College Football 2007

[Celtigo]

Fuck yeah indeed.

Props to Tedford for being a classy guy, though. He made a point of coming out of the locker room to congratulate Harbaugh a second time after the game.

First conference win in the new Stanford Stadium. I'm sure everyone wishes it had come sooner than the last game of year 2, but still, it's kind of fitting that it came against Cal. It's going to be strange seeing the Axe in that case in Arrillaga (the Stanford sports admin building) that's been empty since I got here 3.5 years ago.

Congrats to Furd as much as I hate to say it. Truly amazing how Cal has totally managed to fall apart since the Oregon State loss.

Hopefully Harbaugh will turn Furd into a decent team and perhaps the rivalry will get some balance back and cut out these 6 and 5 year win streaks that go either way.

Also, ACC fans you need your conference to do something about that championship game. It had all the atmosphere of a July interleague game between the Royals and Reds.

[Bronn Stone]

Congrats to 'furd. Didn't win it so much as 'failed to lose it', but even still, a gutsy performance and didn't play half as stoopid as the guys in blue and gold.

My dream is of the day that both teams go into this game at 11-0 and it means everything. Harbaugh may be the guy to take you guys to that point.

Hope we keep Tedford. Maybe six losses scares off the scary weasels from Ann Arbor.

[William Stanaforth Donohue]

Hawaii managed to come back and hold off Washington's last second drive for the tie. Undefeated is undefeated, but do they really look like a BCS team?

[AndyP]

Hawaii vs the Ohio State University would by just as good as any at this point. Just no match up involving any team that didn't win their conference.

[maize]

Ah, what a fun season this has been.

IMO OSU and Georgia should play for the NC game this time around. Sure, Georgia did not win their conference, but they're one of the hottest teams in the nation right now, and their conference losses were a long time ago. Besides, LSU has been ranked #1 twice this year and blew their chances each time. Sorry, but granting a team a third chance is ridiculous.

In a way it's sort of like last year, when cooler heads said Michigan already had a chance to go to an NC game, and blew it. Thus Florida's turn.

When all is said and done, the voters will probably spread their votes around to VT, Oklahoma, USC, and LSU enough such that no one will get enough votes to jump Georgia.

[Old Zog]

Woo hoo!!!!!!!!

The Axe is back where it belongs. And I won my yearly Zachary's Pizza bet.

Bronn, I agree. I'd love to see Stanford and Cal both go into Big Game at 11-0.

[dornish prince]

ACC CHAMPIONS, BABY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sean Glennon owned "Matty Ice" today. No more insane comeback at the end of the game (although I almost had a heart attack as Ryan rolled to the left, backpedaled to avoid our rush and launched it towards the endzone).

On the Orange Bowl against ?????????

my guess is the georgia bulldogs...

didn't ya'll play them in a bowl last year?

[HokieStone]

The reason Hawaii was never considered for the MNC is being demonstrated right now as the last-place PAC-10 team is waxing them. At home.

Well, ignore this idiot who commented before the game was over...

You won't convince me that Hawaii deserves a shot at the MNC though.

[Young Wolf]

Just my personal bias, but Id love to see both LSU and USC skipped over for the National Championship game. They've been there at the top and blew it multiple times...I say put them in the Rose Bowl so they can settle their pre-season argument of who should have been #1.

Though if the Rose Bowl committee decides to keep the Big 10/Pac 10 tradition alive...I really cant see USC vs Illinois being all that great of a game.

YW

[Lukkake]

Also, ACC fans you need your conference to do something about that championship game. It had all the atmosphere of a July interleague game between the Royals and Reds.

They are. The title game will likely be moving away from Jacksonville to Charlotte in the next few years, maybe next year. I'm sure the atmosphere didn't seem like much on TV because the stadium was empty, but thats to be expected when the game is being played hundreds of miles from either campus. I was there though and I can say it wasn't any fault of the fans who did show up. Even the BC fans showed up in the 3rd quarter. I'd rather have half a stadium of fans than rely on piped in speaker noise like you get in Morgantown.

[HokieStone]

If there's proof that this sport needs a playoff, it's right here. What complete and utter bullshit the new polls are. LSU jumps 3 spots in the AP and 5 spots in the coaches poll. Oklahoma jumps 5 in the coaches, and 6 in the AP. Meanwhile VT moves up 1 in the AP and 0 in the coaches poll. What a crock of shit. I'm not real pissed about LSU jumping us, because after all they did smack us around earlier in the season. Although maybe they shouldn't have been ranked below last week then - and oh by the way, their two losses were to unranked teams. And one of the losses was last week - so much for the "it's better to lose early than late" theory. But how in the world you can justify Oklahoma jumping over us is absurd. Oklahoma's two losses - two unranked teams, and one loss was just two weeks ago. VT's two losses were both to two teams that were ranked #2 at the time, and both will be ranked in the final poll. And in the rematch, they beat one of those teams.

