2013 NCAA FOOTBALL THREAD

[LAWeaver]

POKEBALL GO!!!

A Wild Defense Appeared! Got away safely!

[rams80]

So UCF is going to be in a BCS bowl. So that is a definite 1 out of 3 possible BCS participants (Clemson and Mizzou) my Gamecocks were victorious over during the regular season.

So in the future Crackalacky should consider not ing the bed against the cupcake portion of the SEC schedule. Oh well, you can't spell "Citrus" without "U", "S", and "C".

[Cola]

So UCF is going to be in a BCS bowl. So that is a definite 1 out of 3 possible BCS participants (Clemson and Mizzou) my Gamecocks were victorious over during the regular season.

So in the future Crackalacky should consider not ing the bed against the cupcake portion of the SEC schedule. Oh well, you can't spell "Citrus" without "U", "S", and "C".

I was curious as to what you thought about the situation.

However, I don't know if we " :censored: the bed". We lost 2 games by a total 13 points...to a healthy Georgia team early and then on a fantastic one handed catch by a freshman against Tennessee to setup the game winning FG. It was a horrible showing by the Gamecocks and specifically Spurrier that day.

Oh well, I guess the nation's longest home game winning streak, 30-6 in the past 3 seasons, and beating up on Big 10 teams in the postseason isn't too bad of a deal.

The fanbase just has a taste for more at this point. Spent a lot of time on outside looking in past few years with teams we felt were good enough. Hard to kick your rival's ass 5 years in a row but see them win conference championships and participate in 2 BCS bowls.

[rams80]

If you can beat Missouri in the other Columbia, you should beat Georgia anywhere, healthy or otherwise. And Tennessee shouldn't be close enough for a random last TD to beat you.

Of course the bigger problem is that Spurrier doesn't care enough to put in the necessary effort to run the table anymore.

[dfwabel]

So UCF is going to be in a BCS bowl. So that is a definite 1 out of 3 possible BCS participants (Clemson and Mizzou) my Gamecocks were victorious over during the regular season.

So in the future Crackalacky should consider not ing the bed against the cupcake portion of the SEC schedule. Oh well, you can't spell "Citrus" without "U", "S", and "C".

I was curious as to what you thought about the situation.

However, I don't know if we " the bed". We lost 2 games by a total 13 points...to a healthy Georgia team early and then on a fantastic one handed catch by a freshman against Tennessee to setup the game winning FG. It was a horrible showing by the Gamecocks and specifically Spurrier that day.

Oh well, I guess the nation's longest home game winning streak, 30-6 in the past 3 seasons, and beating up on Big 10 teams in the postseason isn't too bad of a deal.

The fanbase just has a taste for more at this point. Spent a lot of time on outside looking in past few years with teams we felt were good enough. Hard to kick your rival's ass 5 years in a row but see them win conference championships and participate in 2 BCS bowls.

The teams USCe lost to were a combined 13-11 overall and 7-9 in conference. If you want to be happy with talking about home winning streaks (when you cannot take care of business against poor teams on the road) late December/early January exhibitions, so be it.

[Cola]

If you can beat Missouri in the other Columbia, you should beat Georgia anywhere, healthy or otherwise. And Tennessee shouldn't be close enough for a random last TD to beat you.

Of course the bigger problem is that Spurrier doesn't care enough to put in the necessary effort to run the table anymore.

How do you come to that conclusion? Georgia was a favorite to do big things this year until their injuries hit...a veteran QB with one of the best RB duos in the nation, just an Achilles heel of a weak defense- but many thought their offense would keep them afloat. Mizzou on the other hand has a very weak resume for a 11-1 team...a perfect storm, if you will.

Can't disagree with your Tennessee assessment (even I thought we didn't deserve a Top 25 ranking after that loss), but good teams do have bad games and bad teams have good games (Okie State to WVU, Stanford to Utah, Oregon to Arizona). I'm not saying we were National Championship worthy by any stretch. Just commenting that 3 teams we beat are potential BCS participants.

