T1B

Take it a step further. Where would Cincy finish in any of the major conferences (the big least is not)?

The Big Ten-behind Iowa, Penn State, OSU at the very least.
Big 12- Behind Texas and OU.
SEC-Behind Florida, Bama, LSU,
Pac10- Behind Oregon and SC for sure.
ACC-Behind GT, VT, and Miami.
Indies-ND is better than Cincy.

Just off the top of my head and I'm sure I'm missing a few teams that are better than Cincy.

The Big East is not even remotely close to the Big-10's level and I don't think the Big-10 is that good. But that doesn't mean Cincinnati isn't as good as any team from any conference. We will know just how good they are once the BCS rolls around. This is why we need a playoff system.

We will know just how good they are once the BCS rolls around.

Probably not. Probably, all we'll find out is how good they are compared to the winner of the ACC.

Van wrote:

We will know just how good they are once the BCS rolls around.

Probably not. Probably, all we'll find out is how good they are compared to the winner of the ACC.

There are a couple good teams in the ACC. The conference as a whole is really bad but Georgia Tech and Miami are good teams.

That's fine. That's probably who they'll play, is all I'm saying. That won't really tell us how good they are, overall.

Playoffs, please.

Van wrote:That's fine. That's probably who they'll play, is all I'm saying. That won't really tell us how good they are, overall.

Playoffs, please.

You don't think we need a playoff system??

Let's just say Iowa, Texas, Florida, Boise State, Cincinatti, and TCU all go unbeaten.

Florida beats Texas in championship game. Iowa beats Oregon in Rose Bowl. Cincy beats Georgia Tech in BCS Bowl. TCU beats USC in BCS Bowl. And Boise State beats Alabama in BCS Bowl.

How can you argue that all of the above don't deserve a shot in this scenario?

What else do you think "Playoffs, please?" means?? How did you possibly interpret that to mean I was advocating against a playoff?

Van wrote:What else do you think "Playoffs, please?" means?? How did you possibly interpret that to mean I was advocating against a playoff?

Been a long day, Van........cut me some slack! :D

I took it as "playoffs? pssshtttt.........please"

My bad.

Well, to be fair, only a few seasons ago I was only in favor of Plus One. I'm still not in favor of a sixteen team playoff. I want it limited it to eight teams.

Van wrote:Well, to be fair, only a few seasons ago I was only in favor of Plus One. I'm still not in favor of a sixteen team playoff. I want it limited it to eight teams.

I would agree 8 is absolute max. I'm not sure that's even doable.

The biggest thing that makes it hard to do a long playoff is finals. The season gets over in early December. Then comes finals and every college is different. Some might have finals week early in december and other in mid to late December. And there's no way these universities are going to okay their teams playing playoff games during finals.

So we really can't start the playoffs until late december. But then it's Christmas time and that's just not gonna work out. Sure, you could start it early in January but that's when hoops season gets into conference play and there's no way the NCAA is going to want to have the football season take away from the basketball season any more than it already does. Remember, men's basketball is the only other cash cow the NCAA has. If we're playing playoff games in January, it will take a lot of attention off the conference slate of men's hoops and that's not gonna fly.

These really are bigger issues than people realize, so how do we get around these obstacles and have a playoff system? I really can't think of a way.

That's all a non issue. January 1, we have the first four games. We already have that many games on January 1. One week later, we play the semis. We already play a game on or around the same time: the current BCS title game. Then, one week later, we play the title game.

That's it. We're only adding one week to the season, for only two teams. No extra games in December. It's an absolute non issue.

Van wrote:That's all a non issue. January 1, we have the first four games. We already have that many games on January 1. One week later, we play the semis. We already play a game on or around the same time: the current BCS title game. Then, one week later, we play the title game.

That's it. We're only adding one week to the season, for only two teams. No extra games in December. It's an absolute non issue.

Even with there being just a few teams playing each week, you don't think this will take away from the College Hoops conference play that's starting up? I definitely think the majority of the attention around the country will be on the playoffs- at least the college fans. Even if their team isn't playing.

