T1B

Posted: **Sun Sep 09, 2007 4:22 am**

Watching this? Fuc*ing kickers

Posted: **Sun Sep 09, 2007 4:32 am**

what-a game!

Posted: **Sun Sep 09, 2007 4:34 am**

Kick the FG! No Way!

Posted: **Sun Sep 09, 2007 4:40 am**

Auburn fucking sucks!

Posted: **Sun Sep 09, 2007 4:49 am**

RACK USF!

Posted: **Sun Sep 09, 2007 4:50 am**

BALLGAME!!

Rack the Bulls!

Posted: **Sun Sep 09, 2007 4:56 am**

Auburn ... the Boise State of the SEC, 2007.

If Michigan and Auburn switched coaches, would anyone notice?

Posted: **Sun Sep 09, 2007 4:58 am**

This is why no other sport compares to D1 college football.

Especially when Allbarn shits the bed at home.

Rack USF.

Posted: **Sun Sep 09, 2007 5:02 am**

Jimmy Medalions wrote:This is why no other sport compares to D1 college football.

Once there is a playoff I will totally agree with that.

Posted: **Sun Sep 09, 2007 5:16 am**

I totally disagree and this should probably be its own thread...but the imperfection of the D1 system is the beauty of college football.

Posted: **Sun Sep 09, 2007 5:25 am**

I think you gotta say USF is the #2 program in Florida. Ya they don't have tradition but they do seem to have a definite direction, which is more than FSU or Miami can say right-now.

I thought the bulls had a good shot at winning this one going-in but thought Auburn was taking-over when they were pushing USF all over the field in the second quarter. This was a nice win for an up-and-coming program.

Posted: **Sun Sep 09, 2007 5:29 am**

Jimmy Medalions wrote:I totally disagree and this should probably be its own thread...but the imperfection of the D1 system is the beauty of college football.

Just as long as your team is consistanly on top. There will never be a "cinderella story" under the current system, only fantastic upsets that ultimately mean nothing to the winning team. Just think how much more exciting these upsets would be in December...IN A PLAYOFF!!!

Posted: **Sun Sep 09, 2007 5:33 am**

I still disagree. The system is inherently flawed and entirely unfair. This creates the very controversy that makes the sport so intoxicating to every fan.

Every fan has an opinion and it's always a passionate one. Do some guys get screwed? Of course. Just like real life.

I don't hate playoffs by any means, but I think the creation of one here would be a blow to the sport.

CFB is a soap opera. That is what makes it great.

Posted: **Sun Sep 09, 2007 5:44 am**

DUDE! You are a USC fan! You are almost ALWAYS in the mix come BSC bowl time. Have you ever played collegiate football before? I haven't, but if I ever did I be pretty pissed that I had no chance to go against the "big boys" when it counted if I played for a smaller school.

If you love the soap opera so much, try living it as a fan on a team that doesn't always get the collective blow job from the media that your team does. And no, I'm not talking about LSU either. I'm always about the little guy having a shot to knock off the big guy, but it's not ever going to matter unless they do it in some sort of post-season. See: March Maddness

Posted: **Sun Sep 09, 2007 5:59 am**

TenTallBen wrote:If you love the soap opera so much, try living it as a fan on a team that doesn't always get the collective blow job from the media

I do..on a daily basis. I'm married.

Seriously though, SCfan couldn't even get a handy in the 1990s and it was up to us to get better...somehow, some way. Programs either make the right moves to elevate, or they remain little guys and it's tough shit for them.

I enrolled at SC in 1990 and we pretty much sucked ass for a decade...1995 being the only good year until PC came along.

I simply believe that the sport is unique and enjoys greatness because it is a soap opera. Changing this facet of the sport would be a serious downgrade.

Think about it. Michigan loses their first game and then gets hammerfucked in the second game. In the current system their season is over and the value of each and every game matters. Period. End of story.

In a playoff system losing your first two games doesn't carry the same weight and there is always the chance that your conference foes will fuck up and you can squeak into the playoffs. Every game doesn't matter so much.

National titles are won on day 1, not day 15.

Posted: **Sun Sep 09, 2007 6:08 am**

Jimmy Medalions wrote:Think about it. Michigan loses their first game and then gets hammerfucked in the second game. In the current system their season is over and the value of each and every game matters. Period. End of story.

Yes, but if they ran the table and so did somebody like Rutgers did too...it would be quite nice to see them punked when it matters and give the underdog a chance to succeed.

You mentioned life not being fair and I totally agree that it isn't, but most all other sports seem to keep it fair by choosing a winner on the field/court/whatever. Life is supposed to be unfair, not sports.

