2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Like the title says, anything and everything else goes here. As long as it follows the forum rules.

Moderator: Raccoon

User avatar
thacon
Fiendishly At Large
Posts: 1553
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 1:13 pm
Location: New York

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by thacon » Tue Oct 26, 2010 8:22 pm

Two statues of liberty, a fleaflicker, a quick quick, unsportsmanlike conduct penalty on the coach, an early onside kick, fourth down attempts. LA Tech v Boise St is quickly becoming my favorite game of the season and it's only the second quarter.

User avatar
Pet Rock Steve
Pie in the Sky
Posts: 111
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2008 5:00 pm

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by Pet Rock Steve » Sun Nov 07, 2010 11:03 pm

I want Auburn to lose (I'm tired of the SEC winning the championships), but if they do I hope LSU loses as they could end up in the championship game without winning at least a share of their conference.

User avatar
stupac2
Oh my! Guy with Pie!
Posts: 3027
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 10:04 pm
Location: Stanford, CA
Contact:

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by stupac2 » Mon Nov 08, 2010 12:53 am

I think Oregon would beat Auburn nicely, have a really fun shootout with Boise, and have a tough time with TCU. I really hope Auburn loses because that's the only one that doesn't seem like it would be a good game.

User avatar
thacon
Fiendishly At Large
Posts: 1553
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 1:13 pm
Location: New York

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by thacon » Mon Nov 08, 2010 6:17 am

Auburn still has some difficult tests ahead of it. Alabama won't be easy (they still haven't lost at home) and you never know what will happen in the SEC championship game.

User avatar
Pet Rock Steve
Pie in the Sky
Posts: 111
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2008 5:00 pm

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by Pet Rock Steve » Mon Nov 08, 2010 2:44 pm

Of the undefeated teams, I think Auburn is the most likely to lose before the end of the season. I just don't know where in the BCS LSU will end up if that happens. I'd be pissed if LSU made it to the championship game without winning their conference championship (I believe Auburn would need two losses by the end of the season for LSU to play in it), especially with both TCU and Boise undefeated.

User avatar
stupac2
Oh my! Guy with Pie!
Posts: 3027
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 10:04 pm
Location: Stanford, CA
Contact:

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by stupac2 » Mon Nov 08, 2010 3:16 pm

Another reason to root for Auburn to lose is that's the only real way Stanford gets to the Rose Bowl. Which I really want to happen.

Also, Stanford at #6 is pretty fucking sexy. I wonder if that's the highest we've ever been ranked.

User avatar
thacon
Fiendishly At Large
Posts: 1553
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 1:13 pm
Location: New York

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by thacon » Mon Nov 08, 2010 4:29 pm

One of the two ESPN projections has Stanford in the Rose bowl against Michigan State. (The other one has them facing Missouri in the Alamo bowl.) Also, the current 3-way tie for the Big Ten will cause some wonkiness. It comes down to the last tiebreaker, which is BCS standings.

User avatar
stupac2
Oh my! Guy with Pie!
Posts: 3027
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 10:04 pm
Location: Stanford, CA
Contact:

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by stupac2 » Mon Nov 08, 2010 4:37 pm

Yeah, I can convince myself to make a trip to LA for New Year's, but not to Texas.

Raccoon
Oh my! Guy with Pie!
Posts: 1975
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 10:33 am
Location: somewhere on the West Coast

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by Raccoon » Mon Nov 08, 2010 6:46 pm

Oregon looks pretty unstoppable. The entire first half of the game against Washington was ugly, and even so, Oregon was up 18-3 at halftime. Then they hit the gas pedal in the second half . . . . Sheesh, a poorly played game still gets you over 500 yards of offense and 53 points!

Arizona won't be a pushover, but the game is in Eugene, and Arizona just got blasted by Stanford, who in turn got blasted by Oregon. The transitive property doesn't work for college football (see Texas beating Nebraska, UCLA beating Texas, and so on), but I don't think Arizona will fare any better against Oregon than Stanford did.

Cal is done. My Golden Bears finally won on the road, but it was against Washington State, and it was close. I expect that Cal will finally lose at home against Oregon, and it won't be close.

That leaves Oregon State, who I thought was an underrated sleeper to win the conference. But the loss to UCLA hurts, and the Beavers have been without their best running back.

I think it's looking like Oregon vs. TCU in the BCS Championship game. That should pave the way for Stanford to get to the Rose Bowl, or -- better yet, for Cal to ruin Stanford's season with an upset victory. :twisted:
[img]http://i169.photobucket.com/albums/u218/mad_hamish/raccoonsig.jpg[/img]

User avatar
Eigenbasis
My Pie Blown Sky High
Posts: 606
Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2009 9:07 pm

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by Eigenbasis » Mon Nov 08, 2010 7:26 pm

Could someone explain to me why any of the bowl games (except the national championship) matter at all? Not trolling here, I honestly don't get it.
"Have you ever heard the expression, ‘When life gives you lemons, make lemonade, and then throw it in the face of the person who gave you the lemons until they give you the oranges you originally asked for?’"

User avatar
stupac2
Oh my! Guy with Pie!
Posts: 3027
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 10:04 pm
Location: Stanford, CA
Contact:

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by stupac2 » Mon Nov 08, 2010 8:06 pm

[18:05] c_wraith: current pac-10 results show that cal is infinitely good
[18:05] c_wraith: Cal>UCLA>OSU>Arizona>Cal
[18:05] c_wraith: by transitivity, that gives Cal > Cal


Eigen, none of the games matter at all. Except that people think they matter. I just want to see Stanford in a bowl, especially a really good one I can go to.

