T1B

Florida still has two tough games coming up, against FSU and Jacksonville State.

That matchup is possible, along with several others, should Oregon, K-State, and/or ND stumble in the coming weeks. Stranger things have happened but, of all the scenarios, ND losing to USC is the most likely to happen, imo, although Oregon is facing the toughest part of their schedule in the final weeks too. KSU should handle Baylor but Texas might give them a game.

Sudden Sam wrote:Just wanted to reinforce my rep as being "insufferable".

Not really necessary, what with that lifetime achievement award.

Just wanted to reinforce my rep as being "a bully".

Goober McTuber wrote:

Sudden Sam wrote:Just wanted to reinforce my rep as being "insufferable".

Just wanted to reinforce my rep as being "a bully".

Is that the same thing as being a fat, vapid, flyover fuckstain?

Mace wrote:

Goober McTuber wrote:

Sudden Sam wrote:Just wanted to reinforce my rep as being "insufferable".

Just wanted to reinforce my rep as being "a bully".

Is that the same thing as being a fat, vapid, flyover fuckstain?

I was under the impression that Goobs isn't actually fat.

You don't believe Moving Sale?

Mikey wrote:
I was under the impression that Goobs isn't actually fat.

He lives in Wisconsin.


Hope that helps.

Mace wrote:You don't believe Moving Sale?

He's never called me fat. Yet. But with his stellar record of being wrong, it's just around the corner.

Edit to add: Though another tard might beat him to it.

Sudden Sam wrote:

Goober McTuber wrote: Just wanted to reinforce my rep as being "a bully".

That description surprised me as much as your reference to the T1B Alabama fanbase did.

Hey, you made your own bed. Now go hump your sister in it.

Sudden Sam wrote:Consider this possibility:

Kansas State loses to Texas, Oregon drops one to Stanford, Oregon State, or USC,

You really shouldn't cut and paste the thoughts of some SEC/Alabama poster that has no idea that U$C already played Oregon a week and a half ago.

M2 wrote:

Sudden Sam wrote:Consider this possibility:

Kansas State loses to Texas, Oregon drops one to Stanford, Oregon State, or USC,

You really shouldn't cut and paste the thoughts of some SEC/Alabama poster that has no idea that U$C already played Oregon a week and a half ago.

Conference championship game, you cum-drunk fucknozzle.

Goober McTuber wrote:
Conference championship game, you cum-drunk fucknozzle.

That's funny.


U$C won't even be in that game.


As we speak... U$C is in 2nd place in their own division.. shit for brains.


$C sucks so bad... they'll lose to fucla this weekend.

I give Oregon about a 70% to 80% chance of winning against both Stanford and OSU, and winning the CCG vs USC (UCLA will finish with four conference losses).

Oregon should win all of those games but you never know.

A three TD favorite this weekend? It could happen but I'm thinking it will be closer than that.

M2 wrote:

Goober McTuber wrote:
Conference championship game, you cum-drunk fucknozzle.

That's funny.


U$C won't even be in that game.


As we speak... U$C is in 2nd place in their own division.. shit for brains.


$C sucks so bad... they'll lose to fucla this weekend.

You honestly believe that UCLA will beat USC, Milton? Now that's funny.

Which doesn't change the fact that you completely overlooked the possibility that Oregon still could lose to USC, you brain-damaged cock-snorkeler.

Goober McTuber wrote:
Which doesn't change the fact that you completely overlooked the possibility that Oregon still could lose to USC, you brain-damaged cock-snorkeler.

Ummm... I was one the one that said they won't play... shit for brains !!!


How could I have "completely overlooked the possibility" ???


Get back in your Igloo... tubby.

M2 wrote:

Goober McTuber wrote:
Which doesn't change the fact that you completely overlooked the possibility that Oregon still could lose to USC, you brain-damaged cock-snorkeler.

Ummm... I was one the one that said they won't play... shit for brains !!!

No, Milton, you didn't say they won't play, you said thay had already played. Your stupidity is on display for everyone to see here. Choke on a dick, you gibbering fucktard.

Goobs is on a roll.

Mace wrote:Goobs is on a roll.

You mean the rolls of fat that flop out over his belt when he pulls it about two notches past comfortable?

Mikey wrote:

Mace wrote:Goobs is on a roll.

You mean the rolls of fat that flop out over belt when he pulls it about two notches past comfortable?

No, Goobs isn't fat....he's a vapid flyover fuckstain.

BTW, Sammy -- since you've used QB rating as the end-all, be-all to pump up the guy who everyone here not named Sam was a mediocre QB...

who's the "best" QB now, bitch?

I'll give you a hint -- it's a guy who goes downfield more than once a game.