I expected LSU to jump us, and again, with them beating us head to head, I'm finding it a little bit hard to be too upset. And I should be happy that we're going to the BCS and West Fuckin' Virginia had the choke of the century. And I am happy about those things - but this system is complete and utter joke.

[Commodore]

You make a good case Hokie, and I would thing there would be some sentimental reasons to favor VT as well.

It's like there are certain teams that can automatically regain whatever position they lost simply by winning the next week (or by not playing). As if nothing ever happened.

[Lukkake]

"It's better to lose early in the season than late in the season" has now become "it's better to lose early in the afternoon with only your conference watching than to lose late at night with the entire country watching".

I think if Oklahoma loses both games on national TV we'd have stayed ahead. I wouldn't want to be in the title game though. If Ohio State, Oklahoma, or LSU want to claim BCS champs thats fine, but there just isn't a national champ this year. I'm really okay with that, too.

[Ken Stone]

If there's proof that this sport needs a playoff, it's right here. What complete and utter bullshit the new polls are. LSU jumps 3 spots in the AP and 5 spots in the coaches poll. Oklahoma jumps 5 in the coaches, and 6 in the AP. Meanwhile VT moves up 1 in the AP and 0 in the coaches poll. What a crock of shit. I'm not real pissed about LSU jumping us, because after all they did smack us around earlier in the season. Although maybe they shouldn't have been ranked below last week then - and oh by the way, their two losses were to unranked teams. And one of the losses was last week - so much for the "it's better to lose early than late" theory. But how in the world you can justify Oklahoma jumping over us is absurd. Oklahoma's two losses - two unranked teams, and one loss was just two weeks ago. VT's two losses were both to two teams that were ranked #2 at the time, and both will be ranked in the final poll. And in the rematch, they beat one of those teams.

I expected LSU to jump us, and again, with them beating us head to head, I'm finding it a little bit hard to be too upset. And I should be happy that we're going to the BCS and West Fuckin' Virginia had the choke of the century. And I am happy about those things - but this system is complete and utter joke.

VT lost to two teams that were ranked #2? Considering that this year being ranked #2 almost guaranteed that you were going to lose that is really saying something. Turns out that is worse than being beat by unranked opponents. Crazy year.

[Guest]

This whole controversy, in my mind, is bringing up something else conroversial, but not enough so. The conference championship games. They are awful for a few reasons.

First, so you can be aware of my biases, I am an Oregon fan who loves the Pac-10.

Oklahoma is a team I hate but I am about to defend them here. They should not have had to play Missouria a 2nd time. Not in this sport. Every league, and I mean every league, should have one league that is not broken up into divisions. Under that format, everyone plays as close to the same schedule as possible. Obviously, things like injuries still come into play. (think UCLA was happy to play Oregon with their 4th and 5th string QB's instead of Dixon?)

But I'm hearing people say Georgia has no chance to be the team because they didn't win their conference and LSU did. So? Their conference has a very flawed system for determining it's champion. Georiga and LSU didn't play (at least I'm pretty sure, back me up) and they have the same record. Yes, technically Georgia did not win it's division due to an inexplicable blowout loss to Tennessee, but my point is, Georgia and LSU had different schedules. They had different tasks in front of them on their path to try and become conference champs. Makes no sense.

Apparently, it's all about the money, that's why we have these title games. But fuck that. KU is OK this year, but they got hype because they were unbeaten in late November. But that was due to a scheduling quirk in that they hadn't played the three most talented teams in their league, OU, UT, and Missouri, and they would only go on to play one.

In the Pac-10, everyone played everyone, once. USC and ASU finished tied with the best record and USC won that head-to-head game, so they are conference champs. No problems with that right?

Given my biases, I think the title should either be Ohio State v. USC, or maybe even Hawaii though I know that won't happen. But if it isn't Georgia in there, it shouldn't be because they didnt' win their league and LSU did. They almost aren't in the same league.

[H von T]

This whole controversy, in my mind, is bringing up something else conroversial, but not enough so. The conference championship games. They are awful for a few reasons.

But I'm hearing people say Georgia has no chance to be the team because they didn't win their conference and LSU did. So? Their conference has a very flawed system for determining it's champion. Georiga and LSU didn't play (at least I'm pretty sure, back me up) and they have the same record. Yes, technically Georgia did not win it's division due to an inexplicable blowout loss to Tennessee, but my point is, Georgia and LSU had different schedules. They had different tasks in front of them on their path to try and become conference champs. Makes no sense.