User avatar
Eigenbasis
My Pie Blown Sky High
Posts: 606
Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2009 9:07 pm

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by Eigenbasis » Mon Nov 08, 2010 8:10 pm

I can see the appeal of actually attending the game. That would be a lot of fun if you care about the teams.
"Have you ever heard the expression, ‘When life gives you lemons, make lemonade, and then throw it in the face of the person who gave you the lemons until they give you the oranges you originally asked for?’"

User avatar
Pet Rock Steve
Pie in the Sky
Posts: 111
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2008 5:00 pm

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by Pet Rock Steve » Tue Nov 09, 2010 2:51 am

thacon wrote:One of the two ESPN projections has Stanford in the Rose bowl against Michigan State. (The other one has them facing Missouri in the Alamo bowl.) Also, the current 3-way tie for the Big Ten will cause some wonkiness. It comes down to the last tiebreaker, which is BCS standings.
Aww... they got rid of the "Who has had a longer time between visits" tiebreaker.
Eigenbasis wrote:Could someone explain to me why any of the bowl games (except the national championship) matter at all? Not trolling here, I honestly don't get it.
For me it is team bragging rights, conference bragging rights, and more football games! Also, attending is always spectacular. I've performed at 4 bowl games (1 in HS, 3 in college), and they have always been amazing even if my team rarely won them.

For teams: $$ and publicity/recruitment.

For rankings: The big ones used to matter before the BCS.

User avatar
stupac2
Oh my! Guy with Pie!
Posts: 3027
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 10:04 pm
Location: Stanford, CA
Contact:

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by stupac2 » Wed Nov 17, 2010 2:01 pm


User avatar
thacon
Fiendishly At Large
Posts: 1553
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 1:13 pm
Location: New York

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by thacon » Wed Nov 17, 2010 2:21 pm

Death to the BCS also put up a great blog post this week.

User avatar
Pet Rock Steve
Pie in the Sky
Posts: 111
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2008 5:00 pm

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by Pet Rock Steve » Wed Nov 17, 2010 3:58 pm

The whole Big Ten Championship is pretty weird in general as a loss by Ohio State would mean that Michigan State would go to the Rose Bowl instead of Wisconsin, despite the difference in BCS ranking (the head-to-head tie-breaker is reasonable, but Wisconsin rooting for OSU to win is not). The same could possibly apply to OSU if Michigan State were to win, though it is not a guarantee that OSU would pass Wisconsin in the rankings if they both were to win out.

Note that this will mostly be a moot point next year with an actual conference championship game as I highly doubt that there will be three teams tied in one division that are likely to beat the team from the other division.

Raccoon
Oh my! Guy with Pie!
Posts: 1975
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 10:33 am
Location: somewhere on the West Coast

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by Raccoon » Sun Nov 21, 2010 12:22 am

So this Saturday was looking pretty sucky, with UCLA having already lost on Thursday, and Cal completely rolling over against Stanford*, but all that disappointment was more than erased by Oregon State's demolition of USC! It's hilarious to think that USC has not won a football game in the state of Oregon in 5 years now.


* I wouldn't have minded if Stanford had won a narrow game, the way Oregon did, so as to keep Stanford's BCS hopes alive, since Cal is hopeless this year . . . but really, 48-14? Sheesh.
[img]http://i169.photobucket.com/albums/u218/mad_hamish/raccoonsig.jpg[/img]

User avatar
stupac2
Oh my! Guy with Pie!
Posts: 3027
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 10:04 pm
Location: Stanford, CA
Contact:

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by stupac2 » Sun Nov 21, 2010 1:22 am

Yeah that game was pretty awesome. I was worried for about five minutes, when Cal's defense was actually stopping us. But after that offsides on 3rd and 4 that basically ceased being a problem. During the game snark said Cal probably shot their wad with the game against Oregon, they just didn't have anything left for Big Game.

User avatar
Pet Rock Steve
Pie in the Sky
Posts: 111
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2008 5:00 pm

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by Pet Rock Steve » Mon Nov 22, 2010 12:43 am

I'm ok with how the Big Ten will shake out if the top three teams all win next week, based on their current BCS rankings. Michigan State seems to be the weaker of the three having played many closer games than either Wisconsin or OSU (even with OSU having a slow starting offense the last few weeks), and I believe Michigan State OS the team most likely to lose next week. If they do lose, then the tie breaker still favors Wisconsin.

Also, here's hoping Auburn and LSU lose next week so that there is a Boise State v. Oregon finals!

User avatar
stupac2
Oh my! Guy with Pie!
Posts: 3027
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 10:04 pm
Location: Stanford, CA
Contact:

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by stupac2 » Mon Nov 22, 2010 12:50 am

Pet Rock Steve wrote:Also, here's hoping Auburn and LSU lose next week so that there is a Boise State v. Oregon finals!
And a Stanford-Wisconsin Rose Bowl.

User avatar
thacon
Fiendishly At Large
Posts: 1553
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 1:13 pm
Location: New York

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by thacon » Mon Nov 22, 2010 6:07 am

Pet Rock Steve wrote:I'm ok with how the Big Ten will shake out if the top three teams all win next week
Me too. I don't want OSU to have to play Stanford.

ETA: Pittsburgh?!