Also, let's not forget this is when the NFL has their playoffs and a college playoff system will never be able to compete with the NFL playoffs in terms of ratings. You can't have the college playoff games on the weekends because it would directly compete with the NFL and that would be a ratings nightmare. And if you have it during the week, can we really expect large turnouts at these venues?

Where are games played? Neutral sites or home fields?

One other major problem that people overlook is the fact that many of these colleges would begin 2nd semester during this playoff system. We can safely assume many of the players on these teams will begin dropping out of school for the 2nd semester to focus on the NFL Draft. Well, what happens if a player doesn't want to enroll in 2nd semester classes because he plans on entering the NFL Draft that spring? You can't force them to go to school. But would the NCAA really want to allow a player not enrolled in 2nd semester classes to play during the 2nd semester? I doubt it.

Are you even paying attention? This schedule would be identical to the currrent one, which apparently works for everyone. The only difference is two teams would play one extra week, on a Saturday - the same week the NFL's CCGs take place on a Sunday.

There is nothing to stop this schedule. It's just one extra week, and 117 of the 119 teams wouldn't have to worry about that one extra game.

Van wrote:

We will know just how good they are once the BCS rolls around.

Probably not. Probably, all we'll find out is how good they are compared to the winner of the ACC.

Not this year, I think. The Sugar, Orange and Fiesta rotate their at-large picks, and this year (and next, for that matter) the Orange gets the first pick.

What the BCS would look like, imho, if the season ended today . . .

BCS: Florida vs. Texas
Rose: Iowa vs. Oregon
Sugar: Alabama vs. Cincinnati
Fiesta: USC vs. TCU
Orange: Georgia Tech vs. Penn State

Order of selection for at-large teams:

1. Sugar: Alabama
2. Fiesta: USC
3. Orange: Penn State
4. Sugar: Cincinnati
5. Fiesta: TCU

I stand by what I said. Some of you idiots need to wake up and realize that this isn't 1975 anymore. There are other good conferences and good teams. The non-conference game and bowl game results show this but you want to ignore it. Doesn't matter to me. Enjoy your circle jerk.

WolverineSteve wrote:Take it a step further. Where would Cincy finish in any of the major conferences (the big least is not)?

The Big Ten-behind Iowa, Penn State, OSU at the very least.
Big 12- Behind Texas and OU.
SEC-Behind Florida, Bama, LSU,
Pac10- Behind Oregon and SC for sure.
ACC-Behind GT, VT, and Miami.
Indies-ND is better than Cincy.

Just off the top of my head and I'm sure I'm missing a few teams that are better than Cincy.

Here are the OOC records for the 6 BCS Conferences with the record against BCS OOC opposition listed on the far right.

SEC 30-6 (.833) 7-4

Big East 29-7 (.806) 6-6

Pac-10 20-10 (.667) 7-7

ACC 28-15 (.651) 8-8

Big Ten 29-10 (.744) 5-8

Big 12 34-13 (.723) 4-7

Before you go discounting the Big East it should be noted that a leagues such as the SEC and Big 12, which have 4 more teams, have played 1 less BCS OOC than the Big East. I guess that isn't all that surpising when it concerns the SEC.

ND is better than Cincinnati? Who has ND beaten that would lead you to believe that? Cincinnati's offense would shred ND's defense all day. ND still has to play Pitt and UConn, so let's see how they do in those games first.

Maybe the Big 10 should stop scheduling Syracuse and start scheduling some other Big East teams.

Yes, I think we'll go undefeated but I wouldn't be surprised at all to see us lose to Pitt in the last game of the season. It's on the road and Pitt is playing very well right now. This team knows how to win though so I think we'll win out.

MuchoBulls wrote: ND is better than Cincinnati? Who has ND beaten that would lead you to believe that? Cincinnati's offense would shred ND's defense all day. ND still has to play Pitt and UConn, so let's see how they do in those games first.

Not disagreeing with you w/r/t Cincinnati being better than ND, but ND would do the same to Cincinnati's defense.

Killian wrote:
Not disagreeing with you w/r/t Cincinnati being better than ND, but ND would do the same to Cincinnati's defense.

