Penn State 10 In Coaches' Poll, Lower In Computers
by Kevin HD on Oct 25, 2009 2:06 PM EDT
in Football
101 comments
Penn State moves up one spot to 10 in the Coaches' Poll, thanks Miami, and will probably hold the same spot in the Harris (Update: Indeed). The irrelevant poll has PSU down at 12.
As for the BCS, the computers will hurt. The Guru predicts:
1. Florida, 2. Alabama, 3. Texas, 4. Iowa, 5. TCU, 6. Boise State, 7. Cincinnati, 8. USC, 9. LSU, 10. Oregon, 11. Georgia Tech, 12. Penn State, 13. Virginia Tech, 14. Oklahoma State, 15. Utah.
I'll update tonight when we go official.
Some quick points:
- Iowa is getting a raw deal from the humans. They sit well behind fellow undefeateds TCU, Boise State and Cinci despite having a win over the #10 team on the road, something those other three teams don't have.
- WTF is with USC at #5 in the Coaches'? Their best win was against Ohio State, a team largely devalued after the Purdue loss, and sit above four undefeateds including Iowa. Not only does Iowa have a much better "best" win, but also, you know, hasn't lost to a team that sits with just three wins and isn't likely to even make a bowl this season. It's criminal what USC gets away with.
- Penn State should stabilize a bit in the computers over the next couple of weeks after a poor showing last week in which they weren't even included in all of them. They look to be 14ish in the rankings that are currently public.
0 recs |
101 comments
| Add comment
|
Email
Print
Comments
USC
But they just have so much more talent than everyone who’s not Texas or an SEC team! Results on the field? Who cares! We all know they’re better, right? [/shameless media moron]
If we needed any more proof that the use of polls to determine a championship is insane, there it is.
by SpartanDan on Oct 25, 2009 2:27 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
All we can hope
is that Oregon puts USC to shame this coming Saturday and puts all of this nonsense to rest.
"In the beginning the Universe was created.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
by IcersGuy on Oct 25, 2009 2:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
^ THIS!
" When you cross that Blue Line, you are mine...Across the Blue Line, it's all football. " " And what you need to do in your life is paint Blue Lines everywhere. " - Joe Paterno 2009
by BlueWhiteLife on Oct 25, 2009 2:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hell, not just Oregon
They’ve still got @Arizona State, Stanford (who is 4-2 in the Pac 10), UCLA, and then #20 Arizona. I haven’t seen many PAC10 games, but they could definitely still drop two games with the remainder of the schedule.
by dawsonPSU10 on Oct 26, 2009 7:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If we go under the assumption
that Washington was their “unlikely” loss of the season, I think it’s down to Oregon and Arizona to knock off USC. ASU and UCLA really aren’t on the same level this season, and Stanford looks decent but just hasn’t put it all together to keep pace with USC.
That last week is likely going to decide the Pac-10 (and Rose Bowl birth) – Oregon-Oregon State and USC-Arizona.
"In the beginning the Universe was created.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
by IcersGuy on Oct 26, 2009 9:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
USC Iowa
seriously…..if your first born childs life were on the line, would you take USC or Iowa straight up ?
"When is the last time you heard a CEO say, "You know, I am REALLY glad we lowered our standards. Its really worked out well for us"."
Colin Cowherd
Eric Watters Atlanta, Ga.
by ech2os on Oct 25, 2009 2:28 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
This season
I’ll take Iowa. USC isn’t as good as they have been – the offense has been back and forth, and the defense showed that it can get shredded by a solid/balanced offense. And Iowa is finding a way to get it done, so until they lose, I’m not betting against them.
Helps that I have no reason to believe that a “first born child” is anywhere on the horizon. :)
"In the beginning the Universe was created.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
by IcersGuy on Oct 25, 2009 2:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
By that rationale
Between us and TCU or Boise, would you wager your soul on us or TCU/Boise?
I think Iowa has a much better case to be above USC, regardless of what you think the outcome might be on the field, because of what’s actually happened on the field.
Luring recruits with my new "Posting HD" scheme since '08.
by 06Lion on Oct 25, 2009 2:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd wager my soul that
Boise State has the worst schedule I’ve ever seen. They really need to be penalized for that crap.
