teamroper60

Somebody commented earlier in this thread that Arkansas looked far better than their record indicated. I think they have shown that to be true over the past two weeks. Mizzou definitely has it's work cut out for it next Friday but at least they know what they need to do. I didn't see the FSU game but I see there is some controversy (again). Seems FSU should have at least have been penalized for Winston pushing a ref on their game winning drive. Mike Pereira (the ref guy for Fox Sports) says Winston should have been ejected.. Winston just can't seem to stay away from controversy..

Correction... (Gotta stop using my phone..) FSU almost losing to a downward trending ND team.....

I have the Bushnell Tour V3 Jolt (non slope model). I resisted buying a laser for quite some time partly because of the issues I experienced trying to lock on to a flag using a buddies Nikon. After finally going and testing the Bushnell, I found it easy to lock onto a flag. Most of the time, I can be locked on in a matter of a second or two. I still have a GPS but find that I use it very little. The laser however would be hard to do without...

Ah but you have to play that game if you are going to talk about SOS and the committee is in fact considering it. SOS is by it's very nature, fluid. It involves not just how a team played on a given day against a given opponent but also how they played over the course of the season. EVERY team you play, HOW you played and how those teams played against the rest of their schedule factor in to SOS. The fact Miss. St. only fell from 1 to 4, while an undefeated FSU sits at #3 shows just how important SOS can be to the committee. So yes, FSU losing to a ND team that is clearly trending down matters. A LOT. It weakens that SOS. I will submit to you that your beloved OSU might well be in the top 4 right now if VT were the typical Frank Beamer coached team we have seen in the not so distant past, rather than the 5-5 team that they are this year. So again, you have to play that game. The committee is playing it and have said so all along.

Wow. Just noticed that some stuff is missing from that.. What it was supposed to say was ND lost to a Northwestern team that was beaten by a bad Michigan team. Since FSU barely beat ND, I'm not sure they deserve #3. One has to believe their being the last remaining unbeaten Power 5 team is the only thing keeping them in the top group. They sure aren't there for style point or SOS. I keep thinking they will lose only to see them pull off nearly improbable comebacks. Their luck has to run out before long..

Losing to a Northwestern team that lost to a very bad Michigan team, I am not sure they deserve that 3 ranking... lol

Which is exactly why I propose that the playoff is limited to conference champions and require that every conference hold a championship game. There would be a couple of teams with first round byes but I see no issue with that. If you are the top two teams, you probably earned that bye, just as happens in other playoff/tournament setting. Making it champions only, there is no way an undefeated Miss. St. rests their players if it could cost them their shot at the playoff. It also ensures that EVERY conference game matters, since that will determine who is in the conference championship. BTW, it looks like Miss St. won't be undefeated............

Who do you think is going to beat TCU? All they have left is Kansas, Texas and Iowa State. Texas might be a possibility but a slim one. Oregon still has a PAC 12 championship game to play, so yeah, they could easily lose yet.. Wouldn't even hazard a guess at the 'bama/MSSt game..

Being in a BCS bowl is not the same as being given the opportunity to play in the NC game. In 09, many pundits believed TCU and Boise both had legit claims to the #2 ranking and a shot at the NC but both were left out of that and ranked 3 and 4, so that they played each other. Or the 2010 TCU team that was again professed by many pundits to have had a legit claim to the #2 spot and a shot at the NC. In both cases, those teams ended their regular seasons undefeated and having beaten ranked teams during their seasons. Yet they were convienently kept out of the top two spots, which kept them from being in the NC game. Would either of them have won if they had been in the game? Maybe not. Alabama and Auburn were both very good teams. But we really don't know, since they never got the chance, as Oregon and Texas got those spots... BTW, it is no secret that Boise flirted with joining the Big East and TCU joined the Big 12, to get AQ status... Giving all conference champions a birth in the playoff would at least give such teams a chance, without having to jump conferences to get there. And I stand corrected on who used the LSOP phrase. I knew it was somebody connected with the B1G. Ironically, for the past few years, the same conference that has been viewed as weak..... At any rate, it doesn't matter now. That is not the system and for the time being we are stuck with this one. It will be real interesting to see how this one plays out.

