Ohio State and USC have really big ba11s
- 11-10-2006, 10:22 AM
Ohio State and USC have really big ba11s
Ohio State and USC will meet for a 2 year series on the 2nd Week of the season starting 2008.
In LA, 2008
Hats off to both teams, especially Ohio State, who has no fear of playing Texas or USC -- two programs that will be really strong for the rest of the decade.
- 11-10-2006, 03:12 PM
Originally Posted by CEDeoudes59
11-10-2006, 03:16 PM
11-10-2006, 03:37 PM
11-10-2006, 04:17 PM
11-10-2006, 05:16 PM
by sucks, you mean they haven't won a national championship in awhile rightOriginally Posted by Kris4153
11-10-2006, 06:16 PM
Doing home and homes with Miami (2010, '11), Cal ('12, '13), Virginia Tech ('14, '15), and Oklahoma ('16, '17) as well.
11-10-2006, 06:49 PM
Binge - isn't the game at the OB in '09???
I totally respect the Bucks for the scheduling. Awesome job. That's what I like to see.
Now - let's get a Miami-SC matchup going...
11-10-2006, 08:36 PM
I think it'll be a long while, RD.
I HOPE we have some sort of a playoff system - but I don't think it'll happen.
I'm skeptical (at best).
11-10-2006, 10:42 PM
I KNOW we will never have a playoff system, Bowl games make too much money. Also even a playoff system would be flawed, look how many 1 loss teams there are, someone is always going to get left out...
11-11-2006, 01:25 AM
True, but you can't make everyone happy all the time. I would propose having the winner of the PAC-10, SEC, Big 10, Big 12, ACC, WAC, Big East, MAC, and 2 at large teams so the independents don't cry about it. Have these teams ranked 1-10.Originally Posted by gators52
Week 1: #10 vs #9 & #8 vs #7
Week 2: #10-#9 winner vs #1. #8-7 winner vs #2. #6 vs. #3, #5 vs #4
Week 3: Final Four
Week 4: National Championship game
11-11-2006, 01:28 AM
I think if you somehow did manage to make a playoff system happen, the top couple teams that get left out and their fans are gonna complain every year. That being said, it's still a better system than the current
11-11-2006, 02:06 AM
I believe a playoff system could make money as well, but most of the other 'bowl games' would have to exist to make it worthwhile. maybe an 'NIT' type of 2nd tournament
11-11-2006, 03:50 AM
not a bad idea. i actually like the BCS system to be honest. every and any game could be the difference. you usually only get one chance so theres no room for screw ups. the nations best teams find ways to win and every game matters.Originally Posted by CEDeoudes59
11-11-2006, 11:33 AM
I kinda agree, I might be saying otherwise if my UF wins out and doesn't make the NC game. The only time I think the BSC is screwed up is when you have ranks #1-#3 of all undefeated teams and one gets left out. I also dont really mind teams on boise st and mid major conference teams who go undefeated being left out of the NC game. I dont mind seeing one loss teams getting left out b/c if they would of just won their games they would most likely be in the NC game. I personally like watching the bowl games, allthough I really wish the bowl games were more conference oriented like it was "back in the day". Where the Rose Bowl was always Big 10 leader vs Pac 10 leader and so on. I think the BCS should of made one natl title game with a new bowl name, and kept the other bowl games the same.Originally Posted by WannaBeHulk
11-11-2006, 12:58 PM
The problem is that the BCS is more often than not gotten it wrong the last 6-7 years.
A few glaring years were 2003 (SC in the Rose instead of Sugar) and 2000 (Miami in the Sugar instead of playing OU in the Orange, when we beat FSU).
I'm not sure I fault the system in 2004 - OU and Auburn were both undefeated.
And they got it right in 2002 and 2005 (only because there were only 2 top teams - it obviously won't work well when you have 3 or 4 teams that are good enough to play for the title).
I'm predicting mass chaos this year. There will be a few teams that will be utterly pissed at not making the Fiesta, IMO.
11-11-2006, 01:10 PM
True, but you can never make everyone happy no matter what. In basketball, you always have teams complaining because they don't get in the tourney and they allow 65 teams in the tourney for Christ's sake ! I think my proposition would be fair because it makes the lower ranked teams play an extra game and I would also add DEO's idea of adding a NIT equivalent with bowl games between the other teams. That way almost everyone is happy and the champion can truly say they earned it.Originally Posted by warnerve
11-11-2006, 01:30 PM
11-11-2006, 05:49 PM
11-11-2006, 11:47 PM
how does the bcs system offer more drama than what a playoff system would? With the current system, there's always atleast 3 or 4 really good teams that are legitimate title contenders but end up getting screwed over by some computers and coaches with an agenda. College football is the only sport that we rail against the underdog. Who says that Rutgers(as long as they run out) doesn't deserve the shot at the title. They never will though because no one will ever give them the opportunity because they have always been a bad program. Thursday night was such a great story. Wouldn't be nice if a team like Rutgers or Boise St. got a shot to play against the big boys? Who knows, maybe they'd pull off an upset or two. Look at George Mason in the final four last year.
11-12-2006, 12:00 AM
I don't think it's truly because RU has a terrible (forget bad) history.
It's really because they started out unranked (see Auburn in 2004).
That's just how the polls work. (Which pisses me off many times - but I'm just tryin' to 'splain ya.)
11-12-2006, 12:01 AM
11-12-2006, 03:18 AM
in defense of the current system, teams select their own out of conference schedule. People will feel sorry for Boise and Rutgers but forget that their out of conference games are not assigned.
Similar Forum Threads
- By lennoxchi in forum General ChatReplies: 19Last Post: 08-02-2009, 01:48 AM
- By hethcliff in forum AnabolicsReplies: 8Last Post: 10-11-2004, 03:37 AM
- By Tatt2d in forum AnabolicsReplies: 6Last Post: 12-08-2003, 11:28 AM
- By windwords7 in forum AnabolicsReplies: 92Last Post: 06-23-2003, 10:12 AM
- By YellowJacket in forum AnabolicsReplies: 0Last Post: 02-15-2003, 12:21 AM