iggymcfly

Just one more quick response here. I did move Michigan over Texas, but I couldn't really justify putting them behind Louisville or any of the two-loss teams. As for Boise State, they didn't just almost lose to a bad team, they almost lost to a terrible team. The Sagarin rankings do 1-A and 1-AA teams together, and they have San Jose State ranked 152. Also, the Broncos have done this before with teams like Tulsa and BYU, and at this point, I just can't justify keeping them in the Top 15, when they have this many bad performances, week in and week out. Florida State lets up once, and they lose to Maryland by three. Boise State's let up badly three times, but they just haven't been playing good enough teams to get punished for it.

By the way, it looks like the Associated Press is more diplomatic than we are, as they have Auburn and Oklahoma tied at number two this week. The coaches poll still has Oklahoma at #2, but only by two points. So I guess after all the fuss about focusing on the polls, it's going to come back down to the computer rankings when all is said and done.

Damaramu, if your argument is that Oklahoma's played a solid schedule and won all their games, and deserves to be under a system that gives them a chance at the national title, I agree 100%. I'd even extend the same argument to Utah that there should be a large enough playoff to accomodate the season that they've had. However, if you're saying that Oklahoma can't get jumped by Auburn because they were ranked that high to start the season, or that given the current flawed system, they deserve to play for the title more than Auburn or USC, you're wrong. The Sooners have played three good teams this year. Out of those games, none were decided before the 4th quarter, and only one was decided before the final play. Meanwhile, USC and Auburn have also played three really good teams each. However, not only were the teams they played better, but they also played much better against them. Auburn destroyed Tennessee on the road, leading 31-3 at the half, and not letting Tennesse get a touchdown until late in the fourth quarter. Then they destroyed Georgia just as badly at home, leading 24-0 before giving up a touchdown in garbage time. Meanwhile USC did the same thing to Arizona State, taking a 42-7 lead at the half. ASU's a very good team, as their only other loss was to Cal, and they beat Iowa 41-7. USC also beat VT solidly on the road. And even though they played Cal close, Cal played damn near perfect football. Aaron Rodgers and his receivers couldn't miss as they collectively had the game of their lives, but it still wasn't enough to get by USC. So really, whether two games were at home and one was on the road, or one was at home and two were on the road, isn't really enough to account for 35 point shifts in the scores of those games. The fact is that USC and Auburn have played better football than Oklahoma has, and they've also won against a tougher schedule.

If anyone wants something a little more official, here's the BCS portion of the bowl projections from collegefootballnews.com. I just checked it and they agree that Auburn will likely go to the Orange Bowl, while the Sugar Bowl will pick up Miami. . Bowl: Orange Bowl When: Jan. 4, 8:00, ABC Where: Miami, FL Conference tie-ins: BCS No. 1 vs. BCS No. 2 Auburn vs. USC What looked like a done deal last week has now changed. Auburn played well enough against Georgia to create enough of a buzz to overtake Oklahoma, but It'll take a win over Alabama, which won't be a blowout. USC is getting a free pass in this whole mix and might be the third best team of the top three, but it isn't budging off the number one spot in the polls. . Bowl: Rose Bowl When: Jan. 1, 5:00, ABC Where: Pasadena, CA Conference tie-ins: BCS vs. BCS Michigan vs. California Don't let the win over Washington fool you; Cal isn't playing nearly as well as it did earlier this year. Even so, a trip to Pasadena appears to be a lock if it wins out. The Rose Bowl door is open for Michigan, but don't assume a win at Ohio State. This could easily be Wisconsin if the Wolverines slip. . Bowl: Sugar Bowl When: Jan. 3, 8:00, ABC Where: New Orleans, LA Conference tie-ins: BCS vs. BCS Boston College vs. Miami Here's the deal. The Rose Bowl will get its first choice of at-large BCS teams and will take Cal. The Sugar will get the second choice and will be get Miami after thinking hard about Utah and all of its fans. The Fiesta Bowl host team is the Big XII champion and that'll be Oklahoma. Miami still has Wake Forest and Virginia Tech to go, but it has its groove back after beating Virginia. . Bowl: Tostitos Fiesta Bowl When: Jan. 1, 8:30, ABC Where: Tempe, AZ Conference tie-ins: BCS vs. BCS Oklahoma vs. Utah The Big XII Champion is the host to the Big XII Champion and that'll be the Sooners if Auburn slides in to the Orange. OU deserves a spot in the national championship, but it'll be tough with all of the buzz around the Tigers. If OU gets into the Orange this will be Boston College vs. Utah. The Utes deserve to be in the BCS but it's going to be hard to get past the college football machine that wants to see big league schools in the mix. However, a six slot gets them in.