What leads you to believe that? Have you seen the amount of pressure that Cincinnati puts on opposing QBs? Have you seen how much time Cincinnati's defense spends in the backfield of the opponent? Have you seen Cincinnati's turnover ratio? I know Clausen is having a really good year and seems to really be emerging but the speed and athleticism of Cincinnati's defense would cause him alot of problems and I'm betting he would be under pressure all day.

Killian wrote:Not disagreeing with you w/r/t Cincinnati being better than ND, but ND would do the same to Cincinnati's defense.

It may very well be a high scoring affair, but Cincinnati can play D better than you may give them credit for.

CintiBearcat92 wrote:

Killian wrote:
Not disagreeing with you w/r/t Cincinnati being better than ND, but ND would do the same to Cincinnati's defense.

What leads you to believe that? Have you seen the amount of pressure that Cincinnati puts on opposing QBs? Have you seen how much time Cincinnati's defense spends in the backfield of the opponent? Have you seen Cincinnati's turnover ratio? I know Clausen is having a really good year and seems to really be emerging but the speed and athleticism of Cincinnati's defense would cause him alot of problems and I'm betting he would be under pressure all day.

I've watched Cincy, I've watched Notre Dame. If Cincy has to bring linebackers to get pressure, then Clausen will simply pick them apart. The one game where Clausen struggled, USC managed to get pressure rushing 4 and dropping 7. He still was one play away from tying that game. Cincy hasn't had to face a receiver like Golden Tate, much less Michael Floyd who will be playing this week. Throw in Kyle Rudolph at TE, and I don't think Cincy would get the kind of pressure you think. You could double one, but not both WR's. And Tate has been beating double coverage since the the MSU game.

I've watched as much of Cincy as I could this year because I wanted to see how Kelly responded after losing the majority of his defense. I think Cincy is good, but nothing leads me to believe that their defense would stop Clausen and ND.

MuchoBulls wrote:Here are the OOC records for the 6 BCS Conferences with the record against BCS OOC opposition listed on the far right.

SEC 30-6 (.833) 7-4

Big East 29-7 (.806) 6-6

Pac-10 20-10 (.667) 7-7

ACC 28-15 (.651) 8-8

Big Ten 29-10 (.744) 5-8

Big 12 34-13 (.723) 4-7

Before you go discounting the Big East it should be noted that a leagues such as the SEC and Big 12, which have 4 more teams, have played 1 less BCS OOC than the Big East. I guess that isn't all that surpising when it concerns the SEC.

On the flipside of that argument, the Big East does have one more OOC game per season per team. So while the SEC has half again as many teams as the Big East, it doesn't tranlate to nearly quite as significant a difference in OOC games.

SEC: 12 teams x 4 OOC games/season/team = 48 OOC games/season/conference
Big East: 8 teams x 5 OOC games/season/team = 40 OOC games/season/conference

That having been said, it simply is shocking that the SEC has scheduled fewer OOC BCS opponents than the Big East has. The Big XII is even worse, given that the Big XII has all but completed the OOC portion of its schedule (only one more OOC game to be played involving a Big XII team). In fairness to the Meatgrinder, they have at least three remaining OOC games vs. BCS opponents (Florida-Florida State; Georgia-Georgia Tech and South Carolina-Clemson).

I guess we'll just have to wonder about it since most likely we'll never find out. Oregon State has a damned good offense that USC wasn't able to stop at home and the Bearcats held them to 18 points on the road which is 11-12 points under their average. Also held USF to 14 points under their average at USF. Cincinnati is also second in the Big East in pass defense at 197 yards per game and first in the conference in overall defense. I'll agree that ND's offense would pose some challenges for the Cincinnati defense though.

I'll give Cincy credit on their run defense. That has been the most impressive thing, to me, about Kelly. Yes, replacing and playing 5 different QB's is damn impressive, but replacing 10 defensive starters and not missing a beat and actually getting better is impressive. OSU's offense is predicated on the run. USC has always been vulnerable against teams that line up and punch them in the mouth. They struggled with OSU, Oregon, etc. They usually do well against finesse teams because that allows their defensive playmakers to get in space and make plays. Cincy is the polar opposite, in my opinion. They are very stout against the run, but would seem to have problems with overly athletic teams. Not saying ND is overly athletic across the board, but with Floyd back, they have the best 1-2 punch of receivers in the country.

