against the Ravens even though Addai left in the first quarter. I now feel more justified in being scared of the Titans/Colts game. It should be a fun game. Also, Dungy's making it sound like Addai's injury isn't as serious as people are saying, but I have a hard time believing him. I don't know, Dungy is looking like the new Belichick after hiding Peyton's extra surgery. :wink: Seriously, though, I'm not sure how a torn hamstring could be overstated. Unless the initial reports were factually incorrect, a torn hamstring is going to be difficult to quickly recover from. And I'm torn on the Titans/Colts game. On one hand, I want the Colts to be playing well so we'll get a great game. But, if the Colts still don't have it completely together, it'll be an easier win (if the Titans can still get it) in a pretty tough stretch of games. It's a fairly underrated rivalry, though, in my opinion.

Texas and Florida should go, in my opinion. Texas should be a no-doubter, but I think Florida ought to be a pretty sure thing too. The Ole Miss loss looks bad, but wouldn't be much, if any worse than USC's loss to Oregon State. Florida also will have better wins than either USC or Penn State. There's a very good chance that Penn State would get the nod, though. The Big Ten isn't especially good this year, but it's still no easy task to make it through unbeaten. Florida might be a little more deserving because of their superior wins, but I wouldn't pitch a fit about either making it (I definitely wouldn't complain about Florida getting passed over though :D ).

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. Can Penn State match wins over LSU (by 30), Georgia and Alabama? A win over Ohio State would certainly be one, but I don't see any other top 10 or 15 teams on the Lions' schedule. Plus, there's an excellent chance Bama will be top 5 if UF beats them in the SEC Championship game.

Well, so much for that trade. McCargo fails his physical and goes back to the Bills. Ouch, that sucks. Joseph Addai will also be out 2-4 weeks - not a good week for Colt fans so far. At least Bob Sanders should be back soon. . . No Addai and no Sanders should greatly help us out, but the Colts are still a very good team even without them. That offense looked almost back to normal against the Ravens even though Addai left in the first quarter. I now feel more justified in being scared of the Titans/Colts game.