9/13 Top 25

War Wagon · Post by **War Wagon** » Mon Sep 14, 2009 1:56 am

Mizzou engineers an epic comeback against a tough Bowling Green team and drops out of the top 25?

Alrighty then.

King Crimson · Post by **King Crimson** » Mon Sep 14, 2009 1:58 am

War Wagon wrote:Mizzou engineers an epic comeback against a tough Bowling Green team and drops out of the top 25?

Alrighty then.

read your post out loud to yourself. :wink:

War Wagon · Post by **War Wagon** » Mon Sep 14, 2009 2:08 am

What?

It wasn't Colorado.

BG played their asses off... for 3 quarters.

Sorry, a team shouldn't drop because they didn't cover the spread.

PSUFAN · Post by **PSUFAN** » Mon Sep 14, 2009 2:18 am

I wouldn't worry about it, wags. They just need to win, baby.

War Wagon · Post by **War Wagon** » Mon Sep 14, 2009 2:35 am

No worries, they needed a wake up call and damn sure got it.

Doubt they'll take anyone lightly or read their press clippings from here on out.

Seriously, it was 20-6 until late in the 3rd. I was gripping, listening to it on am radio full of static, damned if I was going to pay $29.95 for PPV.

Watch out for Bowling Green. That team does not suck.

WolverineSteve · Post by **WolverineSteve** » Mon Sep 14, 2009 2:48 am

The MAC is no joke.

Sin,
Colorado and MSU

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Sep 14, 2009 4:21 am

King Crimson wrote:
War Wagon wrote:Mizzou engineers an epic comeback against a tough Bowling Green team and drops out of the top 25?

Alrighty then.
read your post out loud to yourself. :wink:

Jesus, no shit. There is no such thing as an 'epic comeback' when it's against Bowling Green, because unless you're a golfer trying to negotiate Wingfoot at the U.S. Open during a heatwave there is no such thing as 'a tough Bowling Green'.

It's fucking Bowling Green, at home, Whitey! Could you at least dip into the Walmart savings jar and maybe buy a clue??

That game was an outright embarrassment for Missouri. Or, at least it should be, if we're to treat Mizzou with even a modicum of the respect you so desparately crave for them.

TheJON · Post by **TheJON** » Mon Sep 14, 2009 4:24 am

War Wagon wrote:What?

It wasn't Colorado.

BG played their asses off... for 3 quarters.

Sorry, a team shouldn't drop because they didn't cover the spread.

Don't even cry about dropping after having to rally from 14 down over a pathetic football team.

Iowa started #21. We are 2-0. We just blew the fuck out of our opponent on the road. We are ranked #32 now.

I have no sympathy for anyone. These polls are flat out biased.

Okie State ranked ahead of Houston??? What the fuck??? Houston 2-0, Okie State 1-1. Houston DRILLED Okie State on the road. These polls are ridiculous.

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Sep 14, 2009 4:35 am

'Spray, I really can't see how USC or Bama earned any #1 votes at all, other than as protest votes. Some people like to go by the whole Forget What Their Reputation Is, What Have They Actually Done So Far? method of casting votes.

By that method, well, Florida has played Charleston Southern and The Wrong Troy. So, for all intents and purposes, they haven't even played a game yet.

And no, don't try and once again tell me how tough Troy is. No, they're not. They never beat anybody. They lose every single time they play someone good.

Anyway, for that type of voter BYU and USC have the most impressive wins of the season so far. Of those two teams, guess which one they're likely to choose as #1?

Myself, I'd go with...

1-Florida
2-Texas
3-USC
4-Bama
5-BYU
6-PSU
7-Cal
8-OU
9-Ole Miss
10-Utah

Once it goes past #7 it's flip a coin time. Utah, Boise, Ohio St, OU, Ole Miss, TCU, Georgia Tech, etc...who the fuck knows? No way to rank these these teams yet, and there's really no way to rank anybody yet.

:broken record:

Go Coogs' · Post by **Go Coogs'** » Mon Sep 14, 2009 10:18 am

Houston in the top 25 for the first time in 18 years. They impressed on Saturday albeit with a couple of huge breaks going their way.

They have two weeks until they play Taco Tech here at Robertson under the lights. It could be the Coogs' year with them having two weeks to prepare for the Tech game when Tech will be licking their wounds after they travel to Austin this week.

