College Gameday Thread: Week 1 - Page 46

Halsey · 09-07-2010, 02:42 PM

Seriously, if a team finishes undefeated, is it really that big of a deal if they aren't recognized as 'national champs' by a broken system. The only reason the schools really care is because the BCS champ gets a bigger payday. If a team finishes undefeated, who cares what the BSCS says.

Smooth Criminal · 09-07-2010, 02:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by San Diego Chicken

Don't dismiss them like they're nothing though. How many big name BCS opponents does Fresno State have to kill for people to respect them? I think Fresno State has an above .500 record this decade against BCS opponents and the vast majority of those were on the road.

My opinion is this. If a BCS conference team goes undefeated they should absolutely get in over Boise. But once you lose that first game you've lost all right to complain.

Compared to the level of competition major programs play, they are nothing. If Boise wants to be considered for the national title, they should have to get through a schedule like the rest of the teams competing for it. They can't. I don't care if its their fault or not, but they can't, so they should get rewarded for playing less competition.

I still think any 1 loss team from SEC, Big 12, or Big Ten is far more impressive then anything Boise can accomplish this season.

The only reasonable solution is a playoff. Or to root for 2 teams to go undefeated and Boise get "screwed".

Yep I'd enjoy either one.

nrk · 09-07-2010, 02:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JHL6719

The reason Auburn got left out was because their OOC schedule was weak that year... despite going undefeated running the gauntlet that is the SEC...

Auburn was punished for playing a weak OOC schedule... yet all the fuss is about rewarding teams that go undefeated in conferences that Mississippi St. would go undefeated in...

But hey, at least we got to see Oklahoma get blown out 55-19 in the title game...

I definitely agree that Auburn should have went. But Mississippi St. going undefeated? Ouch, that's harsh.

Smooth Criminal · 09-07-2010, 02:46 PM

Certainly possible tho. If Mississippi st traded places with Boise, Mississippi might lose to Fresno, while Boise would likely drop several SEC games.

Sniper · 09-07-2010, 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Halsey

Seriously, if a team finishes undefeated, is it really that big of a deal if they aren't recognized as 'national champs' by a broken system.

To quote the legendary Nelly, "two is not a winner and three nobody remembers."

Quote:

The only reason the schools really care is because the BCS champ gets a bigger payday.

And because of the fact that they get credited with a national title. Not everyone can be like Alabama and claim random national titles because some podunk magazine in southeast Alaska thought they were national champs.

Quote:

If a team finishes undefeated, who cares what the BSCS says.

Again, people remember who wins the national title. No one gives a **** about the 119 remaining losers.

Bob Sanders Dreadlock · 09-07-2010, 03:11 PM

The moving to the MWC and teams will take them more seriously is complete BS. TCU runs the table last year in their supposed better conference and still loses to boise. TCU wasn't even given a legit shot at anyone even though they play in a better conference.

Halsey · 09-07-2010, 03:15 PM

Meh, I guess it's just me, but I wouldn't lose sleep if people don't remember a team because they finished #2. I don't really care who won the national title 5 years ago. I can understand players wanting to be remembered, but from a fans view, whether or not my favorite team gets labeled 'national champs' is not that important if they are undefeated.

Bob Sanders Dreadlock · 09-07-2010, 03:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Halsey

Meh, I guess it's just me, but I wouldn't lose sleep if people don't remember a team because they finished #2. I don't really care who won the national title 5 years ago. I can understand players wanting to be remembered, but from a fans view, whether or not my favorite team gets labeled 'national champs' is not that important if they are undefeated.

You must not have played sports in your entire life if that is how you feel.

Sniper · 09-07-2010, 03:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Halsey

but from a fans view, whether or not my favorite team gets labeled 'national champs' is not that important if they are undefeated.

There's no way in hell that this a serious post.

JHL6719 · 09-07-2010, 03:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shiver

Boise State would probably win the Pac-10, Big East and ACC. They will go undefeated, they should go to the National Championship barring two perfect teams coming out of the Big XII, Big Ten or SEC. They have shown that they can play with anyone. Everyone thought Oklahoma would steamroll them and they didn't. Everyone on the radio said that taking the bet on Virginia Tech was 'easy' money. One image sums it up:

Hell, who doesn't beat Oklahoma in BCS games? ;-)

Bengals78 · 09-07-2010, 03:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JHL6719

Hell, who doesn't beat Oklahoma in BCS games? ;-)

USC now....

Halsey · 09-07-2010, 04:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bob Sanders Dreadlock

You must not have played sports in your entire life if that is how you feel.

Or maybe I just have perspective and don't put a lot of value in meaningless labels from flawed systems.

Sniper · 09-07-2010, 05:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Halsey

Or maybe I just have perspective and don't put a lot of value in meaningless labels from flawed systems.