None of the conferences with championship games play every team in their conference. Kansas didn't have to play OU this year and that helped them immensely. The Big 10 teams don't play every conference team, either. You can't have any meaningful OOC games if you require teams to play everone in their conference

In the Pac-10, everyone played everyone, once. USC and ASU finished tied with the best record and USC won that head-to-head game, so they are conference champs. No problems with that right?

This is relatively new. In 2005 the Ducks only played 8 conference games.

I agree that the championship games are just for the money. I'd gladly swap them for a playoff system.

edited cuz I was wrong

[The Wedge]

You can't have any meaningful OOC games if you require teams to play everone in their conference

I think what you meant to say is that major teams can't schedule cupcakes from lesser-thought-of conferences or from D-I AA that add up to extra home games, which adds up to more $$$ for the major teams. The majors by and large won't sign 1 for 1 contracts with these smaller programs, but are quite happy to host them for one off home game contracts.

It also means that Hawaii can't schedule Michigan or USC, and gets bought out of its contract with Michigan State when MSU decides it's not worth the very potential of losing to Hawaii.

I'm ready to stop lobbying for a playoff at this point because scheduling, polls, and money make a legitimate national championship in D-I BCS a farce.

[dornish prince]

I think what you meant to say is that major teams can't schedule cupcakes from lesser-thought-of conferences or from D-I AA that add up to extra home games, which adds up to more $$$ for the major teams. The majors by and large won't sign 1 for 1 contracts with these smaller programs, but are quite happy to host them for one off home game contracts.

It also means that Hawaii can't schedule Michigan or USC, and gets bought out of its contract with Michigan State when MSU decides it's not worth the very potential of losing to Hawaii.

I'm ready to stop lobbying for a playoff at this point because scheduling, polls, and money make a legitimate national championship in D-I BCS a farce.

this isn't exclusively the case, although for the most part, your are right...i'll bring back up something that i posted earlier and i know that my team isn't the only one. starting next year, auburn has a 2 year home/home with west virginia. the next year, they have a home/home with clemson. so two years from now, auburn will play their regular sec schedule (pretty tough by anyone's estimation, IMO) along with west virginia and clemson.

i'm not claiming that they are the only school to do this...OSU/texas, OSU/miami, cal/tenn, lsu/va tech are the most recent games that stick out...georgia has tried to schedule other opponents, most notably oregon, and if i'm not mistaken, oregon backed out (or we could try the more neutral, "an agreement could not be reached)

this is in no way meant to detract from the fact that all schools schedule cupcakes. the reason why most cupcakes accept is because of the money that their small school gets in recompense for the shellacking they receive on the football field....and hey, sometimes it backfires; just ask michigan.

ETA: just a couple of years ago, alabama played two straight away games to close out the season against hawaii

ETA2: also florida, fla st. and miami play each other every year and before miami joined the ACC that made for 2 brutal OOC games for those teams every year.

[H von T]

I think what you meant to say is that major teams can't schedule cupcakes from lesser-thought-of conferences or from D-I AA that add up to extra home games, which adds up to more $$$ for the major teams. The majors by and large won't sign 1 for 1 contracts with these smaller programs, but are quite happy to host them for one off home game contracts.

It also means that Hawaii can't schedule Michigan or USC, and gets bought out of its contract with Michigan State when MSU decides it's not worth the very potential of losing to Hawaii.

No, if you have a 12 team conference you can only play one OOC game. It'd be great if whatever your team is could schedule USC or some other great team, but that would just be stupid. Schools would make just as much money for the additional home conference games as they would for playing some directional school. What we'd really lose are the traditional rivalries. I'm a Florida fan and I'd much rather play FSU every year than play every SEC each season. Miss State and Ole Miss do nothing for me.

[The Wedge]

No, if you have a 12 team conference you can only play one OOC game. It'd be great if whatever your team is could schedule USC or some other great team, but that would just be stupid. Schools would make just as much money for the additional home conference games as they would for playing some directional school. What we'd really lose are the traditional rivalries. I'm a Florida fan and I'd much rather play FSU every year than play every SEC each season. Miss State and Ole Miss do nothing for me.

Fine, pick your rivalry and go with it, but it stinks when the Big Ten can't get Michigan, OSU, and Wisconsin to all play each other in a given year, or every other year when Oklahoma and Nebraska don't meet. The expansion of conferences has devalued the conferences and many old rivalries, in general.

Just don't go playing FIU or Western Cupcake State and then not reciprocate and play those teams on the road. I understand it's about money, but it's a situation where the rich get richer and pay off the lesser school, who doesn't get quite as rich. The disparity grows.

Earlier in the thread I mentioned that if they wanted to make BCS football legit in the current system that they would only have 6 major conferences. But it was stated that this would be too professional. Well, what is it now, anyway?