If Houston can win that game then Tulsa is the toughest game they have left on the schedule. A lot can happen between now and late November, but this could be UH's year to jump onto the BCS scene. We'll see.

JMak · Post by **JMak** » Mon Sep 14, 2009 1:57 pm

I'm not sure what the fetish is with not penalizing a team that wins against a clearly weak opponent. Why should Florida be rewarded for having a high preseason ranking and thenbeating two clearly weak opponents while punishing a highly ranked USC for beating a clearly strong opponent while on the road. Keeping USC at #3 behind Florida is penalizing a team for taking a quality game on the road and winning that game.

Seriously, Florida and Texas get preseason props and then those polls are used as the baseline whether the teams deserved such props in the first place. So, Florida beats Troy, Texas beats Wyoming, while USC goes on the road to beat OSU and we don't reward USC because we reward teams for beating wimps? WTF? Florida ain't entitled to #1. You drop their asses for playing weak.

JMak · Post by **JMak** » Mon Sep 14, 2009 2:42 pm

Quick follow-up...I know I'm being a little hypocritical here by complaining about preseason polls being used as a baseline from wins and losses are substracted, but my excuse is I'm working within the current polls we have. Whether USC was top 5 or not preaseason, wtf knows. But you cannot penalize a team for beating a top ten team while on the road by not dropping teams that beat pathetic opponents by huge margins and at home.

And there's no way that OSU stays top 20 after getting punked by Houston.

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Sep 14, 2009 2:47 pm

preseason props and then those polls are used as the baseline whether the teams deserved such props in the first place.

:swoon:

MgoBlue-LightSpecial · Mon Sep 14, 2009 3:13 pm

JMak wrote:I'm not sure what the fetish is with not penalizing a team that wins against a clearly weak opponent. Why should Florida be rewarded for having a high preseason ranking and thenbeating two clearly weak opponents while punishing a highly ranked USC for beating a clearly strong opponent while on the road. Keeping USC at #3 behind Florida is penalizing a team for taking a quality game on the road and winning that game.

Seriously, Florida and Texas get preseason props and then those polls are used as the baseline whether the teams deserved such props in the first place. So, Florida beats Troy, Texas beats Wyoming, while USC goes on the road to beat OSU and we don't reward USC because we reward teams for beating wimps? WTF? Florida ain't entitled to #1. You drop their asses for playing weak.

It's a tough situation, especially this year. Everybody and their brother knows UF is the best cfb team in the nation, and probably by a pretty good margin. It seems almost incomprehensible NOT to rank them #1, regardless of who they play. It's no secret how good they are. Yet at the same time if we don't look at resume and wins over good teams to determine polls, what motivation do elite teams like USC have to schedule games against OSU, Texas, etc? I guess USC's only motiviation to continue scheduling these games is that, unlike many other teams, they continue to WIN them, so why not? And obviously, the national exposure only continues to help in recruiting.

Still, so many people rail against the weak out of conference slates and at the same time glorify what USC or other teams do out of conference... yet when it comes time for poll slotting, they seem to forget what they were so passionate about in the first place.

JMak · Post by **JMak** » Mon Sep 14, 2009 4:05 pm

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:It's a tough situation, especially this year. Everybody and their brother knows UF is the best cfb team in the nation, and probably by a pretty good margin. It seems almost incomprehensible NOT to rank them #1, regardless of who they play.

Not being obtuse or difficult here, but I don't know that Florida is the clear-cut #1 in the land. But I'm merely a guy that watches as much as he can get while ignoring anything related to preseason. I guess if you give Florida all of the benefits of doubt, sure, they're clearly #1, but I'm not willing to do that.

OTOH, we have Florida, as usual, crushing these weak teams like jelly beans and in past years that's led to MNC's. So wtf do I know? That you don't penalize a team for going on the road and beating a top ten team. Period. I don't care if everyone thinks Florida is #1, they haven't done shit. Meanwhile, USC went on the road and beat a highly ranked opponent.

MuchoBulls · Post by **MuchoBulls** » Mon Sep 14, 2009 4:34 pm

Jsc810 wrote:Florida doesn't deserve to be ranked number 1 at this time. And there is at least one team that is really looking forward to playing them and settling it on the field.

Yeah, Georgia is really looking forward to settling it on the field.

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Sep 14, 2009 4:42 pm

Gotta agree with every word Mgo said.

