T1B

If you're going to do this every week, then try not to do it through Crimson colored glasses.

'Spray? "Crimson" colored glases?



That's only about as wrong as it gets, champ.

I agree it's a joke for Bama to drop without playing, but it really doesn't matter. They are in a good position. If they beat LSU and Florida, they'll be playing for a title. If not, they won't. Simple as that.

Iowa has wins over #11, #18, and #21.

Texas has wins over #19, #24

I also agree that Oregon got fucked. I definitely think they would beat Boise State by 40 points if they played again, but I also don't think they should be ranked ahead of them. However, to have them behind TCU and Cincinatti is a flat out fucking joke. Not only would they murder those 2 teams, they also have a MUCH better resume even with the opening night loss to Boise State. Let's face it........between TCU and Cincinatti they have exactly one quality wins. The best win is over BYU (by TCU), and that's only against a decent team.

As for some of the teams you criticize being ranked so high like USF or Utah.........it doesn't matter. It's pretty much pointless to even have a Top 25 for the BCS. Top 5-6 is plenty, really. I think it's safe to assume that the national title game will feature 2 teams from the Top 5-6. No one else has a realistic shot. I don't see how any other team could work their way into the championship game.

I know he's an Auburn fan, but dude is pumping up Bama in more than one thread right now. Just sayin'.

I've seen Bama play in a few games too this year. Their defense is just as good, if not better, than Texas and Florida's.

Their offense is what is lacking. That is something Texas and Florida posess, a potent offense. Both Texas and Florida haven't hung 80 on opponents this season, but they both have playmakers at QB. Bama is stronger at RB with Ingram and Richardson, but they can't come from behind and win a big game if it came down to a game winning drive. Julio Jones is a beast, but either he can't get open or McElroy can't make the throws.

That is why Texas and Florida are ranked 1-2.

Yes, I know how the polling system works. Of course Bama will surpass UT in the polls should they beat LSU. They should be ranked ahead of Texas after beating the 9th ranked team in the nation.

I'm giving you MY assessment of why Texas is and should be #2 right now.

I don't think Oregon is getting screwed. They beat a not-so-good SC team. If Boise is 7 then Oregon simply cannot be jump them no matter how many of you just know Oregon would crush Boise today. Look, SC was ranked way too high to begin with and I think the pollsters, while giving the Trojans the benefit of the doubt for a few weeks, knew SC wasn't that good.

Papa Willie wrote:5 Cincinnati (amazing how the NE biased fuckers will do ANYTHING to overhype Big East teams. This is shit)
13 Pittsburgh (more Big East over-inflation)
14 Utah (give me a fucking break. Not this year.)
25 South Florida (Come the fuck on. Sorry Mucho... :D )

Umm, dipshit, how about we just do this to appease all you dumbasses out there who think that there are only 15-20 teams that are somehow deserving of high rankings:

1) Texas
2) Florida
3) Alabama
4) Penn State
5) Ohio State
6) Michigan
7) Oklahoma
USC
9) Tennessee
10) Nebraska

I think that's fair. After all, those names look GREAT in a top ten and everyone knows that what is really important is your history, not how good you are RIGHT FUCKING NOW. I'll take Cincinnati against anyone right now.....yes, anyone.

I saw the strength of schedule ratings somewhere today but I can't remember where. I remember that Texas was somewhere around 42, Iowa at 18, Cincinnati and LSU were tied at 58, Boise was 94th and Bama was I think somewhere between Texas and Cincinnati/LSU.

Connnecticut won't hurt our SOS, WVa and Pitt will help us, and Illinois will definitely hurt. We scheduled them when they were good and going to the Rose Bowl and now it's actually going to hurt us. Bad break but it happens to alot of teams. There is nothing to apologize for on our schedule. We've won FIVE road games and only one of those is against a truly bad team. Best wins are Oregon State, USF, and Rutgers with all of those being on the road. Still have an opportunity to beat WVa and Pitt which will make for a nice resume. There will be teams with stronger schedules and teams with weaker schedules and in the end it really doesn't matter. It's about the quality of the team, not who they've played and in the end we'll find out who the best teams are.

It's about the quality of the team, not who they've played

Yeah, but how do you measure the "quality" of a team if you don't look at who they've played? Dumb take, dude.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:

It's about the quality of the team, not who they've played

Yeah, but how do you measure the "quality" of a team if you don't look at who they've played? Dumb take, dude.