Question for you. I'm sure you aren't expecting Kelly to stick around Cincy forever. What do you think of him as a coach? More specifically, how do you feel he's done on the recruiting side of things?

Jsc810 wrote:

Killian wrote:Question for you. I'm sure you aren't expecting Kelly to stick around Cincy forever.

Gee, I wonder what conference he wants to coach in? :)

Not sure where you are going with this, but he had opportunities to go to the Pac10 (Washington) and SEC (Tennessee) and turned them both down.

Killian wrote:USC has always been vulnerable against teams that line up and punch them in the mouth.

They have??

No, they haven't. Quite the opposite, in fact. Oregon St is the only team during Pete's tenure to cause USC problems with a traditional, straight-ahead offensive approach. That's a function of the excellence of Mike Riley, who schemes against USC better than anyone.

Oregon isn't a "punch you in the mouth" offense. They're a skilled, precision-based read and react spread offense. They work off of balance and leverage, not plowing straight ahead.

When USC plays smashmouth football teams, i.e., the Big 10, ND or the SEC, they shut those teams down cold. Those teams are nearly never able to run on USC.

USC has problems with mobile QBs. They have problems with spread offenses, where the QB can create plays with the option of running or throwing, especially once the play breaks down. They have problems with finesse teams which keep them off-balance, not brute force teams which want to bludgeon them.

Van wrote:

Killian wrote:USC has always been vulnerable against teams that line up and punch them in the mouth.

They have??

No, they haven't. Quite the opposite, in fact. Oregon St is the only team during Pete's tenure to cause USC problems with a traditional, straight-ahead offensive approach. That's a function of the excellence of Mike Riley, who schemes against USC better than anyone.

Oregon isn't a "punch you in the mouth" offense. They're a skilled, precision-based read and react spread offense. They work off of balance and leverage, not plowing straight ahead.

When USC plays smashmouth football teams, i.e., the Big 10, ND or the SEC, they shut those teams down cold. Those teams are nearly never able to run on USC.

USC has problems with mobile QBs. They have problems with spread offenses, where the QB can create plays with the option of running or throwing, especially once the play breaks down. They have problems with finesse teams which keep them off-balance, not brute force teams which want to bludgeon them.

I'm assuming you know that spread teams can line up and punch you in the mouth. No where did I say that USC has problems with traditional teams or traditional offenses. USC has problems with teams that have an effective run game and enough weapons to keep USC from stacking the box. ND has never tried to line up and run against USC in the Weis era because their OL has been soft. When Willingham did it, he had success for the first few drives but it fell apart because there was no one on the outside to keep USC honest.

Back to my point, USC has struggled when teams line up and run right at them. Cal did it in 2003, OSU did it in 2006, Oregon did it in 2007 and OSU did it again in 2008. Texas ran well when they wanted to, but didn't stick with it because they had Young.

Teams that can run right at USC can negate USC's speed on defense.

Van wrote:Are you even paying attention? This schedule would be identical to the currrent one, which apparently works for everyone. The only difference is two teams would play one extra week, on a Saturday - the same week the NFL's CCGs take place on a Sunday.

There is nothing to stop this schedule. It's just one extra week, and 117 of the 119 teams wouldn't have to worry about that one extra game.

For me there is one thing stopping this...a natural aversion to seeing the college football season extend beyond January 1st. Kinda like I'm repulsed that MLB goes into November. My $0.02. A National Championship in college football just ain't that important to me. I'm more interested in seeing the Big Ten play the PAC-10 and SEC teams against Big 12 teams. But I'm conservative like that!

Killian, what you said was "teams that line up and punch them in the mouth." That would indicate teams which try to "out-physical" them, by plowing ahead with their O-line and running straight ahead.

That hasn't been the case at all. That is not what Oregon does, and that is not what Texas did. Only Oregon St has done that, and that's as much about USC's inability to locate and wrap up on that little fucker as anything else. Riley is a genius, and Quizz and his brother are badasses.