Champion is the reason you play the game. Far from a "meaningless" label.

scottyboy · 09-07-2010, 05:05 PM

Halsey, Herm Edwards is disappoint.
YOU PLAY TO WIN THE GAME.

and ricky bobby's all like, dude, srsly?
IF YOU'RE NOT FIRST, YOU'RE LAST!

Halsey · 09-07-2010, 05:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scottyboy

Halsey, Herm Edwards is disappoint.
YOU PLAY TO WIN THE GAME.

and ricky bobby's all like, dude, srsly?
IF YOU'RE NOT FIRST, YOU'RE LAST!

"whether or not my favorite team gets labeled 'national champs' is not that important if they are undefeated."

I bolded it and underlined it for you. You seemed to miss the point.

Hey, I understand the view of many fans. Winning the games is not enough. You need the BSCS suits to pat your team on the head and give them approval. I guess for some it makes you feel warm and fuzzy when a bunch of corporate bullshizzers tell you your team is the champs. Me, I just like to see my team win the games on the field, not so much the political games that play out in the BSCS offices.

Bob Sanders Dreadlock · 09-07-2010, 06:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Halsey

Or maybe I just have perspective and don't put a lot of value in meaningless labels from flawed systems.

Yea lets just have all 119 teams play to know who the real champion should be. An the heisman trophy? Forget about it is all opinionated. What a meaningless label to be named the best player in college football without a real system to determine who is the best.

Halsey · 09-07-2010, 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bob Sanders Dreadlock

Yea lets just have all 119 teams play to know who the real champion should be. An the heisman trophy? Forget about it is all opinionated. What a meaningless label to be named the best player in college football without a real system to determine who is the best.

Wait, so you think the Heisman actually goes to the best player?

jayceheathman · 09-07-2010, 11:32 PM

You dont have to worry about Boise going to the NC because New Mexico State will beat them anyways. D-Unit knows it will happen too.

LizardState · 09-08-2010, 10:26 AM

It's all about California & more people watching more TV screens on FB Saturdays with the revenue that brings in the TV contracts.

That's why the Pac 10 gained Colorado & Utah. The announcers pointed out that there were more players from California than any non-Idaho state on the Boise St. Broncos, recruiting the Golden State is very important to them, & the Utah schools including BYU & the Mtn. West with the TCU exception.

The WAC & Mtn. West are losing programs b/c of the sparse populations of Utah, Idaho, New Mexico, etc.

yourfavestoner · 09-08-2010, 10:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LizardState

It's all about California & more people watching more TV screens on FB Saturdays with the revenue that brings in the TV contracts.

That's why the Pac 10 gained Colorado & Utah. The announcers pointed out that there were more players from California than any non-Idaho state on the Boise St. Broncos, recruiting the Golden State is very important to them, & the Utah schools including BYU & the Mtn. West with the TCU exception.

The WAC & Mtn. West are losing programs b/c of the sparse populations of Utah, Idaho, New Mexico, etc.

Pretty much this. Almost every good mid-major school recruits heavily in California. There is so much unsigned high school talent (most of which go the JUCO route) in this state every single year, it's disgusting.

The Pac-10 schools recruit in the Bay area, the LA area, and in Orange County. Somehow, they still haven't figured out that there is a **** ton of talent in the rest of the state. Boise, Utah, and Utah State are more than happy to gobble up the leftovers.

Halsey · 09-08-2010, 10:53 AM

It really comes down to population, mainly. The 'big 3' states for football talent are Cali, Texas and Florida. 3 of the 4 most populous states. New York is kind of the exception, but that's probably for a combination of reasons, including geography.

wonderbredd24 · 09-08-2010, 11:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Halsey

It really comes down to population, mainly. The 'big 3' states for football talent are Cali, Texas and Florida. 3 of the 4 most populous states. New York is kind of the exception, but that's probably for a combination of reasons, including geography.

It certainly doesn't hurt... Ohio and Pennsylvania are certainly very populated and probably round out the Top 5.

After that though, Louisiana has to be up there and it's not a terribly big state in terms of population.

Halsey · 09-08-2010, 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wonderbredd24

It certainly doesn't hurt... Ohio and Pennsylvania are certainly very populated and probably round out the Top 5.

After that though, Louisiana has to be up there and it's not a terribly big state in terms of population.

Georgia > Ohio and Penn

It's true. Not that either of us could be biased! :D

diabsoule · 09-08-2010, 02:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wonderbredd24

It certainly doesn't hurt... Ohio and Pennsylvania are certainly very populated and probably round out the Top 5.

After that though, Louisiana has to be up there and it's not a terribly big state in terms of population.

Louisiana is definitely top 10 in terms of overall talent as you can watch any SEC game and at least one team has a big time player from the state. Even LSU, who pretty much has the state on lock when it comes to recruiting, still misses out on recruits that sign elsewhere like Alabama, Florida, Texas, Texas A&M, Arkansas, Ole Miss, USC, and others.

Sniper · 09-08-2010, 02:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Halsey

Georgia > Ohio

Extremely, extremely doubtful.