Orange Bowl Thread!!!

[Tress4Pres]

Well you guys can call me biased, but this game does not change my opinion on who the best team in the nation was FOR THE WHOLE YEAR: The Auburn Tigers. I just have to put them up there when they play in the toughest conference and went undefeated in it. Just my opinion. It doesn't mean much, but that's my opinion.

USC is better than I thought they were though. I was wrong about them. They are still #2 in my book and really the ONLY way they could have changed my mind would be to beat them head to head. And I guess that's not fair to them, but like I said before, my opinion doesn't mean that much.

I agree 100%! Auburn made it through a BRUTAL schedule undefeated and deserve to be in the National Championship Game!!!! Once again the AP Writers and Coaches Poll are to blam. I know a lot of people are suseptible to blame the BCS but if the AP or Coaches Poll would have put Auburn ahead of OU!!!!! I just check Espn.com and the schedule strength of both teams: Auburn: 3rd OU: 110th!!!!!! COME ON!!!! Seriously, even OU's non-conference schedule was a JOKE!!!! OU only played two ranked teams all year while Auburn played six ranked teams this year.

Now I do not mean to take anything away from USC. They are indeed the Champions of College Football!!!!

 

[Indy95]

Exactly. Everyone is quick to blame the BCS, simply because it seems like the popular thing to do. But in fact, if college football still utilized the old bowl system, these teams would be playing in THREE different bowls! The BCS actually gave fans a potential #1 vs. #2 game, and everyone suddenly hates it because of things that the system cannot control.

For example, after last year's national championship incident (LSU vs. OU), USC, because the Trojans were ranked #1 in both BCS polls (AP and Coaches I believe), whined and cajoled (along with the media who, surprise! are based in LA) to get the two polls to have greater power in the BCS. Besides being immensely greedy and childish on USC's part, it sacrificed what was best for college football in general, namely the BCS system's integrity, just so they might get into the championship game (because of the media influence in LA). So what happens? This year, not one but TWO disasters, one good, one bad. The so-called "good" disaster was the Texas/Cal incident, where Mack Brown's plead for sympathy grabbed him a Rose Bowl bid, sending Cal (the #4 team in the nation) to the Holiday Bowl. The "bad" disaster was, of course, the championship game, screwing Auburn every which way.

The polls are based on OPINIONS, NOT FACTS! Why don't these people understand this? As long as the polls are involved, the BCS is a flawed system, because of human error. When the AP decided to leave the BCS, then I say good riddence! I can't believe it was even supposed to go on for this long. Oh well, there you have it.

 

[dxwwf3]

Exactly. Everyone is quick to blame the BCS, simply because it seems like the popular thing to do. But in fact, if college football still utilized the old bowl system, these teams would be playing in THREE different bowls! The BCS actually gave fans a potential #1 vs. #2 game, and everyone suddenly hates it because of things that the system cannot control

I agree. It's easy for people to bash the BCS by I like the system alot. For example, if Auburn had lost a game this year before the bowls, the system would be PERFECT! The believe that the regular sechedules are so brutal, that a playoff might not exactly be a "can't miss" solution. It seems to me that most of the people that want a playoff are the fans/media without a favorite team. I know, as a Tennessee fan, that it's really tough to go through a SEC Sechedule enough as it is. An 8 team playoff would add 2 games to the schedule. I like the Plus 1 idea, WHEN NEEDED. For example the past two years. I wish they would schedule a plus one game when these type of circumstances arise and adjust the bowl matchups accordingly. But in the case of the 2002 season when Ohio State played Miami in the Fiesta, there was no need for a playoff and there was no need for a plus one game! The BCS was perfect that year and a playoff would have just wasted our time because Ohio State and Miami were by far the best two teams in the regular season that year and they shouldn't have had to go through a playoff to get there.

 

[bork]

Well in their defense the one thing I can never understand about halftime shows at big bowl games is that they always get artists that have no appeal to the football crowd.

