posted
I was out with some middle schoolers doing an activity day up (or rather, for most of ya'll, down) here in the Pan Handle and you wouldn't believe the rabid devotion those boys have to FSU. You should've seen their faces when they heard that they lost. Their dissapointment made mine, a student, look like nothing.
And I was pretty dissapointed/disgusted. Posts: 2827 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, seeing as Miami was short 13 players, I was kind of hoping Duke would pull that one out - if only to teach them a lesson their university doesn't seem to want to.
I'm just happy that Rutgers has moved up to #16 in both the AP and USA Today polls, which is the highest we've been ranked in school history, I believe. We're also #14 in the BCS poll.
Our next game is on a Sunday, so next week's rankings won't be altered by it - but I'm hoping in two weeks, after a big win over UConn Sunday (and hopefully some losses ahead of us), that we can move up even further.
Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
As much as I think they're waaay overrated, I need Notre Dame to keep winning. If they don't make the BCS, they take one of the Big East's bowl bids because of their Big East status for basketball.
Likely, either WVU or L'ville will get our automatic bid, and the other will get an at large bid. Pitt and Rutgers (and possibly USF) have to fight for whatever other bids the Big East gets, and if Notre Dame takes one, that's going to suck.
As for Boise State, Frisco, I just don't understand how they are ranked as high as they are. I mean, they are 8-0, but they don't play anyone worthwhile all year. They only have four teams on their schedule with winning records at the momment, and those are Oregon State, Hawaii, San Jose State, and Nevada (not exactly heavy hitters). Their nonconference schedule dips into the Big Sky (I-AA), WAC, Mountain West (twice), and Pac 10 (Oregon State - not exactly a Pac 10 power).
I'd have a lot more faith in their ranking if they'd played any team from the Big Ten, Big Twelve, SEC, Big East, or ACC (excluding Duke).
They carry the nation's #16 total offense, which is great until you see that the average of their opponents' total defense ranking is 76th (with only 3 opponents in the top 50, and 1 in the top 25). They have the #5 scoring offense, but their opponents' average scoring defense is 80th (with only 3 opponents in the top 50, and none in the top 25).
They won't see a real defense all year, except possibly in their bowl game.
They should win out (the only possible challenge coming from San Jose state, who has the best defense of the remaining teams at 52nd scoring defense and 69th total defense), but even if they do it seems they'd be stealing a bid just because they won't have shown themselves to be able to compete against a quality opponent all year.
Funny thing is, they could be really good or they could be an illusion... there's just no way of knowing how they'd compare to a quality team, because they don't have one on their schedule.
Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
That's the curse of the small conference champion.
They have trouble getting anyone to come to Boise. Who in their right mind in the SEC, ACC, Big 10, or Big 12 (who is any good) is going to schedule BSU as one of their three OOC games? Those games are supposed to be pushovers. In the big conferences, there's enough in-conference power that they don't need to schedule ranked OOC opponents.
I mean, maybe USC or Ohio State would agree to it, but that's not really in BSU's best interest. Next year, we've got Washington, Bowling Green (both on the road--eek), and Wyoming...all teams with the potential to be good.
We got Georgia (finished the season in the Top 10 or so last year) to agree to it for a single year--last year--which was a big mistake for BSU. They went to Georgia on opening day (a sweltering, humid day for a bunch of boys who play in the mountains) and got whooped. Georgia wouldn't agree to come to Boise for a home-and-home.
We can get lesser Pac-10 teams to come, ala OSU, and in the bowl game in Boise, they beat up on average ACC teams, but anything else is tough.
They proved themselves two years ago by going to Memphis(400 miles from Louisville, compared to 2000 from Boise) to play #7 Louisville in the Independence Bowl. They lost by a field goal, though.
I think they'll do well against a good team this year in a bowl, be it BCS or otherwise.
If they do finish in the Top 12, it's likely they'll go to either the Fiesta Bowl to play Texas (assuming they win the Big-12), or the Orange Bowl to play either Clemson or West Virginia (assuming, again, that they win their respective conferences). Texas would be most able to exploit BSU's weaker pass defense (though their own weak pass defense could be a liability), but WVU could really test BSU's good run defense.
posted
I guess being in Idaho does make it difficult to schedule games. You'd figure you could get Oregon, Arizona State, or Nebraska to do a home-and-home series or something. As it is, you could have the #1 offense and defense in the country, but it wouldn't mean anything since you're almost playing against really good high school teams.
Well, maybe you'll get matched up against Rutgers in a bowl game, and we'll see what happens.
Sorry about Clemson, Eruve and Tres, but they really didn't look good against VTech. On the brighter side, they may have just moved Rutgers into the top 15!
Now, if only Georgia can knock off Florida...
Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by FlyingCow: Sorry about Clemson, Eruve and Tres, but they really didn't look good against VTech. On the brighter side, they may have just moved Rutgers into the top 15!
Ooops... I am a bad Hokie. For the second game in a row, I completely forgot about a game and the Hokies have won. Maybe I should stop watching games for the rest of the season, you know, for the good of the team...
/superstitious sports fan
But yay! They won a game against a good opponent, and from what I've read, they actually looked good doing so!
Posts: 959 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
The risk/reward for playing, say, a Nebraska or Oregon is just not worth it. We already play OSU, who is perennially a middle-of-the-pack ACC team, and this year we played Wyoming and Utah, top teams in the Mountain West (well, Utah's usually better than this year). Why play a potential top 10 team when losing even that one game puts you 100% out of the race for the BCS and winning only increases your chance a small amount--certainly not enough to be considered for the National Championship game?
I think BSU does it right. Play decent OOC teams, then hope to go undefeated. Fresno State and Hawaii are usually good in-conference teams--Fresno State almost beat USC last year, even.
quote:I guess being in Idaho does make it difficult to schedule games. You'd figure you could get Oregon, Arizona State, or Nebraska to do a home-and-home series or something. As it is, you could have the #1 offense and defense in the country, but it wouldn't mean anything since you're almost playing against really good high school teams.
