Bobcat99

I-AA is complicated. There are 15 I-AA conferences, but one of them (the Ivy League) does not officially belong to Division I for football at all and is basically classified I-AA against their will (they are non-scholarship, and do not participate in postseason play). Eight conferences get automatic bids to the tournament. A handful of the conferences do not issue scholarships; those conferences do not receive automatic bids. The SWAC chooses to opt out of the tournament and plays its own championship game. (The MEAC, it should be noted, does receive a bid.) In the end, only one conference offers full scholarships and does not receive an automatic bid: the Great West Conference. The Great West only has five teams, and three of them are in Division I transition, and thus ineligible for the playoffs (a shame for NDSU, who went 10-1.) So, yeah, not every conference in I-AA gets a bid, but all the ones that are fully compliant do. In I-A, all the teams offer the same number of scholarships, so it's a bit more equitable insofar as what the teams put out in that aspect.

That is too subjective for an equitable solution. BCS teams will always carry more agency than non-BCS teams, simply because they are more visible. They have more games on TV and they are covered in-depth by the news media. Case in point? Ohio defeated Akron two weeks ago to win the MAC East and earn their first bowl bid since 1968. This game was televised on ESPNU. That same evening, there was one NCAA football game (Pitt-WVU) and two NBA games. ESPN's 2am ET SportsCenter (the "main" one, the one that runs at 11pm West Coast and is replayed until 11am ET) did not cover the game. The only mention of it was a brief tag by an anchor at the end congratulating Frank Solich on capturing the East. The entire show was taken up by OSU-UM previews. That game, of course, was important, but it's not like ESPN didn't have video of the game. THEY BROADCAST IT. Non-BCS schools just don't get the attention, and thus, if humans are evaluating merit for inclusion into a playoff, inoculation and cultivation theory both point toward the teams with greater media exposure getting the nod.

You all are failing to recognize the core flaw in all this. Either Division I-A is one division, or it's not. Every university that belongs to DI-A pays the same dues to the NCAA. They all vote equally on TV contracts, et cetera. If you are going to exclude teams based entirely on their conference affiliation, you are instituting a de facto division separation. If this is what you want, fine. Let's make I-A, I-AA, and I-AAA. Realize, though, that means we'll rarely if ever have any undefeated teams, since I-A OOC schedules will have to consist of, well, "good" teams. If this is going to be fiated then so be it. The umbrella point, however, is that you have a system that is the only competitive sport on the face of the earth in which you tell teams before they've even played a game that they cannot be a champion -- a champion of the division to which they pay equal dues as the "big" teams. Remember how we felt after we won nine games and didn't go to a bowl? That's how non-BCS teams feel BEFORE THE SEASON STARTS. I find it ludicrous that you argue Michigan deserves a chance at the title when they've already lost to OSU. OSU should have to beat them twice, while Michigan only has to beat this once? (mind you, I am not defending OSU, having hatred in my heart for them and no one else.) That is the key. There is no argument to be made that can justify a system in which teams compete for one trophy, a trophy they all have equal membership to, yet a trophy which by design only half the teams of said membership have actual access to. Teams are only allowed to use one I-AA win a season toward eligibility. Yet the current system creates an underclass that is, in effect, that second level. Why should Florida be able to use a win over UCF? UCF started the season without access to the championship. Why should Michigan have access? They barely beat Ball State, a team that began the season without access to the championship. It goes all the way down the line. If you're going to have a de facto underclass, then implement it so non-"BCS" teams have that access. Oh, and do not commit the fallacy of buying into human rankings as warrant to team supremacy. The nature of the ranking system is broken and meaningless, as rankings are based entirely upon preseason rankings, which have ZERO merit as they are not based upon anything but SPECULATION. That's the problem with using human rankings in the BCS formula. Only in Division I-A football do we determine the postseason based upon what DOESN'T happen on the field, but rather the preseason conjecture of a handful of experts and a whole lot of amateurs (go ahead and take a look at your list of AP voters for a moment) -- not to mention the coaches' poll which has been consistently recognized as being flawed insofar as coaches admitting en masse that they rarely fill out the ballot, leaving that task to graduate students. Certainly, that problem could be alleviated by not holding polling until week 3, but a better solution would be a computer formula that actually evaluates teams based on components that attest to their ability. The current computer rankings are highly inaccurate -- just ask Jeff Sagarin, whose name appears on the list of contributory rankings even though his "formula" used in the BCS has nothing whatsoever to do with Jeff Sagarin. It's the Elo formula, and it's been around longer than Jeff Sagarin has been alive. Sagarin's contribution to the field is the point predictor, which is highly accurate at predicting results of future games. The NCAA does not use this formula, of course, as it implements margin of victory aspects. Feel free to make your bowl picks this year according to the Predictor. You'll find yourself office champion. "But that would result in teams running up the score, Bobcat99!" you say. And that's why you need a playoff consisting of conference champions only. Wins and losses. No human interaction needed at all (save for the unlikely incident of three non-BCS teams going undefeated).