The worst case of not knowing your audience has to be when Harley Davidson had Elton John as the surprise headliner for its big 100th bash. :hammer:

 

[Wilt Dasney]

If the human polls don't belong in the BCS equation, then what should it consist of? Rankings from computers who can never watch a game? There's no mathematical equation to determine the best 2 (or 3, or 10, or 85) best teams in the country. I thought it might work out at first, but after the last few years, it's clear that the BCS is no more capable of crowning a "true" champion year in and year out than the old bowl system.

We've had the BCS 7 years now, and exactly 3 of those years we've had a true 1 vs. 2 in the title game. All three of those years, a retarted monkey could have picked the championship matchup ('98 UT-FSU, '99 FSU-VT, '02 Mia-OSU). So (surprise) the only time the BCS works is when there are two teams that are clearly better than everyone else. We don't need computer math to do that. Just get a committee to select these teams if you're not going to have a playoff.

 

[Piebald]

It makes me upset that idiots like Ashlee Simpson can get a record deal yet artists and bands travel around the country, if not the entire world, trying to get their name out and sell a couple of 10 dollar shirts and burned CDs. Ashlee had a show that shoved her terrible music down people's throats and finally they gave in and bought her P.O.S cd like zombies. "You make me wanna LALA"? Sounds like she couldn't find a word to rhyme..

Maybe this is a wakeup call for all record companies...? .........


..Nah. They'll still churn out over-produced garbage for years to come. :wave:

 

[Tress4Pres]

If the human polls don't belong in the BCS equation, then what should it consist of? Rankings from computers who can never watch a game? There's no mathematical equation to determine the best 2 (or 3, or 10, or 85) best teams in the country. I thought it might work out at first, but after the last few years, it's clear that the BCS is no more capable of crowning a "true" champion year in and year out than the old bowl system.

We've had the BCS 7 years now, and exactly 3 of those years we've had a true 1 vs. 2 in the title game. All three of those years, a retarted monkey could have picked the championship matchup ('98 UT-FSU, '99 FSU-VT, '02 Mia-OSU). So (surprise) the only time the BCS works is when there are two teams that are clearly better than everyone else. We don't need computer math to do that. Just get a committee to select these teams if you're not going to have a playoff.

Actually, many Division 1 coaches do not have time to watch other games!!!! Also, the writers are soooooo biased it is sickening. Here is an interesting statistic: 45% of the AP writers are stationed in California!!!!! Now tell me that the writers were not bias last year when they voted USC to be the National Champ when it was clearly LSU who won the 2003 National Championship!!!!

If the BCS was based on strictly numbers it would be MUCH more acurate and we would be much better off!!!! My soultion is to come up with a mathematical system that determines the top 25 based on: Win-Loss record, Schedule Strength, Strength of Teams Played within and outside of conference, and Quality Win vs. Ranked Teams!!!!!!!! This would prevent teams (cough OU cough) from playing aweful non-conference schedules to pad wins!!!!!

Hey lets face it we will never have a playoff system!!!!!! At least for the next 10 years. Personally, it would be suicide for the NCAA to do away with their bowl system!!! That system makes well over 250 million each year!!!!! Also, if there was a playoff teams would play 15 games a year. DID YOU KNOW: there is actually a NCAA rule in place that no team can play more than 14 games in a year!!!! So what do you have to say to that solution?

 

[dxwwf3]

Do you guys think that the media is making a little too much of this USC team? Yes they did blow out Oklahoma and they did beat Cal, but nobody wants to talk about those very close calls with UCLA, Stanford, or Oregon State right now. They make it seem that USC has blown everyone out all year and that there is NO DOUBT that they would kill Auburn if they played them. I heard Skip Bayless and others on Around the Horn and PTI say basically the same thing. It seems that everyone is forgetting that Auburn did go undefeated in one of the top conferences in America.

Also let me not get things twisted here. USC impressed me alot last night. Alot. They probably would beat Auburn if they played half that good against them. But you cannot totally forget about the regular season in college football (Another reason I like College Football. The regular season is more important than it is in any other sport).

Am I alone on this one?

 

[Wilt Dasney]

Here is an interesting statistic: 45% of the AP writers are stationed in California!!!!! Now tell me that the writers were not bias last year when they voted USC to be the National Champ when it was clearly LSU who won the 2003 National Championship!!!!