No, not a dumb take at all. Everyone involved in this conversation has or will play at least ONE game against a very good team this year. For Cincinnati to go undefeated they will have won at Oregon State, USF, Pitt, and will have beaten WVa at home....all quality wins. Boise State had ONE opportunity and took care of business. So just because Cincinnati has four really nice wins but Boise has only one does that automatically make Cincinnati the better team? No, obviously not. That's all I'm saying. Who they've played is only a PART of it and what I'm saying is that people make TOO much of it.

'Spray, you got Pitt, Utah and Houston as ranked too high, but nobody below them who you think should be ranked higher.

If you're gonna criticize rankings of certain teams as being too high, you should be mentioning the teams you think should be ranked above them, but aren't. Otherwise, the criticism really doesn't mean anything.

Papa Willie wrote:25 South Florida (Come the fuck on. Sorry Mucho... :D )

If Cal, Wisconsin, and ND are in, then we should be too. Only 2 losses to top 15 teams and we have 2 wins over Top 25 teams at the time of play.

Here's a question: How many teams would currently be undefeated, had they played the same schedule as Boise, Texas and Florida?

I daresay our top ten would look entirely different, as there would be a whole lot more undefeateds right now.

Mace wrote:

Van wrote:Here's a question: How many teams would currently be undefeated, had they played the same schedule as Boise, Texas and Florida?

Well, not USC or Oregon. Oregon still loses to Boise and USC still loses to Oregon but, you're right, there would be too many undefeated teams to fit into the top 10.

If USC had Boise's schedule they don't have to play Oregon on Halloween night, in Autzen. They get them at home, in the first game of the year, when Oregon was so bad that Boise beat them despite playing one of the worst games anyone will ever see.

Wildly different scenarios. No way in hell USC loses any other games on Boise's schedule, and they likely beat Oregon in a season opener at home.

If Oregon had Boise's schedule, that game takes place in Autzen. Maybe they still lose it, but it'd be hard to imagine them playing that poorly in Autzen, even despite having lost to them the year before in Autzen; especially because they lost to them the year before in Autzen.

Nobody on the Texas schedule beats either team. On the Florida schedule, only LSU poses a threat.

A team's success in CF is very much a function of their schedule. You just watch, next year. USC will benefit from having their easiest schedule in recent memory, with all their tough games at home, and ND being their only real OOC opponent. Combine that schedule with all their people returning, and they're going to jump right back to the top of the rankings.

Mace there are times when you're truly a "coach speak" cliche spouting idiot. This is one of those times.

If you don't see a difference between the Oregon team who played at home on Halloween night vs the one who sleepwalked through their opener in Idaho, well...fuck it, you do see the difference, but you're just hiding behind lame "coach speak," since it currently benefits your team to do so.

As for USC's D, Oregon would've lit up Iowa the other night. Lit them the fuck up, and there would've been no scabdicking from Iowa. They would've gotten rolled, period.

"Oh, but you don't KNOW that!"

Fuck off. Yes, I do know that.

"All you KNOW is Iowa is undefeated, and Oregon lost a game!"

BFD. Iowa isn't very good. Oregon in Autzen, on national tv for Halloween night, they ain't Indiana in Kinnick. They would score at will on Iowa, and Iowa wouldn't score even as much as USC.

One loss Oregon in Autzen would be an easy ten point favorite right now over undefeated Iowa. Iowa's smoke and mirrors aren't fooling anybody. We all know they're a fraud; a nice little team who've lucked into an undefeated season so far on the back of a shitty Big 10, a shittier OOC, and an ungodly amount of incredibly good fortune.

We'll see how good Iowa's D is when they play in The Shoe, and Ohio St scores a lot more on Iowa than they did against USC. Then we'll see Iowa's D get positively hatefucked by Oregon, should Iowa make it to Pasadena.

"We won our games!"

"You didn't!"

"It doesn't matter who we played, or how we played! We won our games!"

"The bad calls even out! Indiana didn't get screwed!"

"All that matters is we win our next one. Every game is equal! They're all tough!"

Jesus, your bland, fence-sitting cliches are positively ponderous. Everything you say is so safe and pointlessly obvious that it's like Lou Holtz without the garbled, cock in his mouth speech.