Oregon creates confusion through deception. Once they have the defensive front off-balance, they read and react. They use angles and leverage, and plays on the move, outside the pocket. They're not just lining up and punching USC in the mouth, the way a Michigan or Ohio St have always tried to do.

What makes them work is Dennis Dixon, Jeremiah Masoli and a very skilled and well executed blocking scheme.

Stewart did as much or more damage to USC in 2007 than Dixon. I guess it comes down to parsing words. Teams that have had success against USC have been able to run the football. Cal, Oregon State, Oregon and to some extent, Texas as well. Those teams were able to run right at USC's defense and have success.

See, Bama's is the type of offense which almost never causes USC trouble. They do try to line up and punch you in the mouth. USC defends that type of attack much better than they defend something like Florida's spread.

Terry in Crapchester wrote:In fairness to the Meatgrinder, they have at least three remaining OOC games vs. BCS opponents (Florida-Florida State; Georgia-Georgia Tech and South Carolina-Clemson).

The Big East has 4 remaining game against BCS opponents: UC-Illinois, Pitt-ND, UConn-ND, USF-Miami.

I am surprised that you were in shock at how much the SEC avoids playing OOC games against BCS leagues. We've all harped on the SEC about this for years.

Jsc810 wrote:Gee, I wonder what conference he wants to coach in? :)

If he decides to leave Cincinnati, then you can pretty much pencil him in for a Big 10 job.

MuchoBulls wrote:

Jsc810 wrote:Gee, I wonder what conference he wants to coach in? :)

If he decides to leave Cincinnati, then you can pretty much pencil him in for a Big 10 or major independent job.

FTFY

MuchoBulls wrote:

Terry in Crapchester wrote:In fairness to the Meatgrinder, they have at least three remaining OOC games vs. BCS opponents (Florida-Florida State; Georgia-Georgia Tech and South Carolina-Clemson).

The Big East has 4 remaining game against BCS opponents: UC-Illinois, Pitt-ND, UConn-ND, USF-Miami.

I am surprised that you were in shock at how much the SEC avoids playing OOC games against BCS leagues. We've all harped on the SEC about this for years.

I posted this elsewhere, but it bears repeating here...

The Pac 10...

USC plays Ohio St and ND.

UCLA plays Tennessee and Kansas St.

Oregon plays Utah, Purdue and Boise St.

Oregon St plays Cincy.

Cal plays Maryland and Minnesota.

Stanford plays Wake Forest and ND.

Arizona plays Iowa.

Arizona St plays Georgia.

Washington plays LSU and ND.

Washington St plays ND.

So, out of thirty possible OOC games, Pac 10 teams play sixteen games against BCS conference opponents, about 55% - plus the roadie to Boise St. Every team plays at least one OOC game against a BCS conference opponent, despite having only three OOC games.

Now, by comparison, let's look at the Big 10...

Ohio St plays USC.

Michigan plays ND.

Michigan St plays ND.

Illiniois plays Mzzou and Cincy.

Indiana plays Virginia.

Iowa plays Iowa St and Arizona.

Northwestern plays Syracuse.

Purdue plays Oregon and ND.

Wisconsin plays none.

Penn St plays Syracuse.

Minnesota plays Syracuse and Cal.

So, out of forty four OCC games, the Big 10 plays fourteen games against BCS conference opponents, about 30%. They also play more than their fair share of D1-AA teams, and only eight conference games. One team plays no OOC games against BCS conference teams.

How does that look to you? It looks to me like the Pac 10 plays tougher schedules than the Big 10. Without having done the run down on the other BCS conferences, I feel pretty confident that the Pac 10 will end up having a similar advantage over the Big XII and SEC.

Ah, fuck it. Why guess? Let's do them too...

The Big XII...

Oklahoma plays Miami.

Okie St plays Georgia.

Kansas plays none.

Kansas St plays UCLA.

Nebraska plays Va Tech.

Colorado plays W. Virginia.

Texas plays none.

Texas A&M plays Arkansas.

Texas Tech plays none.

Baylor plays Wake Forest and UConn.

Iowa St plays Iowa.

Mizzou plays Illinois.

