BCS Rankings

[Johnny_Blaze_47]

1. Ohio State
2. USC
3. Michigan

[Johnny_Blaze_47]

4. Auburn
5. WV
6. Florida
7. Louisville
8. Notre Dame
9. Texas
10. Cal

[SrA Husker]

And the rest...

http://msn.foxsports.com/cfb/poll?poll=BCS

Go Big Red!! #17 is respectable.

[johngateswhiteley]

SC !

[LaMarcus Bryant]

how the fuck is notre dame ahead of us
thats bull shit

[Horry For 3!]

BCS = GAY


How the fuck Texas drop to 9 and USC is no where a #2 team. Maybe a #4 team at best.

[StylisticS]

9. Texas

Horseshit.

[johngateswhiteley]

how the fuck is notre dame ahead of us
thats bull shit

good question, but probably b/c notre dame has had a higher strength of schedule. notre dame's is 14 and t.u.'s is 37....so i am pretty sure the computer polls have notre dame higher than t.u.

...however, if you two played each other i think it would be a very close high scoring game. neither defense would be able to stop the other. notre dame would pass all over the t.u. secondary and there is no way the irish could stop your running game. probably scoring in the 40's apiece...

[Mr Dio]

4. Auburn
5. WV
6. Florida
7. Louisville
8. Notre Dame
9. Texas
10. Cal


And the ags???

[Mr Dio]

how the fuck is notre dame ahead of us
thats bull shit


As in any race...................It's the final standings that count.
Be patient.

Looking wayyyyyyyyyy better for UT than the ags though. :lol

[MajorMike]

I am completely dismayed with the preferrential treatment ND gets. I think it is the biggest crock in all of sport. There is a specific rule in the BCS picking that deals with ND.

Rule #4 states that ND automatically gets in if they are 8th or higher, and you know that ANY bowl is going to pick ND over a #5 Cal or #5 Michigan because of tv ratings.

For anyone ELSE not in a 'BCS Conf', you have to be in the top 12 or #1 or #2 if you are an independent.

The rules are:
#1 The top two teams in the rankings. Those teams are assigned to the title game.
#2 AQ conference champions, regardless of ranking. Exception: If the #1 and #2 teams are from the same conference and neither is the champion, then the champion of that conference will not participate in the BCS.
#3 The highest-rated champion of a non-AQ conference if it either ranks in the top 12 or is ranked in the top 16 and also ranked ahead of one of the champions of an AQ conference.
#4 Notre Dame, if it finishes in the top eight.
#5 The #3 team, if it is a member of an AQ conference and there is still an open spot.
#6 The #4 team, if it is a member of an AQ conference and there is still an open spot.

This is how screwed it is. Let's say this is our ranking, who gets in?:
1 Ohio St (B11)
2 USC (P10)
3 Mich
4 Tex (B12)
5 L'ville (BE)
6 WVa
7 Aub (SEC)
8 ND
9 Fla
10 Cal
11 Clem
12 Tenn
13 Boise St
14 Wisc
15 VaTek (ACC)
16 Ore

Automatic qualifiers are: Ohio State and USC (Rule 1) Aub, Tex, L'ville, and TaTek (Rule 2) Boise St (Rule 3) ND (Rule 4) and Mich (Rule 5). The final spot goes to whomever the bowl left without a fill wants to pick that is in the Top 12. This year, the Rose would pick last and would take Cal over WVa and Fla. No way WVa, even at BCS #6, gets picked with teams like Cal, Fla and Tenn eligible.

[samikeyp]

I am completely dismayed with the preferrential treatment ND gets. I think it is the biggest crock in all of sport. There is a specific rule in the BCS picking that deals with ND.


No shit. I have a problem with any team getting special treatment. Why do they think they are so much better than everyone else that they deserve it? Fuck N(ot worth a )D(amn).

[sa_butta]

No shit. I have a problem with any team getting special treatment. Why do they think they are so much better than everyone else that they deserve it? Fuck N(ot worth a )D(amn).They think they are Americas team. I cant stand the Irish. Im glad the Wolverines spanked that ass, after that ass whoopin they should not even be in the top ten.

[Mr Dio]

This is how screwed it is. Let's say this is our ranking, who gets in?:

1 Ohio St (B11)
2 USC (P10)

3 Mich
4 Tex (B12)
5 L'ville (BE)
6 WVa
7 Aub (SEC)
8 ND
9 Fla
10 Cal
11 Clem
12 Tenn


If that were the final standings for The BCS game.
Better take the Bucks to clean house & win that game by double digits...Minimum 11-14 pts.

[LaMarcus Bryant]

UT might as well stop playing, they're fucked. Florida and Auburn way ahead of us?

The BCS is going to get SEC the nod this year, so one of those SEC teams is gonna be way high regardless. But both?
eesh

This is why aggie are so lame. They suck total monkey balls, yet their performance gets them in the top 25 but their presence in our conference is not enough to merit the big twelve. I sure hope Aggie beats OU, actually, I hope they win every game until thanksgiving. That'll give us a good boost in the polls when we dismantle their ginger offense and defense.