ETA2: It's interesting to look at the computer polls that allow you to see what they feel are the more accurate numbers as opposed to what numbers find their way into the BCS. Sagarin has the top 4 as Oregon, Stanford, TCU, BSU and Massey has Oregon, BSU, Stanford, Auburn.

User avatar
Pet Rock Steve
Pie in the Sky
Posts: 111
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2008 5:00 pm

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by Pet Rock Steve » Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:38 am

thacon wrote:Me too. I don't want OSU to have to play Stanford.
Curiously, why?
Stupid Big East getting an automatic qualifier. They should probably change that. Next year the Mountain West will probably be a stronger conference than the Big East.

User avatar
thacon
Fiendishly At Large
Posts: 1553
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 1:13 pm
Location: New York

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by thacon » Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:43 am

Pet Rock Steve wrote:
thacon wrote:Me too. I don't want OSU to have to play Stanford.
Curiously, why?
Because OSU would probably lose. I'm sick of seeing Ohio State go down in bowl games. OSU has only won 19 of 41 bowl appearances.

User avatar
stupac2
Oh my! Guy with Pie!
Posts: 3027
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 10:04 pm
Location: Stanford, CA
Contact:

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by stupac2 » Mon Nov 22, 2010 12:21 pm

thacon wrote:Because OSU would probably lose. I'm sick of seeing Ohio State go down in bowl games. OSU has only won 19 of 41 bowl appearances.
The hodradio crowd are pretty fond of saying that OSU just shits itself in bowl games.

User avatar
thacon
Fiendishly At Large
Posts: 1553
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 1:13 pm
Location: New York

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by thacon » Mon Nov 22, 2010 12:45 pm

I started to lament their recent losses, but when I broke down the last decade, it's not as bad as I remember.
Last year's Rose Bowl was a great win.
2008's Fiesta Bowl loss to Texas was close and a heart breaker.
2007's Championship loss to LSU was expected. OSU had no place in that game. They were 7th in the BCS in week 12, but then everyone above them kept losing.
2006's Championship loss to Florida was just ugly, but I think OSU could have won that one if they hadn't injured their best player while celebrating the opening kickoff. (Or at least they could have kept the score closer)
2003-2005 were all wins.
2002 was the single greatest game I've ever had the benefit of watching. (No bias here, I swear.)
2000 and 2001's losses to South Carolina were downright ugly and close, respectively.

So that's 5 wins out of 10 appearances and two of the losses were by a field goal. It's not a good record, but it's not the proverbial self-shitting we all seem to believe.

User avatar
stupac2
Oh my! Guy with Pie!
Posts: 3027
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 10:04 pm
Location: Stanford, CA
Contact:

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by stupac2 » Mon Nov 22, 2010 1:31 pm

I think it's also that every time someone says tOSU my RAAAAGE grows and makes me wish that the school (and, really, the entire state) would just implode. Seriously, fuck that.

In other news, I did this and thought it was interesting:

Oregon - 16,475
Auburn - 20,221
TCU - 8,696
Boise - 19,993
LSU - 21,103
Stanford - 6,878
Wisconsin - 28,968
Ohio - 38,479
Oklahoma - 20,841
Michigan St - 36,489

That's the top 10 schools and their undergrad enrollment. Interesting that only 2 schools are below 10k, and even if you add their enrollment together they'd be below the next closest. I'm not sure this is meaningful, but when I keep hearing "STANFORD CAN'T FILL THE STADIUM" I just think, "Umm, have you seen how big the student body is? If they all showed up the stadium would be 90% empty, and that's true basically nowhere else." Sure, most stadiums aren't full of students, but if you combine students and alums in the area Stanford is still going to be way, way lower than most schools. Seems like an area where some slack should be cut.

User avatar
Pet Rock Steve
Pie in the Sky
Posts: 111
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2008 5:00 pm

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by Pet Rock Steve » Mon Nov 22, 2010 4:32 pm

thacon wrote:So that's 5 wins out of 10 appearances and two of the losses were by a field goal. It's not a good record, but it's not the proverbial self-shitting we all seem to believe.
Heh. Looks like their biggest problem is the SEC (0-4 in this 10 years and 0-9 overall). Against the SEC I could see that claim. Otherwise? Not so much. I may be biased though, having grown up in Columbus and gone to a number of great games there.

User avatar
thacon
Fiendishly At Large
Posts: 1553
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 1:13 pm
Location: New York

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by thacon » Mon Nov 22, 2010 4:57 pm

Pet Rock Steve wrote:Heh. Looks like their biggest problem is the SEC (0-4 in this 10 years and 0-9 overall). Against the SEC I could see that claim. Otherwise? Not so much. I may be biased though, having grown up in Columbus and gone to a number of great games there.
I actually have a spreadsheet with every OSU game, opponent, and score going back to their first game in 1890. So, yeah, behold OSU's terrible all-time record against the SEC

South Carolina 0-2
Florida 0-1
Georgia 0-1
Kentucky 3-0
Tennessee 0-1
Vanderbilt 3-1
Auburn 0-1-1
LSU 1-1-1
Alabama 0-3
Arkansas Never played
Mississippi State Never played
Mississippi Never played

7-11-2

edit: But OSU is undefeated against the Dayton YMCA... so there's that.

User avatar
Pet Rock Steve
Pie in the Sky
Posts: 111
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2008 5:00 pm

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by Pet Rock Steve » Mon Nov 22, 2010 5:17 pm

Only 20 games against the SEC all time (9 of which in bowl games)?! That seems crazy low.