Why did they "clearly" win it? Because they won the game the BCS said was "the game" while the #1 team in both polls wasn't allowed to play? I don't care where the writers are stationed. USC deserved a piece of the pie last year. To say they were biased because they KEPT their #1 team #1 after a bowl win (the same #1 the coaches had before the Sugar Bowl, mind) is silly.

If the BCS was based on strictly numbers it would be MUCH more acurate and we would be much better off!!!! My soultion is to come up with a mathematical system that determines the top 25 based on: Win-Loss record, Schedule Strength, Strength of Teams Played within and outside of conference, and Quality Win vs. Ranked Teams!!!!!!!! This would prevent teams (cough OU cough) from playing aweful non-conference schedules to pad wins!!!!!

I don't like having computers rank teams. I gave it a chance, but the disparity between the numbers some of these programs churn out makes it a joke. It's one of those things that sounds good, but I think there are too many variables in play to make a mathematical calculation of 1 and 2 legitimate.

As for nonconference schedules...don't forget that those are set almost a decade in advance. Granted, some schools might be a cupcake in any season, but you really have no idea what kind of team you're going to be playing when you schedule them that far in advance.

Hey lets face it we will never have a playoff system!!!!!! At least for the next 10 years. Personally, it would be suicide for the NCAA to do away with their bowl system!!! That system makes well over 250 million each year!!!!! Also, if there was a playoff teams would play 15 games a year. DID YOU KNOW: there is actually a NCAA rule in place that no team can play more than 14 games in a year!!!! So what do you have to say to that solution?

Well, not much, because I haven't called for a playoff. All I said was that they need to scrap the BCS rankings and just pick the top 2 teams by committee. Like I said, the ONLY times the BCS has worked is in seasons where there were clearly two better teams. Everytime there hasn't, the BCS has gotten it wrong (FSU over Miami '00, Nebraska over Oregon and Colorado '01, Oklahoma over USC last year, and the junk this year). Why go to all the trouble of having these rankings when anyone with half a football IQ could do what it does?

 

[Indy95]

Do you guys think that the media is making a little too much of this USC team? Yes they did blow out Oklahoma and they did beat Cal, but nobody wants to talk about those very close calls with UCLA, Stanford, or Oregon State right now. They make it seem that USC has blown everyone out all year and that there is NO DOUBT that they would kill Auburn if they played them. I heard Skip Bayless and others on Around the Horn and PTI say basically the same thing. It seems that everyone is forgetting that Auburn did go undefeated in one of the top conferences in America.

Also let me not get things twisted here. USC impressed me alot last night. Alot. They probably would beat Auburn if they played half that good against them. But you cannot totally forget about the regular season in college football (Another reason I like College Football. The regular season is more important than it is in any other sport).

Am I alone on this one?

Not at all. Remember, most of these writers and reports are based from LA. It really doesn't surprise me because these are the same idiots who claimed they were the best team not only last year, but in 2002 as well.

But remember Auburn had its share of close calls as well (LSU), and you could say that about every National Champion in the past 7 years. They are human, after all.

The playoff system should never, EVER get off the ground. It's just a selfish fan's dream. If you knew the kind of punishment these students take just for 11 or 12 weeks, just imagine what 15 would be like. The only thing that would justify a playoff system would be to eliminate non-conference play.

If the human polls don't belong in the BCS equation, then what should it consist of? Rankings from computers who can never watch a game?

That's the entire point. The computers aren't biased toward any team, like a committee or poll would be. If college football gave power back to the committees, then what's to stop USC from scheduling 4 Division II teams for non-conference play, because they know they have the writers in their back pocket already? The computers are a much fairer system than polls. If you say that only 3 of 7 championships were absolutely #1 vs. #2, then the polls would have done the exact same thing, and we would be back to the exact same arguments, and everybody would be screaming for a computerized system. So, like every statistics teacher tells you, you have to eliminate bias to achieve fair results. The polls do not belong in the BCS.

 

[dxwwf3]

But remember Auburn had its share of close calls as well (LSU), and you could say that about every National Champion in the past 7 years. They are human, after all.

