King Yao-ing College Football Season Wins

[MyTurn2Raise]

playoffs suck and ruin it for the real backbone of college football

the quest to declare 118 teams as losers is sickening


I'm rolling over hard at much of this thread
I think it is less than Skip Bayless insight

[MyTurn2Raise]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
you do realize that the number of appearances the big east had...
Those teams aren't running big11ten schedules

[/ QUOTE ]

The Big 10 sucked hard at the top for about 20 years and everyone knows it 'cept a few B10 fans, see John Cooper for details. From 1969 to 2001 the B10 had one split Nat'l title. 1. 11-24 in the Rose Bowl. Overrated.
No one's impressed that a 3-8 B10 team might be able to beat a 3-8 BEast team.

Miami played the hardest sked in the country year-in, year-out, going to FSU, Fla, ND, BYU, Okla, Michigan, Houston, Arkansas, SoCar, and anywhere else they could get a real game v a top 10/20 team, and winning almost all of them, until people refused to play them anymore.

Here are some Miami v B10 scores over the years:
51-3 @ Wisconsin
23-3 Wisconsin
31-30 @ Michigan
35-0 v Purdue
24-7 v Iowa
26-20 v PSU
17-14 @ PSU
33-7 @ PSU
23-12 OSU kickoff classic
[of course Ohio got revenge later.]

I see PSU scheduled FIU and Buffalo this year. Tough! Ohio has YSU, Akron, and Kent. Whoa Nellie!!

[/ QUOTE ]


you're so close, but just missed it

look at the Ohio State teams of the mid through late 90s and ask why they never won a national title

playing tough opponents week-in and week-out >>>>>>> playing a few names here and there

it was only when the big11ten has really sucked that teams made runs (Ohio State in 2002 and last year)
It's almost a pre-req to be in a non-challenging conference to go undefeated.





Big East has been stronger than the big11ten once in the entire lifetimes of the conferences....last year

[pwnsall]

I hate hearing people arguing for playoffs and it seems to be some sort of "common knowledge" that a playoff would determine the best team. It's just higher variance and more entertaining for a lot of people so most sports have them. I would say the NBA's is the only one that gets the best team very often. I wish they would go back to the old system and people would care more about winning their own conference and beating rivals. Plus I love that the bowls match up teams of varying levels from different conferences and that teams from smaller schools at least get a chance to play in them.

BTW, I care about 0 about who actually wins the "national championship" and always call the BCS championship game winner the "BCS champion". Since they made it up I use their made up title. /rant

[Austiger]

Why don't we just have combine workouts and coaching exams and skip the whole season? That way we won't have to worry about variance at all! The 2nd best team will never win the title. Nobody would want to see a playoff where the best team didn't win. Remember when George Mason made the final 4 in hoops, or when Valvano's NCState team won it all? We would never have to go through anything like that in football. I mean, the BCS is nearly perfect, but my idea would be even better!

[NajdorfDefense]

[ QUOTE ]
Well, the 12-team playoff is somewhat reasonable from a competitive standpoint (adding Wake Forest, Notre Dame, Wisconsin, and Auburn wouldn't dilute things too much), but it still doesn't work very well from a logistics standpoint. Where do you fit all the games in? In order to run a I-A playoff with more than 8 teams, I think you need to do the following:
(1) have playoff games either during finals or have multiple games at neutral sites which the vast majority of students and fans wouldn't be able to travel to
(2) destroy the bowl system


[/ QUOTE ]

Stop, stop, you're making too much sense! Of course the fans and students and alums will all travel to Boise, Miami, Birmingham, and Tempe in a 3-week period, with absolutely no time to plan 3 extra trips ahead of time! Money is NO OBJECT!

[NajdorfDefense]

[ QUOTE ]
playing tough opponents week-in and week-out >>>>>>> playing a few names here and there

[/ QUOTE ]

So, when Miami was winning national titles by playing ranked Florida, and top 10-ranked FSU, ND, Arkansas, SoCarolina and Oklanhoma teams they didn't play tough opponents?

Or at Wisky, at Mich St, at FSU, at top 15 Pitt, #1 ND and Alabama?
Or top 10s PSU, FSU, Houston, Nebraska as well as at BC, at Arizona, at Arkansas?
Or at PSU and at top 15 FSU, @ VaTech, Syracuse, Washington, Nebraska?

How odd, because to a normal person, those look like pretty damn hard schedules not even including the many other trips to WVa, BC, Cuse, Pitt, Houston, SDSU, UCLA, Okla, ND, BYU, Michigan, Washington when those teams were good over the years.

[iggymcfly]

[ QUOTE ]
I wish they would go back to the old system and people would care more about winning their own conference and beating rivals. Plus I love that the bowls match up teams of varying levels from different conferences and that teams from smaller schools at least get a chance to play in them.

BTW, I care about 0 about who actually wins the "national championship" and always call the BCS championship game winner the "BCS champion". Since they made it up I use their made up title. /rant

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, kind of surprised to see that this sentiment even exists. Probably the #1 reason that I love college football so much (over say college basketball or the NFL) is that there are so many nationally significant matchups on a regional basis. It's that chase of the championship from Week 1 that makes an early-season Tennesee/Florida or Miami/Florida State game such destination television.

Even when I was actually going to WSU, I didn't care that much about conferences and rivalries. I remember part of me wanting the Cougars to lose the Apple Cup just so that Bill Doba would get fired and the program could rebuild.

I do kind of feel bad that the thread got derailed this much though. Just to say something remotely on-topic, I want to say the Auburn's home advantage against a team not completely used to that kind of hostile environment is probably worth about 5 or 6 points on its own and that even if USF's a legitimate Top 25 team, the Tigers should probably be favored by at least a touchdown.

[pwnsall]

I don't think we really differ THAT much. I love all these games because I like watching people play their hearts out to see who comes out on top and I love watching outstanding athletic abilities. I just think the negative of so much talk about the national championship instead of conference races outweighs the positives of having it. I'm probably one of the few who would take 2 conference titles to 1 national title. I also liked having the Big Ten team play the Pac-Ten team in the Rose Bowl every year... and USC>>>Florida last year.

[pwnsall]

I think we watch sports for different reasons. I enjoy watching greatness and competitiveness. Your post confused me.

[Dudd]

[ QUOTE ]
I think we watch sports for different reasons. I enjoy watching greatness and competitiveness. Your post confused me.

[/ QUOTE ]

QFT. I don't give a rats ass about the greatness of the Rose Bowl, I want to watch the best teams in the nation play each other in meaningful games. A playoff would give me great games, and hell, maybe if I'm lucky they'll cut out the annual slaughter against the dregs of 1-A or a 1-AA team that every team in the country plays.