User avatar
top1214
Oh my! Guy with Pie!
Posts: 1959
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2010 1:10 am
Location: St Louis, MO, USA

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by top1214 » Mon Nov 22, 2010 7:34 pm

thacon wrote: I actually have a spreadsheet with every OSU game, opponent, and score going back to their first game in 1890. So, yeah, behold OSU's terrible all-time record against the SEC
So you've got their all-time record against in-state rival OWU? :twisted:

Raccoon
Oh my! Guy with Pie!
Posts: 1975
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 10:33 am
Location: somewhere on the West Coast

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by Raccoon » Mon Nov 22, 2010 8:07 pm

Pet Rock Steve wrote:Only 20 games against the SEC all time (9 of which in bowl games)?! That seems crazy low.
That's because most of the Big-10 schools play a seriously lame non-conference schedule.

Well, to be fair, most teams from the major conferences do. But the Big-10 has had some ridiculous days, like this one.

The Oregon State Beavers are the most impressive team to me in terms of willingness to schedule real opponents. By the time this season is over, they will have played FIVE top 10 teams (Boise State, TCU, Arizona, Stanford, and Oregon). Of course, they're probably going to be 1-4, but still. . . .
[img]http://i169.photobucket.com/albums/u218/mad_hamish/raccoonsig.jpg[/img]

User avatar
stupac2
Oh my! Guy with Pie!
Posts: 3027
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 10:04 pm
Location: Stanford, CA
Contact:

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by stupac2 » Mon Nov 22, 2010 8:23 pm

Was AZ ever ranked in the top 10? I thought their apogee was 15, the week of the stanford game.

Nonetheless, they're definitely insane. It's too bad they couldn't have taken those TCU/Boise games, would have made so many things so much easier.

User avatar
thacon
Fiendishly At Large
Posts: 1553
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 1:13 pm
Location: New York

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by thacon » Mon Nov 22, 2010 8:49 pm

top1214 wrote:So you've got their all-time record against in-state rival OWU?
OSU has played OWU 29 times and OSU has won 26 (with 15 shutouts), OWU won 2, and they tied once. OSU scored a total of 701 points to OWU's 106. OSU's average margin of victory was 21 points. The two teams last met in 1932.
Raccoon wrote:The Oregon State Beavers are the most impressive team to me in terms of willingness to schedule real opponents. By the time this season is over, they will have played FIVE top 10 teams (Boise State, TCU, Arizona, Stanford, and Oregon). Of course, they're probably going to be 1-4, but still. . . .
I'll agree that Oregon State has one of, if not the, toughest schedule this year, but Arizona, Stanford, and Oregon are all in the PAC-10 and how long ago did they schedule Boise State and TCU? For all we know, when they scheduled those games, they expected them to be cupcakes. I don't mean to take anything away from Oregon State, but I don't know how much of it is a willingness to schedule real opponents. (By the way, Tennessee has a home and away scheduled with USC for 2021 and 2022. Who knows what those teams will look like in a decade. Michigan State will face Boise State in 2023 and Notre Dame in 2031.)

Raccoon
Oh my! Guy with Pie!
Posts: 1975
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 10:33 am
Location: somewhere on the West Coast

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by Raccoon » Mon Nov 22, 2010 9:12 pm

stupac2 wrote:Was AZ ever ranked in the top 10? I thought their apogee was 15, the week of the stanford game.

Nonetheless, they're definitely insane. It's too bad they couldn't have taken those TCU/Boise games, would have made so many things so much easier.
Arizona *was* #9 when Oregon State played and beat them.
[img]http://i169.photobucket.com/albums/u218/mad_hamish/raccoonsig.jpg[/img]

User avatar
Pet Rock Steve
Pie in the Sky
Posts: 111
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2008 5:00 pm

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by Pet Rock Steve » Tue Nov 23, 2010 1:18 am

For shiggles, here the top 10 BCS teams sorted by the combined record of their non-conference opponents. The format displayed is team, percent, record, #games against a BCS conference team (and ND), #games against an FCS team:

LSU, .558, 24-19, 2, 1
TCU, .523, 23-21, 2, 1
Boise St., .515, 17-16, 2, 0
Ohio St., .477, 21-23, 1, 0
Oklahoma St., .469, 15-17, 1, 0
Auburn, .432, 19-25, 1, 1
Stanford, .424, 14-19, 2, 1
Michigan St., .418, 18-25, 1, 1
Oregon, .219, 7-25, 1, 1
Wisconsin, .209, 9-34, 1, 1

User avatar
stupac2
Oh my! Guy with Pie!
Posts: 3027
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 10:04 pm
Location: Stanford, CA
Contact:

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by stupac2 » Tue Nov 23, 2010 10:19 am

Wait, is that data historical? I'm not really sure what the point of data older than a few years is, since college programs change so dramatically. I don't remember which season it was, but at some point in my tenure at Stanford we were like 1-10. Now we're 10-1.

User avatar
slaphappy snark
Widdle Fudge Bunny
Posts: 2689
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 1:27 pm
Location: SF Bay Area

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by slaphappy snark » Tue Nov 23, 2010 10:43 am

It's the right number of games to be the records for 3-4 teams each, so it looks like just this year's non-conference opponents.