In Florida's case, yeah, everyone and their brother does know how good they are, becase they return everyone except Louis Murphy and Percy Harvin from a team that got to play for and win the BCS title last year.

So, no, despite the fact that they haven't played a game yet this year we still have a pretty credible track record by which to measure them.

Conversely, Mgo's also correct in that this is nothing but a disincentive for USC and other teams to keep scheduling games like roadies to The Shoe. Let's face it, USC is in the national title game if they run the table, regardless of who they beat, so why even bother scheduling loseable games? A 12-0 USC team with home game wins over Charleston Southern, Troy and North Texas is still going to the title game, most years. On the flip side, they won't be in the national title game if they have even one loss, no matter who they scheduled and beat. Their OOC schedule could be Ohio St, ND and Mizzou, with two of the three being roadies, and as long as they slip up just one time somewhere in conference, they're out.

The way it's been playing out this decade USC could just as easily go the cupcake route and it wouldn't change a damn thing in terms of their poll slotting.

So, probably the only advantages USC receives from scheduling these Ohio St games are:

-Respect, which, along with a perfect record, will get them into the title game.

-Recruiting

-Toughening them up for big games later in the year, which may be one reason why they nearly never lose a big game.

Teams like Florida, or LSU? They don't have to do worry about any of this. They can schedule nothing but cupcakes, and they can even get into the title game despite losses to conference cupcakes. So, where's their incentive to schedule with any ambition? The pre-season polls insure that they'll have a non-stop situation of always playing ranked teams in conference, because just as soon as one SEC team loses to another the polls merely replace the one with the other. They're never allowed to fall out of the Top 25, so these pre-season rankings are a constant self-fulfilling prophecy for the SEC.

The pollsters seem to figure that while they may get the specific SEC teams wrong, well, whatever; come hell or high water some of those SEC teams will be right there where we said they would be...we'll just have to wait and see which ones they are, later.

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Sep 14, 2009 4:51 pm

Jsc wrote:Florida doesn't deserve to be ranked number 1 at this time. And there is at least one team that is really looking forward to playing them and settling it on the field.

x 1,000,000.

Jsc, there are a LOT of teams which would look forward to settling it on the field. They're known as teams who favor a playoff.

What, you think that weak ass LSU team is the only one who looks forward to playing Florida? You think USC or Texas wouldn't also want a shot?

Besides, the LSU game probably won't matter much anyway. It probably won't settle anything. Florida could lose that game, and more than likely if it ends up being their only loss they're still going to the national title game anyway. For a one loss Florida not to get in it'll require two undefeated teams from the Big XII, the Pac 10 or, maybe, PSU. More than likely a one loss Florida will get in over an undefeated Utah, Boise St or TCU. They'll get in over an undefeated Cincy. Nobody from the ACC is going undefeated, so who cares there, but even if someone did would anybody be surprised to see a one loss Florida get in over them?

LSU's not even a factor. They simply aren't very good this year, and they aren't winning the SEC.

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Sep 14, 2009 4:57 pm

So, Jsc, now you're just committed to being a troll?

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Sep 14, 2009 5:24 pm

Jsc wrote:No, and perhaps that was a bit of an overstatement.

It's an overstatement you've made at least a half dozen times over the years. You clearly believe such nonsense.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial · Mon Sep 14, 2009 5:42 pm

Well, the BCS isn't released until week 6 or something like that, so I wouldn't complain too much.

As long as the AP is still determining champs as well though, yeah, that needs to be fixed.

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Sep 14, 2009 5:50 pm

Jsc810 wrote:Yes, I believe that in most recent years, it has been true. Whether it is true again this year remains to be seen.

Jsc, your continuing belief that the SEC champ should automatically play in the title game isn't related to any given year. You simply believe such nonsense.

You're also blind to the fact of why and how the SEC champ keeps getting into the title game. You seem to simply regard it is their entitlement.

Problem is, so does a large portion of the media, and they're the ones who keep perpetuating this garbage.

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Sep 14, 2009 6:32 pm

WTF else do you want?

-Mandatory balanced schedules. Every team in America plays a 6-6 home and away schedule. Neutral site games must also be played with designated home and away teams alternating each season

-No games between D1 and D1-AA

-Streamline D1, to include only those teams which really are D1-level programs. That way, 6-6 schedules are feasible.