Oh I know. But I just think that nobody talks about those close calls by USC. They make it seem like all of their games went the way it did last night. And that's not right at all.

I was personally there at one of Auburn's close calls (SEC Championship Game), so believe me I know good teams struggle.

 

[Tress4Pres]

Why did they "clearly" win it? Because they won the game the BCS said was "the game" while the #1 team in both polls wasn't allowed to play? I don't care where the writers are stationed. USC deserved a piece of the pie last year. To say they were biased because they KEPT their #1 team #1 after a bowl win (the same #1 the coaches had before the Sugar Bowl, mind) is silly.



I don't like having computers rank teams. I gave it a chance, but the disparity between the numbers some of these programs churn out makes it a joke. It's one of those things that sounds good, but I think there are too many variables in play to make a mathematical calculation of 1 and 2 legitimate.

As for nonconference schedules...don't forget that those are set almost a decade in advance. Granted, some schools might be a cupcake in any season, but you really have no idea what kind of team you're going to be playing when you schedule them that far in advance.



Well, not much, because I haven't called for a playoff. All I said was that they need to scrap the BCS rankings and just pick the top 2 teams by committee. Like I said, the ONLY times the BCS has worked is in seasons where there were clearly two better teams. Everytime there hasn't, the BCS has gotten it wrong (FSU over Miami '00, Nebraska over Oregon and Colorado '01, Oklahoma over USC last year, and the junk this year). Why go to all the trouble of having these rankings when anyone with half a football IQ could do what it does?

Ok here we go: LSU clearly won it because they won the Bowl Game that mattered!!! I've always been told to be the best you have to beat the best. USC clearly by beating Michigan in 2003 did not beat the best!!! LSU beat OU who was, supposively, the best at that time. Just another instance in which OU choked I guess!!!! Don't care where the writers are stationed? COME ON!!!! Are you that nieve?

Ok once again it is not the computers!!!!! The AP poll had the largest influence on the way the computer rankings broke down!!!! Now that the AP pulled out (thank god!!!) you will never see a situation like that again. Actually, if you would have seen the USA Today Sports section on the day after the AP dropped out they showed that without factoring in the AP poll into the BCS system Auburn was #2 and OU was #3!!!!! So how could you blame it come the computers? Now the BCS will finally have a chance to put schedule stength back into the equation!!!!

NON CONFERENCE SCHEDULES ARE NOT ALMOST SET A DECADE IN ADVANCE!!!!:hammer: The furthest a school can schedule a game with an opponent would be 5 years in advance!!! Don't insult my intelligence by saying something like that!!!! Seriously, nearly 10 yrs in advance would be rediculous!!!!

A committee? Come on!!! What is this the Democratic Convention? Seriously, what would that solve? And who would be a part of the committee? It would be impossible to get non-biased voting from all members!! Everyone has their own opinions and there would be no way to control that!!!!

Look we have a good system on hand!!!!! And now that the bias factor is out (AP) the system will finally work!!!!

 

[Wilt Dasney]

Tress:

I'm still not buying LSU as a consensus champion. You say that who they played in the bowls should determine a team's final ranking. So what if Virginia Tech had beaten Auburn while USC beat an OU team that (according to you) didn't belong in the title game anyway? Wouldn't that mean that the Hokies had "beaten the best?" Would VT be national champs now? I'm not saying you can't make the argument that LSU should have had the title to themselves. I'm just saying you can't act like it was clearly obvious. As I recall, Michigan was ranked #4 heading into the Rose Bowl last year. It's not like LSU beat the '85 Bears and USC beat Pittsburg State. LSU beat #3, USC beat #4.

You keep saying that where the writers are from determined their final vote like it's given fact. Here's the scenario: The #1 team in the writer's poll beat the #4 team in their bowl game and actually (get this now) STAYED #1. What a wacky concept! Again, you can say that LSU deserved that #1 if you want, but to say it like it's plain fact is just ridiculous. Just admit that it's your opinion. If you can't admit that the AP voters had a legitimate choice to make in deciding who to vote #1, you aren't being honest. The Trojans beat a good team (yeah, I know, it hurts to admit, Michigan was GOOD), the Tigers beat a good team. There was no clear separation, IMO.