[scott]

Even I can recognize that UT got the shaft in the first BCS rankings. Long way to go though.

[LaMarcus Bryant]

If ou loses alot of their remaining games and ends the season with a very low (or no) ranking, does this affect schedule strength for UT or are those already set in stone prior ot the season

I forget how all this bull shit works.

[tlongII]

It's waaaay to early to worry about BCS rankings. USC is not as good as Cal or Oregon. I realize JGW will disagree, but this fact shall soon be proven.

[LaMarcus Bryant]

Tlong your patos better not puss out like last year. Those fucking trojans are scum. Give them a loss so they'll end up against UT in the Fiesta bowl and we can dismantle them for the second year in a row.

[tlongII]

Tlong your patos better not puss out like last year. Those fucking trojans are scum. Give them a loss so they'll end up against UT in the Fiesta bowl and we can dismantle them for the second year in a row.

USC will have at least 2 losses so I would not expect them to play in as high quality bowl game as Texas will be in. Arizona State's players know the Ducks and Cal are better. Soon USC will know it too.

[Mr Dio]

Yeah, the PAC-10 rules!
The teams are soooooo tough. :lmao


BTW, An opinion doesn't make fact son. :lol

[Mr Dio]

Tlong your patos better not puss out like last year. Those fucking trojans are scum. Give them a loss so they'll end up against UT in the Fiesta bowl and we can dismantle them for the second year in a row.


SC & the PAC-10 are looking weaker each week.

[beachbarbie948]

Okay, here's how I see it. I don't think Texas should be #6. I think OSU, Michigan, Auburn, WV, and Florida are all better teams. But Louisville? Naw. USC? Certainly not. I know Notre Dame is always overrated, but my gosh, they're nothing compared to the overratedness (is that even a word?) of USC this year. Notre Dame is probably not better than Texas, but with them being the usual media darling, and with prettyboy Brady Quinn as a Heisman candidate, of course they're going to be somewhere up there in the rankings.

That being said, I'm disgusted that USC is #2. Bullshit. That should be Michigan.

[Mr Dio]

Okay, here's how I see it. I don't think Texas should be #6.
But Louisville? Naw. USC? Certainly not...they're nothing compared to the overratedness (is that even a word?) of USC this year.

No Shit.
I thought I was the only person with common sense here.
Great View.

===
===

That being said, I'm disgusted that USC is #2. Bullshit. That should be Michigan.

Absolutely correct IMO.
The games played HEAVILY support this as well.
Mich has WON games & SC has ESCAPED in games vs much lower level comp.
UT wins by 32 points vs an underrated Baylor squad & SC escapes the past MONTH!
I pray SC makes The BCS game vs Ohio St.....Ohhhhhh I pray they do. :lol

[BeerIsGood!]

Bowl Crap Series. Oh well, that's what we're dealt. Should have beaten OSU at home. Nobody to blame but our secondary... and Billy Pitman

[NoMoneyDown]

so i am pretty sure the computer polls have notre dame higher than t.u.

Here's how UT faired in the computer polls. Hold the laughter until the end, please.

Sagarin: #8
Andersen: #17 (he has Rutgers at #5)
Billingsley: #7
Colley: #17 (he has Rutgers at #7)
Massey: #15 (he has Rutgers at #11)
Wolfe: #18 (he has Rutgers at #10)

It's no wonder Texas came it at only #9.


This year, the Rose would pick last and would take Cal over WVa and Fla. No way WVa, even at BCS #6, gets picked with teams like Cal, Fla and Tenn eligible.

LOL! That's what people were saying about WVU last year when they traveled to Georgia's backyard to play them in the Sugar Bowl. The Big East's best had absolutely no business playing the SEC's best (and the BCS's #5 team). Georgia would annhilate them. Etc. I guess you know what the result was. WVU has arguably the best 1-2 running tandem in CFB today. Slaton is anywhere from #2 to #5 in most people's Heisman rankings. He ran for over 160yds this past week while the QB (Pat White) ran for a school and Big East record 247yds. Keep thinking WVU isn't at the top-5 level, and they'll keep proving you wrong.

[MajorMike]

Texas is screwed for BCS. Unless Neb and atm win out completely, they have no remaining highly ranked teams left. Even beating both of them will give both 2 losses. Then if Neb were to win out, that would mean they would be in the B12 game, and you don't get double credit for beating the same team twice. Better case for them would be for atm to win out, Mizzou to win out, Neb to lose to Mizzou, and tek to win out. This would give them wins over a 2-loss atm, a 3-loss Neb, a 3-loss tek, and a 2-loss Mizzou. Still may not be enough without help.

Mich and/or Ohio will most likely only lose to the other, leaving one 1-loss and ranked ahead of UT.

USC has ND and Cal left.

