SCMountaineer

Would the layman's term for that be butthead? I dunno, just asking.

Cee, it seems you listen to the pundits about the Big East but ignore them about USF. What gives?

I dunno SCB. Everybody else figured it out and......there are only 8 teams in the poll.

Okay, how about gigolo? That would eliminate the negative "man-whore" connotations.

Well, if true, it will be interesting to watch how the voting changes in the Coaches Poll.

And it isn't just BC smazza.  There's other shenanigans going on in the ACC.  I posted this on another board under the title "ACC - Christmas With The Cranks"  ;D ALL IS NOT:  in the ACC. It seems that the ACC can become quite a bit fractured when they have to compete with each other for bowl slots.   BC is the most screwed.  Before Bowl selections, BC AD (hey, that's kinda biblical) DeFilippo said: To me, that sounds like he already had a sense that he was going to get screwed and he was trying to send Greensboro a message.  Anyway, after Bowl selections.... This from a Bowl analysis by John Markon of the Richmond Times-Dispatch: I included the Virginia notes because of this article from the Roanoke Times: One thing I disagree with....BC wouldn't have been in the Gator Bowl if they were in the Big East because they DON'T TRAVEL!  They never would bump a Louisville or WVU.  Finally, why wouldn't the conference AD's reflect the culture of their conference masters?  This kind of backdoor wheeling and dealing and stabbing each other in the back is elementary "John Swofford 101!"   Apparently, DeFilippo hasn't met the prerequisites for this course yet.  BC will get screwed every year unless they land the BCS bid.  When the backroom conversations between the ACC and BC began, I'm sure Swofford said "sure, we'll have plenty of bowl tie-ins to go around."  Nothing wrong with that right.  It's true.  However, what I'm sure he didn't tell BC that none of the bowls wanted them.   Oh, those wacky ACC Cranks.

Sorry, that's news to me. Actually, in spite of Brad Edwards, I'm still not buying it. All I see on http://www.bcsfootball.org/index2.cfm?page=structure is what your wrote. That they are "automatically qualified for a BCS game". I don't see where they're guaranteed a game. The only change I see is the second qualification involving BCS league champions. Not trying to be argumentative. I just see what I see. I admit the possibility I am wrong and it wouldn't be the first time. ;D

True but it is still an at-large bid, not to be confused with an auto-bid. Also, it only qualifies them for selection but doesn't guarantee a selection. The conference champion of a BCS conference still has that guarantee. The bottom line is that the bowls run the show and it is highly questionable that TCU would've gotten a BCS bowl the way things played out this year. If you leave out Oregon, how do you include a TCU? In any case, if this scenario played out, it wouldn't bode well for the BCS.

Pitt.  Think Ohio..... Coincidence? I think not....

Bingo!

I don't think that is true. I think a non-BCS team still has to be ranked 12th or higher in the BCS standings before they would get an at-large bid. But, no automatic bid. Only after the conferences have been evaluated in 2007 will it be determined whether there will be 5, 6, or 7 autobids. I think there will still be 6 but after the MWC's performance, I'm not sure there will a 7th. All in the MWC but TCU finished with at least 5 losses. As for UCF being a rival. It would be a natural rival but won't happen until UCF gets competitive in the game. I think your biggest rival is going to emerge within the conference.

USF is the surprise team of the year, hands down. I mean, some of the chatter on the boards prior to the season was pretty unfavorable towards the USF program. The Bulls shut that spigot off completely after the Louisville game. I'm here to tell you that that game earned you a lot of respect from Big East fans everywhere. There were expectations about Rutgers from the pundits so I would classify them as a mild surprise. For this poll, I picked WVU. We were picked 3rd and in a couple of instances, 4th.

Real simple guys. You don't pick and choose rivalries. They just emerge. We've played Syracuse for some 33 straight years and, no rivalry. In fact, I don't even think they've had a rival since Penn State went into the Big Televen. So, they may be accepting applications. ;D We've played Pitt 98 times but that is a proximity rivalry born out of a time when there was virtually no rapid transportation infrastructure. Your rivalries will emerge from the field of battle. It's gonna take some time but it will become apparent. Just be patient. You guys are moving so fast. ;D

