2010 NCAA Football Thread

[Cujo]

Well it looks like the Dallas Cowboys can cross a potential coach off their list. It looks like the U may be hiring Gruden.

http://twitter.com/#!/Manny_navarro

Oh really?

[HedleyLamarr]

All that aside, I still think Boise has an outside shot at a BCS bowl. LSU losing today didn't hurt things for them and there are still some key games to be played. They shouldn't be out of the picture because of one loss.

...to a ranked team, mind you. I'd understand getting dropped down to the Humanitarian Bowl if we lost to, like, Idaho, but Nevada is a good team and is ranked. Ultimately, I'm hoping the BCS realizes that whoever ends up winning the Big Least will be a huge albatross on them, and invites Boise to a BCS bowl to try to cancel out the negative publicity that the Big Least "champion" will bring.

If anything, Nevada should get a BCS bid over Boise State, should a bowl pick a team from the WAC.

Not that it'll matter...there's plenty of BCS-conference teams with bigger followings that'll get consideration over Boise State. BSU/TCU wasn't guaranteed a spot had both gone undefeated, anyway. What makes you think a 1-loss small school with a small following will still get major consideration?

And by bringing in a Jim Harbaugh/Brady Hoke/Chris Peterson, he will have the opportunity to bring the entire Michigan Mafia over to his side.

If by that you mean Chris Petersen, I just don't see him leaving Boise. He's made Boise State into one of the most recognizable, prominent programs in college football even though they've only been in FBS since 1996. With Kellen Moore likely coming back next year, he has yet another chance at winning a national title. Plus, he's already snubbed Oregon to stay at Boise State as well. And ever since the first Fiesta Bowl win, he's practically worshiped by the Boise State fanbase. Why leave that dream job to go to Michigan and be trashed by the fanbase if things don't go well immediately?

You're kidding yourself if you think that Peterson thinks Boise State is a "dream job".

You honestly think Peterson would turn down Southern Cal, Texas, Alabama, Florida, or Ohio State if he was given that opportunity?

[Jigga]

And by bringing in a Jim Harbaugh/Brady Hoke/Chris Peterson, he will have the opportunity to bring the entire Michigan Mafia over to his side.

If by that you mean Chris Petersen, I just don't see him leaving Boise. He's made Boise State into one of the most recognizable, prominent programs in college football even though they've only been in FBS since 1996. With Kellen Moore likely coming back next year, he has yet another chance at winning a national title. Plus, he's already snubbed Oregon to stay at Boise State as well. And ever since the first Fiesta Bowl win, he's practically worshiped by the Boise State fanbase. Why leave that dream job to go to Michigan and be trashed by the fanbase if things don't go well immediately?

A whole lot of money.

[infrared41]

You honestly think Peterson would turn down Southern Cal, Texas, Alabama, Florida, or Ohio State if he was given that opportunity?

No because he won't. Frankly, I'm surprised his name hasn't come up to fill the spot at Miami. For that matter, maybe it has and I just didn't see it.

Also, I'm retracting this statement...

All that aside, I still think Boise has an outside shot at a BCS bowl. LSU losing today didn't hurt things for them and there are still some key games to be played. They shouldn't be out of the picture because of one loss. Especially when some dog - team from The Big East is going to get a bid. Which brings me to my final point...

I wasn't thinking when I wrote that. Why in the hell should a team that won't even win the WAC get a BCS bid? It was a stupid thing to say. I was trying to be too fair to Boise State but I was way off base. Boise State has no shot at a BCS bowl and they don't deserve one.

[oddball]

For someone who backs the lesser conference teams, Boise State belongs nowhere near a BCS game. I'll use the same logic with Boise State that I use for the big-time conference schools. Boise State had a schedule in front of them, there job was to go undefeated to get serious consideration for a BCS game, let alone the title game. The fact that they lost, and lost at the end of the year, means they don't deserve a BCS title game shot because they didn't get the job done. Especially considering their lower-tiered opponents. I can overlook a lower-tiered opponent if you beat teams equal and better than you, but the fact of the matter is that Boise State didn't beat anyone better than them, and just beat equal opponents and beat up on lesser opponents, and lost a game to an equal at best opponent. And the fact of the matter that they lost this game at the end of the year, I'm sorry but they had their chance to shine and they blew it big time. It's the same thing if Auburn loses in the SEC Championship game, that's bye-bye to them and I'd take Arkansas over Auburn. Then again, I don't believe in Auburn at all and I'm waiting for them to lose and lose big-time. Will it happen? I'm not sure, they kind of remind me of the LSU team a few years ago that won ugly and really is one of the worst teams to win a title.