Auburn has a poor schedule leftand will most likley win the West, as I see a couple losses for Ark (@ SC, Tenn, LSU). If that is the case, they would play Fla, which they would not get credit for again if they beat. Feasably Auburn could win out, not be in the SEC game, and still be ranked higher than any SEC team. We would then have the uo senario where KState beat them in the B12 game, they were not the B12 Champ, and yet still got a spot in the BCS game. Conversely, Fla could easily win out (UGA, SC, @ Fla St) then beat a highly ranked Ark or Auburn in the SEC game and still be ranked ahead of UT.

If the BEast winner wins out, they will be ranked ahead of UT. Would be WVa or L'Ville. That conf is good, with L'Ville, WVa, and Rutgers all 6-0 while Pitt is 6-1.

If USC beats ND and Cal beats USC, I would say that both P10 teams would be ranked ahead of UT.

I see zero way for UT to be in the top 2. Virtually impossible. They will still get the Fiesta Bowl if they win the B12 game.

[johngateswhiteley]

Texas is screwed for BCS. Unless Neb and atm win out completely, they have no remaining highly ranked teams left. Even beating both of them will give both 2 losses. Then if Neb were to win out, that would mean they would be in the B12 game, and you don't get double credit for beating the same team twice. Better case for them would be for atm to win out, Mizzou to win out, Neb to lose to Mizzou, and tek to win out. This would give them wins over a 2-loss atm, a 3-loss Neb, a 3-loss tek, and a 2-loss Mizzou. Still may not be enough without help.

Mich and/or Ohio will most likely only lose to the other, leaving one 1-loss and ranked ahead of UT.

USC has ND and Cal left.

Auburn has a poor schedule leftand will most likley win the West, as I see a couple losses for Ark (@ SC, Tenn, LSU). If that is the case, they would play Fla, which they would not get credit for again if they beat. Feasably Auburn could win out, not be in the SEC game, and still be ranked higher than any SEC team. We would then have the uo senario where KState beat them in the B12 game, they were not the B12 Champ, and yet still got a spot in the BCS game. Conversely, Fla could easily win out (UGA, SC, @ Fla St) then beat a highly ranked Ark or Auburn in the SEC game and still be ranked ahead of UT.

If the BEast winner wins out, they will be ranked ahead of UT. Would be WVa or L'Ville. That conf is good, with L'Ville, WVa, and Rutgers all 6-0 while Pitt is 6-1.

If USC beats ND and Cal beats USC, I would say that both P10 teams would be ranked ahead of UT.

I see zero way for UT to be in the top 2. Virtually impossible. They will still get the Fiesta Bowl if they win the B12 game.


...thats pretty good Mike, and i agree. but there is also one other point to be made. not only is there no way for t.u. to make the championship game...they are not good enough to be there anyway, so it really does not matter.

Ohio State
Michigan
USC
West Virginia
Auburn
Florida

...those teams are all better, imo. not to mention if notre dame wins out they will have a win over #2 SC which t.u. could in no way overcome in the BCS standings.

as it stands now, i think USC and Ohio State win out and face each other. even if USC loses a game its likely they will still be #2 (like OU when they lost to k-state). their strength of schedule is tops and the computers LOVE them.

[NoMoneyDown]

I think USC should be ranked high because of their record, but in all honesty, I don't see them better than Texas. Their only quality win, IMHO, was against Arkansas at the beginning of the year. but with it being the first game, I can't conclude too much from the score. However, these games should really stick out for anyone wanting to compare the two teams (USC & Texas):

Washington State

USC survived a scare in Pullman, 28-22. Interestingly, two weeks prior, WSU barely gets by Baylor, 17-15 on the same field. And, we all saw how Texas dismantled Baylor, 63-31 (actually, 63-24, but Mack chose not to contest the last Baylor TD).

Washington

USC survives a scare for the 2nd week in a row - this time at home - to the Washington Huskies, 26-20. A month before, Washington traveled to Norman, OK to play the Sooners and were beaten by 17. Two road games by Washington, one ending in a 17pt loss and the other a 6pt defeat. Texas and OU meet in the RRS and Texas wins by 18.

Arizona State

With wins over Northern Arizona, Nevada, and Colorado, Arizona St. didn't expect to even be in the game against USC let alone be looking at a near upset. But ASU just about pulled it off, and USC survived a 3rd week in a row by beating an UNRANKED team by 7pts or less.

Yes, Texas has one loss and that may indeed be enough to claim USC is better than Texas, but while USC has struggled against three UNRANKED teams, Texas has beaten one (Oklahoma - then #14) and kicked the crap outta the others.

[johngateswhiteley]

I think USC should be ranked high because of their record, but in all honesty, I don't see them better than Texas. Their only quality win, IMHO, was against Arkansas at the beginning of the year. but with it being the first game, I can't conclude too much from the score. However, these games should really stick out for anyone wanting to compare the two teams (USC & Texas):

Washington State

USC survived a scare in Pullman, 28-22. Interestingly, two weeks prior, WSU barely gets by Baylor, 17-15 on the same field. And, we all saw how Texas dismantled Baylor, 63-31 (actually, 63-24, but Mack chose not to contest the last Baylor TD).