Deus nobiscum, quis contra?
by chocochuck02 on Oct 25, 2009 2:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I'm really getting sick of these mid-majors getting so much hype
I mean props to Utah last year who was legit, but when you play against teams as crappy as they do, you really should think twice before voting them into the top ten. Yeah, I know, blah, blah Boise beat OMG OKLAHOMA in a BCS bowl a few years ago. Big freaking deal. Anyone with a half-way competent defense probably could have beaten Oklahoma. I’m glad they’re making attempts to schedule high profile OOC games, but honestly, their conference schedules are like our OOC schedule except they’d make Curley blush, and they’re still getting hyped up to top 10, top 5 teams. However, they do take a little hit in the BCS standings: TCU #6, Boise #7, but honestly come on:
Boise’s schedule this year:
Oregon
Fake Miami (of Ohio)
Fresno State
Bowling Green
UC Davis (???)
Tulsa (who they barely beat btw)
Hawaii
San Jose State
Louisiana Tech
Idaho
Utah State
Nevada
New Mexico state
by dawsonPSU10 on Oct 26, 2009 7:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Here is the rationale.....
USC is 29-1 outside of the PAC 10 in their last 30 noncon games. That isn’t due to circumstances. Teams like USC and UF have another gear that other teams don’t.
"When is the last time you heard a CEO say, "You know, I am REALLY glad we lowered our standards. Its really worked out well for us"."
Colin Cowherd
Eric Watters Atlanta, Ga.
by ech2os on Oct 25, 2009 2:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
All due respect
You basically just admitted to justifying USC’s ranking this year by what they’ve done in previous seasons, which is why the polls are largely b.s.
Outside the Pac-10 this year, they’ve beaten an OSU team that’s facing an offensive identity crisis, while losing to a horrible in-conference team. Their accomplishments nearly mirror Ohio State’s, and yet they’re #4 while Ohio State is #15-17. At the least, USC should be somewhere around us in the rankings.
Luring recruits with my new "Posting HD" scheme since '08.
by 06Lion on Oct 25, 2009 2:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You are thinking too much......
people vote using instincts. It isn’t all about numbers despite the fantasy football world we live in.
I’ll be happy to take USC vs. Iowa for any amount you would like to wager should they find themselves playing each other in a bowl.
I wasn’t admitting to anything regarding where USC is right now. I just know that in a game like football, its tough for a team like USC to get up week after week for those shitty teams. One game doesn’t define a team win or lose. When its counted, regardless of personell, USC has gotten it done in their marquee games like no other team in the country over the last decade. I have no reason to think this team is any different.
"When is the last time you heard a CEO say, "You know, I am REALLY glad we lowered our standards. Its really worked out well for us"."
Colin Cowherd
Eric Watters Atlanta, Ga.
by ech2os on Oct 25, 2009 3:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
so you are of the mind that the polls should be a power ranking?
then justify the other rankings
I always thought that the polls should be a reflection of the accomplishments up to that point in the season (though they obviously aren’t, especially with pre-season polls and poll inertia)
by The JuggerNitt on Oct 25, 2009 3:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thats fascinating
Depending on if you count bowls or not in that, we’re either 26-4 or 25-5, stretching back to the dark dark ages. Maybe we can be awesome?
Deus nobiscum, quis contra?
by chocochuck02 on Oct 25, 2009 3:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sure.......
unless we are playing USC.
"When is the last time you heard a CEO say, "You know, I am REALLY glad we lowered our standards. Its really worked out well for us"."
Colin Cowherd
Eric Watters Atlanta, Ga.
by ech2os on Oct 25, 2009 3:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yep
Thats why the extra loss, with bowls. USC is by definition the most overrated team of the decade. By lightyears.
Deus nobiscum, quis contra?
by chocochuck02 on Oct 25, 2009 3:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
22-1
since 2003 against ranked teams. PSU – 7-14. Totally overrated.
"When is the last time you heard a CEO say, "You know, I am REALLY glad we lowered our standards. Its really worked out well for us"."
Colin Cowherd
Eric Watters Atlanta, Ga.
by ech2os on Oct 25, 2009 3:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Alright, lets say there's a college team that has more talent than the Detroit Lions, every year.
Because USC does. How many titles do they have? O-V-E-R-R-A-T-E-D. I don’t care how many wins they have, to lose to a shitty team every year shows an ungodly lack of heart.