I will say the really sucky thing this year, is probably two of the best teams and probably the best matchup in a bowl game would be Wisconsin-Stanford in the Rose Bowl, but for whatever reason there's that stupid rule that Rose Bowl has to take the highest non automatic qualifying conference team. I don't have anything against TCU as they are an excellent team, but it just irks me that you'll lose a traditional Big 10-Pac 10 matchup that would be great, to host another team. It would be awesome and appropriate to see the Rose Bowl completely in red.

[Lights Out]

If anything, Nevada should get a BCS bid over Boise State, should a bowl pick a team from the WAC.

No they shouldn't. Boise is still ranked higher than them in the coaches' poll and the BCS rankings.

What makes you think a 1-loss small school with a small following will still get major consideration?

Ratings. Controversy surrounds Boise due to the arguments over their "worthiness" of being in the BCS, which makes for great TV. Also, when they play AQ teams, it's a ratings bonanza. Case in point: Boise/VT was the second-highest-rated college football game in ESPN's history.

[rams80]

And by bringing in a Jim Harbaugh/Brady Hoke/Chris Peterson, he will have the opportunity to bring the entire Michigan Mafia over to his side.

If by that you mean Chris Petersen, I just don't see him leaving Boise. He's made Boise State into one of the most recognizable, prominent programs in college football even though they've only been in FBS since 1996. With Kellen Moore likely coming back next year, he has yet another chance at winning a national title. Plus, he's already snubbed Oregon to stay at Boise State as well. And ever since the first Fiesta Bowl win, he's practically worshiped by the Boise State fanbase. Why leave that dream job to go to Michigan and be trashed by the fanbase if things don't go well immediately?

A whole lot of money.

I'm not sure the money is enough of a reward for the rest of that.

Seriously though, we are starting to see some coaches stick around when they do very well at jobs with less prestige because 1) Its a job 2) They aren't going to fire you 3) They aren't going to make your life hell. 4) The guys who did bolt keep sputtering out and getting fired.

[knnhrvy16]

I agree with oddball about the Rose Bowl deal (I'd quote ya but iTouches are a total biznatch when trying to quote on here for whatever reason ).

I as well have nothing against TCU, I love that team. But I don't think the Rose Bowl really had to make that non-AQ deal. I just feel that as the Rose Bowl is the grandaddy of em all, they should stick to tradition more than any other bowl. And trust me, even if Utah were the team that made it, I'd be excited as hell for 'em, but still a little irked that we wouldn't see Wisconsin-Stanford. That would have been bowl of the year, in my opinion. When I look at all the potential matchups, I see blowouts all around. With a Wisconsin-Stanford game, though, that would have made for terrific football. The teams who I think are the two most underrated teams in football would be close. Plus, for me personally, the 2000 Wisconsin-Stanford game is one of the games I watched as a little kid, so a re-match would be like going back in time for me

But really, it's all about tradition. It's one thing if you just have no one else at all other than TCU to fill that spot. But in this case, you've got a very qualified and very talented team in Stanford. I could care less if the deal was with the Sugar or Orange or Fiesta, I mean those are great bowls, but it's not like anyone is going to break any tradition by going there.

What I'm really trying to say in short, is that I like that the deal guarantees qualified non-AQ a spot, it's a good thing. BUT, the Rose Bowl, in my opinion, was the wrong bowl to have it.

[Jigga]

And by bringing in a Jim Harbaugh/Brady Hoke/Chris Peterson, he will have the opportunity to bring the entire Michigan Mafia over to his side.

If by that you mean Chris Petersen, I just don't see him leaving Boise. He's made Boise State into one of the most recognizable, prominent programs in college football even though they've only been in FBS since 1996. With Kellen Moore likely coming back next year, he has yet another chance at winning a national title. Plus, he's already snubbed Oregon to stay at Boise State as well. And ever since the first Fiesta Bowl win, he's practically worshiped by the Boise State fanbase. Why leave that dream job to go to Michigan and be trashed by the fanbase if things don't go well immediately?

A whole lot of money.

I'm not sure the money is enough of a reward for the rest of that.

It all depends on how big that "benjamin pile" is.

[WJMorris3]

I agree with oddball about the Rose Bowl deal (I'd quote ya but iTouches are a total biznatch when trying to quote on here for whatever reason ).

I as well have nothing against TCU, I love that team. But I don't think the Rose Bowl really had to make that non-AQ deal. I just feel that as the Rose Bowl is the grandaddy of em all, they should stick to tradition more than any other bowl. And trust me, even if Utah were the team that made it, I'd be excited as hell for 'em, but still a little irked that we wouldn't see Wisconsin-Stanford. That would have been bowl of the year, in my opinion. When I look at all the potential matchups, I see blowouts all around. With a Wisconsin-Stanford game, though, that would have made for terrific football. The teams who I think are the two most underrated teams in football would be close. Plus, for me personally, the 2000 Wisconsin-Stanford game is one of the games I watched as a little kid, so a re-match would be like going back in time for me

But really, it's all about tradition. It's one thing if you just have no one else at all other than TCU to fill that spot. But in this case, you've got a very qualified and very talented team in Stanford. I could care less if the deal was with the Sugar or Orange or Fiesta, I mean those are great bowls, but it's not like anyone is going to break any tradition by going there.