Spurrier is still having fun, I believe. We are still bringing in great recruiting classes and competing in this conference. Our fanbase is upset that we may be relegated to the Outback Bowl again this postseason...in the 80s and 90s, some Gamecock fans would have given up a testicle for that chance.

[infrared41]

Oh well, I guess the nation's longest home game winning streak, 30-6 in the past 3 seasons, and beating up on Big 10 teams in the postseason isn't too bad of a deal.

Talk to me when you've reeled off 24 straight - period. Seriously though, with the lack of respect you SEC fans have for the Big Ten, can you really use to wins against B1G teams as an example of how good you are? Seems like a contradiction to me. If the Big Ten sucks as bad as you guys claim it does, how can beating a Big Ten team mean...well...anything? How is a win over say Iowa any bigger than a win over Syracuse?

Using typical SEC fan logic, what you just said was the equivalent of saying "we have a long home winning streak and we beat UConn and San Jose State." Not the most impressive resume, right?

[OnWis97]

Oh well, I guess the nation's longest home game winning streak, 30-6 in the past 3 seasons, and beating up on Big 10 teams in the postseason isn't too bad of a deal.

Talk to me when you've reeled off 24 straight - period. Seriously though, with the lack of respect you SEC fans have for the Big Ten, can you really use to wins against B1G teams as an example of how good you are? Seems like a contradiction to me. If the Big Ten sucks as bad as you guys claim it does, how can beating a Big Ten team mean...well...anything? How is a win over say Iowa any bigger than a win over Syracuse?

Using typical SEC fan logic, what you just said was the equivalent of saying "we have a long home winning streak and we beat UConn and San Jose State." Not the most impressive resume, right?

SEC Bowl wins over Big Ten in BCS Era: 19

Big Ten Bowl wins over SEC in BCS Era: 19

[Billy B]

I think using bowl results (other than the National Championship) as a legitimate comparison of teams isn't the smartest thing to do.

[Cola]

Oh well, I guess the nation's longest home game winning streak, 30-6 in the past 3 seasons, and beating up on Big 10 teams in the postseason isn't too bad of a deal.

Talk to me when you've reeled off 24 straight - period. Seriously though, with the lack of respect you SEC fans have for the Big Ten, can you really use to wins against B1G teams as an example of how good you are? Seems like a contradiction to me. If the Big Ten sucks as bad as you guys claim it does, how can beating a Big Ten team mean...well...anything? How is a win over say Iowa any bigger than a win over Syracuse?

Using typical SEC fan logic, what you just said was the equivalent of saying "we have a long home winning streak and we beat UConn and San Jose State." Not the most impressive resume, right?

First off, I think 24 straight is impressive- no matter what conference you play in and, believe it or not, I am all for OSU making it into the NCG no matter the results of the SECCG and the ability of the polls to shift. Giving the Big 10 hell is just fun because I am not a fan of the style of football played in the conference...everything just seems...slower and antiquated? WIth that said, I have tremendous pride in beating Michigan and Nebraska the past 2 years because of what they once were; to a program with our history- those are accomplishments in any year.

A win over Iowa is 10x the win over Syracuse, for the record. Now *you* are insulting the Big 10.

[Cola]

I think using bowl results (other than the National Championship) as a legitimate comparison of teams isn't the smartest thing to do.

But it is all we have to go on, for the most part. Bowl game conference tie-ins, as much as I hate them, have been the only guarantee of these bigger non-conference matchups.

Plus I don't buy into a certain few members' theory on here that teams just rollover and play downgraded football in efforts to lose in December/January. These are college athletes and they are competitors. No one likes to lose or half ass something. I question the true competitive nature of anyone who seriously buys into that.

[Billy B]

I think using bowl results (other than the National Championship) as a legitimate comparison of teams isn't the smartest thing to do.

But it is all we have to go on, for the most part. Bowl game conference tie-ins, as much as I hate them, have been the only guarantee of these bigger non-conference matchups.

Plus I don't buy into a certain few members' theory on here that teams just rollover and play downgraded football in efforts to lose in December/January. These are college athletes and they are competitors. No one likes to lose or half ass something. I question the true competitive nature of anyone who seriously buys into that.

