Texas - new BCS #1

Phlegm · Post by **Phlegm** » Mon Oct 24, 2005 8:25 pm

This week Texas edged out USC for the top spot in the BCS ranking.

Top Ten BCS:

Texas
Southern Cal
Virginia Tech
Georgia
Alabama
UCLA
Miami
LSU
Penn State
Florida State

brinstar · Post by **brinstar** » Mon Oct 24, 2005 8:51 pm

man i don't like any of those teams except for LSU

Ouchyfish · Post by **Ouchyfish** » Mon Oct 24, 2005 8:56 pm

WOOT

Glad to see my secondary fav team is doing well...They stole the fuckin defensive coordinator from Auburn! :ugh:

Phlegm · Post by **Phlegm** » Mon Oct 24, 2005 9:03 pm

OuchyFish wrote:WOOT

Glad to see my secondary fav team is doing well...

Which team? 'Bama? HAHAHAHAHAHA....

Ouchyfish · Post by **Ouchyfish** » Mon Oct 24, 2005 9:09 pm

diediedie!

:asshole:

Minrott · Post by **Minrott** » Mon Oct 24, 2005 10:14 pm

Just another example of how the BCS computer has the downsyndrome.worm

Malluas · Post by **Malluas** » Mon Oct 24, 2005 10:52 pm

yea don't let the undefeated so far and like 29 wins in a row fool ya.

don't forget the 2 best players in the backfield who take over games.

so stupid

but oh well as long as vatech doesn't overtake USC while they are all undefeated i will be ok with it

Post by **Gidan** » Mon Oct 24, 2005 11:48 pm

I'm I the only person who thinks the BCS completely sucks? Though I do agree with TX being #1.

Malluas · Post by **Malluas** » Tue Oct 25, 2005 12:11 am

PLAYOFFS DAMNIT!

Post by **Gidan** » Tue Oct 25, 2005 1:17 am

Playoffs would be great, but they are not practical. As much as we all love football, these players are students and their programs are run by the schools. To have playoffs you would either need to shorten the season a few games, extend the period in which the students would need to be at school by a couple weeks.

Spliffs · Post by **Spliffs** » Tue Oct 25, 2005 4:08 am

I think Texas deserves #1 at this point, based on the way they have demolished everyone they have played, outside of Ohio State, who was ranked #4. I mean, Texas Tech came into the game ranked what, #7 or 8? Then got blown out. Where as, USC only beat Notre Dame on a fluke. USC was also given problems by Arizona State. Texas has just been way more dominant against better competition.

I wouldn't worry about it anyway, USC finishes the season with a much tougher schedule, and if they run the table, they will be #1.

Post by **Gidan** » Tue Oct 25, 2005 4:16 am

In the end it really doesn;t matter who is 1 and who is 2. More then likely (unless somehting amazing happens) TX and USC will be playing each other for the championship anyway.

Diekan · Post by **Diekan** » Tue Oct 25, 2005 4:21 am

Minrott wrote:Just another example of how the BCS computer has the downsyndrome.worm

Yep - he's right. I hate to say it, but it's true. The SEC is probably the toughest conf in college football - yet the two undefeated teams are both ranked 4 and 5 - as they were last week.

I'm betting money that neither Georgia or Bama will be in the national championship...

The BCS is fucked.

Post by **Gidan** » Tue Oct 25, 2005 5:27 am

Do you really think Georga and Bama are beter then USC and TX? They shoudl probably be ranked over VT though.

Ouchyfish · Post by **Ouchyfish** » Tue Oct 25, 2005 9:08 am

Diekan wrote:Yep - he's right. I hate to say it, but it's true. The SEC is probably the toughest conf in college football - yet the two undefeated teams are both ranked 4 and 5 - as they were last week.

I'm betting money that neither Georgia or Bama will be in the national championship...

The BCS is fucked.

As it was probably already mentioned, Alabama is nowhere near UT or USC caliber.

Fuck them anyways...Fuckin rednecks would never stfu.

Phlegm · Post by **Phlegm** » Tue Oct 25, 2005 10:39 am

There are 6 undefeated teams left. By the end of the season, the most undefeated teams will be 4. Southern Cal plays UCLA and since the SEC has the championship game either Georgia or Alabama will be undefeated.

So the undefeated teams at the end of the year will be Texas, USC/UCLA, Georgia/Alabama, and Virginia Tech.

Virginia Tech has to play Miami though so they may not be undefeated at the end.

xaoshaen · Post by **xaoshaen** » Tue Oct 25, 2005 12:05 pm

Gidan wrote:Playoffs would be great, but they are not practical. As much as we all love football, these players are students and their programs are run by the schools. To have playoffs you would either need to shorten the season a few games, extend the period in which the students would need to be at school by a couple weeks.

