If Boise wins...

[MikeG]

Wisconsin is better than USC?

seriously?

as much as a tournament would be nice, this isn't basketball and the logistics are completely different. The season itself serves as a tournament of sorts--- maybe not always a fair one but unless you want to blow off the bowl money, it's the best system we have and it's not going to change. Best you can hope for is a a four game playoff of sorts-- but the championship game will not feel like college football in the traditional sense. Think about how much it costs to go to a bowl game-- arranging travel etc -- can you expect a fanbase to do that TWICE? Or to scramble to have reservations ready with a weeks notice?

[Bull Dozer]

According to the NCAA they have the 50th ranked SOS.  

Other "contenders"

UF 1st

UL 22nd

OSU 26th

I mean seriously its a great feel good story but to say they are a contender and have a serious beef for a NC doesnt make sense.  

ok, and they "only" scheduled oregon state, so it's half their fault.  i'm just saying they deserve a shot with a playoff.  they did win every game they played.  utah did the same.  a playoff also eliminates the chance of a split title, which happened just a few years ago.  wisconsin didnt play a hard schedule either but they beat arkansas...so...whatever.  wisconsin only lost 1 game, they are better than usc and i think it would be exciting to see them get a shot too, but oh well.

boise beat oregon state, oregon state beat usc and was 3rd in the pac-10.  they got punished for the conference schedule all year and had they lost JUST ONE game they would not have been close to a BCS game.  and yet they beat oklahoma and proved they are at least as good as them because they dominated until late.  and even when they gave the game away they took it back.  why don't undefeated non-BCS teams deserve a chance?  so what they probably arent quite as good.  clearly they are good enough to compete with the best.  march madness proves the tournament system is awesome.

i think the playoff gives undefeated teams a chance, eliminates a playoff, and eliminates the luck and human voting determining who gets to play for the title (even though they'd still determine the 8 to go to the playoff, which is better).  

all i am saying, is give boise a chance.

Your preaching to the choir im a huge proponant of a playoff but since its not the system in place all you can do is work with what you have and demand change.  Does BSU's win strengthen the arguement for a playoff yes, but to say they are just as deserving of a national championship with the system that we have in place is ludacris.  Who knows maybe the gov't will step in and get us a playoff but until then theres too much money lining too many peoples pockets to get rid of the current system for the powers that be.  

[Bull Dozer]

Wisconsin is better than USC?

seriously?

as much as a tournament would be nice, this isn't basketball and the logistics are completely different. The season itself serves as a tournament of sorts--- maybe not always a fair one but unless you want to blow off the bowl money, it's the best system we have and it's not going to change. Best you can hope for is a a four game playoff of sorts-- but the championship game will not feel like college football in the traditional sense. Think about how much it costs to go to a bowl game-- arranging travel etc -- can you expect a fanbase to do that TWICE? Or to scramble to have reservations ready with a weeks notice?

exactly we all have to face it that NCAA football isnt as pure as we like to think it is.  just like everything else in this country its about $$$$ pure and simple.  

[windbane]

Wisconsin is better than USC?

seriously?

as much as a tournament would be nice, this isn't basketball and the logistics are completely different. The season itself serves as a tournament of sorts--- maybe not always a fair one but unless you want to blow off the bowl money, it's the best system we have and it's not going to change. Best you can hope for is a a four game playoff of sorts-- but the championship game will not feel like college football in the traditional sense. Think about how much it costs to go to a bowl game-- arranging travel etc -- can you expect a fanbase to do that TWICE? Or to scramble to have reservations ready with a weeks notice?

uh...yes...wisconsin lost 1 game, usc lost 2.  that's simple math.  i have no doubt wisconsin is capable of beating oregon state and UCLA, the 2 teams UCS lost to.  but whatever.  michigan beat wisconsin and lost to usc, so obviously i'm wrong.  oh wait, that doesn't work either.