User avatar
stupac2
Oh my! Guy with Pie!
Posts: 3027
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 10:04 pm
Location: Stanford, CA
Contact:

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by stupac2 » Tue Nov 23, 2010 12:28 pm

slaphappy snark wrote:It's the right number of games to be the records for 3-4 teams each, so it looks like just this year's non-conference opponents.
Oh I see, for some reason I thought he meant their record against non-conference opponents. Which seemed really stupid, so I'm glad it's not that.

Raccoon
Oh my! Guy with Pie!
Posts: 1975
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 10:33 am
Location: somewhere on the West Coast

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by Raccoon » Tue Nov 23, 2010 11:01 pm

On a generally related note, I just finished reading Death to the BCS. It does a great job of documenting just how fundamentally corrupt, stupid, illogical, foolish, and backwards the whole BCS system is. I recommend it to anyone who's interested in college football.
[img]http://i169.photobucket.com/albums/u218/mad_hamish/raccoonsig.jpg[/img]

User avatar
Pet Rock Steve
Pie in the Sky
Posts: 111
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2008 5:00 pm

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by Pet Rock Steve » Wed Nov 24, 2010 11:02 am

stupac2 wrote:
slaphappy snark wrote:It's the right number of games to be the records for 3-4 teams each, so it looks like just this year's non-conference opponents.
Oh I see, for some reason I thought he meant their record against non-conference opponents. Which seemed really stupid, so I'm glad it's not that.
Yeah, the current record of this year's non-conference opponents. Sorry about the confusion. Though it might be interesting to see how much (if at all) teams changed their scheduling to play the BCS system. I don't know a good way to go about doing this though.

Raccoon
Oh my! Guy with Pie!
Posts: 1975
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 10:33 am
Location: somewhere on the West Coast

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by Raccoon » Sat Nov 27, 2010 11:18 pm

So, another awful week of college football for me, made palatable by another USC loss.

I watched the second half of the Boise State game (love living on the West Coast!) and can't imagine the emotional peaks and valleys for the Broncos . . . going from thinking they were headed to overtime to the incredible near-Hail Mary pass that left 2 seconds for a 26 yard field goal to the FG miss . . . . And then to lose in overtime on another missed FG. . . . Well, I guess TCU and Stanford were both chortling in delight.

Speaking of Stanford, as much as it pains me to say this, I guess it's pretty clear that Stanford is the best 1-loss team in the country. When your only loss is to the #1 AP and BCS team, and no other 1-loss team can say that, it's conclusive to me. Yes, Stanford *almost* lost to USC, and had a close game against Arizona State, but the other 1-loss teams had similarly flawed victories -- Wisconsin was out-played by Arizona State and likely should have to Iowa as well had Coach Ferentz managed the clock properly. Ohio State had a cleaner record, but was a bit lucky that Iowa choked at the end; otherwise, that could have been a second loss. Michigan State had close wins over Notre Dame and Purdue, and it got crushed by Iowa(!), and not only that, it avoided playing Ohio State because of the Big-10's unbalanced schedule.

The one 1-loss team that arguably could hold a candle to Stanford was LSU. The Tigers had more than their share of close wins (North Carolina, West Virginia(!), Tennessee, Florida, and Alabama), but four victories over ranked teams and a single loss to the #2 AP and BCS team is about as impressive as Stanford's record. However, the loss to Arkansas pretty ends that debate.

My brother, who's a Big-10/Michigan fan, was crowing about how the Big-10 had three teams in the BCS Top 10. I pointed out that the Pac-10 may only have had two Top 10 BCS teams, but both were ranked higher than any Big-10 teams.
[img]http://i169.photobucket.com/albums/u218/mad_hamish/raccoonsig.jpg[/img]

User avatar
stupac2
Oh my! Guy with Pie!
Posts: 3027
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 10:04 pm
Location: Stanford, CA
Contact:

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by stupac2 » Sat Nov 27, 2010 11:24 pm

I'm just praying that Wisconsin doesn't leap us, because that's our best bet for a BCS Bowl. Sure, it'd be Fiesta or Orange, but that's better than Alamo.

Of course, SC finishing the job next week against Auburn would be even better. Fucking Alabama, and double-fucking Auburn.

Oh, and Racc, you likely don't need to fret Stanford's greatness much longer, since Harbaugh and Luck are both going to go to the NFL (although I guess Harbaugh might go to Michigan). Maybe I'm being overly pessimistic, but I don't think we're a #4 team without those two. With them we're a title contender, without them...

Raccoon
Oh my! Guy with Pie!
Posts: 1975
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 10:33 am
Location: somewhere on the West Coast

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by Raccoon » Sun Nov 28, 2010 12:27 am

stupac2 wrote:Oh, and Racc, you likely don't need to fret Stanford's greatness much longer, since Harbaugh and Luck are both going to go to the NFL (although I guess Harbaugh might go to Michigan). Maybe I'm being overly pessimistic, but I don't think we're a #4 team without those two. With them we're a title contender, without them...
Heh, maybe USC will fire Lane Kiffin and you can hire him to replace Harbaugh . . . . :twisted:

Congrats on an impressive season. 11-1 (and one quarter of domination against Oregon).
[img]http://i169.photobucket.com/albums/u218/mad_hamish/raccoonsig.jpg[/img]

User avatar
stupac2
Oh my! Guy with Pie!
Posts: 3027
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 10:04 pm
Location: Stanford, CA
Contact:

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by stupac2 » Sun Nov 28, 2010 12:33 am

I still think that we'd have won had that game been at home. Or if it had been later in the season. Or had that Owusu injury not happened. Gha, that game. Not sure which bothers me more, that loss, or Auburn's win this weekend. I guess the former should, since we'd be in the national title game with a win against Oregon. Jesus, what a thought.