Well, Rutgers has pretty much the same sort of schedule, and their defense is being praised this year. Ohio, Pitt and Navy wins, compared to BSU beating Oregon State, Wyoming and Hawaii. (Pitt's 35 in the BCS, Hawaii's 37)
And it's not too likely that BSU and Rutgers will square off. If BSU wins out, they'll likely go to a BCS bowl. If they finish in the top 12, they're automatic. And with #13Arkansas and #11Tennessee, #3USC and #10Cal, #3USC and #9Notre Dame, #4WV and #6 Louisville, #14Rutgers and #4WV, and #14Rutgers and #6 Louisville still having to square off this season (and that's not counting conference championship games), it's almost inevitable that they'll move up the three spots they need. They already likely move up one spot with Clemson's loss tonight to unranked VTech.
Also, if they finish in the top 16 and one of the automatic bids goes to someone ranked lower than 16 (possible, if there are any upsets in the SEC, Big 12, or ACC Championship games), then they're automatically in, too.
If BSU doesn't win out, they'll probably go to the MPC Bowl in Boise (as the WAC Champ) and face the second or third place ACC team.
For Rutgers to get into a BCS bowl, they're going to have to beat Louisville and WV. Pretty tall order.
Posts: 5264 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by FlyingCow: Sorry about Clemson, Eruve and Tres, but they really didn't look good against VTech.
I have never seen them play that bad in a long time. Clemson is a good team, they have great teamwork, and they have proved it. They just weren't with it tonight (and Will Proctor just couldn't throw the ball to save his life). I think not having the support of the crowd, and lack of enthusiasm was a big factor. *sigh*
(Now if you'll excuse me, I need to go cry myself to sleep.)
Posts: 4174 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think it was a letdown game after the Georgia Tech win, and they just weren't "up" for it, it didn't look like.
I'm hoping Rutgers doesn't suffer the same fate after their big win at Pitt going into a trap game against UConn. We should blow the doors off, but I'm never confident about such things. I'm hoping for a 42-7 win, or something along those lines. Take Rice and Leonard out after the half and let the freshmen Corcoran and Young get some game reps.
Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wisconsin had a bit of a scare - too bad Illinois couldn't pull it off. They've been snakebit the last few games, it seems - just can't seem to close out a second half.
Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
No kidding Wisconsin had a bit of a scare. I talked to my mother after the game and she was horrified to find out that Juice Williams was only a freshman. Thank the Gods we pulled it out this year!
Posts: 3932 | Registered: Sep 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's true that Rutgers will have a hell of a time getting into the BCS - but if they played BSU's schedule the way they've been playing this year, they'd also likely go 12-0. Of course, they have #4 WVU and #6 L'ville in the way of an undefeated season. BSU doesn't have that.
This is also a ridiculously abnormal year for Rutgers (though I hope it is the start of a trend). Before two years ago, Rutgers was normally spoken only in the same breath as Temple and Duke. Last year we went to our first bowl game in 28 years, and this year we're 7-0 against some pretty decent competition (three teams who will go bowling on the road, plus three more teams in the future who will go bowling including WVU and L'ville).
It's a big turnaround for us, and uncharted territory. Should we be ranked as highly as we are? I don't think so. I don't think we should have been ranked so early, either. I think the numbers are a bit inflated - just as BSU's are.
But Rutgers will have a chance to prove themselves against some of the top caliber teams in the country, and BSU won't ever get that chance. As screwed up as the BCS bowl selection is, it's kinda weird that they can include a team that never played anyone in the BCS Top 25.
It feels almost like BSU is cheating the system. If adding a decent opponent to their OOC schedule is such a huge risk, then maybe BSU shouldn't be considered one of the best 12 teams in the country.
If Rutgers loses to WVU and L'ville (which is likely - though we're better matched against WVU), we don't deserve a BCS bid. That's pretty clear. If we do win against both, then we definitely deserve one. That's also pretty clear.
I just think that the top bowls in the country should be reserved for teams that have shown themselves to be able to play and defeat quality competition - not teams that have shown then can pad their year with weak OOC competition in hopes of going undefeated against the bottom half of the country.
Do I count Rutgers among the top 12 teams in the country? Not yet, no - they'd have to show me a big win against a big team, likely two big wins. Even at 7-0 (or 8-0 if we beat UConn tomorrow), we haven't faced anyone worthy of putting us in the top 12 and don't deserve a BCS bid until we do. I find it hard to see BSU in anything but a similar light - though they will have no way of proving themselves worthy or not before bowl time.
If you don't beat a team in the Top 25, I don't think you have a right to be in a BCS bowl. For major conferences, this is easy, because you *have* to play them - making an undefeated year indicative of some big wins. For minor conferences, it would require scheduling some good OOC competition before you get consideration as one of the country's premier teams.
As an aside, USC went down to Oregon State, making the OSU win mean a bit more. Still, had BSU beaten USC themselves, it would have meant a lot more - and if their numbers are to be believed, they probably could have done it. Then again, numbers can collapse against good competition (see Garrett Wolfe).
Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't think you're undestanding my definition of "risk". You may call it cheating the system, I call it playing the system.
Boise State already takes risks--playing an average-to-above average Pac-10 school and the perennial top two WAC programs, not to mention an up and coming Bowling Green. Add that to their own division schedule--Fresno State and Hawaii are almost always either in the top 25 or on the cusp--and you get a pretty good indication of how good they are.
But to play a team in the top 15, now that's not really a risk worth taking. Say they lose by a field goal to the #15 team. It's likely they could go undefeated otherwise and barely crack the top 25.
Do you know how much money a BCS bowl earns a school?
10 MILLION dollars.
And if you can get there by crushing your division and some other teams that are close to the top 25, you'd have to be pretty stupid to do otherwise.
Boise State is already getting some respect because of their reputation as a good program. They were largely untested two years ago when they went blow-for-blow with an awesome Louisville team. The Liberty Bowl organizers knew they were getting a quality program.
As an aside, did you know--no team in the Big East has beaten a current top 25 team?
WVU is ranked #4 and have ONE win against a team with even a winning record--unranked Maryland.
Louisville is ranked #6 with ONE win over a team over .500--unranked Miami.
The ACC as a conference doesn't have a single win over an OOC top 25 team. They pretty much beat up on the doormats of their own league and get top 25 rankings for doing so.