[Bull Dozer]

Wisconsin is better than USC?

seriously?

as much as a tournament would be nice, this isn't basketball and the logistics are completely different. The season itself serves as a tournament of sorts--- maybe not always a fair one but unless you want to blow off the bowl money, it's the best system we have and it's not going to change. Best you can hope for is a a four game playoff of sorts-- but the championship game will not feel like college football in the traditional sense. Think about how much it costs to go to a bowl game-- arranging travel etc -- can you expect a fanbase to do that TWICE? Or to scramble to have reservations ready with a weeks notice?

uh...yes...wisconsin lost 1 game, usc lost 2.  that's simple math.  i have no doubt wisconsin is capable of beating oregon state and UCLA, the 2 teams UCS lost to.  but whatever.  michigan beat wisconsin and lost to usc, so obviously i'm wrong.  oh wait, that doesn't work either.

Uh UM didnt just lose they got their faces kicked in.  If you watched the whole game you know that UM's last TD was a gift.  Yes record wise UW is better than USC but on a football field i would expect USC to beat them by ATLEAST 2 scores.  For reference look at what USC did to Ark who UW beat today.  

[windbane]

According to the NCAA they have the 50th ranked SOS.  

Other "contenders"

UF 1st

UL 22nd

OSU 26th

I mean seriously its a great feel good story but to say they are a contender and have a serious beef for a NC doesnt make sense.  

ok, and they "only" scheduled oregon state, so it's half their fault.  i'm just saying they deserve a shot with a playoff.  they did win every game they played.  utah did the same.  a playoff also eliminates the chance of a split title, which happened just a few years ago.  wisconsin didnt play a hard schedule either but they beat arkansas...so...whatever.  wisconsin only lost 1 game, they are better than usc and i think it would be exciting to see them get a shot too, but oh well.

boise beat oregon state, oregon state beat usc and was 3rd in the pac-10.  they got punished for the conference schedule all year and had they lost JUST ONE game they would not have been close to a BCS game.  and yet they beat oklahoma and proved they are at least as good as them because they dominated until late.  and even when they gave the game away they took it back.  why don't undefeated non-BCS teams deserve a chance?  so what they probably arent quite as good.  clearly they are good enough to compete with the best.  march madness proves the tournament system is awesome.

i think the playoff gives undefeated teams a chance, eliminates a playoff, and eliminates the luck and human voting determining who gets to play for the title (even though they'd still determine the 8 to go to the playoff, which is better).  

all i am saying, is give boise a chance.

Your preaching to the choir im a huge proponant of a playoff but since its not the system in place all you can do is work with what you have and demand change.  Does BSU's win strengthen the arguement for a playoff yes, but to say they are just as deserving of a national championship with the system that we have in place is ludacris.  Who knows maybe the gov't will step in and get us a playoff but until then theres too much money lining too many peoples pockets to get rid of the current system for the powers that be.  

I've never said they deserved the national title.  i suppose saying that they deserve a chance to win it in the playoff is saying the same thing.  that's saying that every team that would have made the playoff deserves it.

look, in college basketball it doesn't matter nearly as much who you played.  teams get seeded based on many factors and if you didn't play quite the competition as other teams they try to judge how well you played.  there are people assigned to watch every single team.  saint joseph got that #1 seed a few years back by going undefeated (or did they lose 1 game, i forget) despite not playing a bunch of top 25 teams.  they ended up going far in the tourney and lost to the #2 seed, oklahoma state, so obviously they deserved that chance as the #1 seed.  i believe it was a close game.

anyway, i believe we agree that there should be a playoff, so the semantics of everything else we're saying doesn't matter, heh.

[MikeG]

to be fair--- when USC played Arky, the freshmen who made such a big impact weren't as big a factor.

You can argue it a lot fo ways if you care to-- which is where I leave this thread entirely

[Bull Dozer]

to be fair--- when USC played Arky, the freshmen who made such a big impact weren't as big a factor.

You can argue it a lot fo ways if you care to-- which is where I leave this thread entirely

Which freshman if you dont mind me asking?