Washington

USC survives a scare for the 2nd week in a row - this time at home - to the Washington Huskies, 26-20. A month before, Washington traveled to Norman, OK to play the Sooners and were beaten by 17. Two road games by Washington, one ending in a 17pt loss and the other a 6pt defeat. Texas and OU meet in the RRS and Texas wins by 18.

Arizona State

With wins over Northern Arizona, Nevada, and Colorado, Arizona St. didn't expect to even be in the game against USC let alone be looking at a near upset. But ASU just about pulled it off, and USC survived a 3rd week in a row by beating an UNRANKED team by 7pts or less.

Yes, Texas has one loss and that may indeed be enough to claim USC is better than Texas, but while USC has struggled against three UNRANKED teams, Texas has beaten one (Oklahoma - then #14) and kicked the crap outta the others.


i understand why you post this, but there are many reasons for USC's inconsistancies...lets just see how it plays out cause there is no way we will agree.

as for only one quality win, thats just not so, we crushed nebraska. and you'll see how good they are this weekend against t.u..

[MajorMike]

At the same time, you have to know that certain teams going no where get up to play the big boys. Same logic applies when Atlanta and the Hornets and the Raptors get up to play the Spurs because they are the Spurs.

Using that logic... USC best watch out for ND. ND has pretty much nothing else to play for (as they are nearly assured of a BCS bowl and no title shot) and they remember having them beaten last year.

And in reality, it doesn't matter if they are better or not. The only game on UT's schedule that matters came and left, and they lost it.

[Mr Dio]

I think USC should be ranked high because of their record, but in all honesty, I don't see them better than Texas. Their only quality win, IMHO, was against Arkansas at the beginning of the year. but with it being the first game, I can't conclude too much from the score. However, these games should really stick out for anyone wanting to compare the two teams (USC & Texas):

Washington State

USC survived a scare in Pullman, 28-22. Interestingly, two weeks prior, WSU barely gets by Baylor, 17-15 on the same field. And, we all saw how Texas dismantled Baylor, 63-31 (actually, 63-24, but Mack chose not to contest the last Baylor TD).

Washington

USC survives a scare for the 2nd week in a row - this time at home - to the Washington Huskies, 26-20. A month before, Washington traveled to Norman, OK to play the Sooners and were beaten by 17. Two road games by Washington, one ending in a 17pt loss and the other a 6pt defeat. Texas and OU meet in the RRS and Texas wins by 18.

Arizona State

With wins over Northern Arizona, Nevada, and Colorado, Arizona St. didn't expect to even be in the game against USC let alone be looking at a near upset. But ASU just about pulled it off, and USC survived a 3rd week in a row by beating an UNRANKED team by 7pts or less.

Yes, Texas has one loss and that may indeed be enough to claim USC is better than Texas, but while USC has struggled against three UNRANKED teams, Texas has beaten one (Oklahoma - then #14) and kicked the crap outta the others.

Some Common Sense among the senseless.
3 wks & counting, how long will the Fallacy continue??
I only hope that SC does make The BCS game, IMO they have clearly escaped with an undefeated record so far vs the big bad PAC-10. :lol
It would be easy money & the team that SC would play in The BCS game (most likely the OSU v Mich winner) would be celebrating a win all night.

[NoMoneyDown]

as for only one quality win, thats just not so, we crushed nebraska. and you'll see how good they are this weekend against t.u..

I'm thinking Texas will beat Nebraska by at least three TD's. On some other message boards - including one inhabited by professional cappers - there was a majority last week who took Baylor and the points. I told them Texas would romp by something like 52-10. They cited Baylor's tough passing attack, Texas' questional pass coverage, and Baylor's revamped defense as support. I held my ground. The rest, they say, is history. Had Mack decided to contest the last play (which I agree he shouldn't have at that time), the score would've been 63-24. 42pts vs. 39pts - pretty darn close predicting.

[johngateswhiteley]

I'm thinking Texas will beat Nebraska by at least three TD's. On some other message boards - including one inhabited by professional cappers - there was a majority last week who took Baylor and the points. I told them Texas would romp by something like 52-10. They cited Baylor's tough passing attack, Texas' questional pass coverage, and Baylor's revamped defense as support. I held my ground. The rest, they say, is history. Had Mack decided to contest the last play (which I agree he shouldn't have at that time), the score would've been 63-24. 42pts vs. 39pts - pretty darn close predicting.

you're talking about a baylor team that shot themselves in the foot about 10 times. IF baylor is not completely inept they only lose by about 17 points, imo.

as for Nebraska, if you give me 21 points...you got a bet.

?

[Mr Dio]

I'm thinking Texas will beat Nebraska by at least three TD's. On some other message boards - including one inhabited by professional cappers - there was a majority last week who took Baylor and the points. I told them Texas would romp by something like 52-10. They cited Baylor's tough passing attack, Texas' questional pass coverage, and Baylor's revamped defense as support. I held my ground. The rest, they say, is history. Had Mack decided to contest the last play (which I agree he shouldn't have at that time), the score would've been 63-24. 42pts vs. 39pts - pretty darn close predicting.


