"Official" 2007 College Football Thread

[Fred T. Jane]

...when taken out of context, but when he goes on to say...

It's perfectly in context. The next paragraph goes on to support the initial statement, which makes them surplus to requirements. Speaking of which...

...meaning they need to learn sportsmanship so they dont get penalties and hurt themselves, therefore probably having a better chance at winning, winning more, and earning a spot in the BCS Championship.

So how many of Southern California's losses the past, oh, let's be generous here, decade, came as a result of unsportsmanlike conduct penalties? If the reason they're not in the BCS Championship Game is because of unsportsmanlike conduct penalties, then they should be easy to find, no?

[averyj]

...when taken out of context, but when he goes on to say...

It's perfectly in context. The next paragraph goes on to support the initial statement, which makes them surplus to requirements. Speaking of which...

...meaning they need to learn sportsmanship so they dont get penalties and hurt themselves, therefore probably having a better chance at winning, winning more, and earning a spot in the BCS Championship.

So how many of Southern California's losses the past, oh, let's be generous here, decade, came as a result of unsportsmanlike conduct penalties? If the reason they're not in the BCS Championship Game is because of unsportsmanlike conduct penalties, then they should be easy to find, no?

Look, I'm not saying its the sole reason, I'm saying that it does have an effect.

Nowhere have I said that it's the only cause of their losses...

[McCall]

By dominating the Cotton Bowl, and containing the nation's top running back, I'd say Mizzou pretty well made their case about why they should've been in a BCS Bowl, other than some of those teams like Hawaii and Illinois (though Hawaii being chosen was completely uncalled for, Illinois just did NOT belong there).

Oh well. Wait 'til next year! We're gonna back and just as good, if not better.

Look, Hawai'i deserved to be in that game. The bylaws of the BCS stated that they must be included as an at large selection. Yes, Hawai'i was obviously overmatched. They earned their shot, they took it, and they whiffed. Badly. But you know what, they had every right to be in that game. No matter how loud the whining is coming from Missouri and Arizona.

Just because a team gets its collective ass handed to it does not mean it didn't deserve the opportunity to get their collective ass handed to it. Did Missouri not belong in the Big XII Championship this year? They got their asses handed to them, didn't they? Did Ohio State not belong in the BCS Championship last year? They got their asses handed to them, didn't they? Should there be about 10 less teams in the NFL because the Patriots gave them all heaping handfuls of their own asses?

I agree that Missouri deserved a shot at a BCS game, but at the expense of Kansas, not Hawai'i. Once Kansas was picked, Missouri couldn't go, no matter how many spots were left, no matter who Missouri already beat, no matter how close they played Oklahoma before losing twice.

So, a big fat "YAY!!!!!" to Mizzou, you won a meaningless game against an overrated team with no coach. Woop-de-damn-doo.

Okay, if you had actually read what I wrote, I said Hawaii being there wasn't really uncalled for. Sure they lost big time, but up until then there was no reason to doubt them. Illinois, should not be there. Kansas, need I say anything about this that I haven't already said a million times?

Why do you lambash me on something that wasn't even what you were making it out to be? I know you just like to rant and rave for the hell of it, we've all grown accustomed to that, but why do it in a case where what your ranting about isn't even being contradicted in the original statement?

[Jigga]

By dominating the Cotton Bowl, and containing the nation's top running back, I'd say Mizzou pretty well made their case about why they should've been in a BCS Bowl, other than some of those teams like Hawaii and Illinois (though Hawaii being chosen was completely uncalled for, Illinois just did NOT belong there).

Oh well. Wait 'til next year! We're gonna back and just as good, if not better.

Look, Hawai'i deserved to be in that game. The bylaws of the BCS stated that they must be included as an at large selection. Yes, Hawai'i was obviously overmatched. They earned their shot, they took it, and they whiffed. Badly. But you know what, they had every right to be in that game. No matter how loud the whining is coming from Missouri and Arizona.

Just because a team gets its collective ass handed to it does not mean it didn't deserve the opportunity to get their collective ass handed to it. Did Missouri not belong in the Big XII Championship this year? They got their asses handed to them, didn't they? Did Ohio State not belong in the BCS Championship last year? They got their asses handed to them, didn't they? Should there be about 10 less teams in the NFL because the Patriots gave them all heaping handfuls of their own asses?

