Jump to content

Official 2011-2012 NCAA Football Thread


Recommended Posts

QUOTE (danman31 @ Dec 5, 2011 -> 11:18 AM)
Who rates Texas and ATM as good teams anymore?

 

Anyway, the reason why Ok State should be in is because under this system we only have one game to determine the champion. After the regular season there is one game to prove who the best was. LSU already has a solid claim that it's better than Bama. They won in Bama. If Bama doesn't get in, they can't complain because they had their shot against No. 1. Ultimately I think Bama keeps the game closer than Ok State would, but just because they are a better match up for that style. If Bama wins, we don't have a clear national champ and that's a big problem. If Ok State and LSU play there is no controversy.

I could not agree with this more, this is exactly where I stand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 2.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Dec 5, 2011 -> 06:25 PM)
There are 10 available BCS slots. Six go automatically to the champions of the six BCS conferences. Two more automatically went to Alabama and Stanford for finishing in the top 4. That left two slots where the bowls could actually pick from among eligible teams.

 

The Sugar Bowl ended up with both of those picks and took #11 Virginia Tech and #13 Michigan. #6 Arkansas and #9 South Carolina were ineligible due to the SEC already having two BCS teams. Eligible teams passed over were #7 Boise State, #8 Kansas State, #12 Baylor, and #14 Oklahoma. I'm not in any way a fan of the Big 12 (minus 2) but they really got doubly screwed over by the BCS this year by not getting OSU into the championship game and by not getting a team ranked #8 into any BCS game.

 

Just as a matter of principle, I'm going to make it a point to watch Boise State and Kansas State's bowl games and not the Sugar Bowl. First of all because the Sugar Bowl didn't pick the most-deserving teams and secondly because Virginia Tech really blows and will probably lose by 20+ points.

 

Sugar bowl was a joke with selections. I don't feel these bcs bowls should get extra significance if they are just going to pick whoever they feel will make the most money rather than reward the best teams that year. That's great Michigan, you made a BCS bowl...because your fans travel more than Kstates. Great resume.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 5, 2011 -> 06:43 PM)
Sugar bowl was a joke with selections. I don't feel these bcs bowls should get extra significance if they are just going to pick whoever they feel will make the most money rather than reward the best teams that year. That's great Michigan, you made a BCS bowl...because your fans travel more than Kstates. Great resume.

 

Yeah, but who really cares? Other than the NC game, the other bowls are basically just for pride. Getting into a BCS bowl nets you some more $$$, not surprising that popular teams expected to generate more interest and revenue would get them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (CrimsonWeltall @ Dec 5, 2011 -> 06:51 PM)
Yeah, but who really cares? Other than the NC game, the other bowls are basically just for pride. Getting into a BCS bowl nets you some more $$$, not surprising that popular teams expected to generate more interest and revenue would get them.

 

I think every fan base cares. BCS get prime TV slots where everyone will watch their team play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i don't get what those few people say about if bama wins the championship game then LSU should still be considered the champion. So if the bears get swept by the packers this season then somehow go on to win the super bowl, are the packers still the champions because they were 1st in the NFC North AND swept the bears? Or are the bears the champions because they won the CHAMPIONSHIP game. Im trying to understand the logic here. If bama beats lsu, people are only going to remember bama raising the national championship, not lsu winning strictly due to an inept alabama kicking game during the regular season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (flippedoutpunk @ Dec 5, 2011 -> 12:22 PM)
i don't get what those few people say about if bama wins the championship game then LSU should still be considered the champion. So if the bears get swept by the packers this season then somehow go on to win the super bowl, are the packers still the champions because they were 1st in the NFC North AND swept the bears? Or are the bears the champions because they won the CHAMPIONSHIP game. Im trying to understand the logic here. If bama beats lsu, people are only going to remember bama raising the national championship, not lsu winning strictly due to an inept alabama kicking game during the regular season.