Deus nobiscum, quis contra?
by chocochuck02 on Oct 25, 2009 3:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I won't go so far as to call them overrated
They’ve easily been one of the top 5 teams in the decade. Not perfect, but no team is [insert Pryor comment here].
The problem lies with the fact that, because of their successes over the past 6-7 years, the media believes that they should always be ranked high. For me, past successes don’t matter beyond the pre-season polls – I want the polls to reflect what the teams have done this season. USC is a good team, but with one loss, they don’t deserve to be ranked ahead of the undefeated teams – they’ve done what you’re supposed to do and win. Also, Oregon has a reason to be ahead of USC as Oregon’s loss is against a better team.
Of course, we’ll know better where both teams (Oregon and USC) deserve to sit after this coming weekend.
"In the beginning the Universe was created.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
by IcersGuy on Oct 25, 2009 4:07 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
USC has been #1 in the nation for 34 of the 85 weeks of football since 2003.
I mean, that should be at least 3 national titles, right?
Deus nobiscum, quis contra?
by chocochuck02 on Oct 25, 2009 4:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Lets ignore the dark years.
PSU is 37-6 against unranked teams since 2005. USC 32-5. Totally overrated.
Deus nobiscum, quis contra?
by chocochuck02 on Oct 25, 2009 3:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why ?
Why ignore the dark years ? Thats assinine.
"When is the last time you heard a CEO say, "You know, I am REALLY glad we lowered our standards. Its really worked out well for us"."
Colin Cowherd
Eric Watters Atlanta, Ga.
by ech2os on Oct 25, 2009 7:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Because even the best payed players at USC only get 4 years.
If you’re trying to make a point about Carroll, we get it. He’s far more interested in LA and Will Farrell than getting his team up for Washington. Or Stanford.
Deus nobiscum, quis contra?
by chocochuck02 on Oct 25, 2009 8:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ok.
So I was sitting here thinking about what you have said…..I need you to show me where in the polling system they reward teams for beating unranked opponents.
Look…….I’m simply saying that frankly, I don’t care that USC lost to their ex-offensive coordinator with their 2nd or 3rd string QB. I’d have to take USC over Iowa even though I would be rooting for Iowa.
"When is the last time you heard a CEO say, "You know, I am REALLY glad we lowered our standards. Its really worked out well for us"."
Colin Cowherd
Eric Watters Atlanta, Ga.
by ech2os on Oct 25, 2009 9:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
They don't. They never have.
But they sure as hell dock anyone that isn’t named USC a lot more for losing to one. If a normal team loses to Iowa, for example, they can barely get a sniff at the top ten. USC bitches because they’re ranked behind undefeated teams. Boo-hoo.
Deus nobiscum, quis contra?
by chocochuck02 on Oct 25, 2009 9:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And another thing..
I don’t care if USC lost to Sarkisian, Jimmy V, and a robot clone of Ditka. They lost, plain and simple. No MNC, probably not even a Rose Bowl. Thats why I wouldn’t pick them this year. To pick them because ESPN says 2003 was the greatest team ever is foolish. Did you know Oklahoma won 47 games in a row once? Make sure to bet on their BCS bowl too.
Deus nobiscum, quis contra?
by chocochuck02 on Oct 25, 2009 9:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I see how small Oklahoma.....
comes up in big games, so I wouldn’t be that stupid. But be my guest.
"When is the last time you heard a CEO say, "You know, I am REALLY glad we lowered our standards. Its really worked out well for us"."
Colin Cowherd
Eric Watters Atlanta, Ga.
by ech2os on Oct 25, 2009 9:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thats what I'm saying.
Using the past as a reason to pick USC would be almost the same thing.
Deus nobiscum, quis contra?
by chocochuck02 on Oct 25, 2009 9:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Choco......
I’m saying I WOULD use Oklahoma’s past performance in big games to NOT bet on them. Its not just about the players. These are “kids”. The coaches, the environment, etc etc all impact their performance and for some reason. I notice you don’t seem to be taking into consideration Iowa almost losing to Arkansas State and Northern Iowa. I am not a big stat guy. I think you can make them sing and dance and ultimately you have to use your intutition. That’s what separates an Einstein with a Comp Sci Degree making 120k a year as a developer from Harvard from Bill Gates. Having said that, here are a couple more numbers…..when in Rome I guess……..