-No polls to come out until week 6 has been completed

-No conference tie-ins to BCS bowls

-No automatic bids to BCS bowls for any conference

-No conference championship games, unless they become necessary to break a tie in the conference. Otherwise, the normal tie-breaking rules apply.

-The Big XII to figure out the simplest shit imaginable: In the case of a three way tie in a division, where each team beat the other, throw out the lowest ranked team. Use the head to head result between the two highest rank teams to determine the winner.

-An eight team playoff, made up of the top eight ranked teams at the conclusion of the season, regardless of conference

-The painful death by house fire of Jim Delany

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Sep 14, 2009 6:45 pm

There is even more money to be made by a playoff system than with the current system.

The other money issue has to do with the greed of specific teams. 6-6 schedules strictly between D1 teams make money for everyone, rather than just the monolith programs.

To really make it work D1 needs to be streamlined down to teams which really are D1 teams. If your stadium is too small to make it worth Bama's time to go there then you shouldn't be in D1.

6-6 schedules work and make money for everyone, but only when Bama isn't forced to play at Troy.

We need to get rid of schedule padding programs who can never play host to the big boys, then we need to get rid of schedule padding in general.

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Sep 14, 2009 7:09 pm

Sam, the SEC winner also fucks up and loses to a conference patsy, same as USC.

Two differences:

-The SEC winner usually never plays anybody worth a crap OOC. USC does.

-The SEC winner is allowed to suffer a loss - or even two - against conference patsies, and USC isn't.

In '03 LSU's conference loss was worse than USC's. OU's was also worse than USC's. USC was left out in the cold.

In '07 LSU suffered TWO losses to conference patsies, and one of them was even in the final game of the season. LSU beat nobody OOC that season. USC did beat someone OOC that year. USC was left out in the cold.

In '08 Florida lost at home to unranked Ole Miss. USC lost on the road to unranked Oregon St. Both Oregon St and Ole Miss ended the season with identical records, including wins in their bowl games. Florida beat nobody OOC last year. USC did beat someone OOC last year. USC was left out in the cold.

Notice a trend here? USC is accused of and condemned for losing games they shouldn't, and it keeps them out of the title game, every time. The SEC does the exact same thing, every time, and they also never play anybody OOC, yet their annual brain fart loss is never held against them. It's only held against USC.

There is no level playing field here. The SEC gets padded SOS rankings, due to being the SEC. They're forgiven their brain fart losses, because they're the SEC. They're given a national title game slot ahead of other teams who are at least equally deserving...because they're the SEC.

It's not about merit. It's about media perception, and self-fulfilling polls, and that media perception is why every year lately the SEC has managed to get in, while also getting to avoid playing USC. The SEC winner's resume is never 'better', yet they keep getting the nod.

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Sep 14, 2009 7:15 pm

Jsc wrote:I still hear people who know absolutely nothing about sports who suggest that the national champ from the previous year should always be ranked #1 the next year.

That would also be Jsc.

He's made that argument on more than a few occasions...always when it would benefit LSU, of course. He's flat out said that the previous year's winner is #1 until someone beats them. Nevermind the fact that the team may have lost 2/3rds of their starters, and all their key play makers.

I do like your politeness though, Sam. Going out of your way to refrain from mentioning fellow SEC brethren Jsc by name there was very decent of you. That southern gentility is always to be commended.

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Sep 14, 2009 7:32 pm

They rarely are right though when they happen to be living in the SEC, Sam. Funny how that works out, that the guys who live in Entitlement Land always foment the most myopic, self-serving arguments.

"We got the highest rankings, because we're the best!"

"We're the best, because we got the highest rankings!"

"Yeah, an SEC team lost! So? It was to another SEC team! They're BOTH the best, and how on earth could you not be impressed when another SEC team has to play them? They're ALL the best!"

"Ohh, fuck...I just nutted myself."

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Sep 14, 2009 7:54 pm

Jsc, you flat out, categorically have said that, on more than one occasion. You were summarily pounded for it each time.

Maybe you were out of your skull on pain meds, and that's why you said it and can't recall saying it, but you have very definitely said that the national champs are #1 the next season until someone beats them.

War Wagon · Post by **War Wagon** » Mon Sep 14, 2009 10:24 pm

Van wrote:There is no such thing as an 'epic comeback' when it's against Bowling Green, because unless you're a golfer trying to negotiate Wingfoot at the U.S. Open during a heatwave there is no such thing as 'a tough Bowling Green'.