So, out of forty eight OOC games, the Big XII only plays ten games against BCS conference teams, or just over 20%. They also only play eight conference games, plus a shitload of D1-AA teams, and fully 25% of the conference plays no OOC games against BCS conference teams.

The Big XII will be tough to beat, for weakest scheduling.

The SEC...

Florida plays Florida St.

Georgia plays Okie St, Arizona St and Georgia Tech. (Very good, Georgia!)

S. Carolina plays Clemson and N.C. St.

Kentucky plays Louisville.

Tennessee plays UCLA.

Vandy plays Georgia Tech.

Arkansas plays Texas A&M.

LSU plays Washington.

Auburn plays W. Virginia.

Bama plays Va Tech.

Ole Miss plays none.

Mississippi plays Georgia Tech.

Out of forty eight OOC games, the SEC plays fourteen games against BCS conference teams, or under 30%. They play only eight conference games, they play more than their fair share of games against D1-AA teams, and one of their teams plays no OOC games against BCS conference opponents.

Only the Big XII is worse, and they're all miles behind the Pac 10.

Now I'll do the Big East and ACC...

Nice job there Van. I'd love it if we'd schedule some PAC 10 and Big 12 games down the road.

The Big East...

Cincy plays Oregon St and Illinois.

Pitt plays N.C. St and ND.

W. Virginia plays Auburn and Colorado

S. Florida plays Florida St and Miami.

Rutgers plays Maryland.

UConn plays North Carolina, Baylor and ND.

Louisville plays Kentucky and Utah.

Syracuse plays Minnesota, Northwestern and Penn St.

So, out of 40 OOC games, the Big East plays seventeen games against BCS conference teams. All their teams play at least one OOC game against a BCS conference opponent. Overall, that's not quite as good as the Pac 10, especially since the Pac 10 also plays nine conference games, to the Big East's seven, but it's far superior to the Big 10, Big XII and SEC.

The ACC...

Miami plays Oklahoma and S. Florida.

Georgia Tech plays Mississippi St, Vanderbilt and Georgia.

Duke plays Kansas.

Va Tech plays Bama and Nebraska.

Virginia plays Indiana.

N. Carolina plays UConn.

Clemson plays none.

B.C. plays ND.

Florida St plays S. Florida.

Wake Forest plays Baylor and Stanford.

Maryland plays Cal and Rutgers.

N.C. St plays S. Carolina and Pitt.

So, out of forty eight OOC games, the ACC plays eighteen games against BCS conference teams. One of their teams plays no OOC games against BCS conference teams.

So, in terms of which conference plays the highest percentage of games against BCS conference teams, it works out like this...

1-Pac 10, and it's not even close, since they're the only BCS conference which plays nine conference games, plus they play the highest percentage of OCC games against BCS opponents.

2-Big East. Only playing seven conference games hurts them here.

3-ACC.

4-Big 10.

5-SEC

6-Big XII

Sorry, Jsc, you can't just brush this aside. This is who you actually play.

They didn't. Who said they did? I clearly made an aside about Boise, when I said, "Plus, they played Boise on the road."

'Plus', meaning 'in addition to.' I didn't count that as a BCS team. Count 'em up. I gave the Pac 10 sixteen, then I made an aside about Boise.

Anyway, using your method, it'll favor the Pac 10 even more. First off, they play nine conference games. So, right off the bat, just in conference, they've played more teams from BCS conferences than many teams will play all season. Wisconsin, Texas, Clemson or Ole Miss, for instance, since those teams all play eight conference game and no BCS conference teams OOC. Most BCS conference teams play eight conference games, and no more than one OOC against a BCS conference team.

The Pac 10 starts with nine, then they also play more BCS conference teams OOC than anybody else. Most Pac 10 teams are looking at eleven out of twelve. Teams like Washington and USC often play all twelve games against BCS conference teams. USC did it just last season - of course, that's including ND as a BCS conference team, which I did for each of ND's opponents.

Good luck finding any other teams who regularly do eleven out of twelve and even twelve out of twelve, besides Pac 10 teams, who also play fewer D1-AA teams than other BCS conferences.

So, do you have a point at all to make here, or is your only purpose to just yap away like TVO at whatever I post?