2009 NCAA Football Thread

[NEW.ERA]

Possibly Oklahoma and Stanford in the Sun Bowl it will be fun to see OU try and contain Mr. Gerhart who will really show off his skills to the NFL.

And this game will be much better then last years snoozer when the Beavers knocked off the Fighting Wannstedt's 3-0.

[rentz]

We do feel like it's working and college football is thriving. We recognize there are elements in each constituency that don't like it, but the fact is, it has a consensus. The critics, the playoff proponents, do not have a consensus.

wut

[infrared41]

Is Are there any games outside of the BCS that interest you and why?

Believe it or not, all of them. I may be the only person on this board that doesn't think there are too many bowl games. I like them all. Capital One Bowl week is my favorite time on the sports calendar. A bowl game is as good as it will ever get for a lot of these players. It will be the highlight of their football careers for many of them. And there's always a chance that we'll get to see an incredible game or two.

34 bowl games and I'll do my best to watch them all.

[Drew22]

Is Are there any games outside of the BCS that interest you and why?

Believe it or not, all of them. I may be the only person on this board that doesn't think there are too many bowl games. I like them all. Capital One Bowl week is my favorite time on the sports calendar. A bowl game is as good as it will ever get for a lot of these players. It will be the highlight of their football careers for many of them. And there's always a chance that we'll get to see an incredible game or two.

34 bowl games and I'll do my best to watch them all.

I too don't think they have too many bowl games. Bowl games bring out classic games. It's part of my Christmas break tradition to stay up way too late watching them all.

[TFoA]

Is Are there any games outside of the BCS that interest you and why?

Believe it or not, all of them. I may be the only person on this board that doesn't think there are too many bowl games. I like them all. Capital One Bowl week is my favorite time on the sports calendar. A bowl game is as good as it will ever get for a lot of these players. It will be the highlight of their football careers for many of them. And there's always a chance that we'll get to see an incredible game or two.

34 bowl games and I'll do my best to watch them all.

I too don't think they have too many bowl games. Bowl games bring out classic games. It's part of my Christmas break tradition to stay up way too late watching them all.

Agreed. That's how I spend the downtime on Winter Break: Watching Bowl Games between two random teams that I may not have gotten a chance to see.

Plus, I'm a MSU fan: The Bulldogs winning the Liberty Bowl in '07 was like the highlight of the decade for me as a fan. Bowl games outside of the BCS are still pretty relevant.

[NEW.ERA]

Is Are there any games outside of the BCS that interest you and why?

Believe it or not, all of them. I may be the only person on this board that doesn't think there are too many bowl games. I like them all. Capital One Bowl week is my favorite time on the sports calendar. A bowl game is as good as it will ever get for a lot of these players. It will be the highlight of their football careers for many of them. And there's always a chance that we'll get to see an incredible game or two.

34 bowl games and I'll do my best to watch them all.

I too don't think they have too many bowl games. Bowl games bring out classic games. It's part of my Christmas break tradition to stay up way too late watching them all.

Agreed. That's how I spend the downtime on Winter Break: Watching Bowl Games between two random teams that I may not have gotten a chance to see.

Plus, I'm a MSU fan: The Bulldogs winning the Liberty Bowl in '07 was like the highlight of the decade for me as a fan. Bowl games outside of the BCS are still pretty relevant.

And that's why there won't be a 16 team playoff had to.

I'll forth that living in Canada you don't get to much exposure to the whole landscape of college football outside of the Pac 10, SEC or Notre Dame (Getting Spokane's ABC isn't the best) but I get what I can through ESPN and watching live feeds so it's great when Bowl season rolls around I get to see most of the games.

[HedleyLamarr]

We do feel like it's working and college football is thriving. We recognize there are elements in each constituency that don't like it, but the fact is, it has a consensus. The critics, the playoff proponents, do not have a consensus.

wut

He's right.

Look on this board alone....you see a ton of pro-playoff folks, but each one has a different format they'd want. 4 teams or 16 teams, all conferences included or just the best teams, neutral site or extra home games, playoffs in December or January....there's no one playoff format folks can agree upon.

The BCS, for what it's worth, has allowed the small conferences to get involved in the top-tier bowls. It's included a computer element as opposed to just human polls. With the BCS, teams like Boise State and TCU and Utah can now earn their way to a primetime game at a prime bowl. And, best of all, the confluence of the human and computer polls now allow us to watch a truer national championship game, instead of having to sell yourselves after you play a bowl game.