No, no, you're missing the provision. Here's the criteria for reaching a BCS bowl in order of priority: 1. Ranked in the Top 2 of the final BCS standings 2. Conference champion of one of the "Big 6" conferences 3. Ranked in the Top 6 of the final BCS standings, and not from one of the "Big 6" conferences 4. Ranked in the Top 4 of the final BCS standings 5. Ranked in the Top 12 of the final BCS standings, and name of school starts with Notre Dame 6. Ranked in the Top 12 of the final BCS standings The stipulation that a Top 6 team will make a BCS bowl is sort of a makeup to the mid-majors for not getting an automatic berth if they win their conference. It's saying that if they finish in the Top 6 of the final standings, they're better than at least one of the "major" programs that won their conference, and they deserve a berth as well. A team from a regular conference has to be Top 4 to be guaranteed a spot, and even that stipulation comes after the one that gives a mid-major team in the top 6 a spot. Although come to think of it, that would probably guarantee Cal a spot over Texas even if the Sugar Bowl does have first pick and wants the Longhorns.

Yes they were #25 in the Coaches poll, unranked in the AP, and unranked in the BCS which is the only rankings that matter. They'll be unranked in all polls this upcoming week. It's like claiming Ohio State as a Top 25 team. On an unrelated note if USC vs. Auburn is the Orange Bowl match-up and that other team then has to go to the Fiesta Bowl, Utah will not be going to a BCS bowl. The reason why is that would leave the Sugar Bowl with an open spot and they would take Texas over Utah. Even if it's USC vs. that other team there is no guarentee that the Fiesta Bowl would still take Utah. Texas is a very big draw and they're fans travel very well. Utah needs A&M to beat Texas in two weeks or I think they will end up in the Liberty Bowl which as I mentioned earlier in the day would be a tougher match-up for them in Louisville than if they ended up playing Boston College. But with the Wisconsin loss, Utah's ranked in the Top 6. If they're in the Top 6, whatever BCS bowl has an open spot is required to take them. Also, the Sugar Bowl has the choice of not only at large teams, but remaining conference champions as well. Even though Miami doesn't travel well historically, their close location and draw for television as the ACC champion would probably be enough for them to pick up the Hurricanes. I guess the only question remaining is who has the first pick out of the Rose Bowl and the Sugar Bowl. If the Rose Bowl has first pick, (which I think they do), they'll take Cal and the Sugar Bowl will have to pick between BC, Utah, and the ACC champ (probably Miami). If the Sugar Bowl has first pick, they can go ahead and take Texas, but then Utah or Miami will play Michigan in the Rose Bowl.

Well, all the people that were all worried about Utah missing out on a BCS berth can relax. The Wisconsin loss puts them at least in the Top 6, and after Texas's shitty performance against Kansas, they could lose enough points to drop back behind Utah as well. Also, correct me if I'm wrong here, but if Auburn plays USC in the Orange Bowl, doesn't the Fiesta Bowl automatically get Oklahoma? I think Oklahoma vs. Utah could be an incredibly intriguing matchup, and if Utah won, they might even be recognized as being worthy of a small share of the national championship.

Forfeits from other teams actually help your strength of schedule. It just counts as if the other team made one less correct pick than you did.

Beating the #15 team in the country on the road by 11 isn't exactly the kind of "struggling" I think that a team should be punished for. If anything, I think that's the kind of solid win that should be rewarded. Also, even though the Beavers were up at half, USC did get them under control, taking a 15 point lead, and not letting them even get back within one possession until there were under four minutes remaining. If you want to hold the undefeateds to that high of a standard, Oklahoma also "struggled" against Texas and Kansas State, and should be punished accordingly. As for Auburn, yes they play in a tough conference, but that doesn't mean that they've necessarily played the toughest schedule. They still have yet to play the best team in the conference (Georgia), and they managed to miss some pretty good teams in Florida and South Carolina too. So far, out of Auburn's nine wins, five of them have been against cupcakes (UL Monroe, Mississippi St., The Citadel, La. Tech, and Kentucky). This is a point that really isn't worth arguing, because I think it will be proven true this Saturday when they get exposed by the Bulldogs, but Auburn hasn't proven themselves at the same level as USC or even Oklahoma thus far.

God damn it. How many times do we have to go over this. USC has obviously played a tougher schedule than Oklahoma, and been more impressive doing it. Cal's been better than Texas this year, Virginia Tech's much better than OSU, and ASU's better than A&M. In addition, USC blew out ASU with a 42-7 lead at the half, while Oklahoma was one play from losing to both OSU and Texas A&M. Also, USC's still got a tough game left against Notre Dame, while Oklahoma's toughest game left will be the Big 12 championship against some 6-5 team from the North. Right now, USC has the best wins of any undefeated team in the country.

Just because he's had some problems at OSU doesn't mean that he's not viable as an NFL player. As a freshman, he was probably the best player on Ohio State's national championship team. I mean Craig freakin' Krenzel's starting in the NFL right now. You think Clarett doesn't have more talent than that guy? I say Clarett gets himself into surprisingly good shape for the combine, goes in the third round, and rides the bench for a couple years, getting some carries mixed in every now and then. Then, about three seasons from now, he'll break into the starting lineup and have five or six really productive years before going the way of Ricky Williams.