This shows you have common sense & not the "Rah Rah Rah Go Team" type of rational that is common place on this thread.
If nothing else at least some of the others' opinions are funny. :lol

[Mr Dio]

I'd bet anyone on the line Vegas provides on UT v NEB.
That is why most people bet on a certain side/team, because they think the line off.

I have yet to meet anyone dumb enough to go to a window in Vegas (or anywhere) & tell them that they'll take less points. :lol
"Excuse me Mr Bellagio, I'll take UT but I insist you make my line at least 14pts higher!" :lol

[samikeyp]

I still want a playoff. Settle it on the field like everyone else.

Just my .02

[NoMoneyDown]

you're talking about a baylor team that shot themselves in the foot about 10 times. IF baylor is not completely inept they only lose by about 17 points, imo.

LOL! First play from scrimmage - score. End around pass to QB (trick play) - score. TD in last 20secs that wasn't - score. Any of those could have easily have never happened, but did. Texas' "D" can take credit for a lot of the game (just like against OU), but that's a mark of a good team.


as for Nebraska, if you give me 21 points...you got a bet.

I wish I could - believe me. Spent my load for the week already, tho (including chalk on this game). I think NU will keep it close in the 1H, but Texas opens the flood gates in the 2H. Too much talent, speed, and experience for Texas. I think even if Texas' "O" didn't play a down, Texas would win the game.

[sa_butta]

I still want a playoff. Settle it on the field like everyone else.

Just my .02Wishful thinking, but then that would actually make some sense instead of just confusing the hell out of everyone.

[DisgruntledLionFan#54,927]

I still want a playoff. Settle it on the field like everyone else.

Just my .02


It will be, November 18th. Welcome to Big 11 country...

[sa_butta]

It will be, November 18th. Welcome to Big 11 country...Hopefully both OSU and Michigan will still be undefeated at that time.

[Vizzini]

Hopefully both OSU and Michigan will still be undefeated at that time.

If either one of them loses, the team that lost would be out and out frauds. There is no reason, given the way both teams have played so far that either of them should win all of their remaining games by at least double digits, until Nov. 18th. I am a Michigan fan, and if they lose before Ohio State, I will give up on the rest of the season and rediscover them come next August.

[scott]

I still want a playoff. Settle it on the field like everyone else.

Just my .02

Good call. I'm of the opinion that any of the top 1-loss SEC teams (Auburn, Tennessee, Florida, maybe even throw LSU in there) could beat the rest of the top 10 nine times out of ten. But we'll never get to know that.

[LaMarcus Bryant]

Playoff format would clear up alot of conference strength questions. I would love a playoff system.

But that is a pipe dream, so instead I will keep praying that UT ends up playing USC in their bowl game so I can call out JohnBryantWhitley until he stops his USC nutsucking. This board is mostly UT biased by far, but at least most of us also call our own team out when need be. This chodemonger just sounds like a USC analyst.

[scott]

Playoff format would clear up alot of conference strength questions. I would love a playoff system.

But that is a pipe dream, so instead I will keep praying that UT ends up playing USC in their bowl game so I can call out JohnBryantWhitley until he stops his USC nutsucking. This board is mostly UT biased by far, but at least most of us also call our own team out when need be. This chodemonger just sounds like a USC analyst.

I wouldn't go so far as to say "most"

[mookie2001]

...thats pretty good Mike, and i agree. but there is also one other point to be made. not only is there no way for t.u. to make the championship game...they are not good enough to be there anyway, so it really does not matter.

Ohio State
Michigan
USC
West Virginia
Auburn
Florida

...those teams are all better, imo. not to mention if notre dame wins out they will have a win over #2 SC which t.u. could in no way overcome in the BCS standings.

as it stands now, i think USC and Ohio State win out and face each other. even if USC loses a game its likely they will still be #2 (like OU when they lost to k-state). their strength of schedule is tops and the computers LOVE them.1. no fucking way auburn or west virginia is better than texas, if they would play saturday Texas would destroy USC ONLY because of all their key, numerous, crucial injuries that only they have suffered this year--2. not making it to the national title game isnt shit, it would still be a great season to win the Fiesta bowl, I mean a few years ago USC won the rose bowl (which wasnt the national championship) and they ended up winning their first of 3 straight national championships 3. If texas beats nebraska by like 7 points, your margin of victory arguement is already looking aggy lame-

[scott]

Auburn > WVU > UT > USC

[mookie2001]

Arkansas>everyone not Ohio St.

[scott]

Last week's (or maybe 2 weeks ago) SI had Texas playing Boise State in the Fiesta I believe. That would be an interesting matchup, though I think Texas would manage to squeek out with a 35 point win.

[mookie2001]

He-Mann wants Notre Dame or USC

[LaMarcus Bryant]

Seriously, I hope we get a good fucking opponent for whichever bowl we end up in. I want an SEC team or USC personally.

[DisgruntledLionFan#54,927]

Good call. I'm of the opinion that any of the top 1-loss SEC teams (Auburn, Tennessee, Florida, maybe even throw LSU in there) could beat the rest of the top 10 nine times out of ten. But we'll never get to know that.