Posted: **Sun Sep 09, 2007 11:33 am**

I've never been on such an emotional roller coaster watching a sporting event than I was last night. To see our FG kicker go through the shanks, only to force OT and then have the offense win it was awesome. Those were the types of games in the past where all that adversity would have just folded our team. I'm so proud of the heart and resiliency we showed when things we at their worst.

Posted: **Sun Sep 09, 2007 3:49 pm**

Congrats, Mucho. That's probably the biggest win your program has ever seen, being on national TV elevates it even farther.

Danimal wrote:I think you gotta say USF is the #2 program in Florida. Ya they don't have tradition but they do seem to have a definite direction, which is more than FSU or Miami can say right-now.

I would agree with this, for the time being anyway. But in fairness, and not to take anything away from USF's win, I think in hindsight Auburn was a fraud waiting to be exposed. Of course, not just any team was up to that task.

Danimal wrote:

Dayum. I mean, I like Seal's music and all, but how . . . on earth . . . did he ever manage . . . to pull . . . THAT?

Jimmy Medalions wrote:National titles are won on day 1, not day 15.

I agree with this, in the current system anyway. One of the biggest problems, of course, is the emphasis that preseason polls have. Like in auto racing, starting position does matter in college football. And not uncommonly, the preseason polls are way off base ('sup, Michigan).

Fwiw, I think eventually we'll see a 16-team playoff in college football. Money talks, when it comes to D1A's postseason, and I think a playoff would prove to be a real cash cow. But it'll probably take 20 years, if not longer, before we see it.

Posted: **Sun Sep 09, 2007 4:02 pm**

i was talking to mucho last year about their qb. I think grothe was the perfect qb for their program.

he is a fighter, can get you the first by running frompressure and can make a big throw. he's not a heisman type, hes more of the blue collar get the dirty job done guy. mucho respect for the guy!

Posted: **Sun Sep 09, 2007 4:21 pm**

As much as I hate the SEC with a passion, I'll still give credit where it's due. Last season, the SEC was jaw-dropping good.

And so far, I'm just not as impressed as I was last year -- not even close.

Although South Carolina is looking better than expected.

It's awfully early to be making the "best conference" argument, but so far, it looks like the PAC is far and away the dominant conference this year.

Posted: **Sun Sep 09, 2007 6:22 pm**

What a great win for USF.

Mucho should still be partying.....Grothe is just nails.

Posted: **Sun Sep 09, 2007 7:41 pm**

In the coach poll, auburn got more votes than USF. What a load of shit.

Posted: **Sun Sep 09, 2007 8:17 pm**

PSUFAN wrote:In the coach poll, auburn got more votes than USF. What a load of shit.

Saw that....ridiculous.

Posted: **Mon Sep 10, 2007 12:37 am**

Rack the Bulls!! Congrats, Mucho. A very nice win for USF. Another impressive showing from the Big East minus the total lack of a Louisville defense.

Posted: **Mon Sep 10, 2007 1:23 am**

Sudden Sam wrote:Oregon hasn't beaten anybody yet.

UM down or not, anytime a team goes into the Big House and puts on that kind of an ass-whipping, it is impressive.

Posted: **Mon Sep 10, 2007 10:52 am**

Jimmy Medalions wrote:National titles are won on day 1, not day 15.

National titles are also lost on day 1 (see Michigan), not day 15.

I agree with you actually, and not because you're a Trojan. Every single damn game means something.

Oh and Sam, USC hasn't beaten anybody yet either.

Posted: **Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:46 pm**

The SEC has Florida and a very nasty-looking LSU so I'll still give them top spot.

If anything I'd say the story is what was supposed to become an uber-conference in the ACC is currently the worst BCS-con. Va Tech was child's play for LSU. VT needs to leave that Taylor kid in at qb, he'll make some rookie mistakes but he'll also make things happen and actually develop.

Right now I'd use this order:
SEC
Pac10
Big12
Big East
Big10
ACC

Posted: **Mon Sep 10, 2007 6:45 pm**

88 wrote:As I was watching that game, I kept thinking that "Mucho Bulls must be shitting himself right now..." Congrats man. That was one for the ages.

Thanks. I was about ready to vomit watching our kicker miss all those field goals. The alcohol went down alot smoother once the game was over though.

I'm not really surprised that we did not crack the Top 25. I'm sure most coaches had their votes in before our game even ended. I would think we'd move up this weekend if Tennessee and BC lose, which they should.

Posted: **Mon Sep 10, 2007 8:41 pm**

Jimmy Medalions wrote:Think about it. Michigan loses their first game and then gets hammerfucked in the second game. In the current system their season is over and the value of each and every game matters.