When you're Iowa, yes, every game is a big game. Despite Iowa apparently treating them as such, they somehow still manage to lose way more of them than USC.

Yeah, I think USC has managed just fine. Iowa fan just needs to shut up and enjoy their dream bubble of a season, before it inevitably pops. They need to stop talking about their resume, because their resume is a facade. They need to stop talking about their D as if it's something special, because it clearly isn't. They need to stop talking about potential national title games, because the last thing any of us needs is to see is yet another Big 10 team getting destroyed in yet another BCS bowl game.

For this Iowa team to play in a title game would represent the single biggest joke of the BCS era.

They're Iowa. They will fail, and it won't be because they shit the bed. It'll be because they never were all that good, and their incredible luck finally ran out. Iowa could easily have four or five losses already, against meh competition, and nobody would be the least bit surprised.

Iowa is the other side of the coin shared by Michigan St. They're no better. They've just been more fortunate. Michigan St could easily have Iowa's record, and vice versa. MSU is simply snakebitten, while Iowa is playing on borrowed time.

God forbid Iowa gets to the title game, off of scabdicking through the weak Big 10. Florida vs Iowa would be a goddamned nightmare, and every SECBSH's dream.

Btw, Mace, so good of you to be so two-faced. In this thread, you say I suck Oregon fan's dick for properly congratulating them and giving their team all due respect. You say you'd never do such a thing.

In that thread, however, you commended me for showing class.

<------

Having a take and not speaking in bland nothings - "coach speak" - doesn't mean you need to become a two-faced hypocrite. It means you might try stepping off the fence and saying something of value, beyond your penchant for spouting off tired cliches.

Papa Willie wrote:5 Cincinnati (amazing how the NE biased fuckers will do ANYTHING to overhype Big East teams. This is shit)

Did an SEC apologist seriously just complain about regional media bias? That's fucking priceless.

8 Oregon (got fucked)

How, exactly, did Oregon get fucked? They're the highest ranked one-loss team in the polls. Unfortunately for them, their one loss is to the (perceived) worst undefeated team, who is ranked one spot above them. If I hear one more person say how Oregon would crush Boise St. if they played right now, I'm going to puke. Guess what? THEY. ALREADY. PLAYED. EACH. OTHER. And Boise fucking won. Tough shit. Maybe next year, Oregon will remember that early season games count just the same as mid- and late season ones.

You guys that constantly hate on the non-AQs (Van, Willie, etc.) seem to have forgotten that non-BCS teams are currently 3-1 in BCS bowls. Yeah, Hawaii shit the bed against UGA, but that is turning out to be the exception, rather than the rule.

Who cares?

Iowa fan just needs to shut up and enjoy their dream bubble of a season, before it inevitably pops.

Nope. We'll be even better next year. We return most of our starters. This was just the beginning.

Just the beginning of what? What, is Iowa suddenly going to build some sort of dynasty? This same team could easily come back and lose three or four of these scabdickers next season.

Dude, wake up. It's just Iowa. This is your dream season. You're not on the verge of becoming Ohio St.

MiketheangrydrunkenCUfan wrote:

Papa Willie wrote:5 Cincinnati (amazing how the NE biased fuckers will do ANYTHING to overhype Big East teams. This is shit)

Did an SEC apologist seriously just complain about regional media bias? That's fucking priceless.

Yeah, Mike, I saw the humor in that, too. I can't believe any SEC fan has the nerve to talk about bias in the polls. Hey Willie, do you remember MISSISSIPPI? Ranked 4th? Are you fucking kidding me? You're incredibly full of shit. Cincinnati was UNRANKED to start the season. We had to keep winning to earn our way up to number 4. I mean how many years are we going to see teams like Georgia continuing to be GIVEN a ridiculously high ranking to start the season and then underperform as always?? For all that NE Big East bias you claim to see, why were there NO Big East teams ranked in preseason polls? Yep, they sure did try to prop us up, didn't they? :?

ESPN and the national media do have a northeast bias for some things, but when it comes to CF the national media bias is so squarely on the SEC that it's not even funny. Cincy and Bama could swap schedules and results and Bama would always begin the season ten spots higher, and they'd always remain ten spots higher throughout the following season. The SEC receives evey single possible advantage the media can give them, in vast abundance. Northeast - and far west - teams in CF are treated as little more than condescended to afterthoughts.

