Its football season!!!

True enough, but third place seems to be a bit high. But then this is coming from someone who rarely agrees with the rankings. LOL
 
Oh yes, and Boise State has lost how many games this season? This decade? Interesting. Which bowl game did Oregon win last year? What happened when Boise State and Oregon last played? How many ranked teams has Boise played? Oregon? I know, BCS bowl wins, who has more? Dammit, I just cannot seem to be able to make a case for why Oregon should be given the nod over Boise State. Wait! I have the dream scenario here for the BCS. Alabama falters the SEC title game. Ohio State, Oregon and Boise all finish undefeated and in that order in the BCS rankings. Naturally, Oregon and Ohio State should play each other because Ohio State beat Oregon in last year's Rose Bowl and Boise State beat Oregon to start that season.

Body of work, this season and others, Boise State has earned the right over Oregon and Ohio State, to play for the National Title. If any team should have dropped this week without losing it was Ohio State who struggled against a horrendous Illinois team. In the same week where Boise State drops from three to four without playing, Arizona moves from 14 to ninth for the same reason. Two schools have twice finished with undefeated seasons and BCS bowl wins since the inception of the BCS. Neither one of them plays in an AQ conference, yet both defeated BCS schools once finishing undefeated. Utah beat Alabama during a stretch of time, which continues to present day, where the only other other team to defeat Alabama was Florida during their national championship run.

I like the bowl system, I do not want to see a playoff system for college football, 32 games, 32 teams who finish the season on a win with something positive to build on next season. A playoff cannot produce such an outcome. The current system requires some level of common sense to function, said sense is missing at the current time. No rational argument can be made for why Oregon should have jumped Boise State this week. The facts speak for themselves and point to one clear outcome, if both teams are undefeated, Boise State, and not Oregon, should be given the higher rank.
 
Bull S*** University doesn't deserve anything except a swift kick out of college football. I have no respect for them or any of their fans. They're some of the most ignorant and rudest people I've ever met. The team plays incredibly dirty, and talk about poor sports. :roll: I remember when they couldn't give away tickets to their games. Now everyone wants to be a fan just because they won a few games. Sorry, but I stick with my team through thick and thin, win or lose. I have no respect for these fair weather fans. Once BS University starts losing again, all these fans will disappear with the sun.
 
Damien435 said:
Oh yes, and Boise State has lost how many games this season? This decade? Interesting. Which bowl game did Oregon win last year? What happened when Boise State and Oregon last played? How many ranked teams has Boise played? Oregon? I know, BCS bowl wins, who has more? Dammit, I just cannot seem to be able to make a case for why Oregon should be given the nod over Boise State. Wait! I have the dream scenario here for the BCS. Alabama falters the SEC title game. Ohio State, Oregon and Boise all finish undefeated and in that order in the BCS rankings. Naturally, Oregon and Ohio State should play each other because Ohio State beat Oregon in last year's Rose Bowl and Boise State beat Oregon to start that season.
Click to expand...
First of all... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txlXcJDtDwM

If you think Alabama's faltering against ANYONE this year. LOL

Secondly, Boise State doesn't play ANYBODY. Do you think they deserve it because of their win over Wyoming or New Mexico State? LOL.
Damien435 said:
Body of work, this season and others, Boise State has earned the right over Oregon and Ohio State, to play for the National Title. If any team should have dropped this week without losing it was Ohio State who struggled against a horrendous Illinois team. In the same week where Boise State drops from three to four without playing, Arizona moves from 14 to ninth for the same reason. Two schools have twice finished with undefeated seasons and BCS bowl wins since the inception of the BCS. Neither one of them plays in an AQ conference, yet both defeated BCS schools once finishing undefeated. Utah beat Alabama during a stretch of time, which continues to present day, where the only other other team to defeat Alabama was Florida during their national championship run.
Click to expand...
Again, Oregon played a Heisman trophy candidate this year and beat them soundly... Has Boise State played a team worthy of recognition yet? Based on this season (since this season is the only one that matters for this National Title), Boise State has yet to impress me.


Damien435 said:
I like the bowl system, I do not want to see a playoff system for college football, 32 games, 32 teams who finish the season on a win with something positive to build on next season. A playoff cannot produce such an outcome. The current system requires some level of common sense to function, said sense is missing at the current time. No rational argument can be made for why Oregon should have jumped Boise State this week. The facts speak for themselves and point to one clear outcome, if both teams are undefeated, Boise State, and not Oregon, should be given the higher rank.
Click to expand...
Not true. Oregon has played better teams than Boise. And beaten them more convincingly. It is still quite early in the season, but based on the schedules so far, Oregon is deserving of the higher rank in my opinion. Especially after their win over a TERRIFIC Stanford team.
 