It's fucking Bowling Green, at home, Whitey! Could you at least dip into the Walmart savings jar and maybe buy a clue??

That game was an outright embarrassment for Missouri. Or, at least it should be, if we're to treat Mizzou with even a modicum of the respect you so desparately crave for them.

Bowling Green has beaten 11 BCS conference teams since 2000.

If they had lost, I would've been embarrassed, but they didn't lose due to an 'epic comeback', so you may go fuck your dumbass elitist self who picked them to cover an 18 point spread.

War Wagon · Post by **War Wagon** » Mon Sep 14, 2009 10:34 pm

TheJON wrote:
War Wagon wrote:What?

It wasn't Colorado.

BG played their asses off... for 3 quarters.

Sorry, a team shouldn't drop because they didn't cover the spread.
Don't even cry about dropping after having to rally from 14 down over a pathetic football team.

That "pathetic" team would fucking roll your Iowa Browneyes, home, away, or on a neutral field.

Iowa started #21. We are 2-0. We just blew the fuck out of our opponent on the road. We are ranked #32 now.

They didn't deserve to be ranked that high to begin with, as your in-State directional school showed. They were beat, twice, yet escaped.

And then you beat the hapless Cyclones, who will be hard pressed to beat Colorado this year.

TheJON · Post by **TheJON** » Mon Sep 14, 2009 11:15 pm

That "pathetic" team would fucking roll your Iowa Browneyes, home, away, or on a neutral field.

Ahahahahahahahahaha! Funniest post of the year!! Rack that!!

Iowa would beat Bowling Green by a minimum of 4 touchdowns with our backups. Horrible take dude, horrible take.

They didn't deserve to be ranked that high to begin with, as your in-State directional school showed.

UNI would beat Bowling Green by 3 touchdowns............MINIMUM. It wouldn't even be a game.

But I like how you talk as if that 1 game, which happened to be the first game of the year, is the be-all-end-all for Iowa.

Ummm...............

FAIL!

Van · Post by **Van** » Tue Sep 15, 2009 5:05 am

'Spray, the SEC has dominated the BCS because they keep getting chosen to play in the games, then they keep getting Ohio St or Oklahoma.

Think USC wouldn't have also won all those same games the SEC team won? Think USC wouldn't have also beaten Ohio St and Oklahoma twice apiece?

I do, and I suspect you do too.

Van · Post by **Van** » Tue Sep 15, 2009 5:07 am

WW, see if you can figure out why my taking Mizzou and giving 18 points doesn't help your argument that squeeking by at home against Bowling Green doesn't exactly bloster your argument that it was an 'epic comeback' against a 'tough Bowling Green'.

Roger_the_Shrubber · Post by **Roger_the_Shrubber** » Tue Sep 15, 2009 8:40 am

Papa Willie wrote:
Van wrote:
WTF else do you want?
-Mandatory balanced schedules. Excluding traditional neutral site games, every team in America plays a 6-6 home and away schedule

-No games between D1 and D1-AA

-No polls to come out until week 6 has been completed

-No conference tie-ins to BCS bowls

-No automatic bids to BCS bowls for any conference

-An eight team playoff, made up of the top eight ranked teams at the conclusion of the season, regardless of conference

-The painful death by house fire of Jim Delany

Sounds great to me. You're only forgetting one thing.

Money.

And that's why it will never happen, unfortunately.

RACK!

Van · Post by **Van** » Tue Sep 15, 2009 6:06 pm

Spray wrote:~~USC~~ Florida and LSU have to quit losing games to average teams during the season. That's nobody's fault but their own.

FTFY.

Why do you continue to damn USC for losing games they shouldn't, while excusing the SEC champs for doing the exact same thing?

Van · Post by **Van** » Tue Sep 15, 2009 10:20 pm

'Spray, why are you excusing the SEC champs for doing the exact same thing USC does? I'm not saying USC doesn't do it too, I'm just saying you and many others only condemn USC for it.

It's always the same thing...

"If USC wants to play for the title then they need to pull their heads outta their asses and quit losing games to shitty teams."

Yeah, great. They do. You know what? You're right. If USC never lost a game they'd win every championship.

Pretty simple solution, right? Can't argue with that logic. If Pete had gone 108-0 so far, well, yep, USC would have a few more titles.