So you are saying, then, that the playoff system in I-AA, II, and III is too many games? Again, I point you toward the fact that Michigan is in the BCS, and under your system, would be in the 8-team playoff, despite the fact they LOST already, and if OSU wanted to win the championship, they'd have to beat Michigan TWICE. How, exactly, does that make the regular season meaningful? Wow. The committee system has consistently proven to be a failure and slanted toward major-conference teams. In football, this would be even worse. You really think they'd let Boise State in over Florida or Arkansas or LSU or even Notre Dame (considering how often the NCAA bends over for ND)... The biggest problem is everyone's willing assumption that the 6 BCS conferences are somehow superior to the other ones. National champions have and will come from non-BCS conferences. It was only 20 years ago that the national champion was from the WAC. Of course, every year that goes by in which a Big 10 bottom-dweller like Northwestern earns more money in bowl revenue than the MAC Champion (CMU will struggle to break even, while Northwestern will reap $750,000 in cash for simply being terrible) this gap will widen and the likelihood will fade. Evaluated for merit? THEY WENT UNDEFEATED! What more do you want? The NCAA basketball tournament looks at Out-Of-Conference games for their main evaluation of at-larges. So let's take a look at OOC games for Boise State and currently-whining-about-being-left-out-of-the-game Florida: Boise State Sacramento State (crappy I-AA team) Oregon State (beat USC, possibly bowl bound) @ Wyoming (Mountain West, bowl bound) @ Utah (Mountain West, bowl bound) Florida Western Carolina (crappy I-AA team) Southern Miss (bowl bound) UCF (4-8 CUSA team) @ Florida State (6-6, laughable) Okay, let's take it a step further: 8 teams. All must be conference champions. However, throw out this "BCS conference" ********. Take the TOP EIGHT CONFERENCE CHAMPIONS. Sure, human bias will mean the "BCS Conference" champions get in most of the time, but as far as I'm concerned, IF YOU DON'T WIN YOUR CONFERENCE, YOU DON'T DESERVE TO WIN THE NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP. This isn't basketball. I would be fine with that (assuming Nebraska beats Oklahoma and Arkansas beats Florida) except replace Michigan with BYU, the next best conference champion. Again, Michigan has no business competing for the national championship. THEY ALREADY LOST TO OHIO STATE. Once you lose, you have no case. For anything. Quit whining. If you wanted to be national champion, perhaps you shouldn't have lost to anyone.