(because if its Mustain he hasnt been a for sure #1 starter for a while)

[windbane]

Wisconsin is better than USC?

seriously?

as much as a tournament would be nice, this isn't basketball and the logistics are completely different. The season itself serves as a tournament of sorts--- maybe not always a fair one but unless you want to blow off the bowl money, it's the best system we have and it's not going to change. Best you can hope for is a a four game playoff of sorts-- but the championship game will not feel like college football in the traditional sense. Think about how much it costs to go to a bowl game-- arranging travel etc -- can you expect a fanbase to do that TWICE? Or to scramble to have reservations ready with a weeks notice?

uh...yes...wisconsin lost 1 game, usc lost 2.  that's simple math.  i have no doubt wisconsin is capable of beating oregon state and UCLA, the 2 teams UCS lost to.  but whatever.  michigan beat wisconsin and lost to usc, so obviously i'm wrong.  oh wait, that doesn't work either.

Uh UM didnt just lose they got their faces kicked in.  If you watched the whole game you know that UM's last TD was a gift.  Yes record wise UW is better than USC but on a football field i would expect USC to beat them by ATLEAST 2 scores.  For reference look at what USC did to Ark who UW beat today.  

i honestly don't care what you expect would happen.  no one expected boise state to win.  i thought they'd play a decent game but i can't say i "expected" them to win.  i'm glad they did.  arkansas played USC early in the season.  if USF played WVU early in the season we would have been blown out, so let's not compare that.  it was 3-3 at halftime, i wouldnt say USC dominated against UM.  

that's the UM that people argued should be in the title game, too.  over USC and UF.  guess the experts just don't get it right all the time, even you.

i could never expect a team that lost to ucla to do that well.  they obviously did today, but they lost to ucla a game that would have put them in the title game.  fsu beat ucla.  any other games we should compare?

let's just let wisconsin, usc, boise, ul/wake, and osu/uf play it out in a playoff!  *sigh*

[Bull Dozer]

Wisconsin is better than USC?

seriously?

as much as a tournament would be nice, this isn't basketball and the logistics are completely different. The season itself serves as a tournament of sorts--- maybe not always a fair one but unless you want to blow off the bowl money, it's the best system we have and it's not going to change. Best you can hope for is a a four game playoff of sorts-- but the championship game will not feel like college football in the traditional sense. Think about how much it costs to go to a bowl game-- arranging travel etc -- can you expect a fanbase to do that TWICE? Or to scramble to have reservations ready with a weeks notice?

uh...yes...wisconsin lost 1 game, usc lost 2.  that's simple math.  i have no doubt wisconsin is capable of beating oregon state and UCLA, the 2 teams UCS lost to.  but whatever.  michigan beat wisconsin and lost to usc, so obviously i'm wrong.  oh wait, that doesn't work either.

Uh UM didnt just lose they got their faces kicked in.  If you watched the whole game you know that UM's last TD was a gift.  Yes record wise UW is better than USC but on a football field i would expect USC to beat them by ATLEAST 2 scores.  For reference look at what USC did to Ark who UW beat today.  

i honestly don't care what you expect would happen.  no one expected boise state to win.  i thought they'd play a decent game but i can't say i "expected" them to win.  i'm glad they did.  arkansas played USC early in the season.  if USF played WVU early in the season we would have been blown out, so let's not compare that.  it was 3-3 at halftime, i wouldnt say USC dominated against UM.  

that's the UM that people argued should be in the title game, too.  over USC and UF.  guess the experts just don't get it right all the time, even you.

i could never expect a team that lost to ucla to do that well.  they obviously did today, but they lost to ucla a game that would have put them in the title game.  fsu beat ucla.  any other games we should compare?

let's just let wisconsin, usc, boise, ul/wake, and osu/uf play it out in a playoff!  *sigh*

We can dream (about the playoff), but its a shame thats all we can do is dream.... >