USC is 12-2 against top 10 teams since 2003 winning by an average outscoring their opponents by an average of 14.5 points per game. PSU on the other hand is 2-6 losing each of those games by an average of 8 points. 22.5 difference.
USC has given up a lot of yardage the last two weeks against “lesser” competition. I predict that they find another gear this weekend and come up big against Oregon.
Anyhow, time will tell, but every year USC loses a game and everybody talk about how over rated they are and then they walk into a BCS game and totally hand somebodys ass to them. When I see that trend snapped, I’ll count them out. Until then, I’ll stay smart on the bus.
"When is the last time you heard a CEO say, "You know, I am REALLY glad we lowered our standards. Its really worked out well for us"."
Colin Cowherd
Eric Watters Atlanta, Ga.
by ech2os on Oct 25, 2009 9:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Last year doesn't matter
Ten years ago doesn’t matter. We’re ranking teams on THIS YEAR. (And you’re also throwing out inexplicable losses to Washington, Stanford, UCLA, etc.)
by SpartanDan on Oct 25, 2009 7:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
1) Rankings aren’t supposed to be predictive. They’re supposed to be based on what has happened on the field. And based on what has happened on the field, Iowa should be ranked miles ahead of USC.
2) If I had to stake my life on one of those two, it would be Iowa. And I wouldn’t even hesitate.
by SpartanDan on Oct 25, 2009 7:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd stake my life on Iowa too
Too bad watching them all year long would most likely kill me anyways.
Deus nobiscum, quis contra?
by chocochuck02 on Oct 25, 2009 7:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'll be sure to give you
my bank routing and account numbers. If USC and Iowa end up playing in a bowl, you name the amount and I’ll take USC straight up.
"When is the last time you heard a CEO say, "You know, I am REALLY glad we lowered our standards. Its really worked out well for us"."
Colin Cowherd
Eric Watters Atlanta, Ga.
by ech2os on Oct 25, 2009 7:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, there's not much point because SC isn't good enough to win the Pac 10
DO YOU HAVE PRIDE, DANNY?
by ReadingRambler on Oct 25, 2009 7:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
BOOM ROASTED?
Deus nobiscum, quis contra?
by chocochuck02 on Oct 25, 2009 8:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No, it's not good enough
DO YOU HAVE PRIDE, DANNY?
by ReadingRambler on Oct 25, 2009 8:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
There are two computers to watch for this week
Wolfe and Sagarin – Wolfe had us at 25 (worth 1 point), and Sagarin had us outside the top 25 (so, no points).
Sagarin has us at 13 this week, so that will be a sizable bump. Still waiting on Wolfe.
"In the beginning the Universe was created.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
by IcersGuy on Oct 25, 2009 2:33 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
The high and low computer scores are thrown out, right?
So we can live with a terrible score from the russian judge.
Deus nobiscum, quis contra?
by chocochuck02 on Oct 25, 2009 2:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i dont remember who was calling the USC game last night
but for the 5 minutes i could stomach listening to/watching it, i heard the announcers verbal jack-off barkley the entire time…including an exchange where they mutually agreed to start a ’Matt Barkley For Heisman" campaign. nice…
We decide when you hear the snap count...
by thedrizzle on Oct 25, 2009 2:40 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Humans are stupid
I hate humans.
DO YOU HAVE PRIDE, DANNY?
by ReadingRambler on Oct 25, 2009 2:40 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Humans are stupid, yes
but human, non-blogpoll, poll voters are stupider than most.
And that’s without the Harris “my vote is secret, so I can do whatever the hell I want” poll
It never gets to be easy
by chitownhawkeye on Oct 25, 2009 6:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Are you some sort of super-posting monster?
or something?
"I feel like I'm taking crazy pills! I invented the piano key necktie, I invented it!" - Mugatu
by Captain Hairdo on Oct 25, 2009 8:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
do you not come around here often?
We decide when you hear the snap count...
by thedrizzle on Oct 25, 2009 9:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
...