User avatar
stupac2
Oh my! Guy with Pie!
Posts: 3027
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 10:04 pm
Location: Stanford, CA
Contact:

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by stupac2 » Sun Nov 28, 2010 8:12 pm

#4! #4! We're #4! Automatic bid! Sure, something might get fucked up next week, but our lead over Wisconsin is >0.0200, which would be hard to make up when neither team is playing.

Now the only question is which bowl is forced to take us. I'm good with Fiesta since that's an easy flight and thanks to Con I know people in Pheonix. Of course, with an especially crazy weekend we could end up in Rose, or even better! (Yeah, that won't happen. But it could!)

What's really sad is that with a playoff we'd have a serious chance to win the whole damn thing. Fucking BCS.

Raccoon
Oh my! Guy with Pie!
Posts: 1975
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 10:33 am
Location: somewhere on the West Coast

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by Raccoon » Sun Nov 28, 2010 10:17 pm

stupac2 wrote:#4! #4! We're #4! Automatic bid! Sure, something might get fucked up next week, but our lead over Wisconsin is >0.0200, which would be hard to make up when neither team is playing.

Now the only question is which bowl is forced to take us. I'm good with Fiesta since that's an easy flight and thanks to Con I know people in Pheonix. Of course, with an especially crazy weekend we could end up in Rose, or even better! (Yeah, that won't happen. But it could!)

What's really sad is that with a playoff we'd have a serious chance to win the whole damn thing. Fucking BCS.
Congrats, and as a Cal fan, I'm glad to share in the BCS payout. :D

As for playoffs, again, I endorse Death to the BCS.
[img]http://i169.photobucket.com/albums/u218/mad_hamish/raccoonsig.jpg[/img]

User avatar
stupac2
Oh my! Guy with Pie!
Posts: 3027
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 10:04 pm
Location: Stanford, CA
Contact:

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by stupac2 » Sun Nov 28, 2010 11:38 pm

I just ordered that book. I'm kind of planning on reading it on the way to the Fiesta Bowl... (or whichever)

User avatar
thacon
Fiendishly At Large
Posts: 1553
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 1:13 pm
Location: New York

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by thacon » Mon Nov 29, 2010 6:31 am

I asked for that book for Christmas, but have been reading their blog at deathtothebcs.com/blog. It's a good read, but they don't write very often.

ETA: The Sagarin rating has Stanford at #1 in the predictor.

ETA2: TCU will join the Big East. Probably a good idea, even if it's a weak conference.
Last edited by thacon on Mon Nov 29, 2010 10:09 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
stupac2
Oh my! Guy with Pie!
Posts: 3027
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 10:04 pm
Location: Stanford, CA
Contact:

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by stupac2 » Mon Nov 29, 2010 10:09 am

thacon wrote:ETA: The Sagarin rating has Stanford at #1 in the predictor.
Yeah I know. That's why I'm sad we played Oregon so early, I think we're a stronger team now. I'd really like our odds in a playoff. Oh well, maybe Stanford will have a shot at a Championship at some other point in my life...

Responding to the other ETA, I think this is good for TCU but bad for football. We need to kill the BCS, and this will help prop it up (since they're less likely to get screwed out of a BCS game now, which is what we need for Congressional action or something that will be able to take down the BCS clusterfuck).

Raccoon
Oh my! Guy with Pie!
Posts: 1975
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 10:33 am
Location: somewhere on the West Coast

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by Raccoon » Mon Nov 29, 2010 10:50 am

stupac2 wrote:Yeah I know. That's why I'm sad we played Oregon so early, I think we're a stronger team now. I'd really like our odds in a playoff. Oh well, maybe Stanford will have a shot at a Championship at some other point in my life...

Responding to the other ETA, I think this is good for TCU but bad for football. We need to kill the BCS, and this will help prop it up (since they're less likely to get screwed out of a BCS game now, which is what we need for Congressional action or something that will be able to take down the BCS clusterfuck).
While Stanford has played even better down the stretch, I'm not convinced that playing Oregon later would have resulted in a different outcome. Oregon, too, played more of its "weak" wins early on. The 11-point win over Arizona State was pretty ugly, seeing as how ASU outgained Oregon with 600+ yards of offense. The 20-point win over Washington State wasn't so good either, although WSU seems less lame than it originally appeared. True, the 15-13 win over Cal was recent, but that's offset by Stanford's recent 17-13 win over Arizona State.

On the other hand, if the game were in Palo Alto, regardless of when in the season . . . .

As for BCS-busting, I agree with the need for it. But would it be too much to ask that Congress fix the long-term unfunded liabilities in Social Security and Medicare and maybe to make an attempt at balancing the budget, and so on, before turning its attention to college football?
[img]http://i169.photobucket.com/albums/u218/mad_hamish/raccoonsig.jpg[/img]

User avatar
stupac2
Oh my! Guy with Pie!
Posts: 3027
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 10:04 pm
Location: Stanford, CA
Contact:

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by stupac2 » Mon Nov 29, 2010 11:17 am

Raccoon wrote:As for BCS-busting, I agree with the need for it. But would it be too much to ask that Congress fix the long-term unfunded liabilities in Social Security and Medicare and maybe to make an attempt at balancing the budget, and so on, before turning its attention to college football?
I'm kind of shocked you're naive enough to think they'll ever do those things. But they'd probably do something about football!