Why single out Boise State for not playing a tough schedule? Just because one can't prove that WAC and MWC teams are any good on paper doesn't mean that they're not. Watch a few games and see. Watch Fresno State almost upset USC last year. Watch Wyoming beat a heavily favored UCLA in a bowl a couple years ago. Watch Utah crush Big East champ Pitt two years ago. Watch Hawaii beat just about anyone who plays them in a bowl game. Watch Boise State whoop a OSU team that beat USC today, or come within a field goal of #6 Louisville two years ago. Any time the cream of the WAC or MWC meets a non-conference foe, they hold their own, winning as often as not.
Really, there comes a point where your program just gets respect. There's really no reason for anyone in the Big East or ACC to be ranked as well as they are, but them's the breaks.
Somebody's got to be in the top 25.
Posts: 5264 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Out of curiosity, what does anyone from outside the Big Ten think about it? I find the analyses of the other conferences fascinating and would love to hear a (relatively un-biased) view from outside the conference.
(edit for spelling - it is, after all, Halloween party night )
Posts: 3932 | Registered: Sep 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thing is, everyone in the Big East and ACC will play a top 25 team - actually, more than one. If they come out undefeated, that's a clear indication that they faced down and defeated some tough opposition. If they lose, they are rightly taken out of consideration for a BCS bowl.
Boise St has no such litmus test.
"Above average Pac-10" and "top WAC" should not be the highlights of a schedule from one of the top 12 teams in the country. And Bowling Green just lost to Temple, so I don't know how up-and-coming they are.
I agree that BSU is "playing" the system, and I guess the maxim of "don't hate the playah, hate the game" holds true. They've found a loophole and are exploiting it. Maybe the BCS should close the loophole and require a Top 25 win to qualify for a BCS bowl.
You say there's a time when a team gets respect. To me, that time is when a team has respectable wins. I'm not saying BSU is a bad team by any stretch - obviously, they are a good team with the numbers they are putting up. I just can't respect them as a Top 12 team without any wins over quality competition.
Right now, Rutgers ranking is very "soft" because the hardest teams they've played are Navy and Pitt (about the same level as Hawaii and Fresno St). We'll know at the end of the year, after two tough tests, where they stand.
If Rutgers is 12-0, that will mean a whole lot more than if BSU is 12-0. BSU will end the season with a "soft" ranking, regardless.
Going undefeated means you're good. It doesn't mean you're one of the best 12 teams in the country, in my mind. Going undefeated against strong competition does.
BSU is exploiting the system to get their paycheck. Maybe it's time to close the loophole and put in a stipulation about needing at least one win over a BCS top 25 team.
BSU is doing the football equivalent of graduating with a 4.0 average without ever taking a 300 or 400 level class for fear of getting a B. It doesn't mean they're not smart, just that they abused the system without ever putting themselves to the test.
Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, that wasn't a happy Rutgers game. They won 24-13 when it should have been 42-7 or more. And Ray Rice may have gotten hurt... not good all around.
We made it to 8-0, but if we play like this against WVU, we'll get blown out. Still, we got past the trap game and are looking forward to L'ville on the 9th.
Not at all happy with our defensive lapses against what is really a subpar rushing offense, on the whole.
Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Thing is, everyone in the Big East and ACC will play a top 25 team - actually, more than one.
But why are these teams ranked in the top 25? Nobody in either conference has beaten an OOC top 25 team. West Virginia beating Louisville and Rutgers could just mean that both are overrated, since neither the Cardinals or Knights have played anyone who's proven themselves against a team arbitrarily labeled "good".
Rutgers'(#3 Big East) best win is over Pitt(#4 BE), whose best win is over Cincinatti(#5 BE) whose best win is over South Florida (#6 BE), whose best win is over Connecticut(#7 BE). See a pattern?
WVU's best win is over 5-4 Maryland, whose best win is over 4-4 FSU, whose best win is over 5-3 Miami, whose best win is over Houston.
My point being, it's likely that WVU will win the Big East undefeated with it's most impressive win being the team one below it in the standings, Louisville. Maybe even go to the National Championship game on these credentials! All we can get out of WVS's record will be that it's the best team in the Big East. Is the Big East better than the WAC? As a whole, likely. On top? We'll never know. All we know is that WVU is better than the rest of their conference, and better than the middle of the pack ACC teams.
This will get them to the National Championship game, and could be crowned second best team in the nation with its only top 25 wins being possibly overrated Louisville and Rutgers(if they finish the season in the top 25).
And we're griping that BSU shouldn't be in the top 12 because they haven't been tested? Who's to say that Oregon State couldn't come over and whip Louisville? OSU has lost their three games all to top 25 teams and beaten the #3 team in the country. For this they're rewarded with...nothing in the BCS. Louisville, on the other hand, has beaten no one good, lost to no one good, and sits in the top 10.
Is it possible that schools and conferences who've historically been better get votes for just that reason? And conferences without quite so much ESPN airtime might be underrated?
And do we think that maybe--just maybe--the people voting in these polls know something about football and are qualified to spot talented squads whether they squeak by UConn or blow out Oregon State?
The BCS system was modified this year SPECIFICALLY so that teams outside the big 6 conferences had a shot at these games. The Pac-10 is never going to offer a BSU or a Utah or a Fresno State or a BYU into their conference. And nobody is going to play any of those teams in a home-and-home series. Sure, these big conference teams will let BSU come to Georgia or Fresno to the Rose Bowl...but no way are they coming out to Boise or Fresno the next year. And that's really the bad thing. I know that BSU has offered other Pac-10 teams home-and-homes, but only OSU has accepted.
I think it says something about BSU's program that they're so feared that nobody will come to their turf.
posted
It's a great time to be a buckeye. Just thought I'd start with that.