The only matchups remaining between teams ranked ahead of us are:
LSU vs. Bama
Florida vs. Bama (maybe)
Oregon vs. USC
Say LSU beats Bama, and Bama beat Florida. IF WE’RE LUCKY, we pass all three, but that’s still unlikely because a 1-loss SEC > 1-loss Big Ten. The best case scenario is that we pass all three, but it’s likelier that we only pass one (LSU). We’ll pass the loser of USC/Oregon.
So…
We’re only really assured of passing 2 teams the rest of the way. We need a butt load of upsets, and that…sucks…
God Created the World Out Of Nothing, Paterno Built A National Superpower On Cow Fields...
by fugimaster24 on Oct 25, 2009 2:53 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I couldnt believe it.
This morning on tWWL the pundits were raving about how much of an injustice it was for USC to be ranked as low as they were. They were crying about how even if USC wins out from here, they are not guaranteed one of the top spots in the BCS. They were practically demanding that the computer side of the rankings be thrown out, because they were unjustly holding USC down.
by scotty2hotty89 on Oct 25, 2009 2:55 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I think everyone accepts that USC will lose to a lousy conference team.
And as thus, its better recieved when they do than most teams with a loss to a top 6 team, err.. I mean Washington.
Deus nobiscum, quis contra?
by chocochuck02 on Oct 25, 2009 3:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Who?
Any names? Because I want to know who is least credible.
God Created the World Out Of Nothing, Paterno Built A National Superpower On Cow Fields...
by fugimaster24 on Oct 25, 2009 3:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I honestly have no clue
I just had the tv on while I was doing homework. But I am like 95% sure it was twwl.
by scotty2hotty89 on Oct 25, 2009 4:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's beyond absurd
USC lost. Seven teams have yet to do so. If USC wants to be taken seriously as a championship team, maybe they should quit losing to the Washingtons and Stanfords of the world.
by SpartanDan on Oct 25, 2009 7:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Amen
Deus nobiscum, quis contra?
by chocochuck02 on Oct 25, 2009 7:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, but they won the national championship 5 years ago
DO YOU HAVE PRIDE, DANNY?
by ReadingRambler on Oct 25, 2009 7:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe, but...
My guess is that USC fans (and other Pac 10 fans) would be happy if when there was some contraversy about who belonged in the BCS title game, things would fall out so the Pac 10 champ got in more often. 2000 Washington, 2001 Oregon, 2003 USC, 2007 USC, and 2008 USC all have pretty strong cases they should have been playing for everything, and weren’t. About the only counter-argument is 2004 (when USC and Oklahoma got in ahead of also-undefeated Auburn), but that really wasn’t at all contraversial outside of Alabama until USC blew out Oklahoma. And once out of six years is not all that great. At least one of the teams that did go to the title game in all of those years (except 2004) also had a bad loss or two.
by drothgery on Oct 25, 2009 9:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
2008 USC: There’s an argument, but in an eight-way standoff you’re going to miss out more often than not. I don’t think they had a better case than Texas, Oklahoma, Florida, or Utah, and prior to the Rose Bowl I’m not sure they had a better case than PSU either.
2007 USC: LSU lost in multiple OTs twice to a pair of eight-win teams. One of USC’s losses was to freakin’ Stanford. If you lose to Stanford, you move to the back of the line. That’s all there is to it.
The others are back far enough that I don’t remember the exact circumstances, but I remember looking this up before and thinking there was a pretty compelling case for all three being the third-best team.
by SpartanDan on Oct 26, 2009 1:48 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
BCS
If we’ve conceded the Rose Bowl and MNC, can someone please explain the BCS scenarios? Thanks.
God Created the World Out Of Nothing, Paterno Built A National Superpower On Cow Fields...
by fugimaster24 on Oct 25, 2009 3:21 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Hmm.. Here goes.
Rose Bowl – Big Ten champ vs Pac-10 champ
Fiesta Bowl – Big 12 champ
Orange Bowl – ACC champ
Sugar Bowl – SEC champ
And the Big East champ takes one of the remaining spots, I think.
Deus nobiscum, quis contra?
by chocochuck02 on Oct 25, 2009 3:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
So...
A Pitt-Penn State matchup in a BCS game is impossible?
God Created the World Out Of Nothing, Paterno Built A National Superpower On Cow Fields...
by fugimaster24 on Oct 25, 2009 3:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No Wait
If the Sugar or Fiesta loses their champ, Pitt could fill that spot, and we’d get a chance to play them as an at-large.