Remember, in our political system the only things that get accomplished are things that are easy to do, things that get some powerful lobby lots of money, and things that are totally trivial. Or some combination thereof.

User avatar
thacon
Fiendishly At Large
Posts: 1553
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 1:13 pm
Location: New York

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by thacon » Wed Dec 01, 2010 7:47 am

stupac2 wrote:I'm kind of shocked you're naive enough to think they'll ever do those things. But they'd probably do something about football
See also: steroids in baseball

User avatar
stupac2
Oh my! Guy with Pie!
Posts: 3027
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 10:04 pm
Location: Stanford, CA
Contact:

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by stupac2 » Wed Dec 01, 2010 2:53 pm

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5870788

SEC rules:
If at any time before or after matriculation in a member institution a student-athlete or any member of his/her family receives or agrees to receive, directly or indirectly, any aid or assistance beyond or in addition to that permitted by the Bylaws of this Conference (except such aid or assistance as such student-athlete may receive from those persons on whom the student is naturally or legally dependent for support), such student-athlete shall be ineligible for competition in any intercollegiate sport within the Conference for the remainder of his/her college career.
...How is he still eligible?

User avatar
top1214
Oh my! Guy with Pie!
Posts: 1959
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2010 1:10 am
Location: St Louis, MO, USA

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by top1214 » Wed Dec 01, 2010 4:14 pm

stupac2 wrote:http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5870788

SEC rules:
If at any time before or after matriculation in a member institution a student-athlete or any member of his/her family receives or agrees to receive, directly or indirectly, any aid or assistance beyond or in addition to that permitted by the Bylaws of this Conference (except such aid or assistance as such student-athlete may receive from those persons on whom the student is naturally or legally dependent for support), such student-athlete shall be ineligible for competition in any intercollegiate sport within the Conference for the remainder of his/her college career.
...How is he still eligible?
B/c otherwise the final is guaranteed to be TCU and Oregon, and the NCAA might not make as much money. Don't worry, though. Auburn's wins (including potentially the "national championship") will be vacated in a year's time, and Auburn will face the loss of some scholarships. B/c the integrity of college athletics is important.

User avatar
stupac2
Oh my! Guy with Pie!
Posts: 3027
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 10:04 pm
Location: Stanford, CA
Contact:

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by stupac2 » Wed Dec 01, 2010 4:23 pm

I had the same thought a bit after I posted this. It's really quite sad how fucking greedy the NCAA and the conferences are. It's too bad that the people actually doing all the work get almost none of it.

User avatar
thacon
Fiendishly At Large
Posts: 1553
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 1:13 pm
Location: New York

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by thacon » Thu Dec 02, 2010 10:51 am

stupac2 wrote:
If at any time before or after matriculation in a member institution a student-athlete or any member of his/her family receives or agrees to receive, directly or indirectly, any aid or assistance beyond or in addition to that permitted by the Bylaws of this Conference (except such aid or assistance as such student-athlete may receive from those persons on whom the student is naturally or legally dependent for support), such student-athlete shall be ineligible for competition in any intercollegiate sport within the Conference for the remainder of his/her college career.
I think they're saying it hinges on the fact that no money ever changed hands. And for the NCAA rules, they're saying it's a combination of that and the fact that Cam didn't know about it. From what I can tell, Auburn suspended him based on SEC rules violations, but then appealed to the NCAA and the NCAA ruled him eligible. It definitely comes down to money though. If he were the quarterback at UNLV, he'd be ineligible without question.

This is a travesty for both TCU and Andrew Luck. (And it leaves a bad taste in the mouths of everyone else)

User avatar
stupac2
Oh my! Guy with Pie!
Posts: 3027
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 10:04 pm
Location: Stanford, CA
Contact:

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by stupac2 » Thu Dec 02, 2010 11:12 am

Eh, I think you mean LMJ. Luck's going to come in third, maybe fourth. But it's a tragedy for us anyway because a TCU-Oregon BCSCG puts us into the Rose Bowl. So it's kind of a double-fuck-you to Stanford.

User avatar
thacon
Fiendishly At Large
Posts: 1553
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 1:13 pm
Location: New York

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by thacon » Thu Dec 02, 2010 11:54 am

It's hard to compare a quarterback to a running back apples to apples and determine who is better, but if I were a heisman voter, I'd put Luck first. James is definitely good, but I can't remember the last time I saw someone who impressed me as much as Luck. But at least there's still one more week for Stanford to have a shot at roses.

Raccoon
Oh my! Guy with Pie!
Posts: 1975
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 10:33 am
Location: somewhere on the West Coast

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by Raccoon » Thu Dec 02, 2010 12:24 pm

thacon wrote:It's hard to compare a quarterback to a running back apples to apples and determine who is better, but if I were a heisman voter, I'd put Luck first. James is definitely good, but I can't remember the last time I saw someone who impressed me as much as Luck. But at least there's still one more week for Stanford to have a shot at roses.
It is hard to compare QB to RB. And head-to-head is even less reliable, since it's just one game. But in the Oregon-Stanford game, Luck was 29/46 for 341 yards, 2 TDs, 2 ints, and a passer rating of 131.0. Apart from the yardage, he was outplayed by Darron Thomas, who is good but nobody's idea of a Heisman candidate this year (20/29 for 238 yards, 3 TDs, 0 ints, rating of 158.2; and a better yards/attempt average, too). Meanwhile, James had 31 carries for 257 yards (8.3 yards per carry) and 3 TDs.