I agree that Missouri deserved a shot at a BCS game, but at the expense of Kansas, not Hawai'i. Once Kansas was picked, Missouri couldn't go, no matter how many spots were left, no matter who Missouri already beat, no matter how close they played Oklahoma before losing twice.

So, a big fat "YAY!!!!!" to Mizzou, you won a meaningless game against an overrated team with no coach. Woop-de-damn-doo.

Okay, if you had actually read what I wrote, I said Hawaii being there wasn't really uncalled for. Sure they lost big time, but up until then there was no reason to doubt them. Illinois, should not be there. Kansas, need I say anything about this that I haven't already said a million times?

Why do you lambash me on something that wasn't even what you were making it out to be? I know you just like to rant and rave for the hell of it, we've all grown accustomed to that, but why do it in a case where what your ranting about isn't even being contradicted in the original statement?

Because, God damnit, it's January 2 and I haven't had :censored: to rant about all year!

I wasn't lambashing you. I wasn't even lambasting you. I certainly wasn't lamb :censored:ing you because that's nasty, and I don't do bestiality. Anywho, don't take it personal dog. I probably shouldn't have quoted your post, just made my statement. I've been hearing all day about how Hawai'i didn't belong and it's crap. You said, "Hawaii being chosen was completely uncalled for." There was no "not" as you stated in your reply to me. So, how am I supposed to read that, sir? I apologize if I misunderstood your words, but that's where I was coming from.

Yes, I took at shot at Mizzou, but don't confuse that with taking a shot at you. That "dirty water" from Beantown must be finding it's way all the way to the Midwest because people are so sensitive about anyone saying anything about their team anymore. Gee whiz. It's not like I said Matt Call is a flaming douchebag or anything. I don't know you, I don't judge you, and other than the MBisordi fiasco, I really don't pay attention to what you say (Though it's nice to know you have all of my posting pegged as ranting just for the hell of it).

Mizzouri rocks, they were screwed out of the BCS, they should have been in the BCS Championship game, Chase Daniel should have won the Heisman, and will in 2008, Gary Pinkel is a legend and a genius, black and gold is the sweetest color palette ever, and Missouri will roll to the Big XII title next year and get their shot at the National Title they were screwed out of this year. Oh, and Mizzou's win over Arkansas was the greatest bowl performance of all time, even though the Tigers proved that Arkansas didn't even belong on the same field.

You happy?

[maz]

...meaning they need to learn sportsmanship so they dont get penalties and hurt themselves, therefore probably having a better chance at winning, winning more, and earning a spot in the BCS Championship.

So how many of Southern California's losses the past, oh, let's be generous here, decade, came as a result of unsportsmanlike conduct penalties? If the reason they're not in the BCS Championship Game is because of unsportsmanlike conduct penalties, then they should be easy to find, no?

I was never saying thats why they lost, I was simply explaining what he meant, since it seemed you misunderstood...and if how you quoted it isnt out of context, then how come if you read just that statement, it has a different meaning than if you read the whole post? Sure, im only 14 and dont know much more about the english language than anyone else my age (especially in my school district), but I always thought that if something is taken out of a quote and means something different than when its in its original place, like in this case, it is out of context...

Reguardless, I know unsportsmanlike conduct penalties often arent THE sole reason of losses, I was not saying that, and neiteher was averyj. However, unsportsmanlike conduct penalties never help a team's cause, either. He was stating that if they continued to take unsportsmalike conduct penalties, that an occourance in which a penalty like that would cause them to lose a game would be more likely. And though not all games lost may be due to penalties, one loss cause by a penalty can have the effects caused by any loss, effects that sometimes cause more losses, and, in turn, being out of contention for the BCS Championship game.

[Fred T. Jane]

I was never saying thats why they lost, I was simply explaining what he meant, since it seemed you misunderstood...and if how you quoted it isnt out of context, then how come if you read just that statement, it has a different meaning than if you read the whole post? Sure, im only 14 and dont know much more about the english language than anyone else my age (especially in my school district), but I always thought that if something is taken out of a quote and means something different than when its in its original place, like in this case, it is out of context...