I agree with a lot of the comments being made about the Big East and SEC. I think West Virginia has benefitted most from USC loss. They will more than liekly run the tables and be the team in the BCS championship game. Of course if the Big East all beat on eachother and the champion comes out with one loss I think the SEC championship team will play for all the marbles. THat will probably be florida. BUT... No one is going to be able to hang with the buckeys this year. They are head and sholders above the rest of the NCAA this year. Only two teams have scored more than 7 points on them this year. (the defense averages only 7.3 pointsa allowed on the year) They have covered the spread in 15 of their last 16 games. They are winning by more than 17 points a game. The defense is lights out, they have 18 intereceptions on the year and are allowing under 270 total yards of offense per game. The offense is just sick, averaging over 420 yards a game. PLus they have a few of teh biggeest names in College football right now. I know this is a down year for the Big Ten and a lot of people are saying that the Bucks are playing a weak schedule but look at their wins against Texas and Iowa. Heck, look at their wins agains the middle run teams in the big ten. All around the country the top ten teams seem to be struggling against average teams but not the buckeyes. They are dominating and showing no sign of stopping.
A couple of predictions...
tOSU will beat Michigan by at least 2 touchdowns. Michigan has a good team this year but after watching the first 3/4 of the season they just aren't as good as they will need to be to beat Ohio State. Next year is a different story. I think they will be scary good next year, but not November 18th of this season.
tOSU will play West Virginia for the National Championship. WV has their destiny in their own hands and I think they will win out. This Thursday should let us all know if I'm right. I think Louisville is their last real challenge. Again I think tOSU is at least a two touchdown favorite in the championship game.
Heisman Trophy Winner - Troy Smith. This is a pretty easy prediction. Unless he gets injured or has a total meltdwon over the next three games he has the thing wrapped up. But he has been so consistent and calm under center that I really don't see anything stopping him. It's time to get a sixth banner ready for the Horseshoe.
Posts: 1294 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
WVU's early season ranking was based on a victory over Georgia, last year's SEC champion, last year in a bowl game. Louisville's triple overtime loss to that same WVU team last year factors into their ranking, as well.
Rankings don't exist in a single year bubble. The BCS doesn't just look at this year, but the computers look at your record and victories over the past several years - and your strength of schedule.
If the WAC decided all of a sudden next year to have all Top 25 teams in their OOC schedule, and won against at least half of them, then their overall schedule strength would rise - even if they were denied a BCS slot. If, the following year, they did the same, their overall schedule strength would again rise. If they did a third year, it would continue to rise.
There will come a point when the overall strength of the conference would become self-sustaining and they could drop off their OOC difficulty a bit.
If, for example, Boise St's OOC schedule included wins over Tennessee, Oklahoma, Texas, and Florida, they'd be vying for the national title instead of just hoping people ahead of them drop back and allow them to back-door into the BCS.
If BSU's schedule was that strong, then Hawaii's schedule strength would increase (just for having BSU and their powerhouse schedule on their schedule) as would all the other WAC teams. If Hawaii also added victories over Oregon, Notre Dame, LSU, and Clemson, their strength of schedule would go way up - as would BSU's.
The SEC isn't considered good because someone pulled their name out of a hat. They're good because of years of playing top caliber teams has built a respect for their conference - so much repect that it has become self sustaining.
BSU is undefeated and in the Top 15 in the country at the moment. If, next year, they added a stronger schedule and accomplished the same feat, they'd gain more respect - as would the WAC. If Hawaii and Fresno St got some big wins over big competition, the WAC would get even more respect.
If they continued to win over big competition, the WAC would start to be talked about in comparison to the ACC, Pac 10, and Big East. If they continued to win over big OOC competition, they'd be talked about in comparison to the SEC, Big Ten and Big 12.
And at that point, they could lighten their OOC schedule because BSU, Hawaii, and Fresno St would be considered strong perennial programs like Tennessee, Michigan, Notre Dame etc.
It doesn't happen overnight. And it doesn't happen by padding the OOC schedule every year in hopes of jumping through that BCS loophole.
Right now, BSU is only ranking 18th in total offense against an average total defense of 76th (out of 119, not including their I-AA game). They're only ranking 46th in total defense against an average total offense of 38th. They only show up in the top 15 of two statistical categories - rushing offense (#6 against an average defense of 63rd) and scoring offense(#3 against an average defense of 80th).
They can only make it to the Top 12 by relying on others to lose - not by winning themselves. It's like a gymnast doing a perfect routine with a low difficulty level - they have to hope the people with higher difficulty levels screw up.
To me, BSU is one of two things.
1. A great team that is playing it safe, not challenging themselves, beating up on weaklings, and hoping they'll get a big payday after never being forced to really compete.
2. A mediocre team that has benefited from a weak schedule and will stumble backwards into the BCS when better teams lose to even better teams.
At this point, there's no way for me to tell.
BSU may get a BCS bowl bid, but they're a few good wins away from getting respect.
(As an aside, this is a fluke year for Rutgers, and there's no way in hell we should be ranked so high. Rutgers should be around #20-25 at the moment... with BSU right there with them. When Rutgers loses (and they are almost guaranteed to), they should drop out of the top 25, and... when BSU wins out, they should hover right around #18 or so. Just my opinion, of course.)
Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Rankings don't exist in a single year bubble. The BCS doesn't just look at this year, but the computers look at your record and victories over the past several years - and your strength of schedule.
Unless you can find me a link for that, I'm going to insist that you just pulled that out of thin air.
Every explanation I've ever seen of the computer rankings says opposite. Only your record, your opponents' records, final score, home field, margin of victory, and offensive and defensive stats factor into the computer score. It's a lot of small factors from different computer sources, but there's nothing anywhere I've ever read to even hint that they used a previous year's stats.
Why would they, when players graduate, become academically ineligible, or join the draft?
If anything takes last year into account, it's the human polls. If you've got to pick which unknown is going to perform well, you pick the one that already has, since coaching staffs are relatively unchanging, and can make big differences on the field.
This is why they don't release a computer score until week 8 of the season.
quote:BSU may get a BCS bowl bid, but they're a few good wins away from getting respect.
They may be a few wins from getting respect from you, but they already have the respect of the coaches and voters, who are the people who've actually seen them play. And that's probably all they care about. Posts: 5264 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I can't find a link to it, but I read an article in the Sunday Star Ledger (NJ) that said there is a computer that has Rutgers at an entirely unrealistic 4th in the country (3rd as of Sunday, it seems). The article mentioned that this is the only computer that doesn't take into account previous years' records.