Oregon and Stanford were each other's best opponents this season. Against the best, Luck had a good game, but not really the kind of performance that wows you. Against the best, James had his BEST game of the season. I wouldn't put James over Luck just because of the results of that one game, but given how strong both players have been, I might give James the edge because of it.
[img]http://i169.photobucket.com/albums/u218/mad_hamish/raccoonsig.jpg[/img]

User avatar
thacon
Fiendishly At Large
Posts: 1553
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 1:13 pm
Location: New York

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by thacon » Thu Dec 02, 2010 12:51 pm

Ok, fair enough. I'll admit that I didn't see that game. (I'm like a Harris voter, wee!)

User avatar
Eigenbasis
My Pie Blown Sky High
Posts: 606
Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2009 9:07 pm

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by Eigenbasis » Thu Dec 02, 2010 4:12 pm

stupac2 wrote:Eh, I think you mean LMJ. Luck's going to come in third, maybe fourth. But it's a tragedy for us anyway because a TCU-Oregon BCSCG puts us into the Rose Bowl. So it's kind of a double-fuck-you to Stanford.
Is there something wrong with the Rose Bowl, assuming Stanford doesn't go to the championship either way? (I honestly don't know, I'm not baiting you)
"Have you ever heard the expression, ‘When life gives you lemons, make lemonade, and then throw it in the face of the person who gave you the lemons until they give you the oranges you originally asked for?’"

User avatar
thacon
Fiendishly At Large
Posts: 1553
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 1:13 pm
Location: New York

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by thacon » Thu Dec 02, 2010 4:16 pm

I think he meant that by allowing Cam Newton to play/not sanctioning Auburn, the NCAA is allowing them to go to the championship, thereby robbing Stanford of a Rose Bowl appearance. (Because TCU takes their spot)

User avatar
Eigenbasis
My Pie Blown Sky High
Posts: 606
Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2009 9:07 pm

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by Eigenbasis » Thu Dec 02, 2010 4:27 pm

I'm confused. Stanford likely doesn't go to the Rose Bowl if Auburn plays, but they do go if Auburn doesn't play?
"Have you ever heard the expression, ‘When life gives you lemons, make lemonade, and then throw it in the face of the person who gave you the lemons until they give you the oranges you originally asked for?’"

User avatar
thacon
Fiendishly At Large
Posts: 1553
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 1:13 pm
Location: New York

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by thacon » Thu Dec 02, 2010 4:35 pm

If Auburn goes to the national championship, TCU plays Wisconsin in the Rose Bowl. If Auburn doesn't go to the NC, TCU goes instead and Stanford plays Wisconsin in the Rose Bowl. (Which is a game I'd really love to see!)

Raccoon
Oh my! Guy with Pie!
Posts: 1975
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 10:33 am
Location: somewhere on the West Coast

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by Raccoon » Thu Dec 02, 2010 4:49 pm

thacon wrote:If Auburn goes to the national championship, TCU plays Wisconsin in the Rose Bowl. If Auburn doesn't go to the NC, TCU goes instead and Stanford plays Wisconsin in the Rose Bowl. (Which is a game I'd really love to see!)
Agreed, except it would be really weird to see a red-and-white team play a red-and-white team!
[img]http://i169.photobucket.com/albums/u218/mad_hamish/raccoonsig.jpg[/img]

User avatar
slaphappy snark
Widdle Fudge Bunny
Posts: 2689
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 1:27 pm
Location: SF Bay Area

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by slaphappy snark » Thu Dec 02, 2010 5:10 pm

Raccoon wrote:
thacon wrote:If Auburn goes to the national championship, TCU plays Wisconsin in the Rose Bowl. If Auburn doesn't go to the NC, TCU goes instead and Stanford plays Wisconsin in the Rose Bowl. (Which is a game I'd really love to see!)
Agreed, except it would be really weird to see a red-and-white team play a red-and-white team!
Both cardinal and white, even. One of my grad school buddies was a Wisconsin alum and had a poster with an overhead poster of the 2000 Rose Bowl hanging in his apartment--barely distinguishable.

User avatar
stupac2
Oh my! Guy with Pie!
Posts: 3027
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 10:04 pm
Location: Stanford, CA
Contact:

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by stupac2 » Thu Dec 02, 2010 5:20 pm

It's kind of funny, of the people I know who care about football (most not even Stanford fans), Stanford-Wisconsin is the matchup they most want to see. Too bad it's probably not going to happen.

User avatar
thacon
Fiendishly At Large
Posts: 1553
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 1:13 pm
Location: New York

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by thacon » Thu Dec 02, 2010 5:22 pm

Since you brought up Rose Bowl posters, I stumbled on this earlier today. The artist is an OSU fan who makes concert-style posters of all their games. They're pretty neat.

User avatar
thacon
Fiendishly At Large
Posts: 1553
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 1:13 pm
Location: New York

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by thacon » Sat Dec 04, 2010 2:20 pm

2010 turned out to be the year of the mascots: http://www.bearcatsblog.com/2010-articl ... ested.html

User avatar
Pet Rock Steve
Pie in the Sky
Posts: 111
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2008 5:00 pm

Re: 2010-2011 College Football Discussion

Post by Pet Rock Steve » Sun Dec 05, 2010 5:42 pm

Will there be any type of contest for selecting bowl winners?

Post Reply