You don't think UM or OSU could run with Florida, Tennessee or Auburn?

Thinking that any of those teams could beat OSU or UM 9x out of 10 is laughable.

[johngateswhiteley]

You don't think UM or OSU could run with Florida, Tennessee or Auburn?

Thinking that any of those teams could beat OSU or UM 9x out of 10 is laughable.


...i am starting to question whether any of these posters even watch the games...or just look at the box scores.

cause Ohio State is better than EVERY team in the SEC, though i am not sure about Michigan, yet.

whats also laughable is these tea-sips take on USC and the Aggs. both of which t.u. would lose to... :elephant

[Cant_Be_Faded]

how could i be so stupid? I realize--theres no way UT could beat a team like OSU or even USC this year. ESPECIALLY USC though--they are so good that they don't even have to win the game they are playing to be a better team than their opponent.

[DisgruntledLionFan#54,927]

tOSU>>>UT

That much has already been decided.

[scott]

You don't think UM or OSU could run with Florida, Tennessee or Auburn?

Thinking that any of those teams could beat OSU or UM 9x out of 10 is laughable.

Because Ohio State has beaten UT and Michigan has beaten Notre Dame? WOW.

[DisgruntledLionFan#54,927]

Because Ohio State has beaten UT and Michigan has beaten Notre Dame? WOW.


So that means that they can't beat Florida, Auburn or Tennessee at least half the time?

Thinking these teams would walk all over the top teams in the Big 10 just tells me you don't watch them play at all.

They are all very good teams that have flaws. Saying the top of the SEC would beat the top of the Big 10, repeatedly, is still laughable.

[Cant_Be_Faded]

[/big ten homer]

http://www.smugmug.com/photos/48563717-S.jpg

[scott]

So that means that they can't beat Florida, Auburn or Tennessee at least half the time?

Thinking these teams would walk all over the top teams in the Big 10 just tells me you don't watch them play at all.

They are all very good teams that have flaws. Saying the top of the SEC would beat the top of the Big 10, repeatedly, is still laughable.

You are a Lions fan, so any opinion you have about the sport of football is laughable.

I've seen Ohio State roll up on Northern Illinois and Bowling Green... color me unimpressed. The SEC is a SIGNIFICANTLY better conference than the Big 10 or any other conference, and the top of the conference is no exception. Put Ohio State (or any other school) in the SEC and they are looking at a 2 loss season.

[DisgruntledLionFan#54,927]

You are a Lions fan, so any opinion you have about the sport of football is laughable.

I've seen Ohio State roll up on Northern Illinois and Bowling Green... color me unimpressed. The SEC is a SIGNIFICANTLY better conference than the Big 10 or any other conference, and the top of the conference is no exception. Put Ohio State (or any other school) in the SEC and they are looking at a 2 loss season.


And that has nothing to do with your point. The SEC has more solid, tough teams than any other conference. Never disputed that. The top teams for all the conferences, usually, are about equal. Look no further than NC games of OSU/Miami, UT/SC, LSU/OU etc. All close games decided in the final minutes.

So why would the top SEC teams beat the top Big 10 teams 90% of the time? Because you said so?

As for the Lions reference, I'm also a fan of UM. Does that mean that my opinion on the matter means more than yours since they have won more games than any other 1-A university in the country?

And neither has any bearing in the matter, IMO. Nice weak dig, though.

[scott]

And that has nothing to do with your point. The SEC has more solid, tough teams than any other conference. Never disputed that. The top teams for all the conferences, usually, are about equal. Look no further than NC games of OSU/Miami, UT/SC, LSU/OU etc. All close games decided in the final minutes.

So why would the top SEC teams beat the top Big 10 teams 90% of the time? Because you said so?

As for the Lions reference, I'm also a fan of UM. Does that mean that my opinion on the matter means more than yours since they have won more games than any other 1-A university in the country?

And neither has any bearing in the matter, IMO. Nice weak dig, though.

Get a grip little man, I didn't mean that if we took a statistically valid sample which accounts for control variables that the SEC would win exactly 90.00000% of the time. Just that I think the top SEC teams are better than the rest of the top 10. It's my opinion, which is probably why I led my statement with "I'm of the opinion."

[johngateswhiteley]

You are a Lions fan, so any opinion you have about the sport of football is laughable.

I've seen Ohio State roll up on Northern Illinois and Bowling Green... color me unimpressed. The SEC is a SIGNIFICANTLY better conference than the Big 10 or any other conference, and the top of the conference is no exception. Put Ohio State (or any other school) in the SEC and they are looking at a 2 loss season.

...the fact that Ohio State played Northern Illinois and Bowling Green has nothing to do with your argument. you're saying the top SEC teams would beat the top Big 10 teams...and i think NO.

right now, i think Ohio State trashes Auburn, Florida, LSU, Tennessee, etc. and as i said before i am not yet sold on Michigan, though i think they are very good.

the only team that can beat Ohio State, imo, is USC b/c of their ability on offense and defense. but if they played right now, b/c of USC's inconsistancy, i'd pick Ohio State by 10-14 points. if USC gets it together i think they win by 3-7 points.

ironically, USC is winning games the way Ohio State used to...by grinding it out, while Ohio State is putting teams away.