And I'm pretty sure nonconference schedules are determined almost a decade in advance (8 to 9 years). You're welcome to prove me wrong there.

You also say that the AP pulling out of the BCS eliminates bias. What about the coaches' poll? Yeah, they're obligated to vote for the BCS winner AFTER the bowls, but they can vote any way they want BEFORE the bowls, so their bias will still affect the BCS rankings. Or were you saying that only sportswriters are biased when they vote?
-----
dxwwf3:

Maybe the computer rankings will come out better without the polls. I'm just suspicious of them. I honestly trust the polls more. That's just me, though.
-----

And as for the selection committee: I'm not saying it would be perfect. My only point is this--the BCS has (in my opinion, I will admit) worked 3 times now. All 3 of those times, my one-year-old nephew could have picked the title game matchup. Assuming that a committee would have done better in just half of the other 4 instances (hell, just assuming that they wouldn't have sent Nebraska to the Rose Bowl 3 years ago) means they'd have a better track record than the BCS has to this point.

Anyway...I've made my argmuents pretty clear, I think. They are my opinions, yes, but they are somewhat considered. I'm gonna go get ready for the NFL playoffs now. No debating who's #1 there.

 

[Tress4Pres]

Tress:

I'm still not buying LSU as a consensus champion. You say that who they played in the bowls should determine a team's final ranking. So what if Virginia Tech had beaten Auburn while USC beat an OU team that (according to you) didn't belong in the title game anyway? Wouldn't that mean that the Hokies had "beaten the best?" Would VT be national champs now? I'm not saying you can't make the argument that LSU should have had the title to themselves. I'm just saying you can't act like it was clearly obvious. As I recall, Michigan was ranked #4 heading into the Rose Bowl last year. It's not like LSU beat the '85 Bears and USC beat Pittsburg State. LSU beat #3, USC beat #4.

You keep saying that where the writers are from determined their final vote like it's given fact. Here's the scenario: The #1 team in the writer's poll beat the #4 team in their bowl game and actually (get this now) STAYED #1. What a wacky concept! Again, you can say that LSU deserved that #1 if you want, but to say it like it's plain fact is just ridiculous. Just admit that it's your opinion. If you can't admit that the AP voters had a legitimate choice to make in deciding who to vote #1, you aren't being honest. The Trojans beat a good team (yeah, I know, it hurts to admit, Michigan was GOOD), the Tigers beat a good team. There was no clear separation, IMO.

And I'm pretty sure nonconference schedules are determined almost a decade in advance (8 to 9 years). You're welcome to prove me wrong there.
-----
dxwwf3:

Maybe the computer rankings will come out better without the polls. I'm just suspicious of them. I honestly trust the polls more. That's just me, though.
-----

And as for the selection committee: I'm not saying it would be perfect. My only point is this--the BCS has (in my opinion, I will admit) worked 3 times now. All 3 of those times, my one-year-old nephew could have picked the title game matchup. Assuming that a committee would have done better in just half of the other 4 instances (hell, just assuming that they wouldn't have sent Nebraska to the Rose Bowl 3 years ago) means they'd have a better track record than the BCS has to this point.

Anyway...I've made my argmuents pretty clear, I think. They are my opinions, yes, but they are somewhat considered. I'm gonna go get ready for the NFL playoffs now. No debating who's #1 there.

OK here we go again: As far as I'm concerned the writers opinion on who is #1 means nothing!!!!! LSU won they are the Champs that's all there is to it. Eventhough USC won the AP poll that essentially means nothing!!!! And your whole thing with VT what is that? Look I know you may not like the BCS but it is a fair system that gives everyone a fair shot at the BIG GAME!!!! And since USC lost to CAL in 2003 (who went 5-6) they did not deserve a shot in the BCS Championship Game!!!! Seriously, just admit that LSU won the REAL National Championships Game and you could save yourself the humiliation!!!! You can't beat me!!!