Love it or hate it, there is no getting around that reality. The SEC is what it is because of the media's bias towards them.

Oh, definitely, USC enjoys a media bias as well. Unfortunately for them, they're the only team out west to do so. So, they don't receive the luxury of a conference bias, which would send them to the title game over other teams with identical records from other conferences. That's where the SEC gains so much. The media's bias towards them pumps up the rankings of every team with a pulse in the SEC, making every game seem larger than it really is, then the SEC always gets every benefit of the doubt at the end of the season, when it comes to picking between teams with equal records.

The following year, it starts up again. The media throws up a bunch of high rankings to untested, undeserving SEC teams, then they simply replace one SEC team with another as they beat each other. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy, whereby the media will not allow the SEC to fail.

When the same thing happens in your conference or mine, i.e., teams beat each other up, the league as a whole gets ridiculed, and even the team at the top suffers because of it.

USC receives a media bias, absolutely, but that bias ends the moment they lose a game. Once they lose, they're out of the title picture. In the SEC the media bias is so strong that similar losses are always excused. They're allowed to lose a game they shouldn't, while USC isn't.

Papa Willie wrote:

Go Coogs' wrote:I know he's an Auburn fan, but dude is pumping up Bama in more than one thread right now. Just sayin'.

I've seen 'Bama play in quite a few games this year. I've also seen Texas play several times this year, as for some reason, ABC seems to think we are in love with the Big 12.

Sorry. 'Bama is better. I honestly don't think Texas is as good this year as they were last year. But hey - that's just my asshole opinion. :D

I've seen Texas play every game and I've seen most of Bama's games. I tend to agree with you, Texas has looked horrible against much weaker competition. Bama right now should be ranked ahead based on their body of work.

With that said, Texas has much more upside than Bama does. Texas can actually pass the ball and run the ball, bama can't. Nor would they be able to move the ball against the Texas defense. Texas on the other hand would be able to move the ball against bama enough to win the game.

Papa Willie wrote: And they were almost hailed as the second coming by people like ESPN - UNTIL, an average Va Tech team kicked the shit out of them in Miami.

Never said the Big East was as good as the SEC, dipshit. The SEC isn't as good as people think though. LOTS of mediocre teams there and then you have your shit teams like Vandy, Miss State, and Auburn. The best conference? Maybe. A big gap between the SEC and other major conferences? No.

Ummm, did you watch the same Orange Bowl that I watched? The game I watched was a 20-7 game in which Va Tech scored their last TD with a couple minutes left. So a game that was a one touchdown game throughout the entire game is an ass kicking? Ok. Now that I know that I can hold your SEC teams to the same standard.

Vito Corleone wrote:

Papa Willie wrote:

Go Coogs' wrote:I know he's an Auburn fan, but dude is pumping up Bama in more than one thread right now. Just sayin'.

I've seen 'Bama play in quite a few games this year. I've also seen Texas play several times this year, as for some reason, ABC seems to think we are in love with the Big 12.

Sorry. 'Bama is better. I honestly don't think Texas is as good this year as they were last year. But hey - that's just my asshole opinion. :D

I've seen Texas play every game and I've seen most of Bama's games. I tend to agree with you, Texas has looked horrible against much weaker competition. Bama right now should be ranked ahead based on their body of work.

With that said, Texas has much more upside than Bama does. Texas can actually pass the ball and run the ball, bama can't. Nor would they be able to move the ball against the Texas defense. Texas on the other hand would be able to move the ball against bama enough to win the game.

this year's Texas team finishes 3rd in the South last year. take away Shipley, which OU did, and UT is the same McCoy stat padding dink/dunk underneath. that's all. an SEC team will have the db's to do that.

UT's front 7 is for real, that's about it though. I'd bet SEC champ over Texas.

Spray - roll tide roll, eh?

Sudden Sam wrote:
Yet teams that finish lower in the SEC (those "shit" teams you mentioned, say finishing 8th in the SEC) routinely beat higher finishing teams from other conferences in bowls. You know how they pair the SEC's bottom qualifiers against the 4th, 5th or 6th place team from other conferences...trying to make it fair...give y'all a chance.

:wink:

Thanks, Sam, it really is nice of you all to give the rest of us a fighting chance. I guess it's just Southern hospitality :)