The games are only valuable if you keep winning. Once you lose a ball game, your season is basically over. Once you lose two, it's almost definitely over. And if you lose early, that makes for a whooooole lot of watered down football the rest of the way. Michigan's season ended in week one. That means the rest of their schedule is basically meaningless. Trust me, I'm no apologist for losing teams. I just want to see more exciting, more valuable regular season games with something more on the line. With a playoff, their games could still mean something. With a playoff, teams will be battling 'til the bitter end to secure a berth. Simple math tells you this equals more important games for MORE teams.

One of the reasons I want a playoff is to see more meaningful games during the regular season.

Anyway, Rack USF.

Posted: **Mon Sep 10, 2007 8:56 pm**

I think you took the comment out of context. The sentence you highlighted should have been two sentences. Their season is over, because the value of each and every game matters.

Posted: **Mon Sep 10, 2007 9:01 pm**

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:
Jimmy Medalions wrote:Think about it. Michigan loses their first game and then gets hammerfucked in the second game. In the current system their season is over and the value of each and every game matters.
The games are only valuable if you keep winning. Once you lose a ball game, your season is basically over. Once you lose two, it's almost definitely over. And if you lose early, that makes for a whooooole lot of watered down football the rest of the way. Michigan's season ended in week one. That means the rest of their schedule is basically meaningless. Trust me, I'm no apologist for losing teams. I just want to see more exciting, more valuable regular season games with something more on the line. With a playoff, their games could still mean something. With a playoff, teams will be battling 'til the bitter end to secure a berth. Simple math tells you this equals more important games for MORE teams.

One of the reasons I want a playoff is to see more meaningful games during the regular season.

Rack.

A larger playoff field will also get you more meaningful OOC matchups as well, fwiw. Under the current system, you can't lose more than once and still contend for the national championship. For that reason, a lot of teams will schedule OOC cupcakes and hope that their conference schedule will carry enough weight.

Ask yourself, why did tOSU-Texas get so much run on this board the last few seasons? Because it was a dying breed -- an OOC matchup between traditional powers who were not traditional rivals with one another. Va Tech -- LSU was another exception in that regard. But these days, most meaningful OOC matchups are either legislatively mandated (e.g., Florida -- FSU) or involve Notre Dame (and with ND having a down season this year, that option could be gone). Give a little more margin for error in the regular season, and you'll see better matchups than you currently see, particularly in the OOC portion of the schedule.

Anyway, Rack USF.[/quote]

Posted: **Tue Sep 11, 2007 2:34 am**

T REX wrote:
PSUFAN wrote:In the coach poll, auburn got more votes than USF. What a load of shit.
Saw that....ridiculous.

That just shows that Auburn can manipulate the pollsters at will!!!

Sin,
Satire

Posted: **Tue Sep 11, 2007 1:16 pm**

Sudden Sam wrote:RadioFan,

Re: My Oregon not beating anyone yet comment: Just diggin' at UM. The Michigan people I know are the most arrogant (for no reason) fans I've ever met.

I dunno, having more consensus All Americans than any other program in college football is a pretty good reason to be arrogant...

Posted: **Tue Sep 11, 2007 2:06 pm**

Sudden Sam wrote:
SunCoastSooner wrote:
Sudden Sam wrote:RadioFan,

Re: My Oregon not beating anyone yet comment: Just diggin' at UM. The Michigan people I know are the most arrogant (for no reason) fans I've ever met.
I dunno, having more consensus All Americans than any other program in college football is a pretty good reason to be arrogant...
Yeah, but winning 6-7 games a year against high school teams doesn't impress anyone.

If you really believe that then you just lost a lot of credibilty with me SS which is disappointing. Michigan consitantly plays a pretty tough schedule in and out of conference. There are just as few patsies in the Big 10 as the SEC.

Posted: **Tue Sep 11, 2007 3:28 pm**

Sudden Sam wrote:Michigan plays Ohio State and Notre Dame. They lose their bowl game.

So very untrue. Penn State is no pushover. Wisconsin is no walk through.

Recent OOC series in the last decade (besides Notre Dame) include Oregon, Washington, Utah (while under Urban), UCLA, Vanderbilt, Colorado, and Boston College.

Michigan State, Indiana, Purdue, Illinois, Northwestern, etc. are pushovers every year.

As oppossed to Vanderbilt, Ole Miss, and Miss Stake. And Mich State is not a traditional pushover they have just sucked recently.