Prior to the BCS, the call was to have #1 play #2 (two teams). Everybody thought that was a good idea, so the BCS was created. Then, when we had multiple undefeateds, the call became to have 4 teams and a playoff. Now here we are and without even having had ONE playoff game, much less crown a champion, the call is already to expand it to 8 teams. You know the NCAA tournament started with 8 teams, right? At least that tournament gives EVERY conference champ a birth. I think you need to include all conference champs if you are going to expand beyond four. And don't give me the BS about how a team outside the "power 5" can get in if they crack the top 4/8/whatever. That is a farce. Ever since Boise beat OU, the pollsters have done a good job of keeping Jim Delaney's "little sisters of the poor" from getting a chance. They will do the same now unless it is mandated by automatic berths and settled on the field.

They haven't and won't fix it because doing so means eliminating the bowl system. All of those toiletbowl.com games mean one thing. MONEY. Money for the host cities, money for the teams and money for the conferences. As long as the money remains good, the bowl games are gonna exist and the conferences/NCAA are not going to give up that sacred cash cow. So, even though they could, they won't really fix it. It isn't in their financial interest to do so.

and 'bama wins So I would expect 'bama, Oregon (provided they continue to lead and ultimately win), TCU and Arizona St. to move up. I would think OSU would move up too. Enough to have a shot at the playoff?? That will be interesting to see...

From what I heard on TV today, I think a lot of people are rethinking their assessment of FSU... Frankly, over the last few years, people who would only casually see an SEC game would think the conference wasnt that good, only to see the conference champ demolish their competitor in the BCS game. IMHO, SEC dominance of the BCS series is exactly why we now have a playoff (which I do think is a good thing). edit:: OT in the 'bama/LSU game!!

With the ball inside the 10 and 1:13 on the clock!

Today's games and particularly the upsets are going to give us some enlightening insight into the thinking of the committee...... In all likelihood, TCU moves up.. If Oregon wins, they move up. But what about Ohio State (presuming they hold on and win)? If 'bama wins, they will move up. If they lose, how far do they fall? Does an Ohio State win vault them above a two loss 'bama? Does a win by #16 LSU over #5 Alabama vault them over a win by #14 OSU over #8 MSU?? I think we are gonna learn alot after this one!!

It has been a good game. If somebody watched this one in a vaccuum, they would think the B1G was pretty good. My real hope here is that whoever wins this game, makes the playoff (disproving my pre-season prediction) and does well. Not sure that is a reality but it would be nice to see the B1G be relevant again. That said, your comment about special teams being an OSU advantage has not proven to be the case.. Two fumbles by the OSU special teams..... Good thing their defense is playing well and their offense has been firing on all cylinders!! BTW, you might want to keep your undeniable predicitions to after dark. You didn't do so good in the daytime games!! LOL

Nope. Wasnt defeated. But we are done with that discussion.

I don't know as I see Alabama and MSU as being flipped but on the other hand, I doubt I would holler about it either.... The biggest thing I see is that based on this set of rankings, TCU has a clear advantage over MSU.

I don't think the bye week is the problem. I think this goes back to the perception that the the B1G is weak. I am not saying it is deserved. I think MSU has a really good team (and yes, a REAL top 10 defense) that deserves to be in the discussion but perception is hurting them.

That is nearly verbatim what the chairman of the committee said last week on TV. He also basically said the B1G was perceived as weak when he said OSU was ranked where they were because of who they had played. So if the choice is TCU and MSU, I would not want to bet either direction at this point. Perhaps the committee will change their opinion of the B1G as the season progresses and the top teams in the conference match up. But then again, if TCU beats KSU, they could easily get an advantage. Hopefully, tonight's rankings will help clear up their line of thinking a little bit.

I gave you stats which clearly showed Auburn's defense had played against far stronger offenses than PSU had faced, which to anyone not trying to make an excuse for a poor showing by their team, clearly shows that PSU's defense is not even close to the caliber of Auburns. Yet here we are multiple posts later and you still haven't even acknowledged them. Even after I repeatedly posted them. Now, I really am done with debating the strength of PSU's defense. Anybody who has watched PSU play and also seen games from teams outside the B1G, can clearly see PSU is not one of the top ten defenses in the country. No matter how you skew the stats to make it look like they are. Period. Now, you may have the last word on this. I said I am done and I am.