After going back and rereading it, I have to change my stance: The first sentence is a definitive statement about a subject, then the next sentences go off in a completely different direction. As a result, there's no need to keep them in the quote to give context because they only have a tenuous connection with the one I quoted. here's why:

<Teacher Mode>

• Statement one states that Southern California is not going to the BCS Championship Game because they aren't very sportsmanlike
  
• Statement two says that penalties can change the course of a game
  
• Statement three says that because Southern California allegedly acts like subhumans, they will continue to get penalized
  

Statements two and three do not support statement one because there is no evidence to support the statement that the reason why Southern California is not in the BCS Championship Game is because they aren't sportsmanlike.¹ As a result, there is no reason to quote them because they are of no use to the statement being quoted.

After all, to quote a rather strange teacher I once had, you don't tell someone that you'll be serving them beef for a meal and then serve them a plate of grilled hoof. Sure, it was once a part of a cow, but that doesn't make it beef.

</Teacher Mode>

--------------------

¹In the grand scheme of things, unsportsmanlike conduct is not very high on the list of the reasons Pete Carroll has written down to improve on to get into the BCS Championship Game.

[DG_ThenNowForever]

So WVU can light up Oklahoma, but struggled against Pitt at home. Wild.

[maz]

I was never saying thats why they lost, I was simply explaining what he meant, since it seemed you misunderstood...and if how you quoted it isnt out of context, then how come if you read just that statement, it has a different meaning than if you read the whole post? Sure, im only 14 and dont know much more about the english language than anyone else my age (especially in my school district), but I always thought that if something is taken out of a quote and means something different than when its in its original place, like in this case, it is out of context...

After going back and rereading it, I have to change my stance: The first sentence is a definitive statement about a subject, then the next sentences go off in a completely different direction. As a result, there's no need to keep them in the quote to give context because they only have a tenuous connection with the one I quoted. here's why:

<Teacher Mode>

• Statement one states that Southern California is not going to the BCS Championship Game because they aren't very sportsmanlike
  
• Statement two says that penalties can change the course of a game
  
• Statement three says that because Southern California allegedly acts like subhumans, they will continue to get penalized
  

Statements two and three do not support statement one because there is no evidence to support the statement that the reason why Southern California is not in the BCS Championship Game is because they aren't sportsmanlike.¹ As a result, there is no reason to quote them because they are of no use to the statement being quoted.

After all, to quote a rather strange teacher I once had, you don't tell someone that you'll be serving them beef for a meal and then serve them a plate of grilled hoof. Sure, it was once a part of a cow, but that doesn't make it beef.

</Teacher Mode>

--------------------

¹In the grand scheme of things, unsportsmanlike conduct is not very high on the list of the reasons Pete Carroll has written down to improve on to get into the BCS Championship Game.

i see now... thinking that way, one could misunderstand what averyj meant.........

Ive never liked english class - hopefully my hate for it doesnt result in me speaking like an idiot.

[DG_ThenNowForever]

So WVU can light up Oklahoma, but struggled against Pitt at home. Wild.

No one else watching the game? I'm surprised.

Anyway, it looks like the refs are doing what they can to keep Oklahoma in the game.

[TFoA]

Oklahoma needs to stay away from the Fiesta Bowl. Nothing but bad things there.

[rainmaker17]

I'll leave my UT bias out of this but can someone teach the OU band another song? No matter what happens they play the same damn song. I'll be hearing it in my sleep.

[Thad]

Holy .

In the words of some great football mind: "You can't trade scores when you're behind." Oklahoma needs a quick score, and then a stop.

But I don't think they can keep up with West Virginia. Devine is a quickster. Of course from tonight's game, WVU's O-line looks like its faster than OU's RB.

[DG_ThenNowForever]

I'll leave my UT bias out of this but can someone teach the OU band another song? No matter what happens they play the same damn song. I'll be hearing it in my sleep.

It's not your bias; I'm tired of it too. The problem is that I actually like Fox's college football broadcasting teams, and don't want to turn the volume off.

On another note, great to see Good Ol' J.R. on the sideline. Not so great to see more personal foul calls against WVU.

[Joshawaggie]

When Oklahoma finally started scoring, WV would score twice as fast, crazy.

[DEAD!]

Oklahoma needs to stay away from the Fiesta Bowl. Nothing but bad things there.

No kidding... maybe they should scream loud enough to be in the Orange Bowl next year.