I respect the fact that Michigan has won more games than anyone. I respect the fact that they are consistently ranked and win 9-10 games a year. But even in Bo's day, they lost the Rose Bowl most every time they went. They walked thru their Big Ten schedule, then lost to any good team they played.

Michigan is 10-12 in the Rose Bowl all time. That's a far cry from losing it ever year, especially considering how much of a premier match up it is virtually every season.

Yes, occasionally they have a decent team. Alabama and Michigan played a great game in the '99 Orange Bowl. UM beat UA, 35-34 in OT. We missed an extra point. Tom Brady was their QB. 2 other bowl meetings with UM were exciting last-second wins, 1 for each.

But...overall, Michigan and Ohio State dominate that conference so much...and have for so long, it's ridiculous. Penn State is the only serious threat to either. Michigan State pops up once a century, as has Northwestern.

Weak conference.

I'm not suggesting Michigan doesn't belong in the pantheon of all-time great programs. But I am suggesting that they pile up 8-9 wins a year against patsies.

I think you are very wrong. Michigan's schedule is more daunting on a consistant basis than 3/4 of the SEC and that is being kind.

Posted: **Tue Sep 11, 2007 3:33 pm**

I think Sam would be surprised to see how close the Big Ten is to the SEC in bowl games over the last ten years. Many of the B10 teams don't seem as glamorous as the SEC's, so the assumption is that they can't play ball, that they don't recruit talent, etc.

But the bottom line is it's DIVISION 1 FOOTBALL!! The gap isn't as wide as he thinks between the SEC and everybody else.

Posted: **Tue Sep 11, 2007 3:39 pm**

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:I think Sam would be surprised to see how close the Big Ten is to the SEC in bowl games over the last ten years. Many of the B10 teams don't seem as glamorous as the SEC's, so the assumption is that they can't play ball, that they don't recruit talent, etc.

But the bottom line is it's DIVISION 1 FOOTBALL!! The gap isn't as wide as he thinks between the SEC and everybody else.

I think that may be it as well. If the talent in the SEC has always and is so much better than everyone else why don't they have as many consensus all americans as the Big 10 and Big 12 institutions? Or as many national titles in their conference? That's a completly different 20+ page argument but I was just sayin'...

Posted: **Tue Sep 11, 2007 3:45 pm**

Sudden Sam wrote:I may be prejudiced a bit . I was raised in a home where the superiority of midwest football was pounded into my head daily by an Ohioan (dad). So as I grew up and watched Alabama destroy Ohio State (and lose to Notre Dame 3 goddamn times!) and observed southern teams' style (smaller, quicker players) versus midwest style (huge, slow as molasses players), I decided long ago that Big Ten football is a lesser sport than SEC football. Statistics, records and scores be damned.

I admit a degree of prejudice in this matter. I've mentioned before my very unpleasant Ann Arbor experience. I despise all Michigan-related matters. Detroit sucked. Nasty, dangerous place. I'm sure there must be some nice things about Michigan (early Bob Seger, Nugent, The Stooges, MC5, Motown, the '68 Tigers, the Duffy Daugherty years at MSU), but I'm not a fan of the state, its' sports teams, its' colleges, it's women...shudder...saw some nasty biguns, or anything else up there.

That said...I shall try to temper my anti-Big Ten/Michigan comments. I still say that UMers display an amazing amount of misplaced arrogance about their football program, though.

They are arrogant as hell but they have earned the right as much as you or I have concerning their football program...

Posted: **Tue Sep 11, 2007 3:45 pm**

I can fully respect that view, Sam.

But if you think for one second that the rest of the country doesn't feel the same way about the SEC and the mouths on the fans that are big enough to swallow up several Michigan women simultaniously, then you're a fool.

SEC fan talks about how great his conference is -- the rest of the country tries to go out and prove it on the field.

Posted: **Tue Sep 11, 2007 3:54 pm**

Local sports radio hack...went to Clemson but proclaims his love for SEC everyday on the air...despises Big 10 and ND especially...

last year...Big 10 was 2-0 against SEC in first two bowl games...then tOSU got pummeled...didn't matter the Big 10 was 2-1 last year against SEC...the SEC was far superior...now when someone tried to bring up that the vaunted SEC had some bowl losses last year and some early non con losses this year (after AU/USF) he was like UT blows...they suck...that is what gets me the most...they are part of the vaunted SEC but when they get beat by a Big 10 team they suck and blah, blah...but never mind the Big 10 was 2-1 again the SEC was vastly superior...

I would venture to say the SEC and Big 10 are about even in bowl games in the last 10 years...I'll try and effort it but I would agree the gap isn't that wide...

but hey we all have our teams, conferences, etc

T1B

USF-AU

USF-AU