Unfortunately, it doesn't work that way. Nobody wins every game in which they're favored.

Ever notice that Florida also doesn't win all the games in which they're favored? Or LSU? Nope. They don't either. They both lose games they shouldn't, just like USC does...and yet somehow it's okay for them to do so. They still get invited to the dance, and we never hear talk from anybody about how Florida and LSU need to pull their heads outta their asses and quit losing games they shouldn't.

That's even in spite of the fact that it's very rare for either of those teams to ever play anybody really good OOC. LSU almost never does, and unless Florida St is good neither does Florida.

Florida also never travels. Florida hasn't left the southeastern region to play an OOC roadie since you were still dissecting Brain Salad Surgery.

As for the Pac 10 adding two more teams just so they can play a stupid CCG...why?? The Pac 10 is still one of the only conferences in the nation that does it right. Everyone plays everyone. Nobody gets to skip the best teams. It's the perfect system.

CCGs? Those things are jokes, more often than not. Not only should the Pac 10 not add one but the conferences which do have them should drop them, except for those rare instances when they're necessary to break a tie between teams from different divisions. Really, how often has that happened, where two teams from the Big XII North and South both had identical records? Or the SEC East and West? Then, on top of that, those teams also hadn't played each other during the regular season, which would've resolved the tie.

It doesn't happen very often, and those are the only times those games should ever be played.

The rest of those CCGs are pure money grabs. They're worthless, and they can actually hurt a conference on those rare occasions when the underdog with multiple losses beats the much better team who was carrying that conference's national title hopes.

The mere threat of that happening should be all the reason in the world to never play a CCG unless it's needed to break a tie.

War Wagon · Post by **War Wagon** » Tue Sep 15, 2009 10:38 pm

Van wrote:WW, see if you can figure out why my taking Mizzou and giving 18 points doesn't help your argument that squeeking by at home against Bowling Green doesn't exactly bloster your argument that it was an 'epic comeback' against a 'tough Bowling Green'.

While I realize that you only have amorous eyes for BTPCF programs and even then for only the select few you deem worthy of attention from your lofty perch high above such plebes as Mizzou... take off the blinders for a second and give credit where it's due. To a MAC team.

Hey, I made the same mistake myself... that of under estimating Bowling Green. No, I'm not proud it took a late comeback to spoil that upset bid, just utterly relieved they pulled it off.

My point was only that I didn't think they shoulda' dropped from the rankings for having not covered the spread. Maybe I embellished a bit with the "epic" gloss as certainly no one looking from the outside in would see it that way, but that's damn sure the way I saw it... rather heard it, due to the fucking game only being on PPV.

Bottom line is that was a game they would have lost in years past. I've never seen Mizzou comeback from 14 down against anybody during the Pinkel era.

Van · Post by **Van** » Tue Sep 15, 2009 10:48 pm

My point was only that I didn't think they shoulda' dropped from the rankings for having not covered the spread.

They probably wouldn't have dropped had they won by 17 after being comfortably ahead, only to give up a cosmetic score to blow the spread at the end.

That isn't what happened. They won by the skin of their teeth against a team nobody respects, least of all the people who know best: Vegas. That wasn't merely a 'non-cover' by Mizzou; that was a near death experience...at home.

Not all non-covers are created equal.

War Wagon · Post by **War Wagon** » Tue Sep 15, 2009 11:02 pm

Van wrote: They won by the skin of their teeth against a team nobody respects, least of all the people who know best: Vegas.

Wrong.

Iowa won by the "skin of their teeth" against UNI. Mizzou had the game in hand midway thru the 4th qtr and ran the clock off at the end.

As for nobody respecting BG, that's bullshit. And the Vegas honks were dead wrong setting that line at 18.5... dead fucking wrong, obviously, just like you are. And I'm sure that they'd admit it. Would you? Have you ever admitted you were wrong about anything?

That wasn't merely a 'non-cover' by Mizzou; that was a near death experience...at home.

Agree, sorta'.... I was in my car for the 2nd half and yes, damn near died.

Van · Post by **Van** » Tue Sep 15, 2009 11:22 pm

WW, who are you to tell Vegas right and wrong??

What, do you always wait until after the game to decide what the spread should be?

Umm, good luck with that. I definitely want a room at Whitey's Casino And Sports Book.