I know, the actual discussion was almost a year ago, but to Damaramu, there's a couple reasons you might not have gotten high. 1) You have to breathe it into your lungs hard and then hold it there for a while. I mean, you really need to work at it a little bit. The first few times I smoked, I didn't think I could get high either. 2) You might just need to get some better quality weed. If I take two or three hits off of some good weed, you can get higher than smoking crap for half an hour. You might have some sort of tolerance. (i.e. my nose and sinuses are always plugged, so I probably don't breathe things in as well as I should. However, if you're not getting high at all, it just means that there's something wrong. Anyone who thinks that weed doesn't work just hasn't smoked the right weed the right way.

I'd think Louisvilee has to be considered a strong favorite to win the Big East next year. They'll have 7 returning starters on offense, 6 returning starters on defense, as well as a likely improvement at QB with Brian Brohm. Just looking at how much better Louisville is than W. Virginia right now, I'd say there's a really good chance that they should get their automatic BCS berth next year.

I've heard real-life stories of track athletes getting jobs they didn't have to work at back in the 70's. Reliable source or no, I think what Maurice Clarett is saying is exactly true. In fact, if you go to the actual page on ESPN.com, they have a little follow-up piece with about three or four more former Buckeyes saying that that's exactly the kind of stuff that happens around there all the time. And besides, what would Clarett gain if this isn't true. If investigations are made, and his claims are revealed to be false, it's not going to help his draft status; it's just going to make him look like an even bigger dipshit. I think it's much more likely that he just decided to rat on the university, and take everyone down to (try to) show that he wasn't that bad of a guy.

This is such a stupid argument. Most people know what a mixer is, and most people know exactly what Sledgehammer is trying to say. Technically, a mixer is a small party, but it's still not a "real" party which is enough to brag about, so he doesn't want you to flame him for the mixer not being a good enoug party. The concept's really simple, but everyone here just seems to be flaming each other for no particular reason.

The reason ASU and Boise State are rankes do high is that the computers can't count margin of victory. The big difference between Utah and Boise is that Utah's been dominant while Boise's nearly lost to the likes of Tulsa and BYU. However, they have similar wins and both have an undefeated record. Meanwhile, ASU's only lost to Cal and USC who are both top four. The only reason they're ranked so lowly in the polls is that they were down 42-7 at the half to the Trojans, and they got shutout by the Golden Bears.

I still think that Utah's fine for now. The Fiesta Bowl wants them, so unless there are two at large teams in the top four, they should get their BCS berth. If they want to avoid that circumstance, Utah should actually be cheering for Auburn this weekend, because if the Tigers lose to Georgia, they'll still win the SEC and get an automatic berth, but the Dawgs should move up quite a bit, and actually get within range of joining Cal in the top four.

I don't see why Wisconsin should be ahead of Cal. They haven't beaten anyone even close to a Top 25 team all year, and they've been incredibly underwhelming all year. Minnesota is the first BCS team they've beaten by two touchdowns all year. Meanwhile, Oregon is the first team that Cal's beaten by less than two touchdowns. Yeah, they lost to USC. But it's USC. They were on the road against the best team in the country and they lost by one play. How can you punish them for that? You have to say to yourself, "what would happen if the shoe were on the other foot." If Wisconsin was playing Cal's schedule, what would their record be. Well, there's no way in hell that it would be 8-0, and there's a good chance that they would have picked up a second loss somewhere along the way against a tough team like ASU. Now, if Cal was playing Wisconsin's schedule, does anyone think they might have a loss right now? Of course not. At least not if they know college football. They would have blown through that slate, and they would have almost definitely won in better fashion than the Badgers have. It's all nice to reward teams for their record, but when the best team you've beaten all year is Ohio State, it's really hard to say that you've "earned" the indisputable right to be recognized as a top four team.

Actually, despite being derided for being "biased against OU" earlier in the year, I actually still think they should be #2 right now. They played a pretty decent nonconference schedule whereas Auburn didn't do shit, and they've played about the same number of strong teams within their conferences. Even if the OSU and A&M games were close, Oklahoma still won both of them on the road. Auburn had LSU at home, and they needed the referees to make up a new rule to keep the game from going to overtime. Again, if Auburn beats Georgia and Tennessee again, and looks fairly good in the process, they would have a really strong case to unseat OU for the 2 slot, but I think that for now, all the talk about Auburn being the real #2 team in the country is pretty unfounded.

Oh my god! He should have totally caught that. That was damn near the game-tying touchdown.

Yes! Arkansas State's up 21-20 at the half after the Vandals let the clock run out with the ball on the 42. Not that you can even follow this game on the internet, but luckily where I'm living, I can be one out of the eight total people listening to the Vandal radio network.

Edit: Never mind, apparently ESPN Gamecast isn't very accurate.

Wow, 71 yards. Cal/Oregon is fun and all, but I really wish I could watch this OU/A&M game instead of following it on the internet.

Well, I don't actually have the game in my area either. However, I'm very surprised to see A&M with that early lead. I thought they'd keep it close, but you'd think that 77-0 would be too much of a mental edge to overcome.

On another note, I'm kind of surprised how Cal's secondary is getting burned by Oregon. Their defense has looked impenetrable pretty much all year, and now they look like the friggin Cougars out there. And talk about deja vu. That Cal fumble on the kickoff was straight out of the WSU/USC game last week.