Sorry, I wanted him to come out of the shadows yesterday but he's a bit shy.  Here ya go:  Thanks, glad to be here.  This is a pretty entertaining board.  Thanks for all the kind words and support from the Bulls community and, you can be certain, the WVU community is behind the bulls versus NCState. If there's one thing I learned from this season, it is that it was not a mistake to bring USF into the BE.  That is, until that day when USF get its first victory over WVU.  Then I might reconsider my thinking.  As for next year?  In Morgantown?  I've been to Tampa/St. Pete/Sarasota.  This would have to be my favorite area because of the way little old ladies, who can only see over the steering wheel because of the medical doughnut inflatables they are sitting on, barrel out of parking lots because they can't really see if any traffic is coming anyway.   I've been to Orlando.  I've been to Miami.  I've been to Key West.  I've been to Jacksonville (have you been trying to give Jax to Georgia?).  I've been to Gainesville.  I've been to Pensacola.  I've been to many points in between.  So, I think I've seen enough to make comparisons. ÂÂ

Where do you get this stuff? WVU went into the USF game with a lot of respect for USF and you all gave a pretty good accounting of yourself. I don't think WVU fans underestimate USF at all. Cincy? Well, that's another story...

Hats off to USF.  You really had a much better year than anybody predicted (save maybe some bull fans).  There's always the woulda, coulda, shoulda's but you really shocked the nation when you rolled up Louisville like a cheap-imitation Persian rug.  On the board I frequent and, prior to the beginning of the season, there were a lot of WTF's about USF's invitation and acceptance into the Big East.  I wasn't one of them.  I just didn't know enough about USF to form an opinion yet.  However, I must say I've been impressed.  As I read your board, I see that some of you aren't completely satisfied and I understand that.  But, there definitely should exist much optimism.  I saw nothing that would lead me to believe that USF wouldn't be competitive for titles in this conference year-in and year-out. As for this board?  Well, I see there are the inevitable and gratuitous inbreeding and hillbilly jokes. Honestly? I've covered a lot of ground between Tallahassee, Appalachicola and points westward.  I don't see a whole lot of difference.  Aside from that, great board.  Knowledgeable and cerebral posters.  Anyway, congrats on a successful first campaign in the Big East!  I think having USF will be good for the conference.  I'll see some of you in Charlotte.  I'll be the one wearing the Bulls t-shirt and Mountaineer ball cap.  ;D  Good luck against State.  Let me warn you up front that there's gonna be a sea of red.

Yeah, I noticed it here just before I revived my posting on this board.  No offense taken although it do leave a lot to the imagination.  ;D Oh yeah....thanks. ;D I always did like to read this board.

Oh, eh!  We'll give ya' exactly what Pitt got!!  Just step up to the examination table! ÂÂ

Gotcha and, yep, I wanna kick the tires on this site a little more and take her for a test spin. You've got some real entertaining characters on here. I'll check my musket at the door.

That headline is quite the revelation. Think anybody sweated out a deadline for that jewel?

Okay, perhaps I was demonstrating an "outsider's" sensitivity?  First, thanks dabull80 but, I think, smazza nailed both of us whether it was intented or not.  You for listening to what he considers polemical of Bull doctrine and me for being that polemic.  I would have preferred that he challenge my remarks directly, however, rather than employing the dismissive "outsider" technique.  Three questions though.  If I'm a member of this board, am I still considered an outsider simply because I'm a WVU fan?  Do I have to wait for a pod to be placed near where I'm sleeping to achieve full Bullintegration?  Can I not be granted dual-citizenship every day but game day? Anyway, the reply to smazza was not one of my finer moments and, although it was nice of you to say so Bulliever, it is certainly not a post I would characterize as thought-provoking, articulate, interesting, or competent.  Hence, the ol' rolleyes I suspect.  : I also made another mistake...being unfamiliar with the board I was assuming that post count = standing in the community.  Judging by what I've read in various posts and threads here, I can see that it absolutely does not.  Going forward, I'll try to thicken the skin as well as make a conscious effort to ignore smazza altogether.

Well screw you too @sshole. With that, you can pull my membership. If you simply want an inbred bullorgy on this board, then just say so during registration so "outsiders" won't waste their time here.

USF has the edge as far as receiver corp.

You really think so? I beg to differ. The game is STILL important. A loss is not but nobody who competes at this level wants to lose whether, in the grand scheme of things, the game has outside implications or not. This game does have implications with regard to the perception of the Big East as being BCS-worthy. If the Big East isn't BCS-worthy then WVU isn't BCS-worthy. If WVU isn't BCS-worthy, then what team in the BE is? If anything, I think WVU will play more loose than they would have if the BE title had still been on the line.

With our respective passing games, and I use respective loosely, this could be real ugly. ÂÂ