Yeah, a collegiate playoff system is clearly impractical.

Malluas · Post by **Malluas** » Tue Oct 25, 2005 12:48 pm

Gidan wrote:Playoffs would be great, but they are not practical. As much as we all love football, these players are students and their programs are run by the schools. To have playoffs you would either need to shorten the season a few games, extend the period in which the students would need to be at school by a couple weeks.

sorry gidan you have fallen into the BS of the BSC talk

Division I-AA Division II Division III and NAIA all have playoffs. maybe one less game.

the big college just want the money from the bowl it has nohting to do with the kids or time from school

you can still have bowls and such but you need a playoff of some kind

what happens if there are 4 undeafted teams this year? Vatech, Georgia USC and Texas.. can you say one of those don't deserve to be in the title game.. no

point being playoffs imo would bring in MUCH more money cause of match ups.. and a few weeks of them.

even if you cut it down to 4 teams. at least its something

Post by **Gidan** » Tue Oct 25, 2005 6:36 pm

xaoshaen wrote:
Gidan wrote:Playoffs would be great, but they are not practical. As much as we all love football, these players are students and their programs are run by the schools. To have playoffs you would either need to shorten the season a few games, extend the period in which the students would need to be at school by a couple weeks.

Yeah, a collegiate playoff system is clearly impractical.

Ok so you take college basketball where they play 5 rounds in 2 weeks. College football is played 1 game a week. If you wanted to have the same type of setup it would take over 2 months. In 2 weeks you could get 4 teams in the playoffs, picking those 4 teams would be about as successful as the BCS. You would still need to use some obscure point system to decide what 4 teams shoudl be in the playoffs.

Phlegm · Post by **Phlegm** » Tue Oct 25, 2005 7:08 pm

college basketball playoff is 6 rounds in 3 weeks. If you count the play-in game then it would be 7 rounds in 3 weeks. That is on top of each conference tournaments. So in essence, 4 weeks of playoffs for college basketball.

In college football other divisions, 16 teams make the playoff for 4 rounds in 4 weeks.

Malluas · Post by **Malluas** » Tue Oct 25, 2005 11:37 pm

Gidan wrote:
xaoshaen wrote:
Gidan wrote:Playoffs would be great, but they are not practical. As much as we all love football, these players are students and their programs are run by the schools. To have playoffs you would either need to shorten the season a few games, extend the period in which the students would need to be at school by a couple weeks.

Yeah, a collegiate playoff system is clearly impractical.

Ok so you take college basketball where they play 5 rounds in 2 weeks. College football is played 1 game a week. If you wanted to have the same type of setup it would take over 2 months. In 2 weeks you could get 4 teams in the playoffs, picking those 4 teams would be about as successful as the BCS. You would still need to use some obscure point system to decide what 4 teams shoudl be in the playoffs.

but better than the potential if having like 4 undefeated teams who all deserve a shot at the championship

i think they should do a 10 game season then do like 3 weeks of playoffs or something

xaoshaen · Post by **xaoshaen** » Wed Oct 26, 2005 9:20 am

Gidan wrote:Ok so you take college basketball where they play 5 rounds in 2 weeks. College football is played 1 game a week. If you wanted to have the same type of setup it would take over 2 months. In 2 weeks you could get 4 teams in the playoffs, picking those 4 teams would be about as successful as the BCS. You would still need to use some obscure point system to decide what 4 teams shoudl be in the playoffs.

Not really, particularly if you expanded it to an eight team playoff system. You're essentially looking at best records and conference championships at that point. Even with only four teams, you'll almost always get all the undefeated teams that played a I-A schedule into the playoffs. Anyone who gets left out after that has only themselves to blame. The biggest problem with the system right now is that a team can do everything in its power and still be excluded.

Reynaldo · Post by **Reynaldo** » Wed Oct 26, 2005 9:36 am

Texas's schedule is so weak they'll be back down to #2 in no time.

USC at least has 2 ranked teams left on the schedule to play.

The biggest coup would be if VaTech wins out, with the teams they still have to play it would surely vault them to #2 if not #1.

When a media darling like Texas or USC gets left out of the title game if undefeated, I'd bet the playoff change would come sooner than we'd thnk.

Of course its all wishful thinking and theres plenty of football left in the season.

Tacks · Post by **Tacks** » Wed Oct 26, 2005 9:48 am

You could do an entire playoff in 2 weeks. No more than 3 teams ever deserve the championship.

#1 vs. #4

#2 vs. #3

these games are non-bowl games

winners of the 2 games play in national championship

Post by **Lyion** » Wed Oct 26, 2005 9:48 am

It'd be easy to incorporate a 16 team playoff system into Division I. Hopefully it'll eventually happen, as the bowl system is and always will be complete ass.