The BCS has it's faults throughout the season, but when the BCS rankings are finalized at the conclusion of the season, more often than not...the BCS rankings prove to be in line with the consensus of what the fans believe are the top two teams, as well as getting the best matchups in the Big Four bowls.

[Jigga]

University of Richmond Head Coach Mike London will be named the new Head Coach at the University of Virginia.

Okay, Mike. Tons of Virginians clamored for your hire. Please do not let us down. No one is expecting national titles (or even ACC titles, really), but please find a way to make some bowls. Thanks.

[Sport]

Am I the only person bummed out by the TCU-Boise matchup? It reminds me of when they gave Utah a BCS bid in 2004, and then made them play Pitt, the worst of the BCS teams.

Here's my reasoning: First, these two teams played each other in a bowl just last season.

Second, this matchup teaches us nothing. Regardless of the winner all we are going learn about them is that they beat a school outside of a BCS conference, which is where we are with both teams right now. If Boise goes up against Iowa and gets destroyed (not saying that would happen, it would probably be the other way around) then at least we know where they stand. If TCU kills Florida then we've got a fascinating debate on our hands. I think this matchup eliminates a lot of interesting scenarios.

Third, I know we have Cincinnati-Florida, but it's fun to watch the little guy take on the powerhouses. Utah-Alabama was a great game last year as was Boise State-Oklahoma a few years ago. It was even good to see Hawaii give their all against a clearly superior Georgia team. We're missing out on learning experiences by pitting them both against one another. BTW, those thinking Florida will demolish Cincinnati should look at the Big East's recent performance in BCS bowls. It's not bad, especially against SEC teams.

And I'm okay with Ohio University taking on Marshall. This used to be a rivalry (albeit one-sided) when Marshall was in the MAC. They even used to play for trophy and it was called, "The Battle For the Bell". I wonder if they'll dust it off and give it to the winner. I'm not jazzed about having to play in Detroit again. We just played the MAC championship game there and I don't know how many Ohio fans are going to make the return trip. I know I won't be one of them and a lot of people are probably in the same boat.

[twi]

Considering going to Toronto for the USF game. HHOF having the Olympic medal display only adds to this likelihood.

Boise St vs TCU is a major cop-out. Nothing about this screams 'BCS game' to me, they definitely should have each been matched up with a different team.

Leaving for the Army-Navy game on Friday. Go Navy! Beat Army! (again)

[rams80]

We do feel like it's working and college football is thriving. We recognize there are elements in each constituency that don't like it, but the fact is, it has a consensus. The critics, the playoff proponents, do not have a consensus.

wut

He's right.

Look on this board alone....you see a ton of pro-playoff folks, but each one has a different format they'd want. 4 teams or 16 teams, all conferences included or just the best teams, neutral site or extra home games, playoffs in December or January....there's no one playoff format folks can agree upon.

The BCS, for what it's worth, has allowed the small conferences to get involved in the top-tier bowls. It's included a computer element as opposed to just human polls. With the BCS, teams like Boise State and TCU and Utah can now earn their way to a primetime game at a prime bowl. And, best of all, the confluence of the human and computer polls now allow us to watch a truer national championship game, instead of having to sell yourselves after you play a bowl game.

The BCS has it's faults throughout the season, but when the BCS rankings are finalized at the conclusion of the season, more often than not...the BCS rankings prove to be in line with the consensus of what the fans believe are the top two teams, as well as getting the best matchups in the Big Four bowls.

We have a consensus that a playoff would be superior method of determining a consensus national champion than electing two teams, based on where they stood in a Partial ranking to start the season, to play for a national title.

To argue that as there is no consensus playoff format being argued for, there is no consensus among the pro-playoff crowd, is mere sophistry. By the same token, it could be argued that the BCS' constant rejiggering of rules and imposition of various restrictions on bowls after each season (such as the "Illinois Rose Bowl Rule") indicates that the BCS lacks consensus on how it should operate.

Furthermore, the criteria for assuring eligibility for a championship change every year. To whit: Having an undefeated season used to be sufficient, provided your schedule had some difficulty or you sufficiently choke slammed all who opposed you. Then it was revised to "have an undefeated season, and play for one of the 6 automatic qualifier Conferences". And now, we are at "have an undefeated season, play for one of the 6 automatic qualifier Conferences, and be highly ranked at the start of the season (i.e. be a traditional power)".

Where is the consensus here, pray tell?