Mizzouri rocks, they were screwed out of the BCS, they should have been in the BCS Championship game, Chase Daniel should have won the Heisman, and will in 2008, Gary Pinkel is a legend and a genius, black and gold is the sweetest color palette ever, and Missouri will roll to the Big XII title next year and get their shot at the National Title they were screwed out of this year. Oh, and Mizzou's win over Arkansas was the greatest bowl performance of all time, even though the Tigers proved that Arkansas didn't even belong on the same field.

You happy?

you forgot ..... "I am a Tiger"

[infrared41]

Oklahoma needs to stay away from the Fiesta Bowl. Nothing but bad things there.

Oklahoma needs to stay out of the BCS. That's four straight BCS losses. Could it be that the Big XII is...gasp...overrated? Which leads me to this...

Perception is a funny thing. With last night's pounding by West Virginia, Oklahoma has now lost four straight BCS bowls games including back to back losses in the BCS title game (let's not forget a 55-19 drubbing by USC) yet a lot of people were saying the 2-loss Sooners were more deserving of a shot at the BCS title game than Ohio State is this year.

Ohio State on the other hand has won 3 of their last 4 in BCS Bowl games but one bad loss has turned them into a punchline. Since this lack of respect for the Buckeyes seems to be based on past performance, I am wondering what it is about Oklahoma that makes them so much more deserving than Ohio State?

Just curious.

[BlueSky]

Oklahoma needs to stay away from the Fiesta Bowl. Nothing but bad things there.

Oklahoma needs to stay out of the BCS. That's four straight BCS losses. Could it be that the Big XII is...gasp...overrated? Which leads me to this...

Perception is a funny thing. With last night's pounding by West Virginia, Oklahoma has now lost four straight BCS bowls games including back to back losses in the BCS title game (let's not forget a 55-19 drubbing by USC) yet a lot of people were saying the 2-loss Sooners were more deserving of a shot at the BCS title game than Ohio State is this year.

Ohio State on the other hand has won 3 of their last 4 in BCS Bowl games but one bad loss has turned them into a punchline. Since this lack of respect for the Buckeyes seems to be based on past performance, I am wondering what it is about Oklahoma that makes them so much more deserving than Ohio State?

Just curious.

It would be a good idea to wait and revisit this after the title game. It's going to be a little embarassing for you if Ohio State gets spanked.

OU is an outstanding team full of excellent players. Their problem is that Bob Stoops apparently couldn't motivate a house fly to buzz around a room, and apparently cannot instill a sense of discipline or consequences worrisome enough that his players won't commit stupid penalties. What an awful loss.

[Thad]

Oklahoma needs to stay away from the Fiesta Bowl. Nothing but bad things there.

Oklahoma needs to stay out of the BCS. That's four straight BCS losses. Could it be that the Big XII is...gasp...overrated? Which leads me to this...

Perception is a funny thing. With last night's pounding by West Virginia, Oklahoma has now lost four straight BCS bowls games including back to back losses in the BCS title game (let's not forget a 55-19 drubbing by USC) yet a lot of people were saying the 2-loss Sooners were more deserving of a shot at the BCS title game than Ohio State is this year.

Ohio State on the other hand has won 3 of their last 4 in BCS Bowl games but one bad loss has turned them into a punchline. Since this lack of respect for the Buckeyes seems to be based on past performance, I am wondering what it is about Oklahoma that makes them so much more deserving than Ohio State?

Just curious.

It would be a good idea to wait and revisit this after the title game. It's going to be a little embarassing for you if Ohio State gets spanked.

OU is an outstanding team full of excellent players. Their problem is that Bob Stoops apparently couldn't motivate a house fly to buzz around a room, and apparently cannot instill a sense of discipline or consequences worrisome enough that his players won't commit stupid penalties. What an awful loss.

How much motivating does a team need for a BCS bowl though? Especially after being embarrased like they were last year, it seems like no motivation would be needed.

[BlueSky]

I've watched every OU game this year. They've dominated some good teams, struggled to beat some weak ones (Iowa State) and lost to Colorado and Texas Tech. They came out flat against Boise State last year and against WV this year. At their best, they can play with anybody in the country. At their worst, they might lose to anybody in the country. I don't know what other than motivation it could be.

[Thad]

Motivation was definately a factor it just seems like it should be on the players to get motivated for this type of bowl game. If you can't get yourself pumped up for a BCS bowl, then thats a problem.