What I'm really trying to say in short, is that I like that the deal guarantees qualified non-AQ a spot, it's a good thing. BUT, the Rose Bowl, in my opinion, was the wrong bowl to have it.

We could still see Wisconsin and Stanford square off, you know, it'd just be in the national championship (if Auburn and Oregon both lose).

[tBBP]

And by bringing in a Jim Harbaugh/Brady Hoke/Chris Peterson, he will have the opportunity to bring the entire Michigan Mafia over to his side.

If by that you mean Chris Petersen, I just don't see him leaving Boise. He's made Boise State into one of the most recognizable, prominent programs in college football even though they've only been in FBS since 1996. With Kellen Moore likely coming back next year, he has yet another chance at winning a national title. Plus, he's already snubbed Oregon to stay at Boise State as well. And ever since the first Fiesta Bowl win, he's practically worshiped by the Boise State fanbase. Why leave that dream job to go to Michigan and be trashed by the fanbase if things don't go well immediately?

A whole lot of money.

I'm not sure the money is enough of a reward for the rest of that.

It all depends on how big that "benjamin pile" is.

Straight cash, homey.

[Billy B]

I agree with oddball about the Rose Bowl deal (I'd quote ya but iTouches are a total biznatch when trying to quote on here for whatever reason ).

I as well have nothing against TCU, I love that team. But I don't think the Rose Bowl really had to make that non-AQ deal. I just feel that as the Rose Bowl is the grandaddy of em all, they should stick to tradition more than any other bowl. And trust me, even if Utah were the team that made it, I'd be excited as hell for 'em, but still a little irked that we wouldn't see Wisconsin-Stanford. That would have been bowl of the year, in my opinion. When I look at all the potential matchups, I see blowouts all around. With a Wisconsin-Stanford game, though, that would have made for terrific football. The teams who I think are the two most underrated teams in football would be close. Plus, for me personally, the 2000 Wisconsin-Stanford game is one of the games I watched as a little kid, so a re-match would be like going back in time for me

But really, it's all about tradition. It's one thing if you just have no one else at all other than TCU to fill that spot. But in this case, you've got a very qualified and very talented team in Stanford. I could care less if the deal was with the Sugar or Orange or Fiesta, I mean those are great bowls, but it's not like anyone is going to break any tradition by going there.

What I'm really trying to say in short, is that I like that the deal guarantees qualified non-AQ a spot, it's a good thing. BUT, the Rose Bowl, in my opinion, was the wrong bowl to have it.

We could still see Wisconsin and Stanford square off, you know, it'd just be in the national championship (if Auburn and Oregon both lose).

The particular Wisconsin-Stanford matchup is not the thing he's really talking about, it's the Big 10-Pac 10 Rose Bowl matchup. Even if Auburn and Oregon both lost this weekend and Wisconsin played Stanford in the title game (even though TCU would likely play for the title in this scenario), you're still stuck with TCU in the Rose Bowl when there are Big 10 and Pac 10 teams eligible. TCU would be playing Oregon in the Rose Bowl while either Ohio State or Michigan State go to another BCS game.

[WJMorris3]

I agree with oddball about the Rose Bowl deal (I'd quote ya but iTouches are a total biznatch when trying to quote on here for whatever reason ).

I as well have nothing against TCU, I love that team. But I don't think the Rose Bowl really had to make that non-AQ deal. I just feel that as the Rose Bowl is the grandaddy of em all, they should stick to tradition more than any other bowl. And trust me, even if Utah were the team that made it, I'd be excited as hell for 'em, but still a little irked that we wouldn't see Wisconsin-Stanford. That would have been bowl of the year, in my opinion. When I look at all the potential matchups, I see blowouts all around. With a Wisconsin-Stanford game, though, that would have made for terrific football. The teams who I think are the two most underrated teams in football would be close. Plus, for me personally, the 2000 Wisconsin-Stanford game is one of the games I watched as a little kid, so a re-match would be like going back in time for me

But really, it's all about tradition. It's one thing if you just have no one else at all other than TCU to fill that spot. But in this case, you've got a very qualified and very talented team in Stanford. I could care less if the deal was with the Sugar or Orange or Fiesta, I mean those are great bowls, but it's not like anyone is going to break any tradition by going there.