It's true, though. I don't think anyone believes that Florida really wanted to be in the Sugar Bowl last year and gave their best effort. Heck, I recently heard that a good amount of the Illinois team got trashed on New Year's in 84 and were hungover during the Rose Bowl. For some teams it's just a vacation that happens to include a football game. Then there's all the teams playing in lower tier bowls that thought during the season they'd be competing for conference championships/major bowls. Teams aren't trying to lose, but some aren't nearly as focused as they would be if they were still competing for a conference/national championship.

[Cola]

I think using bowl results (other than the National Championship) as a legitimate comparison of teams isn't the smartest thing to do.

But it is all we have to go on, for the most part. Bowl game conference tie-ins, as much as I hate them, have been the only guarantee of these bigger non-conference matchups.

Plus I don't buy into a certain few members' theory on here that teams just rollover and play downgraded football in efforts to lose in December/January. These are college athletes and they are competitors. No one likes to lose or half ass something. I question the true competitive nature of anyone who seriously buys into that.

It's true, though. I don't think anyone believes that Florida really wanted to be in the Sugar Bowl last year and gave their best effort. Heck, I recently heard that a good amount of the Illinois team got trashed on New Year's in 84 and were hungover during the Rose Bowl. For some teams it's just a vacation that happens to include a football game. Then there's all the teams playing in lower tier bowls that thought during the season they'd be competing for conference championships/major bowls. Teams aren't trying to lose, but some aren't nearly as focused as they would be if they were still competing for a conference/national championship.

I can agree with that in some terms...they are playing more for "fun" and enjoying themselves because there are no real implications of a win or loss. Some of them take some extra risks to show off a bit if they are NFL prospects. I understand those accusations about the games. As a former athlete, I could just never see myself playing soft or light because of the implications of the game...that is how you get hurt. I expect no less of these college athletes...they are machines that can't be programmed to just "take it easy." Hell, some of them aren't smart enough to know the implications...they just know one thing: play football and play it hard. *cue the SEC jokes on that one*

I watch these games every year...you certainly can't TELL they are throwing in the towel, if that is what they are actually doing.

[DS729]

Tech is now projected to play Louisville in the Russell Athletic Bowl. That's assuming Miami or Duke take the Chick-Fil-A and Sun Bowl spots. Should be an interesting matchup, would probably give Teddy Bridgewater the toughest defense he's seen yet.

I would have to agree just like with the 2005 Gator Bowl, but look what happened last year with Bridgewater dominating the Florida D. For VT, they better bring the good Logan Thomas because if he was playing like he did vs Alabama or Duke, he's going to be in big trouble against a solid Louisville defense. I think Louisville has simply the better offensive weapons to win this matchup and having Teddy to play his final game in a Louisville uniform is going to end with a bang.

Louisville- 34

Virginia Tech- 25

Please make it happen bowl executives. Then the board can officially have a "loser leave town" match, err bowl game.

I knew someone would say that. Tech will probably beat Louisville, the Hokies always play up to the level of competition, and I don't know what to think of that Florida win. But if Thomas doesn't turn the ball over, Tech will win. Although our starting back will be out for the game.

[DS729]

17-7 BGSU. Keep it up!!! Gotta knock the Huskies out of the BCS Bowl picture.

[dbadefense1990]

17-7 BGSU. Keep it up!!! Gotta knock the Huskies out of the BCS Bowl picture.

Shucks. I wanted a little more drama for Sunday's BCS selection pools.

[rams80]

17-7 BGSU. Keep it up!!! Gotta knock the Huskies out of the BCS Bowl picture.

OK I'll bite.

Why?

[pcgd]

It's kinda funny how a Bowling Green win costs them about $600k because of the BCS money that would've been shared with all MAC schools.

[FiddySicks]

It's kinda funny how a Bowling Green win costs them about $600k because of the BCS money that would've been shared with all MAC schools.

They even said that a BG win would cost the whole conference nearly $8 million. Ouch.

[Funky Bunky]

Yay, now the Fiesta Bowl might be watchable!