Looking into this myself, I found this was not entirely the case:
The Billingsly Report says this: "I am convinced that carrying a team's RANK over from one season to the next, and then making the rules for the first few weeks of the season "more relaxed" is the best method to use."
The Massery ratings say this: "The only purpose preseason ratings serve is to provide a reasonable starting point for the computer. Mathematically, they guarantee a unique solution to the equations early in the season when not enough data is available yet."
So, prior performance is taken into account in two of the polls for sure. The Wolfe poll was surprisingly vague about what it did and did not take into account. Sagarin and Colley were very clear that they did *not* include previous data.
Beyond the computers, the Coaches Poll and Harris Poll are both large factors in the BCS calculations, and both of these take into account a team's image in the minds of voters.
"All three components—The Harris Interactive Poll, the USA Today Coaches Poll and the computer rankings—shall be added together and averaged for a team's ranking in the BCS standings. The team with the highest average shall rank first in the BCS standings."
Two thirds of the input comes from human voters, and, of the final third, two of the six polls use information from the previous year.
quote:They may be a few wins from getting respect from you, but they already have the respect of the coaches and voters, who are the people who've actually seen them play. And that's probably all they care about.
But they don't. They're not in the top 12 in any human poll. Four of the remaining six undefeateds are in the Top 5 (getting respect from voters) and two are just barely scraping into the Top 15 (not getting nearly the same respect, nor earning it). Eight one-loss teams are ranked higher than BSU and RU, and one two-loss team is.
LSU has two losses, and still gets 20% more votes in the AP and 12% more votes in the coaches poll than BSU does. And BSU's lowest rankings are found in fan polls, which is closer to the court of public opinion.
If BSU had even one quality win over a Florida, Auburn, or Texas team, they'd be in the top 5 along with the other unbeatens. As it is, a team can lose twice and still get significantly more respect than an undefeated BSU team.
I'm glad going undefeated and still hoping against hope for a loopholed BCS bid is considered getting respect in Boise.
posted
It's not that they lost -- it's how they lost and who they lost to. Namely, Auburn (by 4 points and with several key calls that could've gone either way) and Florida (again, a much closer game than the final score). Both away.
And I don't know what you'd have Boise State do -- no good team is going to agree to a home and home with them, so they schedule the best teams they can get and win every game on the schedule. And you want to fault them for that? Frisco points out, rightfully, that the Big East (which has been the Big Least until this year) is just beating up on each other. That was my complaint at the beginning of the season with WVU. Their ranking is based on their bowl game last year against Georgia (which, by the way, was the biggest game in WV history and a game Georgia didn't even want to play -- one of the easiest trap games you'll ever see). I called it early on that they'd probably go undefeated this year and go to the championship game.
At the beginning of the year I gave Louisville a good shot to beat them, but with their stars both coming off of multigame injuries I just don't think they have the offensive consistency right now.
My only hope now is that if they do go to the Nat'l championship that Ohio State pastes them by at least 4 touchdowns.
Posts: 5462 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:The Billingsly Report says this: "I am convinced that carrying a team's RANK over from one season to the next, and then making the rules for the first few weeks of the season "more relaxed" is the best method to use."
The Massery ratings say this: "The only purpose preseason ratings serve is to provide a reasonable starting point for the computer. Mathematically, they guarantee a unique solution to the equations early in the season when not enough data is available yet."
I read those, too, and in context, it looked like they only made a difference in the beginning of the season. Later in the season, the computers wouldn't let you jump from, say, #60 to #10 with a win even over the #1 team in the country. Earlier in the season, such a jump is possible due to the relaxed rules that Billingsley uses in the first 4 weeks.
quote:So, prior performance is taken into account in two of the polls for sure. The Wolfe poll was surprisingly vague about what it did and did not take into account. Sagarin and Colley were very clear that they did *not* include previous data.
*shrug* Two polls out of 8 use an iota of last year's performance. Not enough for it to make much of a difference, I don't think.
quote:But they don't. They're not in the top 12 in any human poll. Four of the remaining six undefeateds are in the Top 5 (getting respect from voters) and two are just barely scraping into the Top 15 (not getting nearly the same respect, nor earning it). Eight one-loss teams are ranked higher than BSU and RU, and one two-loss team is.
They're ranked in the top 14 (ahead of Rutgers--#15 in both) in both human polls, despite not having had to prove themselves against a top 25 team. This is the respect I'm referring to. That LSU gets more respect doesn't mean that BSU gets none. I figured a smart guy like you would understand that.
OSU and Michigan have respect because they've beaten good teams. WVU and Louisville get more respect for some unknown reason. Perhaps some of the voters actually watch football?
quote:If BSU had even one quality win over a Florida, Auburn, or Texas team, they'd be in the top 5 along with the other unbeatens. As it is, a team can lose twice and still get significantly more respect than an undefeated BSU team.
Tell me, what are WVU's and Louisville's quality wins? Yeah, middle of the road ACC teams. BSU's is a middle of the road Pac-10 team (who, as we know, halted #3 USC's 37 game Pac-10 winning streak).
So in that respect, yeah, the Big East get's too much respect and BSU too little.
quote:I'm glad going undefeated and still hoping against hope for a loopholed BCS bid is considered getting respect in Boise.
Whatever. Have fun in the Meineke Car Care Bowl.
It's not so much hoping against hope as it is just not looking so far ahead at what is likely a given (a BCS bid) that you stumble over an inferior team in your last four games.
Posts: 5264 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
It's nice to see BSU get some respect from big time ACC, SEC, and Pac-10 coaches, though.
I hadn't even thought about the fact that they barely lost to Boston College(at #18, the ACC's top-ranked team and possible ACC champion) in their bowl game last year. And BSU's a lot better this year.
Posts: 5264 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
I think BSU (first automatic-at-large* bid) will go to the Fiesta Bowl, because the FB has the fourth and last pick of at-large teams, and BSU is by far the smallest market.
I think Notre Dame will beat USC and finish the season ranked #7, thus securing an automatic-at-large berth. The Sugar Bowl gets second pick of teams this year, and will pick ND over Auburn, since Auburn will have already played Florida twice during the season.