[MajorMike]

All this talk about 'the best conf' is irrelivant. The best teams become the best teams. Everyone joked about how easy the P10 was the last few years and USC still beat all comers except last year.

The ACC is supposedly the best' conf in basketball every year, with teams having losing records having better RPIs than some 3rd place teams in other confs. However in the past 5 years, the B12 has had more Final Four participants than the ACC.

I seem to recall that the SEC SOS was not strong enough a couple years ago to get an undefeated team into the BCS game.

[DarkReign]

Texas at #5 is proof-positive that playing actual meaningful opponents early in your season is bad scheduling.

Because, you know, losing to #1 Ohio State is such a stain on their record.

/sarcasm

Absolute bullshit. I thought the rankings would turn some-what of a blind eye to that loss based on the fact that one game alone has already superceded any matchup since. Texas vs OSU? 2nd or 3rd game of the season?! While everyone else (I mean EVERYONE) were playing patsies, theyre both playing for the National Championship in the 3rd game.

Whoever lost would have to run the table to even be considered. Rankings suck. Playoff already.

[Mr Dio]

Seriously, I hope we get a good fucking opponent for whichever bowl we end up in. I want an SEC team or USC personally.


SEC would provide a mouch more enjoyable game for the viewing public.
SC wouldn't stand a chance vs UT.

[samikeyp]

Playoff already

amen.

[scott]

...the fact that Ohio State played Northern Illinois and Bowling Green has nothing to do with your argument. you're saying the top SEC teams would beat the top Big 10 teams...and i think NO.

right now, i think Ohio State trashes Auburn, Florida, LSU, Tennessee, etc. and as i said before i am not yet sold on Michigan, though i think they are very good.

the only team that can beat Ohio State, imo, is USC b/c of their ability on offense and defense. but if they played right now, b/c of USC's inconsistancy, i'd pick Ohio State by 10-14 points. if USC gets it together i think they win by 3-7 points.

ironically, USC is winning games the way Ohio State used to...by grinding it out, while Ohio State is putting teams away.

You had a good post going right up until you said USC. Get over it dude, they are overrated big time this year.

[johngateswhiteley]

http://insider.espn.go.com/ncf/insider/news/story?id=2627248

There are seven undefeated teams remaining in Division I-A, but three have clearly separated themselves from the pack.

And unlike past years, when three unbeaten teams atop the BCS Standings would have caused much national consternation, this situation holds little potential for controversy. There is such a large gap between the BCS averages of the top three teams and everyone else, that those three -- No. 1 Ohio State, No. 2 USC and No. 3 Michigan -- might as well be alone on an island. Unless two of them lose, there is no chance for anyone else to reach this season's BCS National Championship Game.

And since the Michigan-Ohio State game on Nov. 18 guarantees that at least one of them will lose, it's nearly impossible for any of the three to finish with a perfect record and not be in the top two of the final BCS Standings. So, at least for now, there's no impending controversy.

Where the top three rank
BCS Rank Team Coaches Rank Harris Rank Avg. Computer Rank
1 Ohio State 1 1 3
2 USC 2 3 1
3 Michigan 3 2 2

West Virginia and Louisville certainly have the right to gripe as long as they're also unbeaten, but when the two polls and six computers are all in agreement about which are the nation's top three teams, not many people care who's complaining.

The big surprise of the initial 2006 BCS Standings comes in the fourth position, where 6-1 Auburn sits above all other one-loss teams. This is the fourth time that a once-beaten team has debuted in the No. 4 spot, so that much isn't out of the ordinary. What is shocking -- borderline unfathomable -- is that a team which lost at home by 17 points to a lower-ranked opponent just eight days earlier could be resting in the fourth spot of the only national rankings that matter. The Tigers have to consider themselves extremely fortunate to be back within striking distance so soon after being dominated by Arkansas.

The truth of the matter, however, is that Auburn still needs a lot of help. Barring an incredible meltdown by Ohio State and Michigan, the Tigers need a USC loss to clear their path to the BCS top two. They might also need enough upsets in the Big East to prevent that conference from having an unbeaten team (it currently has three). And perhaps the biggest problem for Auburn right now is that it can't even win the SEC West unless Arkansas loses at least two of its final five conference games. Nevertheless, fourth is still a pretty good place to be in the middle of October.

LSU, ranked 12th in the initial BCS Standings of 2003, went on to win the national title. A whole lot of teams are conceivably still in this race.

• There are always fan bases that find disappointment in the initial BCS Standings, and Notre Dame's fans have to be somewhat deflated by what they see. At this time last week, ND was the highest-ranked one-loss team in the mock standings, so Irish supporters must have been excited to see Florida fall from the ranks of the unbeaten on Saturday. But that joy didn't last long. Even with the loss, the Gators stayed ahead of Notre Dame in the BCS Standings, and to make matters worse, the result vaulted Auburn past both of them. Now, Notre Dame sits third in line among the once-beaten teams and doesn't have a ranked team left on its schedule until the season finale at USC. The Irish may have a difficult time working their way into the national title hunt as long as the SEC has the potential for a one-loss champion.