It's weird -- when McCarron faced non-cupcake defenses, he didn't look so good.

Sudden Sam wrote:

Dinsdale wrote:It's weird -- when McCarron faced non-cupcake defenses, he didn't look so good.

Texas A&M is a "non-cupcake defense"? 57 points to La Tech says otherwise.

Don't look now, but La Tech is 9-1, ranked 20th in the BCS and has the #2 scoring offense in the nation. They've dropped 50+ on 8 of their 10 opponents this year, including the two other AQ schools they played (and beat).

Goober McTuber wrote: you didn't say they won't play, you said thay had already played.

M2 wrote:

That's funny.


U$C won't even be in that game.

You want to step back and give that another try there... tubby ?


You're a fucking mess.

Sudden Sam wrote:
You can't be so stupid as to not expect USC to play Oregon again. Oh wait...apparently you are.

I'm the ONLY one on this board that predicted that Alabama would lose to A&M.



You really want to question my knowledge about the PAC with yours ???



You southerners and midwesterners live where you live... because of a lack of intelligence, not because you have an abundance of it.


Trust me on this one...

Sudden Sam wrote:
And you had problems understanding this:

Kansas State loses to Texas, Oregon drops one to Stanford, Oregon State, or USC, and Notre Dame loses to USC.

Who's a mess?

You are... being that you included U$C when they won't play each other again.


Is this really that hard to understand ?

Sudden Sam wrote: Your knowledge of the PAC is pretty slim considering you didn't even realize Oregon could play USC again.

Huh ???

I said they won't be playing in the game... that kinda fucks your premise right off the bat.

You do understand that, right ?

Sudden Sam wrote:You predicted that Alabama would lose to both LSU and A&M, as I recall.

... and I was a Less Miles away from being right on that one too.

The PAC doesn't have a Less Miles.

Sudden Sam wrote:BTW, I prefer you continue to hold the opinion you have of the south. We really would like you to stay the fuck outta here.

EVERYONE has that view of the south... and they're right.

SuC will win with little effort Saturday. The Bruins will fight for awhile and match the intensity...even maybe out hit the trogans...but SuC has these 2 receivers and UCLA has shit for CB's...so unless they pressure the shit outta inbredBarkley, it could get ugly.

The Seer wrote:SuC will win with little effort Saturday.

I see you working...

The Seer wrote:so unless they pressure the shit outta inbredBarkley,

Bingo !


fucla is strong along the line... and Mora is a defensive coach (he'll be ready)


Also, see the Stanfurd game.

Hit Barkley hard a couple of times early. Maybe even at the risk of a late hit. He gets gun-shy.

Cash Grab Nonsense Redux, Part 3,417...

So, assuming Oregon beats Stanford and Oregon St, why the fuck does the Pac 12 even need to hold a CCG? Oregon will be 12-0, and 9-0 in conference play. Even if USC beats UCLA and ND, they'll still only be 9-3 and 6-3 in conference play. Oregon already beat USC too, so there goes that flimsy excuse.

Even if USC were to beat Oregon in the Cash Grab they'd still only be 7-3 vs Oregon's 9-1 in conference play, with the two teams having split the head-to-head meetings.

There is simply no reason whatsoever for the Pac 12 to risk losing not only a shot at the national title but also having a second team in a BCS bowl game. Oregon will have clearly won the conference already so why play such a game? Both they and the conference have everything to lose and nothing to gain. Even pure greed doesn't work here, not when the conference stands to lose more money than they can hope to gain merely by playing that one CCG. If Oregon loses, the conference loses a national title game representative and a second BCS slot in the Rose Bowl. Chances are that Oregon would then get that Rose Bowl bid, and that would be it for the conference in terms of BCS bowl games. If Oregon wins, neither USC nor any other Pac 12 team has a shot at the Rose Bowl.

Pretty simple stuff: Don't hold a Cash Grab Game unless it's necessary to break a tie and/or at least benefits the conference.

To force 12-0 Oregon to play in one this year would be pure stupidity.

M2 wrote:

Goober McTuber wrote: you didn't say they won't play, you said thay had already played.

M2 wrote:

That's funny.


U$C won't even be in that game.

You want to step back and give that another try there... tubby ?


You're a fucking mess.

M2 wrote:

Sudden Sam wrote:Consider this possibility:

Kansas State loses to Texas, Oregon drops one to Stanford, Oregon State, or USC,

You really shouldn't cut and paste the thoughts of some SEC/Alabama poster that has no idea that U$C already played Oregon a week and a half ago.

Idiot.

Sudden Sam wrote:

Van wrote: There is simply no reason whatsoever for the Pac 12 to risk losing not only a shot at the national title but also having a second team in a BCS bowl game.