God Created the World Out Of Nothing, Paterno Built A National Superpower On Cow Fields...
by fugimaster24 on Oct 25, 2009 3:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, or Pitt gets devoured by the woodchipper that is Cincinnatti.
Deus nobiscum, quis contra?
by chocochuck02 on Oct 25, 2009 3:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
But is that what you really want?
I’d love to play them in a BCS game. We’d kick their ass, then not have to hear the harping about playing again.
God Created the World Out Of Nothing, Paterno Built A National Superpower On Cow Fields...
by fugimaster24 on Oct 25, 2009 3:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wish JESSE! was here for this..
But Bill Stull and the Wannastache would stomp a mud hole in us. Lulz.
Deus nobiscum, quis contra?
by chocochuck02 on Oct 25, 2009 3:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
While playing/beating Pitt would be a nice way to start the new year
there would also be something poetic about Cincinnati being in a BCS bowl, while jaOSS finds themselves in a 2nd/3rd tier bowl game.
"In the beginning the Universe was created.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
by IcersGuy on Oct 25, 2009 3:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No, just unlikely
… because the Big East doesn’t have an ‘anchor’ bowl and the Panthers don’t have a Big Ten-esque fanbase.
Probably the best chance for a Pitt-PSU BCS game would be if the ACC champ gets to the title game in a year when the Orange Bowl picks 2nd or 3rd (the Sugar, Fiesta, and Rose will replace a title game participant with someone from their conference if possible; the Orange… not so much) and PSU does not win the Big Ten but is BCS eligible.
So Virginia Tech goes to the title game (can you really see any other ACC team in the title game any time soon?), the Orange selects Penn State as a replacement, and then when it gets around to their turn to pick an opponent, they have a choice of Pitt or some non-BCS team.
This year, though, it’s unlikely. The Fiesta would take Boise or TCU ahead of Pitt; the Sugar should have a second ACC team available; and the ACC has no plausible title game participants.
by drothgery on Oct 25, 2009 4:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Reality Check
1) Pitt is a real longshot to get a BCS bid at all, unless they win the Big East. They lost to NC State. No way will they get an at-large.
2) We should be hoping for an at-large BCS. Big money and exposure.
3) Outside of the BCS, they are not going to meet up.
4) I live in Pittsburgh. they don’t even care about Pitt. Why are we wasting our time with this? Wouldn’t you rather go up against an SEC, Big12, or PAC10 team? I’d rather see PSU v LSU/Alabama or Florida/Oregon/OK State.
"I feel like I'm taking crazy pills! I invented the piano key necktie, I invented it!" - Mugatu
by Captain Hairdo on Oct 25, 2009 8:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Haha, I'm too lazy
But now would be the perfect time to post the picture of the “yellow-out”.
Deus nobiscum, quis contra?
by chocochuck02 on Oct 25, 2009 8:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm a Syracuse fan
I just post here a lot.
No Big East team except WVU will ever get an at-large except in the extremely unlikely scenario where a Big East team other than the Big East champ gets an autobid for being in the top 4. None of us — from my Orange to Louisville to Pitt to UConn to USF to Rutgers to Cinci — have the kind of fanbase the major bowls really want. A good Syracuse team (they used to happen, really) will get TV ratings, but we Orange fans don’t travel well.
And I’d rather go up against an ACC team (for spite reasons) or a Big Ten team (because we’ve got some connection with most of them) than an SEC or Big 12 or Pac 10 team. And we’d have a better chance of winning.
by drothgery on Oct 25, 2009 9:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Also,
if a Non-BCS team is ranked in the top 8 in the BCS, they must be selected. (And there’s a very good chance of that happening.)
"In the beginning the Universe was created.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
by IcersGuy on Oct 25, 2009 3:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
There's a very good chance Boise State shouldn't be anywhere near the top 10.
Deus nobiscum, quis contra?
by chocochuck02 on Oct 25, 2009 4:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bah
They scheduled and beat Oregon. It’s good enough for me. And I hate dogging on a team because of their conference. We sit here and yell at tWWL for being down on the Big Ten and the fact that the “lousy” conference is what will keep a Big Ten team from making the MNC. So I refuse to be hypocritical on the subject – if we don’t want to be blasted for our conference, I won’t blast other good teams for winning the games they’re forced to play.