Michigan will get the third automatic-at-large bid by finishing the season at #4. The Rose Bowl gets first shot at them, since they lose OSU to the NC game.
That leaves one true at-large berth, and Auburn is gonna beat out West Virginia, who gets upset by Louisville this Thursday. Hopefully, the Orange Bowl (with the third pick) takes Auburn over BSU (since Auburn will bring more revenue), because I want to see BSU have a shot to play a Top-10 team (even if they match up unfavorably) rather than play a #10 or 11 Boston College again. The committee also takes into account if the two teams would be playing each other in a bowl game again, and since they met in the MPC Bowl last year, I don't think the BCS would do it again.
*yeah, I know, an oxymoron...but I use the term to distinguish from the automatic berths from the big 6 conferences who already have BCS bowl affiliations
Posts: 5264 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
This should be a very interesting game since both teams are sharing similar stats. On offense, WVU has per game has scored 40.9 points and had 459.3 yards (319 rushing, 140.3 passing) while Louisville per game has scored 38.7 points and had 496.1 yards (216 rushing, 280.1 passing). The biggest difference being Louisville is primarily a passing team while WVU a rushing team.
Defensively, WVU has allowed 12.7 points and 271.4 yards (89.3 rushing, 182.1 passing) per game while Louisville has allowed 12.6 points and 284.6 yards (74.9 rushing, 209.7 passing) per game. Both teams have similar defenses with slowing the run and giving some to the pass in an effort to prevent the big play and score.
The one common opponent is Syracuse, with WVU defeating the Orangeman 41-17 and Louisville winning it 28-13. Syracuse coach Greg Robinson was quoted as saying: "Two different styles of offense, two different styles of defense. But both good teams. Both high-powered offenses. Both show defenses that attack you in totally different ways. I'm not a predictor of things, but I think it'll be a great game."
The West Virginia/Louisville match up could come down to whoever has the final possession of the ball. But on the other hand, it could also come down to who has Pat White on their team.
WVU will have a huge advantage with their running quarterback. Of course it’s nice to have Slaton to confuse the defense and Schmitt to plow through them, but when you add in White -- who can pass it or run it -- that could be the difference in this otherwise seemingly even game.
Let's go Mountaineers!
Posts: 2845 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Meh. Boise State gets the benefit of the BCS version of affirmative action, and that's a mark of pride? There had to be threats of legal action just to make their back door entry possible.
Next year maybe Notre Dame will schedule games against Temple, Duke, and the rest of the bottom ten and take their BCS spot.
You're right, though, that the Big East has gotten too much respect too quickly after losing the core of their conference. But Boise is just as overrated as Rutgers is, and Rutgers has had a harder strength of schedule. Realistically, they're probably a good 20 and 21 right now.
At the end of the season, if Rutgers loses to WVU and Louisville (which they likely will), they'll be dropped into the low "receiving votes". If Boise wins out, they'll only move up the ladder by watching better teams beat themselves up. I mean, down the stretch, their schedule strength just gets worse.
That Boise is undefeated and still not in the top 10 is a testament to the respect voters give their schedule.
Maybe the affirmative bowl action BSU gets this year will give the conference some respect - but if they can't get some wins against BCS conference teams, it'll be short lived.
The WAC is 16-19 against OOC opponents (46%). Against BCS teams, they're 3-13 (19%). Against Top 25 teams, they're 0-5.
By comparison, the Big East (admittedly not the best BCS conference, and also admittedly given more respect than they've earned) went 32-8 against OOC opponents (80%). Against other BCS teams, they're 11-7 (61%). Against top 25 teams, they're 1-2.
Just sayin'. And even outpacing the WAC by that much, I think the Big East is still way overrated. Doesn't say much about the WAC, or teams that come out of it.
Maybe next year they could spot each WAC team a couple of wins... you know, to give them that leg up.
(As an aside, it's also kind of funny that if any WAC team has the audacity to beat Boise St, they'll lose half a million dollars. Some incentive, eh? )
Edit: Missed a couple BCS teams here and there, it seems, based on the link following. Fixed the stats.
posted
That link doesn't say much except the BE is 11-7 against other conferences, but with the weakest SOS of the big 6 conferences.
In other words, you win, but you didn't play anyone good.
5 of those 11 wins came against last place Mississippi St, last place North Carolina, and second-to-last Illinois.
quote:Against top 25 teams, they're 1-2.
Yes, but against current top 25 teams, they're 0-4.
Newly ranked Wake Forest has beat the Big East twice, and the one top 25 team the BE beat, then #17 Maryland, has since dropped out.
Posts: 5264 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:That link doesn't say much except the BE is 11-7 against other conferences, but with the weakest SOS of the big 6 conferences
Actually, it says the BE is 32-8 against other conferences. It's 11-7 against other BCS conferences.
Also, it has the WAC as the third weakest SoS of the 11 conferences, only barely better than the Sun Belt and the MAC.
The Big East's .800 record against a 62.13 SoS is a heck of a lot better than the WAC's .457 record against an 86.78 SoS no matter how you look at it. The WAC plays weaker teams, and loses to them more often.
Of course, the SEC's .825 against a 32.50 SoS is far better - but in a straight comparison between BE and WAC, the WAC loses.
quote:In other words, you win, but you didn't play anyone good.
As opposed to the WAC who doesn't win, and didn't play anyone good.
Plus, you say this as a condemnation, but it's exactly what BSU does. So, are you comdemning BSU, too?
quote:5 of those 11 wins came against last place Mississippi St, last place North Carolina, and second-to-last Illinois.
Have you looked at the WAC's schedule?
- 7 of their 16 total OOC wins came against I-AA teams. (and the combined record of these teams is 24-34... in I-AA! Only two of them have winning records! ) - 5 of the remaining wins came against teams with 2 wins or less. - Of the 4 remaining games, there's Oregon State (5-3), Utah (5-4), Colorado State (4-4), and Wyoming (4-5). Of these, only one (Utah) is in the top 3 in its conference, and only one (Oregon St) has even played a Top 25 team. - Three of these four were beaten by BSU, leaving only 1 pseudo-respectable win for the rest of the conference. - The three BCS teams they've beaten have a combined 7 wins between them in 25 games.
quote:Yes, but against current top 25 teams, they're 0-4.