To force 12-0 Oregon to play in one this year would be pure stupidity.

When the SEC first split nto divisions and instituted the championship game idea everyone freaked out saying we'd never get to play for another NC. Potentially it's a disastrous situation, but, IIRC, only once in all these years has a team with a worse record knocked off a "better" team in the SEC. And I can't even recall who or when that was.

But yes, potentially it could destroy a deserving team's shot at a BCS title game.

If they lost, maybe they weren't all that "deserving". I hate conference championship games, BTW.

OTOH, a win can also allow the winning team to leapfrog someone in the polls who is idle that last weekend. And, for the record, I don't like the CCG either. As Van said, it's simply a money grab....one that will put Oregon's players at risk of injury before the NC game...if they win out.

The thing is, it's not just the national championship the Pac 12 risks losing. It's also a berth in a second BCS bowl game. And for what? Exactly what does the league or Oregon gain with a victory in a CCG this year? Nothing. With wins over Stanford and Oregon St the Ducks are going to Miami, regardless. Those same two wins will knock the Beavers and the Cardinal out of any BCS bowl games, and a win over USC or UCLA in the CCG will knock the Trojans or Bruins out of the Rose Bowl. A loss in the CCG knocks the Ducks out of the title game, and it likely still means that only one Pac 12 team would receive a BCS bowl bid. The Rose Bowl would have a tough call there. Do they take the better team with the higher ranking in Oregon, or do they take (in USC's case) the more telegenic conference 'champion' sporting the recent win over Oregon?

So Van, you think the Pac should just pick and choose each year whether to have a CCG? Sounds a bit wishy-washy and self-serving to me. (A USC fan self-serving? Shocker.)

That's as bad as when the Northwestern coach suggested that because PSU and tOSU from the Leaders division are ineligible for bowl games this year, a committee should select an opponent to play the winner from the Legends division.

Van wants to cancel a game because it can hurt the chances of a conference team (possibly his team) from being selected for a BCS bowl? Who does he think he is, Bill Snyder? Hypocritical much?

Goober McTuber wrote:So Van, you think the Pac should just pick and choose each year whether to have a CCG? Sounds a bit wishy-washy and self-serving to me. (A USC fan self-serving? Shocker.)

How on earth is it self-serving to a USC fan? I'm advocating that USC not be given any chance at winning some bogus conference championship that Oregon will have clearly already won.

And no, I'm not saying that the Pac should randomly pick and choose when to play a CCG. It shouldn't be random at all. I've been saying for years that those games should only be played when necessary to break a tie in the conference that wasn't already broken by a head-to-head meeting. When a team already has a three-game lead at the end of the regular season (including a head-to-head win), such a game is not only pointless, it's stupidly risky both for the championship team and the conference.

It's the same thing in, say, MLB. They only play the one-game tiebreaker when necessary. Otherwise, they don't go through the silly charade of making the obvious champion have to play one more game against a less-deserving opponent just to cement what they already achieved during the regular season.

That's as bad as when the Northwestern coach suggested that because PSU and tOSU from the Leaders division are ineligible for bowl games this year, a committee should select an opponent to play the winner from the Legends division.

Apples and assholes.

Mace wrote:Van wants to cancel a game

Nope. My point is that such a game shouldn't even be scheduled until it becomes necessary to break a legitimate tie in the conference standings.

because it can hurt the chances of a conference team (possibly his team) from being selected for a BCS bowl?

Speaking from the standpoint of looking out for what's best for the conference, absolutely. The conference's main goal is to see two teams win BCS bowl berths, including a slot in the national title game. A CCG under the current scenario needlessly risks both things. There is no reason to play a game where both the championship team and the conference as a whole have everything to lose and nothing to gain, and that's exactly what they'll be staring at if Oregon ends the regular season with a 12-0 record.

Van wrote:My point is that such a game shouldn't even be scheduled until it becomes necessary to break a legitimate tie in the conference standings.

So what's the timeframe of when/if deciding to schedule this extra game? A week, two?

You realize the logistical nightmare that would involve?

Van wrote:A loss in the CCG knocks the Ducks out of the title game, and it likely still means that only one Pac 12 team would receive a BCS bowl bid. The Rose Bowl would have a tough call there. Do they take the better team with the higher ranking in Oregon, or do they take (in USC's case) the more telegenic conference 'champion' sporting the recent win over Oregon?

In that scenario, I find it highly unlikely that there wouldn't be 2 Pac 12 teams in the BCS. If USC beats Oregon in the CCG, USC goes to the Rose Bowl as the Pac 12 champ, and Oregon gets an at large birth, likely displacing the SEC CCG loser.