To this point, Boise State and TCU are both undefeated and both deserve to be top 10 teams.
"In the beginning the Universe was created.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
by IcersGuy on Oct 25, 2009 4:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I'm with you, mostly. BUT.
Oregon
Miami(OH)
Fresno State
Bowling Green
UC Davis
Tulsa
Hawaii
San Jose State
Louisiana Tech
Idaho
Utah State
Nevada
New Mexico State
Put a positive spin on that. University of Mexico must have been booked.
Deus nobiscum, quis contra?
by chocochuck02 on Oct 25, 2009 4:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Meh
OOC looks like a normal BCS team’s – One BCS conference, three (compared to the usual two, difference due to conference size) non-BCS, one FCS team. I thought we stopped all this crap about schedules.
In conference, I’ll reiterate my point from above. You can’t dictate your conference – you can only play with the cards your dealt, or some cliche like that. All they can do is win these crappy conference games,
Could they have gotten a better second OOC game? Perhaps. But it wasn’t necessary. The only thing the schedule tells us is that we might not know how good, or bad, this team actually is.
"In the beginning the Universe was created.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
by IcersGuy on Oct 25, 2009 4:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I Agree
I’ll give them the benefit of the doubt. THAT SAID, I don’t believe they should be ahead of any undefeated team from one of the Big 6.
God Created the World Out Of Nothing, Paterno Built A National Superpower On Cow Fields...
by fugimaster24 on Oct 25, 2009 4:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'll agree with that
on the basis that I think Iowa and Cincy are better teams anyway. And if everything stays as is, it’s likely that Boise’s lack of “quality wins” will keep them at the back of the list too.
"In the beginning the Universe was created.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
by IcersGuy on Oct 25, 2009 4:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
On a side note
I don’t know how easy/hard it is for Boise State to schedule decent OOC games. The top non-BCS teams aren’t in the most ideal locations for match-ups. They basically have the Pac-10, and then maybe they can salvage something out of a team in the mid-west. (BYU’s home-and-home with Florida State seems to be the anomaly here.)
Which brings me to my conspiracy theory [puts on tin-foil hat] – do you think the MWC and WAC have a standing agreement to not let their top teams play each other? This way, both conferences have the chance to flood the top of the BCS standings and perhaps fight their way into becoming a BCS conference? And perhaps there’s an agreement that says if the MWC makes it into the BCS-level, they’ll find a way to move Boise State into the MWC? Oh yeah, tin-foil hat stuff right there…
"In the beginning the Universe was created.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
by IcersGuy on Oct 25, 2009 4:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not Out Of The Realm Of Possibility...
I mean, they have to try something right?
God Created the World Out Of Nothing, Paterno Built A National Superpower On Cow Fields...
by fugimaster24 on Oct 25, 2009 4:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
On a purely football perspective
A MWC with Boise is easily on par with the Big East and the current ACC in most years. Unfortunately, football is about number 6 on the list of things the BCS gives a fuck about. I believe the list is something like this:
1. Money
2. TV Ratings (Money)
3. Fans in the seats during bowls (Money)
4. Cash
5. Ching
6. Football
The MWC just can’t provide the revenue stream that the BCS would be interested in. Sure a Utah or a Boise win in a BCS bowl is a good underdog story from time to time, but there is no way they want to see those teams every year. It’s the exact same reason that they aren’t interested in seeing who really is the best team in football through a playoff. Money, Money, Money.
Fuck tOSU
by ajs1122 on Oct 25, 2009 9:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Certainly
If the best MWC and WAC teams combined, it would easily be on par with a BCS conference, if they get elevated to that status, that means more money, better recruits and so on until they are fully equal.
Black Shoes. Basic Blues. No Name. All Game.
"Everyone has a plan, until they get punched in the mouth."
by Roland86 on Oct 26, 2009 2:37 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
But building a TV fanbase and traveling better isn't as easy.
And that’s all that really matters. As someone just said, actually being good at football isn’t enough.