How is Stanford terrific? I must have missed the part where Stanford beat a ranked team. What's their big win so far? 3-2 UCLA? They folded like origami under pressure. So once again, "A win over a Pac-10 team does not a good team make." Boise has already played more ranked teams than Oregon this season and has the same number of ranked teams left on the schedule. Stanford has four wins, UCLA (3-2), Notre Dame (2-3), Wake Forest (2-3) and FCS Sacramento State (2-3). Oregon has beat one team with a winning record, Stanford. Oregon's other opponents include: New Mexico (0-5), Tennessee (2-3), FCS Portland State (2-2) and Arizona State (2-3) who has has a whopping zero wins against FBS opponents. As we have just read, Oregon and Stanford went into their game, both as top ten teams, without having played a single quality opponent. Combined their previous opponents included one team with a winning record, with an overall combined record for their opponents at 15-23. Oh, and at this point of the season, every player in America is a Heisman trophy candidate, so that's a null and void argument.
 
You're right. Boise State has beaten teams who have a combined 1-7 record versus ranked opponents.

By the way, Virginia Tech is no longer a ranked opponent. Neither is Oregon State.

Stanford, however... Still in the Top 25. So the "quality opponent" thing is a null and void argument, as well.
 
I support Rob in this discussion. Mostly because he spoke the magic words "Boise State has yes to impress me." :D They've never impressed me. Not one win, not one play....nothing about them is in the least bit impressive or deserving of a National Title.
 
Well agree to disagree, I just don't believe that teams who continue to win should drop in the rankings because they did not win by enough. 2003, Ohio State has to win three games on their last drive, one on the last play, Miami trails for like 17 minutes all season. Yet despite that, Ohio State beat Miami for the title. A win is a win. Teams should not be punished for winning. But the same argument applies for Oregon, they have yet to impress me. The only team to have done that is Alabama.
 
Everyone said:
Whatever, this all sucks for a Longhorn fan...... :bang:
Click to expand...


The Longhorns have been a good team for a while. They were due for a slump. Every team goes through them. Just look at my Irish! :)

And Damian, I've never agreed with the BCS ranking system. Although the farther down BSU and LSU are, the happier I am. I despise them both. In case you haven't noticed. :)
 
THATS IT

Screw this season, all my football wishes have been scorched so far...

I am just going to watch American Le Mans and go to Road Atlanta to see the Porsche Hybrid GT series car's debut in America, and hope for the appearance of a ZR 1 to listen to the hum of American Aluminum Push rod V 8....mmmm :drink:

Hey the Braves actually won yesterday though lol.
 
Damien435 said:
Well agree to disagree, I just don't believe that teams who continue to win should drop in the rankings because they did not win by enough. 2003, Ohio State has to win three games on their last drive, one on the last play, Miami trails for like 17 minutes all season. Yet despite that, Ohio State beat Miami for the title. A win is a win. Teams should not be punished for winning. But the same argument applies for Oregon, they have yet to impress me. The only team to have done that is Alabama.
Click to expand...
Winning is not the only factor taken into consideration when rankings are posted. I have a scenario for you. Here are the rankings.

1. Alabama
2. Boise State
3. Auburn
4. Oregon
5. Ohio State
120. San Jose State

Now, Alabama trounces San Jose State 140-0. Oregon beats Ohio State 35-12. Boise State beats Auburn 21-17.

What happens to the rankings?

Does Alabama fall? Why? They won, didn't they? Broke the record for most points scored in an NCAA Div. I football game. Why should they drop?

Does Boise State rise to the #1 spot? Why? They only beat the #3 team. They haven't beaten Alabama.

Does Oregon leap Auburn? Why? They only beat the number 5 team. And it wasn't even that big of a game. Auburn didn't lose as bad as Oregon won.

See what I mean?
 
In that situation, my 1-2-3 would be Alabama, Boise and Oregon. Auburn and Ohio State lost, they drop, the other three won so they stay where they are or move up if a team ahead of them lost.
 
But winning is not the only factor! Okay... Boise beat Auburn, but Boise also lost to Oklahoma. Auburn ends the season 13-1, Boise ends the season 13-1. Why shouldn't Auburn leap Boise? Boise lost to an unranked team...

See what I mean? There are MANY MORE variables other than wins vs. loses.
 
I see your point, Rob. And I actually understand the rankings a little bit better now, believe it or not. I still don't like or agree with them.....but I kind of get it now. :)
 
And head to head Boise best Auburn, so why should Auburn leap Boise? Why bother creating these hypotheticals when the BCS has given us so many in past years? 2005 Orange Bowl, Auburn, Oklahoma and USC all three finished undefeated. Which two teams do you put in the championship game and why?
 
A play-off system would be much better. This ranking system is crap. I've yet to meet anyone who agrees with the rankings. Someone is always ranked too high or too low.
 
Damien435 said:
I like the bowl system, I do not want to see a playoff system for college football, 32 games, 32 teams who finish the season on a win with something positive to build on next season. A playoff cannot produce such an outcome. The current system requires some level of common sense to function, said sense is missing at the current time. No rational argument can be made for why Oregon should have jumped Boise State this week. The facts speak for themselves and point to one clear outcome, if both teams are undefeated, Boise State, and not Oregon, should be given the higher rank.
Click to expand...


Here's the one person who likes the BCS system......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top