Ok just because the writers #1 stayed #1 means nothing!!!! Heres a fact for you: going into the game against CAL last year USC was ranked #2 ok, after their lost to CAL (who was aweful in '03) they only fell to #5!!!!! And you try and tell me the writers are not biases:hammer: !!!! Seriously, you can not argue against that!!!! They lost to an aweful team that year and were still named National Champs? I don't think so!!!!!!

And as for the non-conference issue: You just can't admit when your wrong can you? Currently OSU has their schedule complete through 2008!!! How many years is that? Lets do the math 2008-2004= 4years:lol: !!!! I know for a fact that there is a very strict limit that the NCAA keep on the Universities!!!! Come on 8 years?

Ditch the committee idea!!!! That has to be the most aweful solution I have ever heard!!! Seriously, everyone on these forums are now dumber because of that!!!!

 

[RU42]

She was boo'd DURING her "performance."

I just saw this on Yahoo - thought some might find it interesting:

Now the train has come off the tracks again following her halftime "performance" at the Orange Bowl. In front of 70,000 in the stands and millions more on TV, she screeched out a version of her latest single, "La La." Fronted by a hot fever dream of a spectacle involving copious fireworks, pom-pom waving cheerleaders, and football players decked out in all black, Simpson sashayed across the stage in an odd black and pink ensemble while trying to hit a few notes. She finished with a flourish, but the Miami crowd let her know exactly how they felt with a loud chorus of boos. ABC offered no reaction shot of Ashlee, so searchers were left guessing what the end of a music career looks like. Searches on Ashlee Simpson eclipsed the ho-hum rout of Oklahoma in the Orange Bowl, and searches on "Ashlee Simpson Orange Bowl" and "Ashlee Simpson Video" were red-hot in the aftermath of the embarrassment.


I was laughing when I heard the 'boos' coming. And it wasn't a couple people, it was quite loud. That had to be one of the funniest moments of the game.

RU

 

[Piebald]

I was laughing when I heard the 'boos' coming. And it wasn't a couple people, it was quite loud. That had to be one of the funniest moments of the game.

RU

Even funnier----- you can clearly hear someone yelling [very loudly],
"YOU S-U-C-K!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" .... :lol:

 

[Wilt Dasney]

OK here we go again: As far as I'm concerned the writers opinion on who is #1 means nothing!!!!! LSU won they are the Champs that's all there is to it. Eventhough USC won the AP poll that essentially means nothing!!!!

Well, that's certainly some convincing logic you're using there. You don't acknowledge the AP, so it doesn't matter. Wow, you got me there.

And your whole thing with VT what is that?

Little thing I call consistent logic. Sorry, didn't mean to throw you off with it.

Seriously, just admit that LSU won the REAL National Championships Game and you could save yourself the humiliation!!!! You can't beat me!!!

I couldn't care less about "beating" you. I'll stick to considering the facts, while you stick to your well-considered position of "I'm right because I say so." You'll win many a debate that way.

As for USC losing to Cal: You can argue that that loss should have kept them from winning the title, but then how do you explain that both polls had them #1 going into the bowls? If the writers were wrong to give them a piece, then the coaches were just as wrong voting them #1 before the bowls started. Another one of those unfortunate little things I call a fact (pesky little buggers, aren't they?)

And as for the non-conference issue: You just can't admit when your wrong can you? Currently OSU has their schedule complete through 2008!!! How many years is that? Lets do the math 2008-2004= 4years:lol: !!!! I know for a fact that there is a very strict limit that the NCAA keep on the Universities!!!! Come on 8 years?

Here's some more math: There are over 100 schools in D-IA. OSU is (I think) ONE of them. One example does not settle the point. I said that I might be wrong about the scheduling, but if I am, you have yet to prove it. Show me specifically where the NCAA says 4-5 years and no more and you get a point. Until then, you're talking out of your sphincter.

Ditch the committee idea!!!! That has to be the most aweful solution I have ever heard!!! Seriously, everyone on these forums are now dumber because of that!!!!

Again, your debate skills are astounding. What an immensely thoughtful critique you presented there.

If you can present some real responses at this point, I'll be glad to continue a dialogue. If you continue to present such brilliant dissertations as "I'm right because you're wrong," then you'll just have to have fun without me.