It also means the schools in those conferences that don’t move to the supergroup are dead in the water. It’s one thing to lose a team or two, but when you take the best half of a league, the bottom falls out for the rest of the group. Maybe no one cares and that capitalism ect., but I think it would be considered, especially by lawmakers who could get in the way of a move by any public school.
BSD
by Kevin HD on Oct 26, 2009 8:20 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
"when you take the best half of a league, the bottom falls out for the rest of the group"
Isn’t that the how the Mountain West Conference was formed?
by Aaron PSU on Oct 26, 2009 6:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Take a look at Colley's website
Colley (www.colleyrankings.com) has a cute trick where he pretends the conferences are all one team, and then ranks them exactly as he does the rest of the teams. There’s a massive gulf between the BCS conferences plus the MWC and the other ones.
The MWC is really rapidly approaching “BCS level.” But the WAC, MAC, Sun Belt, Conference USA? No way. Those teams need to schedule very hard because their in-conference schedule is weak. That’s just life.
by Bleed Blue 'n White on Oct 26, 2009 5:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
We're 13th in Billingsley, dude.
by chocochuck02 on Oct 25, 2009 8:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Heh, its all love.
At least you tried.
Deus nobiscum, quis contra?
by chocochuck02 on Oct 25, 2009 8:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wolfe
13th was 25th.
Deus nobiscum, quis contra?
by chocochuck02 on Oct 25, 2009 8:10 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Computer polls worry and scare me.
How’s it work that in some of the polls we jump from, say, 14th to 13th. Others we’ve jumped up as many as 12+ positions in one week. How high did these computers have Meatchicken ranked?!?
Deus nobiscum, quis contra?
by chocochuck02 on Oct 25, 2009 8:25 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Usually in the 40's
But that’s all our schedule really needed. Looking at Sagarin only, our best opponent is our only loss (obviously); our next best opponent behind Michigan is Minnesota currently sitting at 59. (4 of our 7 wins are against teams ranked 100+, with the only other top 100 win being Temple.) So, I’ll go under the assumption that playing (and beating) a team ranked inside the top 50 helped our SOS and thus our overall ranking.
And if I’m completely off, I humbly take my typed-verbal abuse from BBnW.
"In the beginning the Universe was created.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
by IcersGuy on Oct 25, 2009 8:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thats what I mean though.
How’s that constitute 25th before Michigan (B.M.) whereas in another poll, we were 14th B.M.?
Deus nobiscum, quis contra?
by chocochuck02 on Oct 25, 2009 8:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Um, because before we didn’t have a win versus a team ranked in the top 50, and now we do?
by Bleed Blue 'n White on Oct 26, 2009 5:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It’s because you’re looking at ordinal ranking – that is, #13, #14, etc. The actual value didn’t change a lot.
by Bleed Blue 'n White on Oct 26, 2009 5:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That I do not know
Other than Billingsley is crazy, I don’t know the ins and outs of the formulas and which statistical figures are used amongst the 6 statistical ratings.
"In the beginning the Universe was created.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
by IcersGuy on Oct 25, 2009 9:00 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Yeah....reply fail on that one...
"In the beginning the Universe was created.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
by IcersGuy on Oct 25, 2009 9:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No worries..
We fail because we care. :)
Deus nobiscum, quis contra?
by chocochuck02 on Oct 25, 2009 9:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
oooh, I have an idea...
What if every team was required to schedule their out of conference games based on the available teams final ranking from the last year. So the average ranking of your OC opponents would have to be 60 or better (based on 119 teams overall).
Everyone would pick opponents draft-style. You would have a certain number of minutes to pick, so you’ve got teams making phone calls trying to find the best opponent based on $, ranking, etc…
So WAC and Mountain West teams could only be ranked high if they proved it. Maybe make all teams play their OC games on similar weekends.
by PSUTampa on Oct 25, 2009 9:55 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
BCS
Iowa in at #4, USC at #5. Jesse Palmer objects. Idiot.
A win over Pitt is like kissing your sister
by JuniataMan on Oct 25, 2009 10:19 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Iowa #1 in computer polls
That will cause major head explosions.
A win over Pitt is like kissing your sister
by JuniataMan on Oct 25, 2009 10:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sir, you have just offended the idiot population nationwide by lumping Jesse Palmer in with them. They demand an apology.
by SpartanDan on Oct 26, 2009 1:49 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Join the community and dive in!
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