TOP-12 BCS FINISHERS
Non-Automatic-Qualifying Conferences
Year Team Final Rank Initial Rank
2004 Utah 6th 7th
2004 Boise State 9th 14th
2004 Louisville 10th 17th
2003 Miami (OH) 11th NR
1999 Marshall 12th 14th
1998 Tulane 10th 19th

• Boise State is the only remaining unbeaten team in the non-major conferences, and media all over the country will immediately ordain the Broncos as "possible BCS Busters." Busting the BCS, though, is not what it used to be.

A new rule went into place this year that allows the champion of a non-automatic-qualifying conference to earn a spot in a BCS game by finishing the season in the top 12 of the BCS Standings. Previously, a team needed a top-six finish to gain automatic entry, and in eight years, only Utah in 2004 was able to make it happen.

Boise State debuts at No. 15 in the standings this week, which is great news for its chances of crashing the BCS party. Despite an incredibly weak schedule the rest of the way, the Broncos should be able to climb another three spots just by staying undefeated. Many teams ranked ahead of them right now will lose at least once more. A few will lose multiple times. Through this attrition alone, they will rise in the polls as long as they don't have a few close calls against inferior opposition in their conference. The human voters can keep them out of the final top 12, but they'll only do it if the Broncos don't show themselves to be a worthy contender.

In the previous eight years of the BCS system, there have been 15 teams that have finished the regular season undefeated, and all 15 have been ranked in the top 12 of the final BCS Standings. History says Boise State is sitting in a perfect spot.

The last unbeaten Division I-A team not to be ranked in the top 12 of the polls at the end of the regular season was Bowling Green in 1985 ... and the Falcons weren't even sniffing the rankings in the middle of October of that year. Boise State is in the top 18 of both polls.

Brad Edwards is a college football researcher at ESPN. His Road to the BCS appears weekly during the season.

[NoMoneyDown]

LMAO!!!

* USC beats UNRANKED Washington St. by 6 pts (relying on a last sec INT to seal the victory).

* USC beats UNRANKED Washington AT HOME by 6 pts (relying on time to run out as the Huskies were on the 15yd line and about ready to score).

* USC beats UNRANKED ASU AT HOME by 7pts (relying on a 74yd TD drive in the 4Q to pull out the victory).

Yeah, some powerhouse team you got there.

BTW, Baylor went to Washington St. and lost by 2, they travel to Austin and lose by 32 (actually, 39 since that last TD shouldn't have counted). USC beats WSU by 6. Wahington travels to Norman and loses by 17. USC ekes by Washington by 6. Texas beats OU by 18.

Baylor -2 vs. WSU
Baylor -32 vs. UT
UT +30 vs. WSU (*)
USC +6 vs. WSU
UT +24 vs. USC (*)

Washington -17 vs. OU
UT +18 vs. OU
UT +35 vs. Washington (*)
USC +6 vs. Washington
UT +29 vs. USC (*)

(*) hypothetical based on previous match-ups.

[johngateswhiteley]

LMAO!!!

* USC beats UNRANKED Washington St. by 6 pts (relying on a last sec INT to seal the victory).

* USC beats UNRANKED Washington AT HOME by 6 pts (relying on time to run out as the Huskies were on the 15yd line and about ready to score).

* USC beats UNRANKED ASU AT HOME by 7pts (relying on a 74yd TD drive in the 4Q to pull out the victory).

Yeah, some powerhouse team you got there.

BTW, Baylor went to Washington St. and lost by 2, they travel to Austin and lose by 32 (actually, 39 since that last TD shouldn't have counted). USC beats WSU by 6. Wahington travels to Norman and loses by 17. USC ekes by Washington by 6. Texas beats OU by 18.

Baylor -2 vs. WSU
Baylor -32 vs. UT
UT +30 vs. WSU (*)
USC +6 vs. WSU
UT +24 vs. USC (*)

Washington -17 vs. OU
UT +18 vs. OU
UT +35 vs. Washington (*)
USC +6 vs. Washington
UT +29 vs. USC (*)

(*) hypothetical based on previous match-ups.


...i guess they should not play the games then.

[NoMoneyDown]

If USC had beaten WSU by 6pts and Washington and ASU by a good margin (definately more than one TD), people could write-off the WSU game as a fluke. If they beat WSU and Washington by 6pts and beat ASU outright, it looks questionable, but still okay. But to do it THREE times in THREE consecutive games? Sounds more than just a fluke coincidence to me.

[johngateswhiteley]

If USC had beaten WSU by 6pts and Washington and ASU by a good margin (definately more than one TD), people could write-off the WSU game as a fluke. If they beat WSU and Washington by 6pts and beat ASU outright, it looks questionable, but still okay. But to do it THREE times in THREE consecutive games? Sounds more than just a fluke coincidence to me.

...so, i guess USC shouldn't bother finishing out the season then?