The fact that Michigan very nearly found itself in the national championship game immediately after losing to Ohio State is proof that the regular season is not as important as anti-playoff advocates would have you think. They play 16 team playoffs at all other levels of college football. I fail to see why that cannot be done for I-A. Any other solution fails to address the major issue with the bowl system, which is NOT that teams like Florida, et al get left out. They chose to be left out by LOSING. The major failure with the system is that UNDEFEATED TEAMS get left out. Boise State and Ohio State are the only two undefeated teams in the country. In any other sports division, conference, or league on EARTH those two teams would be facing each other for the championship. Alas, Boise State is denied a chance -- despite the fact they pay the same NCAA membership dues as Ohio State. The idea that BCS Conference teams are somehow more deserving, simply because they have more money (owing mainly to them earning more BCS bowl money, which is simply a matter of widening the wage gap), is ludicrous. If you're going to exclude non-BCS teams, then completely exclude them and create a new division. But don't use non-BCS teams to bolster your record (*cough* Florida), claim they're legitimate wins, but then deny the Boise States (or Utahs, or Miamis, or any other non-BCS undefeated teams from the past three/four years) access to the money that keeps the rich schools rich. Hence, a 16 team playoff that includes all 11 conference champions and 5 at-large teams. The "it keeps students out of school too long" argument is, of course, laughable, as it someone alleges I-A football players are somehow more studious than those at I-AA, II, or III who play 16-team playoffs yearly. I realize that we are BCS now and have no reason to acknowledge the existence of non-BCS teams. Yet it was not all that long ago we WEREN'T BCS.

I'm pretty sure the BOYS have been called BOYS on this board at one point or another. Lighten up. It's posts like this that really reflect badly on our university. Seriously, if you don't know why it's inappropriate to refer to adult female athletes as "girls," I suggest you go find out.

I don't like the new ones either. I *loved* last year's, as did some of the male basketball players who felt the women had nicer jerseys than they did. This year's is, I dunno, lame.

If you haven't heard of Tennessee-Martin, you're not paying very close attention. The Skyhawks are in the I-AA playoffs and have gone 9-1 after losing their opening game to the Ohio Bobcats. They are ranked ahead of I-A teams Memphis, Utah State, Duke, Temple, and FIU in the computer rankings the BCS uses. Hofstra is 2-9 this year and Georgia Southern is 3-8.

They do indeed rotate the seats. Half of the lower deck is on motorized platforms that slide over. It's kind of a neat thing to watch in person... I saw it when I was a kid, when the then-SkyDome first opened.

Dude, that was so funny. I almost felt bad for the guy. Almost... I kept yelling "Rik Smits!!!" at him. My evaluation of this team so far: 1. Enormous improvement in fundamentals over the last two years (the only two years I've seen this team in person). A lot less streetball, a lot more running the offense. The backdoor play and pick & rolls were working amazingly well tonight. 2. Aris Williams looked a bit lost at times but will catch up to the tempo eventually. He was in the right place at the right time quite a few plays. 3. Our defense is not as good as FIU's shooting is bad. Wow, are they bad shooters... horrible. 4. I really thought a fight might break out. Kudos to the refs for recognizing when things were heating up and taking care of things. 5. Horrible attendance. I showed up at 8:00 and easily found a seat three rows back, center court. 6. This team is so much better and easier to watch than it's ever been since I've been here. I'm really, really, really looking forward to this season. Once KG becomes eligible it's going to be even better. That guy will be a monster.

I'm guessing that pain from stun guns still linger for many USF students, too. By the way, did anyone see that set of clips from the 1950 Snow Bowl game between OSU and Michigan? They've been showing the greatest games in the series on ESPN2 all morning. I particularly like how the fans rushed the field and tore down the goalposts. In 1950. But "it's not a tradition."

19-13. They've been in the top four teams in the MAC the past two years, and Witherspoon's contract was extended through the next decade. Buffalo will be good this year, too, and the fact that Idbihi was shut down so much tonight is a great sign for our ability to defend the better players of the Big East.

Who said anything about BGSU? USF beats Louisville, gets beatdown when rushing the field. Buttgers beats Louisville, gets massive media attention when rushing the field. If you still believe cops were in the right for tasering students, I'm guessing you're the type of person who was awfully disappointed Wednesday morning.

She went to South Carolina, actually.

The stupidity contained in this short statement is utterly astounding. Did you learn ANYTHING at USF?