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

Furthermore, one of the biggest knocks on those teams not in the automatic qualifier conferences is that they do not play against the "Big Boys". By conspiring, and yes that is the right term to use in this case, unless you expect us to believe that a purely profit-minded Bowl committee would willingly and independently select a TCU team that cannot sell out Conference home games over an Iowa team that reportedly sold out its BCS ticket allotment some time ago, to create the aptly nicknamed "Plessy vs. Ferguson" Bowl, the BCS has deprived these midmajors of their best chance to play against the "Big Boys." This is an opportunity which they have earned by winning all of their games and doing all that could be asked of them, and instead of receiving what they have earned, they have been given a chance to play each other in a game that has no long term benefit to their program in terms of prestige and recognition.

[infrared41]

He's right.

Look on this board alone....you see a ton of pro-playoff folks, but each one has a different format they'd want. 4 teams or 16 teams, all conferences included or just the best teams, neutral site or extra home games, playoffs in December or January....there's no one playoff format folks can agree upon.

The BCS, for what it's worth, has allowed the small conferences to get involved in the top-tier bowls. It's included a computer element as opposed to just human polls. With the BCS, teams like Boise State and TCU and Utah can now earn their way to a primetime game at a prime bowl. And, best of all, the confluence of the human and computer polls now allow us to watch a truer national championship game, instead of having to sell yourselves after you play a bowl game.

The BCS has it's faults throughout the season, but when the BCS rankings are finalized at the conclusion of the season, more often than not...the BCS rankings prove to be in line with the consensus of what the fans believe are the top two teams, as well as getting the best matchups in the Big Four bowls.

As well as those of us who are quite content with the way things are right now in college football. I don't want to fire the first salvo in the annual college football playoff debate but... Looking at every playoff plan, including my own, I don't see one that I would find preferable to the way things are now.

The BCS did OK this year. My one complaint would be the TCU - Boise State game but otherwise, I think everything turned out pretty good.

Well said Hedley. I couldn't agree more.

[WJMorris3]

We do feel like it's working and college football is thriving. We recognize there are elements in each constituency that don't like it, but the fact is, it has a consensus. The critics, the playoff proponents, do not have a consensus.

wut

He's right.

Look on this board alone....you see a ton of pro-playoff folks, but each one has a different format they'd want. 4 teams or 16 teams, all conferences included or just the best teams, neutral site or extra home games, playoffs in December or January....there's no one playoff format folks can agree upon.

The BCS, for what it's worth, has allowed the small conferences to get involved in the top-tier bowls. It's included a computer element as opposed to just human polls. With the BCS, teams like Boise State and TCU and Utah can now earn their way to a primetime game at a prime bowl. And, best of all, the confluence of the human and computer polls now allow us to watch a truer national championship game, instead of having to sell yourselves after you play a bowl game.

The BCS has it's faults throughout the season, but when the BCS rankings are finalized at the conclusion of the season, more often than not...the BCS rankings prove to be in line with the consensus of what the fans believe are the top two teams, as well as getting the best matchups in the Big Four bowls.

We have a consensus that a playoff would be superior method of determining a consensus national champion than electing two teams, based on where they stood in a Partial ranking to start the season, to play for a national title.

To argue that as there is no consensus playoff format being argued for, there is no consensus among the pro-playoff crowd, is mere sophistry. By the same token, it could be argued that the BCS' constant rejiggering of rules and imposition of various restrictions on bowls after each season (such as the "Illinois Rose Bowl Rule") indicates that the BCS lacks consensus on how it should operate.

Furthermore, the criteria for assuring eligibility for a championship change every year. To whit: Having an undefeated season used to be sufficient, provided your schedule had some difficulty or you sufficiently choke slammed all who opposed you. Then it was revised to "have an undefeated season, and play for one of the 6 automatic qualifier Conferences". And now, we are at "have an undefeated season, play for one of the 6 automatic qualifier Conferences, and be highly ranked at the start of the season (i.e. be a traditional power)".

Where is the consensus here, pray tell?

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

Furthermore, one of the biggest knocks on those teams not in the automatic qualifier conferences is that they do not play against the "Big Boys". By conspiring, and yes that is the right term to use in this case, unless you expect us to believe that a purely profit-minded Bowl committee would willingly and independently select a TCU team that cannot sell out Conference home games over an Iowa team that reportedly sold out its BCS ticket allotment some time ago, to create the aptly nicknamed "Plessy vs. Ferguson" Bowl, the BCS has deprived these midmajors of their best chance to play against the "Big Boys." This is an opportunity which they have earned by winning all of their games and doing all that could be asked of them, and instead of receiving what they have earned, they have been given a chance to play each other in a game that has no long term benefit to their program in terms of prestige and recognition.