 

[Tress4Pres]

Well, that's certainly some convincing logic you're using there. You don't acknowledge the AP, so it doesn't matter. Wow, you got me there.

Little thing I call consistent logic. Sorry, didn't mean to throw you off with it.


I couldn't care less about "beating" you. I'll stick to considering the facts, while you stick to your well-considered position of "I'm right because I say so." You'll win many a debate that way.

As for USC losing to Cal: You can argue that that loss should have kept them from winning the title, but then how do you explain that both polls had them #1 going into the bowls? If the writers were wrong to give them a piece, then the coaches were just as wrong voting them #1 before the bowls started. Another one of those unfortunate little things I call a fact (pesky little buggers, aren't they?)



Here's some more math: There are over 100 schools in D-IA. OSU is (I think) ONE of them. One example does not settle the point. I said that I might be wrong about the scheduling, but if I am, you have yet to prove it. Show me specifically where the NCAA says 4-5 years and no more and you get a point. Until then, you're talking out of your sphincter.


Again, your debate skills are astounding. What an immensely thoughtful critique you presented there.

If you can present some real responses at this point, I'll be glad to continue a dialogue. If you continue to present such brilliant dissertations as "I'm right because you're wrong," then you'll just have to have fun without me.

LOGIC? How is the AP logical? Oh, BTW, in the coaches poll USC was ranked #2 going into the Rose Bowl last year!!!! The reason I don't acknowledge the AP is it is based strictly on opinions of many members of the media. That's right these are the people who have probably never stepped foot on a football field in their lives!!!!!

 

[Wilt Dasney]

The reason I don't acknowledge the AP is it is based strictly on opinions of many members of the media. That's right these are the people who have probably never stepped foot on a football field in their lives!!!!!

There...that's a more legit position and it makes it a lot easier to respect where you're coming from. I don't have to agree with it, but I can understand it.

 

[Tress4Pres]

Well, that's certainly some convincing logic you're using there. You don't acknowledge the AP, so it doesn't matter. Wow, you got me there.

Little thing I call consistent logic. Sorry, didn't mean to throw you off with it.


I couldn't care less about "beating" you. I'll stick to considering the facts, while you stick to your well-considered position of "I'm right because I say so." You'll win many a debate that way.

As for USC losing to Cal: You can argue that that loss should have kept them from winning the title, but then how do you explain that both polls had them #1 going into the bowls? If the writers were wrong to give them a piece, then the coaches were just as wrong voting them #1 before the bowls started. Another one of those unfortunate little things I call a fact (pesky little buggers, aren't they?)



Here's some more math: There are over 100 schools in D-IA. OSU is (I think) ONE of them. One example does not settle the point. I said that I might be wrong about the scheduling, but if I am, you have yet to prove it. Show me specifically where the NCAA says 4-5 years and no more and you get a point. Until then, you're talking out of your sphincter.


Again, your debate skills are astounding. What an immensely thoughtful critique you presented there.

If you can present some real responses at this point, I'll be glad to continue a dialogue. If you continue to present such brilliant dissertations as "I'm right because you're wrong," then you'll just have to have fun without me.

Ok first of all the AP is consisted of a bunch a journalists that have never stepped foot on a football field in their lives!!!!!

Ok let me play out this scenerio for you: Last year USC lost to Cal and still won the AP poll yet LSU lost one game all year to Florida (who was #12 at the time) you tell me who was the better team!!!! Also, going into the Rose Bowl USC was #3 in the Coaches Poll. What you fail to realize is that the coaches poll essentailly means NOTHING!!!! It has no weight in how the BCS funtions!!!! And only the AP can vote for their #1 team!!! Sooooo they weren't #1 in the CP!!!!!!

Ok as for the scheduling. First of all there are 117 schools in Division 1A football!!!! I did some digging and here it goes: according to the NCAA rules on scheduling: there is a 5 year limit as to when you can schedule a team. Also, something you probably didn't know, no games can be scheduled between August 1st and Jan. 4th.

That's it!!!

Game
Set
Match!!!!!!!

"Jordan fades back swish and that's the game"