Miami actually travels very well -- they just don't have the best home attendance. There's a few reasons for this, mainly that as a private school, Miami's alums are generally more widely spread geographically to the degree that it's not easy for them to make weekly trips back to Coral Gables but the annual bowl game is a natch. This is what I feel really burdens us. We do not have a long history of alumni supporting the football team as we do not have a long history of football, period. It's not a matter of success or failure, it's a matter of the potential supporters not identifying their USF affiliation as being one that involves football. The second problem is the nature of USF, insofar as we are a very regional university, and one that, frankly, seems to suffer from a bit of a pride problem. What do I mean by that? For many students/alumni, from my observation of having worked here for three years now, consider their USF education to be but a tool toward advancing a career. (This is the case with most commuter schools, and it's nearly impossible to overcome; you simply can't indoctrinate people to worship at the altar of alma mater when they're only on campus for classes). This is why you get a lot of the FSU or Gator apparel on campus. This will, of course, get better as the years advance and more students who grew up attending USF football games graduate. However, it's not going to change the fact that most of our alumni stay in the vicinity, and this will hamper our bowl crowds for a while. The solution, of course, is to change admissions practices and admit fewer local students and more from other states/regions, but that's the exact opposite of what's happening, and perhaps it is rather insane to demand admissions changes in order to increase attendance at mythical future football bowl games.

I talked to KG an hour ago, and he said the scrimmage went great and everyone feels healthy and ready for the season. I'm excited for the Las Vegas trip when he'll finally be eligible to play.

CFN is predicting Ohio vs USF in the International Bowl. Get your passports ready. I am not prepared to make bowl predictions about either of my alma maters, especially with alma mater #3 looking to play spoiler to #1 in Ypsilanti next week. However, it would be pretty freakin' awesome to have Ohio playing USF. I'll cheer for whichever school has the most girls show up at my party.

No one would ever insure that game. I love the Ice Bulls, but they would get truly demolished by an NCAA team. Hell, they'd get demolished by an ACHA Division I team. The gap in talent between ACHA Divisions I and III is pretty enormous. Let's look at it this way. Division II teams generally beat Division III teams by 4-5 goals. Division I teams beat Division II teams by about 5-6 goals. NCAA teams beat ACHA Division I teams by 7-10 goals. You can go back and do the math :-)

The service academies have a significant problem in hockey, and probably always will. Canadians (which make up more than half the players on many college hockey teams) are not exactly motivated to spend four years serving in the U.S. military. This was actually not that big a problem until about five years ago. The U.S. had recruiting offices in major Canadian cities, and Canadians made up the largest foreign contingent of the U.S. military for decades. The tide has turned considerably, alas, and I believe the U.S. has pulled all its recruiting offices out of Canada owing to low performance. It's also very, very hard to get accepted at the service academies as an international student, because you have to be sponsored by a member of the U.S. Congress -- usually your representative. International students don't have that kind of support. I don't know the numbers for the USAFA or West Point, but I know that the incoming class of 2009 at the Naval Academy had a total of 11 international students, all of them from very small, faraway countries.

I feel bad for UConn. Rutgers might break some kind of rushing record against them.

Um, WVU was forced to play Marshall by the WV government. It's not their fault that this year, Marshall is worse than they've been in the past ten. There's many years that Marshall would have killed WVU (and this is why they've always avoided scheduling them).

Oh my gosh..memories of Montgomery Inn Ribs and homemade potatoe chips just rushed through my mind!! Haha, yeah, I went nuts when I found out Montgomery Inn was catering the Bobcat Bash before the Ohio-Kentucky basketball game last December (played in Cincinnati). I ended up negotiating deals to get a bunch of the leftovers for cheap and spent the rest of the night drinking to extreme excess and eating barbecuey potato chips. FAN-FREAKING-TASTIC! Dammit I miss Cincinnati... though I get to be there in three weeks for my best friend's wedding :-)

Don't like it? Let Time Warner know. Everyone else on the face of earth gets the U.

At least they weren't at Banana Joe's having lesbian sex. Wait, what?