Yeah, right. Needing double OT to beat a team with a 4-4 record, when you are hoping to make the top 4 by season's end. Yeah. No reason to pump that team's defense up at all.. Uh huh. Sure. Totally believeable... Keep hawking that all you want, I'm not buying it. Especially after having seen PSU play several times this year. BTW, I notice in the Sagarin rankings, PSU's SOS is 57. Auburn's is 2. Yet PSU has the better defense? Sure. Tell me again how cupcakes aren't affecting those other rankings..... No wait. I said I was done with this discussion and I am. So you can keep deluding yourself all you want. I don't care. I disagree that winning isn't the only stat that matters. You have to win. Losing to a better/equal team is still losing. Moral victories is a really poor way to determine a champion. SOS should only matter for seedings once the champions are determined. Regarding the conference champ only playoff. Who said anything about limiting it to the "Power 5?" I sure didn't and I don't think it should be. Apparently you missed my comment about Boise St. EVERY FBS conference champ gets to play. Give the Butler's and Richmond's of FBS football a chance at the big boys. I am firmly in the camp that says a few years back Boise should have been given a chance. But they weren't, simply because the rules were set up to favor the "Power 5". I say let them play. Are they going to win? Most likely not. But then again, we won't know if they aren't given the chance to try. However it shakes out after a playoff of champions, the winner will have earned the title of National Champion and that conference will have bragging rights for the year, without anybody being able to say the deck was stacked in favor of that conference. Who knows, if it were set up that way, the B1G might have a chance................

Even that argument doesn't hold water. They are 2-2 in playoff meetings..

I haven't read the whole thread either and frankly don't think you can really label one QB as the greatest ever. The game and the rules have changed so much over the years, it is impossible to compare QB's from different eras. An argument could be made for either Manning or Brady as being the best of their generation and both sides can present enough evidence to support their cause but really, does it matter? The bottom line is we have been fortunate to watch these two guys for a long time and while they are both in the twilight of their careers, they are not only still relevant but still the best two QB's on the field on any given Sunday. It's a shame we are down to very few more matchups between them..

You basically eliminated them when you discounted the performance against them and blew it off as "a bad game" and discount that game's performance as an outlier. Did it ever occur to you that PSU had a bad game BECAUSE of Northwestern, rather than in spite of them? I disagree that the stats don't help teams that schedule cupcake teams. I showed you that the teams PSU lost to had an average offensive ranking of 52.5 and the teams they beat were much worse than that. Auburn has one loss, to the team with a current offensive ranking of 8 (I believe it was higher than that last week but I can't be positive). The average for the teams Auburn faced was 40 (not going to redo the math to see if those changed after this weekend). The only feasible way for a PSU to have a higher ranking is the cupcakes, because they lose the SOS badly. You failed to even acknowlege these stats TWICE, so clearly stats only matter to you when they support your argument and become irrelevant when they don't. Given the fact OSU struggled to beat PSU, it is in your (and OSU's) best interest to pump them up to make your team's struggle against them look better. So I am done debating PSU's defense. To change gears to the playoffs. Why is stats a bad way to choose who is in the playoff? Again because stats are always skewed. You talked about PSU having a bad game and how every team can have a bad game. But those bad games play into the stats, just as beating bad teams play into the stats. Moral victories don't count. Wins and losses is the only stat that really matters. If that weren't true, then you wouldn't really care that a 2 loss team might get in to a champions only playoff. Requiring a conference championship in order to make the dance provides an easy to follow road map for teams and fans since it becomes very clear that to get in, you have to win your conference. Simple and straightforward. It also makes every conference game just that much more important. To your comments about a 2 loss team getting in as conference champ, sure it is possible. Stuff like that happens in the NCAA basketball tournament frequently and I seem to recall Seattle slipping into the NFL playoffs a few years ago as the NFC west champ with barely a .500 record. Since a tournament requires seedings, a 2 loss team is probably going to be seeded lower than the one-loss teams, so they are going to draw a tough first round opponent (likely the top seed). That system seems to work pretty well without much arguing about who should or should not be there in most post season playoff situations and nobody really debates whether or not the winner was in fact the champion. Further, limiting the playoffs to conference champions also removes the possibilty of a stacked deck in favor of any one conference and the resulting bickering about biases for or against a conference. (It would have also put Boise State in there during those years when people debated whether they should have been included or not.) Finally, yeah, I know Notre Dame, Navy, BYU and a couple of others aren't in a conference. To that I say, join one if you want a shot at the dance. ND is halfway in one now. Commit and get it over with. BYU quit a conference, they can re-join one. The others can find one as well. BTW, I do not propose the champions only idea because of Mizzou. Barring a bout of food poisoning taking out the whole SEC west champ, I don't see Mizzou or anybody else from the SEC east as having a snowball's chance to win the conference. BUT, you should really hope they do (that chaos you talked about would set in for sure)