NCAA College Football 2010

[Chris]

Chris the problem I have with the 35-1 argument is that we're talking about single season titles and awards.

It is much much easier to go 13 - 0 when you only have 2 or 3 games against top quality opponents. Instead of fighting tooth and nail each game you're fighting to stay focused on beating up weaker teams. You also can avoid showing all of your coaching wrinkles because you don't need them!

35 - 1 just doesn't impress me when 20+ of those wins are against bad teams.

But what you do you want them to do?  Should only teams in the major conferences have a chance at the title, even if they are not the best teams in college football?

This is the problem.  Without a playoff, I think you have to take into account the fact that the team has beaten everyone who would play them.

Yeah, if there are other undefeated teams, sure, tie goes to the team with the harder road.  However, if we are talking about 1 loss teams, then I need to give it to the team that is undefeated, and has shown over the last few seasons that they belong with the big boys.  

The only reason I mention the record over multiple seasons is that I agree that in a single season, a mid-major just can't compete with the resume of a major conference team.  But at some point, you have to give them a shot, when they have proven themselves over and over again.  Or else just knock them down to 1-AA, if they aren't allowed to compete for the championship with the big boys.

[Roy H.]

And if BSU makes it to the title game, and beats a team that did go through all those other teams, how is that not satisfying?

If BSU makes it to the title game and wins, I think any argument about them being on a lower tier / not having paid their dues goes away.  The problem is, what happens if BSU makes it to the title game and gets clobbered?

I'll be rooting for BSU just as soon as Nebraska is eliminated from title contention.  However, I do think that BSU fans should acknowledge that there are at least 15 - 20 teams in college football every year that could go undefeated against the other teams in BSU's conference.

I'm pretty disappointed that Utah bolted for the Pac-10.  I was hoping to see how BSU held up having to play against decent schools like Utah and BYU, along with their other non-conference games.

[Chris]

  Teams like BSU are truly one and done.

True.  I'd argue that "one and done" is a lot easier to pull off, though, when all you have to do is avoid losing to Utah St., Louisiana Tech, and Fresno.

I'm sure I'm preaching to the choir, but college football definitely needs a playoff.  It's ridiculous that Boise State will have the inside track to the national championship by beating only one decent school.  What's more impressive, an undefeated BSU school or a one-loss SEC team?

Well, last year they were undefeated, and didn't have a sniff of the championship game.  I think going 28-0 over the last 2 seasons (or 35-1 over the last 3) is more impressive than going 13-1 in the SEC.  

I agree that they absolutely need the playoff, and Boise state (or TCU) are the exact reasons why.  It is such a messed up system.  Teams like that never get the respect because they play in such a bad conference, but also because the other great teams want no part of playing them in their non-conference games.  

They have done everything they possibly can to prove they belong, but the system has made it nearly impossible for them to compete for a championship, and to show that they are (or aren't) the best team in the country.

Undefeated by any means is a huge accomplishment, don't get me wrong.  It just rubs me the wrong way when you're doing it against the likes of Wyoming, Utah State, and Idaho.  A bit of an emptiness there.

To me, its more satisfying watching a team have to knock off the LSUs, Floridas, and Alambamas of the world.

I agree.  Which is why I generally hate CFB, because I guarantee you, BSU would play any of those teams any day, but those teams choose to add cupcakes as their non-conference games, rather than risk losing their own championship chances to a team like BSU.  

But again, 28-0 over the last two seasons would be very tough to turn down.  

And if BSU makes it to the title game, and beats a team that did go through all those other teams, how is that not satisfying?

If they get there and win, its a whole different story to me.   Just the process of getting there rubs me the wrong way. 

If Boise State knocks off an undefeated Alabama team, then everything is legit.  Until then, I'm gonna have qualms about the whole process.

That's understandable.  And that is what makes it so much more intriguing to me (and got me to even pay the least bit attention to college football, other than laughing at BC's yearly meltdown in the biggest game), because if they do run the table again, and beat Alabama (or whoever) in the championship game, it will really show how bad the system is.