So, by this bizarre logic, does that mean that Oregon State didn't beat the #3 team in the country? That they just beat the #9 team, because that's what USC is "currently" ranked? And if USC loses against Cal and Notre Dame, does that mean Oregon State didn't beat a Top 25 team at all?
Even so, with "current" ranked teams, the WAC is still 0-5.
Not sure how any of this was supposed to boost the WAC's respectability.
Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well the Big east does have a chance at the NC, but...
Mich and OSU can still play 2x for conference and NC. One would have to completely blow out the other in order to drop them from contention.
WVU Louis and Rut have a problem in that if rutgers wins out they would not reach the top 2. Rutgers is fit to play the spoiler (so is pit) If the team that wins the Louisville/WVU loses to Pit or Rut, it will hand #2 to UF, Aub or Tex. depending on what happens in thier respective conferences. UF needs Auburn to win out and also needs Ark to either lose to both Tenn and LSU or completely dominate them. If Ark does and beats UF in the SEC TG it will ruin the SEC bid and hand it right to Tex or USC.
In all likelyhood i don tthink the OSUvMich game will be a blowout. Since we all know the BCS is all about money a close game between those two would only make more money as a NC rematch (UFvFSU anyone?) so i think pretty much everyone else will be sitting on the sidelines begging for a playoff system.
or eating cheeseburgers like Weiss
Posts: 467 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Cow, I don't get where you read any of my recent post as comparing the Big East to the WAC.
I know the WAC, as a whole, is not as good as the Big East. I was just pointing out that by the numbers, the Big East is probably the weakest of the big 6 conferences.
I've compared BSU to all the BE undefeateds, but beyond BSU and Hawaii (and to a lesser degree Nevada and Fresno State in years past), the WAC is really weak.
Nowhere did I mean to imply that the WAC, from top to bottom, could compete with a "power" conference.
quote:So, by this bizarre logic, does that mean that Oregon State didn't beat the #3 team in the country?
I don't think USC is the third best team in the country, do you? They were overrated all year. Not so overrated, though, that losing to an unranked Beaver team wasn't a stunning upset. Even losses to #9 ND and #10 Cal probably wouldn't drop them out of the top 25, though, unless they really got blown out.
Why is that logic so bizarre? You're only as good as where you finish the season. Maryland was overrated, probably. If they win out and maybe beat a ranked ACC team along the way and get back into the top 25, then the WV win will mean a bit more. As of right now, Maryland's last four wins are by a combined 15 points over four teams with a combined record of 11-22. Not terribly impressive, especially where they almost lost to a winless Florida International team.
Posts: 5264 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Mich and OSU can still play 2x for conference and NC. One would have to completely blow out the other in order to drop them from contention.
While I think that Michigan will still be near the top, if Florida and either WV or Louisville win out, both will be ranked ahead of UM. Louisville or WV will have beaten #15 Rutgers and the #3 or #5 team in the country, boosting their computer rankings. Florida will have beaten Arkansas or Auburn, helping too. Michigan has no such chance to help themselves. They play only Ball State and Indiana, which won't raise their stock, and losing to OSU will likely drop them to #4...possibly #5 if Texas is impressive against TTU and whoever wins the Nebraska-Missouri game.
Posts: 5264 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
If Rutgers wins out with solid victories over L'ville at home and WVU away (highly, highly, highly unlikely... did I mention the word highly?), and the WVU/L'ville game is very close and Ohio St. blows out Michigan (also highly unlikely), and Texas loses to Texas A&M, and something happens to spoil the claims from Auburn and Florida...
Rutgers could have a chance at seeing the NC.
Then, at the game, the devil will ride in on his flying pig selling raffle tickets for a ski vacation in hell.
I'm just hoping we can knock off one of either WVU or L'ville. And even then, Cincinnati isn't going to be a cake walk. They almost beat Louisville and fared better against OSU for the first half than any other team but Penn State. In fact, Cincy is the only team to lead OSU after the first quarter (with Penn State the only team to lead after the first half).
The Big East backloaded their schedule this year for dramatic, nationally-televised effect, and it's worked out well for them. All the top conference teams are meeting in the last weeks of the year.
Oct. 21 Rutgers at Pittsburgh (ESPN2) Nov. 2 WVU at Louisville (Thurs/ESPN) Nov. 9 Louisville at Rutgers (Thurs/ESPN) Nov. 16 WVU at Pittsburgh (Thurs/ESPN) Nov. 25 Louisville at Pittsburgh Dec. 2 Rutgers at WVU (ESPN or ESPN2)
Should be some great games. I can't wait. Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well when you look at the numbers given to OSU, Mich, WVU, UF (top 4 BCS) OSU and Mich are at .99 while UF is .007 off from #3 with a .779 Mich is in a healthy spot to keep #2 as one loss as long as the loss isnt big, OSU the same. UF can potentially sink without losing any games if ARK wins LSU and Tenn, esp if they lose to South Car(not likely). WVU could lose SoS depending on how well Louis, Pitt and the teams that they have beaten (miami etc.) play. Tex doesnt really play anyone else and Cal and ND can beat USC which would diminish each of their wins with them.
Boise State however has a real good chance at a bid since the Acc isnt doing so hot, i think they could easily take their bid.
Posts: 467 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Big East is actually probably fourth in the big six conferences this year.
I mean, the top 3 are pretty clearly the SEC, Pac-10, and Big Ten this year (in no particular order). They had strong, similarly ranked schedules, and performed well against them. They're pretty close, in that slightly tougher schedules had slightly lower win %.
SEC - SoS: 35.00 Win v. OOC: 82.5% Big Ten - SoS: 28.09 Win v. OOC: 73.2% Pac-10 - SoS: 21.80 Win v. OOC: 69.0%
The next three are clumped, too. Still, though, the Big East's 11-7 BCS mark puts them above the ACC's 4-7 and Big Twelve's 3-8. Even if you take out the 5 wins over weaker BCS teams, the Big East would still be 6-7.
