soccer10k

Two should be the limit. If you can't finish top 2 in your conference you shouldn't go to a BCS bowl. The problem is that there are 6 major conferences, 1 possible spot for a minor conference team, and 1 possible spot for Notre Dame. There are 10 spots overall. What happens if both Notre Dame has a year where they don't make the BCS and there is no eligible minor conference team? That means that there will be 6 conference winners, and then 4 of the conferences will be forced to send a 2nd team-and some of those 2nd place teams might not be deserving. This year in the conferences is an example, where there are at least 3 conferences with no at-large teams eligible at this moment. (Pac-10, Big XII, ACC) The BCS is just lucky that 2 of those spots will be filled this year by Boise State and Notre Dame, or else there would be an extra spot with no team eligible to fill it. That's a good point. I feel it should be an 'if necessary' sort of thing though. If no other teams are eligible then you can have a third team. I just don't like the idea of a third place team in the BCS.

Boise St. in a BCS bowl would be a travesty. Outside of an early win against Oregon St, they have played absolutely no one. Just because a team goes undefeated against a high school schedule does not entitle them to a BCS game. Although it would be kind of fun to watch them get massacred. you have to feel bad for them though. That program has done a great job in recruiting and building a good team....not their fault that the rest of the conference is a joke. I think it's elitist to say that only teams from the 6 BCS conferences should be allowed to play in a BCS game. Boise St. has been pretty well punished in both the polls and computer, but staying undefeated has forced them in there. If they lose today, then no problem, they go to the whatever bowl. If ND loses tonight, would you still put them in as an at-large over BSU? If they are punished by both the Polls and the Computers, doesn't that actually mean something? That they face weak competition and they really aren't that good? I sorta agree that it would be an embarrassment to see them in the BCS. They'll get steamrolled. If they want to go, let them go, but they will get destroyed. Also, LOL, ND is pretty bad. Notre Dame's victories are about on par with Boise State. In fact, has Charlie Weis really beaten any quality opponent? Boise State rolled Oregon State earlier this year and Ian Johnson torched them for 240 yards. That Oregon State rushing defense has only given up 103 rushing ypg this year. I'm not saying they'll win the BCS game but I don't think they're as bad as a lot of people think.

Touchdown Louisville. 17-14 Cardinals.

Boise St. in a BCS bowl would be a travesty. Outside of an early win against Oregon St, they have played absolutely no one. Just because a team goes undefeated against a high school schedule does not entitle them to a BCS game. Although it would be kind of fun to watch them get massacred. you have to feel bad for them though. That program has done a great job in recruiting and building a good team....not their fault that the rest of the conference is a joke. I think it's elitist to say that only teams from the 6 BCS conferences should be allowed to play in a BCS game. Boise St. has been pretty well punished in both the polls and computer, but staying undefeated has forced them in there. If they lose today, then no problem, they go to the whatever bowl. If ND loses tonight, would you still put them in as an at-large over BSU? With all the losses to the top teams this weekend, yes I would take ND as an at-large with a loss today.

Two should be the limit. If you can't finish top 2 in your conference you shouldn't go to a BCS bowl.

Boise State playing Nevada on ESPN2 and is basically playing for a BCS bowl.

Especially in just over 90 seconds.

Better than the Big 12. That may or may not be true, though a healthy OU and Texas would beat any team in the Big East. Of course, no one has been in the football threads hyping the Big 12 as the best conference in america. Who has been hyping the Big East as the best conference? All Cuse and I are saying is that they should get some respect. For the record, I think the Pac-10 is, top to bottom, the best conference in the nation with the SEC a close second.

Better than the Big 12.

USF has to get a first down still. There's your first down. And even if they didn't get one, White would have had to throw the ball and go around 80 yards to win. Not likely.

South Carolina's going to beat Clemson.

WVU is going down.

Yet they can't against SF. It's pretty funny to watch a club like WVU, who once tried to convince the nation of their national title credentials, struggle with a ballclub like South Florida. The fact that they are just illustrates that the Big East is a small time conference parading as one of the big boys. I'm not sure how you can take any conference game and prove anything. Florida and SC did the same thing several weeks ago-did that prove the SEC was a small time conference? The only way you can really measure a conference is their non-conference play-the Big East was good against that, but very unproven at the same time (lots of wins, bad competition). It's all a matter of perspective-you can take this game and say the Big East isn't very good, or you can take the same result and show how the conference is deep enough that the middle teams can beat the top teams. It's very hard to tell which of those interpretations is really the correct one. BTW, South Florida up 21-12 now. No, I feel quite safe in saying that South Carolina is far superior competition to a school such as USF. Plus this game is for all the marbles for WVU. There's nothing to overlook. This is it. Except for the fact that they play Rutgers next week. Louisville has 1 conference loss and what *looks* to be an easy schedule to close the season. And your point is? Louisville beat WVU so they hold the tiebreaker anyway. If both win out Louisville wins the conference.

Yet they can't against SF. It's pretty funny to watch a club like WVU, who once tried to convince the nation of their national title credentials, struggle with a ballclub like South Florida. The fact that they are just illustrates that the Big East is a small time conference parading as one of the big boys. I'm not sure how you can take any conference game and prove anything. Florida and SC did the same thing several weeks ago-did that prove the SEC was a small time conference? The only way you can really measure a conference is their non-conference play-the Big East was good against that, but very unproven at the same time (lots of wins, bad competition). It's all a matter of perspective-you can take this game and say the Big East isn't very good, or you can take the same result and show how the conference is deep enough that the middle teams can beat the top teams. It's very hard to tell which of those interpretations is really the correct one. BTW, South Florida up 21-12 now. No, I feel quite safe in saying that South Carolina is far superior competition to a school such as USF. Plus this game is for all the marbles for WVU. There's nothing to overlook. This is it. Except for the fact that they play Rutgers next week.

I have my doubts about Florida as a National Title contender.

Yet they can't against SF. It's pretty funny to watch a club like WVU, who once tried to convince the nation of their national title credentials, struggle with a ballclub like South Florida. The fact that they are just illustrates that the Big East is a small time conference parading as one of the big boys. Don't start this again.

I would also. I think Smith, Quinn, and McFadden are definitely going to New York, and Slaton is likely to go. I'm not sure who would be the 5th right now though as there are several candidates on the next level. They don't have to invite 5 players for the ceremony. Only Bush, Young, and Leinart were invited last year. I think the candidates are weak enough for them to invite a 5th person-I think they only invited 3 last year because vitually no one had anybody but those 3 1st, 2nd, or 3rd. I think some other names could get some top 3 votes this year, and so there will be a 5th invited-I'm just not sure who (Hart/Rice/Calvin Johnson/others). I agree they probably will. I was just saying that they don't necessarily have to invite 5. As for an extra candidate, try Colt Brennan.

I would also. I think Smith, Quinn, and McFadden are definitely going to New York, and Slaton is likely to go. I'm not sure who would be the 5th right now though as there are several candidates on the next level. They don't have to invite 5 players for the ceremony. Only Bush, Young, and Leinart were invited last year.

USC's defense is better than last years version.

Same here and I wear it proudly.

The Cubs will win, and lose, somewhere between 0 and 162 games in 2007 (just regular season).

GO TROJANS!!!

Zito and Boras probably laugh at 5/60. If the Cubs are serious, $12M per year isn't going to get it done. Not even close.

Already did.

Arkansas should have tried to run the ball on first and second down. They know Dick is having a horrible day and you know McFadden could break one on any play. You have to try it at least.