[Chris]

And if BSU makes it to the title game, and beats a team that did go through all those other teams, how is that not satisfying?

If BSU makes it to the title game and wins, I think any argument about them being on a lower tier / not having paid their dues goes away.  The problem is, what happens if BSU makes it to the title game and gets clobbered?

If BSU makes it there and gets clobbered, it basically kills the chance of any mid-major ever getting there again, until there is a playoff.  But I think at some point, some team needs to be given that chance to prove that mid-majors can run with the big boys, just so a direction can be chosen.

BTW, I hated the way the BCS dealt with it last year by putting BSU and TCU against each other.  To me, it was clear that they did not want to open the discussion that would have started had one of those teams (or both of them) beaten teams from the big conferences, so they chickened out, and basically made it a mid-majors championship. 

[Donoghus]

And if BSU makes it to the title game, and beats a team that did go through all those other teams, how is that not satisfying?

If BSU makes it to the title game and wins, I think any argument about them being on a lower tier / not having paid their dues goes away.  The problem is, what happens if BSU makes it to the title game and gets clobbered?

If BSU makes it there and gets clobbered, it basically kills the chance of any mid-major ever getting there again, until there is a playoff.  But I think at some point, some team needs to be given that chance to prove that mid-majors can run with the big boys, just so a direction can be chosen.

BTW, I hated the way the BCS dealt with it last year by putting BSU and TCU against each other.  To me, it was clear that they did not want to open the discussion that would have started had one of those teams (or both of them) beaten teams from the big conferences, so they chickened out, and basically made it a mid-majors championship. 

I hated the whole BSU/TCU matchup as well.  I thought it was a major cop-out.

[Rondo2287]

Anybody else see BC Stomp out Weber st?

[Donoghus]

Anybody else see BC Stomp out Weber st?

Yeah.  But its Weber State.  I wouldn't exactly get too up because of it. 

V-Tech in two weeks will be the real test.  I still have question marks about this team and the Weber State game really didn't illustrate much.

[Rondo2287]

Anybody else see BC Stomp out Weber st?

Yeah.  But its Weber State.  I wouldn't exactly get too up because of it. 

V-Tech in two weeks will be the real test.  I still have question marks about this team and the Weber State game really didn't illustrate much.

I know i was just messing around.  I actually left with alot more questions than i went with.  There secondary seemed pretty poor.  And the pass rush was pretty non-exhistant.  Herzlich looked ok.  When we was chasing down a play he looked good physically but when diagnosing plays he looked lost. I assume that is because he only had 3 practices though and i assume it will come back to him in time.

I thought Shinksie actually looked pretty good for the most part though most articles are kinda tearing him up.

[Donoghus]

Anybody else see BC Stomp out Weber st?

Yeah.  But its Weber State.  I wouldn't exactly get too up because of it. 

V-Tech in two weeks will be the real test.  I still have question marks about this team and the Weber State game really didn't illustrate much.

I know i was just messing around.  I actually left with alot more questions than i went with.  There secondary seemed pretty poor.  And the pass rush was pretty non-exhistant.  Herzlich looked ok.  When we was chasing down a play he looked good physically but when diagnosing plays he looked lost. I assume that is because he only had 3 practices though and i assume it will come back to him in time.

I thought Shinksie actually looked pretty good for the most part though most articles are kinda tearing him up.

I know you're well aware that I'm a pretty big Shinske critic and think he's a liability to this team.

He didn't exactly endear himself to many by starting the game with a false start and then lining up behind the guard on the next play from scrimmage before throwing a ridiculous interecepion on the same play.

[Rondo2287]

Anybody else see BC Stomp out Weber st?

Yeah.  But its Weber State.  I wouldn't exactly get too up because of it. 

V-Tech in two weeks will be the real test.  I still have question marks about this team and the Weber State game really didn't illustrate much.