Is it worth getting Crapo and Risch involved? I mean, the team that has won as many NCAA football championships than any team in the Football Bowl Subdivision (save two), has gone undefeated four times in the last six seasons, and have no BCS title game appearances and only one BCS game against a BCS opponent to show for it? Calling Crapo and Risch...

[NJTank]

Considering going to Toronto for the USF game. HHOF having the Olympic medal display only adds to this likelihood.

Boise St vs TCU is a major cop-out. Nothing about this screams 'BCS game' to me, they definitely should have each been matched up with a different team.

Leaving for the Army-Navy game on Friday. Go Navy! Beat Army! (again)

I love Boise vs TCU its a battle of unbeaten Non BCS teams to determine who is the best between the two of them.

And Go Army

[rams80]

Considering going to Toronto for the USF game. HHOF having the Olympic medal display only adds to this likelihood.

Boise St vs TCU is a major cop-out. Nothing about this screams 'BCS game' to me, they definitely should have each been matched up with a different team.

Leaving for the Army-Navy game on Friday. Go Navy! Beat Army! (again)

I love Boise vs TCU its a battle of unbeaten Non BCS teams to determine who is the best between the two of them.

And Go Army

Will you love it when its a Conference game in the next few years Tank? (if rumors are to be believed.)

[NJTank]

Well that's different if its a conference game then you want have this situation of them both being unbeaten, but as of now I think it is the second best BCS Bowl.

[Jimmy!]

And I'm okay with Ohio University taking on Marshall. This used to be a rivalry (albeit one-sided) when Marshall was in the MAC. They even used to play for trophy and it was called, "The Battle For the Bell". I wonder if they'll dust it off and give it to the winner. I'm not jazzed about having to play in Detroit again. We just played the MAC championship game there and I don't know how many Ohio fans are going to make the return trip. I know I won't be one of them and a lot of people are probably in the same boat.

Then maybe Ohio should have played better against CMU.

Are you actually complaining about having to go back to Detroit for a bowl game when several schools would love the chance to be in Ohio's shoes?

Roll Herd!

[NEW.ERA]

Move Fresno State and Boise State to the Mountain West and kick out SDSU and New Mexico to the WAC, The WAC would terrible it would be Nevada's title to lose every year.

Then the MWC deserves to be a BCS Conference.

In other news Jimmy Clausen has declared for the draft good for him because I think he's gained a lot on Sam Bradford.

[Sport]

And I'm okay with Ohio University taking on Marshall. This used to be a rivalry (albeit one-sided) when Marshall was in the MAC. They even used to play for trophy and it was called, "The Battle For the Bell". I wonder if they'll dust it off and give it to the winner. I'm not jazzed about having to play in Detroit again. We just played the MAC championship game there and I don't know how many Ohio fans are going to make the return trip. I know I won't be one of them and a lot of people are probably in the same boat.

Then maybe Ohio should have played better against CMU.

Are you actually complaining about having to go back to Detroit for a bowl game when several schools would love the chance to be in Ohio's shoes?

Roll Herd!

Short answer, yes. Don't take this as complaining, I'm thrilled about them playing in a bowl game, but I kind of feel like they got shafted on the bowl location. Example, Northern Illinois, a team OU beat, gets to go to Toronto for the International Bowl. I would've loved to have an excuse to go to Toronto. Ford Field is nice, but I don't need to see it twice in one month and I think a lot of the people and students who made the trip for the MAC championship game will feel the same way.

[slightly shotgunned]

I just said that. Go back a few posts and re-read what I wrote, speedy.

Edit: It's now official. Almost all 34 Bowl games are set in stone. Is there any games outside of the BCS that interests you and why?

:EDIT: It's not outside the BCS I realize, but...

Bearcats/Gators.

I live in Cincy and I'm kinda hoping that the 'Cats run into some pretty pissed off Florida Seniors just to quiet all the "UC is better than the Big Ten!" a bit. I've been hearing it from almost everyone I work with for about two weeks now.

I don't think I'm prepared for what would happen if UC somehow beats Florida.

Other than that, there's not much I have to look forward to. The bowl matchups were pretty much expected (read:boring) so I'm just looking for some good, close games this bowl season.