What I'm really trying to say in short, is that I like that the deal guarantees qualified non-AQ a spot, it's a good thing. BUT, the Rose Bowl, in my opinion, was the wrong bowl to have it.

We could still see Wisconsin and Stanford square off, you know, it'd just be in the national championship (if Auburn and Oregon both lose).

The particular Wisconsin-Stanford matchup is not the thing he's really talking about, it's the Big 10-Pac 10 Rose Bowl matchup. Even if Auburn and Oregon both lost this weekend and Wisconsin played Stanford in the title game (even though TCU would likely play for the title in this scenario), you're still stuck with TCU in the Rose Bowl when there are Big 10 and Pac 10 teams eligible. TCU would be playing Oregon in the Rose Bowl while either Ohio State or Michigan State go to another BCS game.

That's where you hope TCU goes because that's the one thing that keeps the Rose Bowl intact. You might then get Oregon-Wisconsin or Stanford-Ohio State.

[CDixonDesign]

Speaking of TCU, according to ESPN Dallas, they've agreed to join the Big East.

[OnWis97]

...to a ranked team, mind you. I'd understand getting dropped down to the Humanitarian Bowl if we lost to, like, Idaho, but Nevada is a good team and is ranked. Ultimately, I'm hoping the BCS realizes that whoever ends up winning the Big Least will be a huge albatross on them, and invites Boise to a BCS bowl to try to cancel out the negative publicity that the Big Least "champion" will bring.

The cannot do that. Some like to talk about a non-AQ lawsuit, well this would be the best way to have a lawsuit. The rule is in ink and with the money at stake, the Big East would be all over a lawsuit. So you can forget this. You are right about the negative publicity and hopefully it will effect change for future iterations of the ever-changing BcS, but this year, the Big East will be there.

[Seadragon76]

Speaking of TCU, according to ESPN Dallas, they've agreed to join the Big East.

I'd question what the Big East is doing by adding a team in Texas for all sports, but then again the WAC has a team in Louisiana. Geography must be something these conference comissioners must of failed during their schooling.

[Lights Out]

It's a great short-term plan for TCU, but in the long run, I think being in the Big East will be a hindrance to them. Travel costs will be prohibitive for them as they are so far away from the rest of the conference. All that money will start to add up fast.

Utah and now TCU have gotten the invite to move up to AQ... when's Boise getting invited to complete the trifecta? Get crackin', PAC-12.

@OnWis: I think you misread my post. I'm not suggesting that the Big East would be left out, I'm suggesting that Boise might be invited to a BCS bowl to counterbalance the negative publicity another blowout of a Big East team would bring.

@infrared: The WAC has a bad rap for prior years, but Boise and Nevada are ranked in the BCS, Hawaii is ranked in the AP, and Fresno's close in the AP. To put it in perspective, the Big East has a whopping one team in the BCS top 25, and that's #24 West Virginia. I can't remember the last time the WAC was this competitive. To say that Boise is somehow undeserving just for losing to Nevada is wrong.

[slightly shotgunned]

Utah and now TCU have gotten the invite to move up to AQ... when's Boise getting invited to complete the trifecta? Get crackin', PAC-12.

Nope, it'll never happen. The AQ Big Six are too afraid of Boise State dominating them.

[WJMorris3]

So let's see. Really, only two games matter this week to the BCS standings: the Civil War and the SEC Championship. The four at-large teams should be TCU, Stanford, (Big Ten team), and (SEC team).

If Oregon and Auburn both win, then we're pretty set with the following, I think.

Rose: TCU v Wisconsin

Fiesta: OU/NU v Conn/Pitt/WV

Orange: VT/FSU v Stanford

Sugar: Arkansas v Ohio State

NCG: Oregon v Auburn

If Auburn wins, but Oregon gets upset, then we might get the following:

Rose: TCU v Oregon

Fiesta: OU/NU v Conn/Pitt/WV

Orange: VT/FSU v Stanford

Sugar: Arkansas v Ohio State

NCG: Auburn v Wisconsin

If Oregon wins, but Auburn gets upset, then we might get the following:

Rose: TCU v Ohio State

Fiesta: OU/NU v Conn/Pitt/WV

Orange: VT/FSU v Auburn

Sugar: South Carolina v Stanford

NCG: Oregon v Wisconsin

Finally, if Oregon and Auburn both get beat, we might get this:

Rose: TCU v Oregon

Fiesta: OU/NU v Conn/Pitt/WV

Orange: VT/FSU v Auburn

Sugar: South Carolina v Ohio State

NCG: Stanford v Wisconsin

TCU can book those Rose Bowl tickets, there's no way they're playing anywhere else.

[Gary]

I'm curious of how Wisconsin would jump Stanford if Standford is #4 to Wisconsin's #5? Wouldn't Stanford go #2.