I know i was just messing around.  I actually left with alot more questions than i went with.  There secondary seemed pretty poor.  And the pass rush was pretty non-exhistant.  Herzlich looked ok.  When we was chasing down a play he looked good physically but when diagnosing plays he looked lost. I assume that is because he only had 3 practices though and i assume it will come back to him in time.

I thought Shinksie actually looked pretty good for the most part though most articles are kinda tearing him up.

I know you're well aware that I'm a pretty big Shinske critic and think he's a liability to this team.

He didn't exactly endear himself to many by starting the game with a false start and then lining up behind the guard on the next play from scrimmage before throwing a ridiculous interecepion on the same play.

Ya that was pretty rough but i also saw some better throws from  him than i ever saw last year.  Specifically the touchdown to Momah and the two long passes to Coleman. 

[RAcker]

Alabama v. Boise St. in AZ?  I wouldn't mind that.  I think it would actually be a very entertaining game.

[RAcker]

Both teams were determined to choke that game away last night.  VT just wanted it more (the choke that is).   

[Donoghus]

Both teams were determined to choke that game away last night.  VT just wanted it more (the choke that is).   

Yeah, it was a very entertaining game but plenty of sloppiness from both sides.  Special teams errors, dumb penalties, general boneheadedness. 

[Fafnir]

But what you do you want them to do?  Should only teams in the major conferences have a chance at the title, even if they are not the best teams in college football?

I think only major conference teams should have a shot because non-BCS teams don't play enough quality opponents for us to know if they're the best team. Its a huge unknown that without a demanding regular season is impossible to determine.

Boise State could win two very tight games against their only equivalent competition. (VTech and the BCS title game)

Does that really tell you they were the best? No it highlights the stupidity of the BCS system but that's all.

I want a playoff, but absent that I don't want Boise St or any other team to make the game based on reputation and one game. NE could beat Texas and lose two other games in the Big 12 schedule and I can hold that up against what Boise St has to do to win out now. Only losing two games in NE's remaining schedule (absent Texas) is at least as difficult as beating up on their awful conference.

(Not pumping NE really I just know their schedule as a I'm a fan, you can insert a ton of other teams in their place)

[Chris]

But what you do you want them to do?  Should only teams in the major conferences have a chance at the title, even if they are not the best teams in college football?

I think only major conference teams should have a shot because non-BCS teams don't play enough quality opponents for us to know if they're the best team. Its a huge unknown that without a demanding regular season is impossible to determine.

Boise State could win two very tight games against their only equivalent competition. (VTech and the BCS title game)

Does that really tell you they were the best? No it highlights the stupidity of the BCS system but that's all.

I want a playoff, but absent that I don't want Boise St or any other team to make the game based on reputation and one game. NE could beat Texas and lose two other games in the Big 12 schedule and I can hold that up against what Boise St has to do to win out now. Only losing two games in NE's remaining schedule (absent Texas) is at least as difficult as beating up on their awful conference.

(Not pumping NE really I just know their schedule as a I'm a fan, you can insert a ton of other teams in their place)

And this is precisely why I generally can't stand college football, and why I will likely not pay attention again once BSU's run is over.  I just want to watch them show everyone how terrible the system is, and force the BCS idiots to either continue to show that only a relatively small percentage of college football teams are really "eligible" to compete for the "championship" (and I think that puts the whole championship into question IMO), or show that their system that has been doing that is now obsolete, because a team that is supposedly not on the same level just beat the team that is supposedly better than them.

Sports should be based on competition, not politics, and unfortunately, college football has become a game of politics, where the outcome of the season is decided by the athletic directors making back door deals to play out of conference teams, rather than the players on the field.  

And until this is cleared up, I will never understand how anyone can consider College Football to be anywhere near the same level as the NFL, or any other pro sport, where at least every team has a chance to win, even if it is a small chance.

OK, rant over.  I knew my desire to watch college football would be short lived.