You can't compare a playoff to a one-off system. A playoff isn't about the best team winning, it's about a team beating everyone put in front of them in the playoffs resulting in a title. A one-off is about the best two teams playing for the title THEN beating the team in front of you. In a playoff like the NFL, Ok State would be able to settle it on the field and no one cares.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 5, 2011 -> 11:43 AM)
Sugar bowl was a joke with selections. I don't feel these bcs bowls should get extra significance if they are just going to pick whoever they feel will make the most money rather than reward the best teams that year. That's great Michigan, you made a BCS bowl...because your fans travel more than Kstates. Great resume.

The only reason they made it was because the team that actually won their division lost the CCG. Thus is the BCS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (danman31 @ Dec 5, 2011 -> 12:52 PM)
You can't compare a playoff to a one-off system. A playoff isn't about the best team winning, it's about a team beating everyone put in front of them in the playoffs resulting in a title. A one-off is about the best two teams playing for the title THEN beating the team in front of you. In a playoff like the NFL, Ok State would be able to settle it on the field and no one cares.

 

im not going to argue whether or not bama or ok state deserves to be in the title game, theres nothing that can be done about that now. What I'm trying to find the answer to is how the heck some people won't consider alabama national champions if they beat lsu in the national championship game. LSU is clearly the best team in college football, but if the best team in college football gets beat in the biggest game of the year, then what does that mean? I get it that people are upset that bama made it and that no one wants to see a defensive struggle but it is what it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This happened before, FSU v Florida. FSU won the first game, lost the second. Only difference was FSU beat Florida @ FSU. Florida beat FSU badly in the title game.

 

I think there are certain circumstances where a match up makes sense and is compelling, I just dont think it was the best match up this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (danman31 @ Dec 5, 2011 -> 03:41 PM)
Heisman anyone? Haven't really heard enough about it, but it's the closest race I can remember. To me, it comes down to Griffin and Mathieu.

My vote would be Montee Ball, it takes alot to do what he's done this season, and somewhat quietly. This is an O-line that graduated 3 NFL starters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Dec 5, 2011 -> 03:48 PM)
My vote would be Montee Ball, it takes alot to do what he's done this season, and somewhat quietly. This is an O-line that graduated 3 NFL starters.

 

That's who I think SHOULD win it too. He has the 2nd most TDs in a season in D-1 history, just behind Barry Sanders. Wisconsin's two losses will probably hurt him though. I think Richardson ends up winning it, with Griffin second, Ball 3rd, followed by Luck & Moore.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (knightni @ Dec 5, 2011 -> 03:41 PM)
I'd think that Stanford/Oklahoma St might be a better game than LSU/Alabama.

It'll be higher scoring and something new, that's for sure.

 

QUOTE (danman31 @ Dec 5, 2011 -> 03:41 PM)
Heisman anyone? Haven't really heard enough about it, but it's the closest race I can remember. To me, it comes down to Griffin and Mathieu.

It's really a good question and I have no clue who I would vote for at this point to be honest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Dec 5, 2011 -> 03:54 PM)
That's who I think SHOULD win it too. He has the 2nd most TDs in a season in D-1 history, just behind Barry Sanders. Wisconsin's two losses will probably hurt him though. I think Richardson ends up winning it, with Griffin second, Ball 3rd, followed by Luck & Moore.

This Wisconsin team isnt really as good as last year's team, their o-line is much more suspect (Ogelsby as first team is laughable) and their defense is not nearly as good, yet Ball goes out and almost sets a record. Unreal.

 

I would also give Luck a ton of credit considering he seems to completely carry that team at times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As much as I don't care for Robert Griffin's personality of late, you have to give him the Heisman.

 

4,000 yards passing, 36 TD's, 6 INT's

 

644 yards rushing, 9 more TD's.

 

Baylor beat Texas, TCU, Iowa State, Mizzou, and OU in route to a 9-3 record.

 

Baylor was arguably the worst program in a BCS conference before Griffin's arrival.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...