Big East - SoS: 62.13 Win v. OOC: 80.0% ACC - SoS: 52.00 Win v. OOC: 67.5% Big Twelve - SoS: 54.50 Win v. OOC: 68.8%
quote:Why is that logic so bizarre? You're only as good as where you finish the season.
I don't believe that at all. A win over Oklahoma St. pre-Adrian Peterson injury is a lot different than a win post-injury, for instance. From what I remember reading of the computer rankings, they take into account ranking-at-the-time as well as the current ranking. And all schedules have the ranking-at-the-time listed, rather than the current ranking.
To answer your question, though, did I think USC was #3 in the country? No. But I also don't think BSU is 14th. Or Rutgers as 15th, for that matter.
Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:WVU could lose SoS depending on how well Louis, Pitt and the teams that they have beaten (miami etc.) play.
Actually, WVU's SoS will only rise over the last weeks with games against Louisville, Pitt, and Rutgers. All three of those teams are better than their schedule to date. Throw in Cincy (almost bowl eligible, with the strongest SoS in the conference) and USF (also looking for bowl eligibility) and their final stretch is a lot tougher than the first 7 games.
If they win out, they'll be in good shape.
Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
well it was a highly improbably scenario, but i was more referring to the down the line teams, louisvilles win over miami, teams that inflate WVU victory could possibly collapse and may drop the SoS for WVU. Similar to how S.Car can play a spoiler in the SEC, say S.Car beats Ark or UF destroys Tenn and Aub chance of going anywhere, esp if they beat LSU and Tenn. IF Ark beats LSU and Tenn then it drops UF's SoS and kills Aub.
The Catbird is really Tex i think. IF WVU Rut and Lousville knock each other off and if Ark, S.car mess up SEC Tex could potentially pick up many spots especially if ND blow out USC and especially if that USC team blows out Cal.
posted
actually SoS isnt as important as winning for style points is now. UF has to win handily at Vandy, post a vitory (i don tthink score is important) to SC then win big at both W.Car and FSU. WVU has its best shot because of the Televises Big East games, the coaches can be swayed easily because of these factors. And the coaches will count more than the SoS at this point in the year.
Posts: 467 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Boise State however has a real good chance at a bid since the Acc isnt doing so hot, i think they could easily take their bid.
BSU doesn't have to take any bids. The six conference champions get bids, and there are four more up for grabs. Notre Dame gets one if they're in the top 8 and Boise gets one if they're in the top 12(or 16, depending on who gets the rest of the automatic bids). The #3 or 4 teams get them if they don't get an automatic.
After that, a committee decides who gets in if there are more bids left.
Posts: 5264 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
I don't think Notre Dame has much of a chance at the national championship game this year. They needed to beat a USC team that went undefeated and legitimately claimed the #3 spot. I think they're out of contention for that.
I'm curious what happens if the three undefeateds in the Big East each end the season with one loss. Say, for sake of argument, that West Virginia beats Louisville, Louisville beats Rutgers, and Rutgers beats West Virginia. Who wins the Big East and gets the automatic bid if each of these teams win the rest of their games? They'd each by 6-1 in conference, 11-1 overall, and have one loss to one of the other tied teams.
Anyone know how that tie is broken?
Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
The last post was from my article in Your Bulletin Board that I do each week. Here is part of this week’s that adds a bit more to the BCS fun!
Underdogs
The Mountaineers greatly enjoyed the USC loss this past weekend as it opened the gates for a possible WVU national championship game. The Mountaineers moved up to number 3 in all the major polls (the highest ranking in school history) and in this spot they control their own destiny. As long as WVU keeps winning, and once #1 Ohio State and #2 Michigan play each other, the other spot in the big game will open up. WVU’s biggest game of the season happens tonight at 8:00 on ESPN as they take on Big East conference foe #5 Louisville.
Louisville is a 2 point favorite in this game and that should help motivate the Mountaineers to rise to the occasion and show they deserve all the recognition they have been getting. WVU plays best when they are the underdogs.
For those worried about a one-loss team jumping WVU in the BCS, let not your hearts be troubled. When you look at the BCS rankings you’ll notice the Mountaineers are 13th average in the computer poll. This can only go up as long as we continue to win and will separate ourselves from the other one-loss teams.
The other scenario that seems to be popular on the sports talks shows and amongst worried fans is a close game by Michigan and Ohio State and the thought that the loser would hold on to the #2 spot. Again, our strength of schedule towards the end of the season will help us greatly with this. If by chance WVU and Rutgers are both undefeated when they play on Dec 2nd that would be for the Big East Championship and another game with two top ranked teams, which should give us no problem encountering any one loss jump issue.
Posts: 2845 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think that Frisco's Bowl predictions on 10/30 are dead-on. The only thing that makes me hesitant is that Florida may win the rematch with Auburn in the SEC championship, and they may get the pick over an undefeated Louisville. A one-loss SEC team carries more respect than an undeafted Big East team in my book.
Posts: 407 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
If WVU beats UofL and UofL beats Rutgers, that would make the final game of the season likely #2 WVU v. #20(???)Rutgers. If Rutgers wins, that would likely drop WVU several spots, and raise Rutgers several spots.
I wonder who'd come out highest in the BCS after all that. I mean, everyone would be 11-1, but WVU would have a loss to a #20ish team and a win over a #5, UofL would have a loss to #3 but a win over a #15, and RU would have a loss to a #10-15ish (guessing at UofL's rank after a loss to WVU), but a win over a #2. Of the three, WVU has the lowest schedule strength, and Rutgers the highest.
It would just be pure chaos... and totally awesome.
Personally, I'm already stoked that Rutgers is going to *any* bowl. Two bowls in two years? Unheard of! To possibly end the season 10-2 or better, and maybe get a chance to play at a major non-BCS bowl?
I'd love to jump into the Sun Bowl vs. USC/Washington State. Or possibly the Texas Bowl against Texas A&M/Mizzou/Nebraska. The Car Care bowl or Gator Bowl would be great, too, and a chance to maybe meet up with a former Big East power.
The closest bowls would be the Car Care or International bowls - though I wouldn't mind a short vacation to Texas or Florida. Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Thank the Gods we pulled it out this year!
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[Taunt]](graemlins/taunt.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
) ![[Blushing]](graemlins/blushing.gif)
