Fiesta Bowl

[santosh]

Yes all I know that it is very close to kick off right now and my mind should be off trying to predict this years game or designing up a new drive train or something like that, but did anyone see the Boise St. Oklahoma University game?

That was literally the on of the most ridiculous game I have ever seen in my life. I am generally a under dog supporter, but I never would have picked this one in Boise St. favor.

Towards the end I thought Boise St. was getting too cute with all their trick plays and whatnot, but hey it worked. And going for two in second overtime and gtting it off of a trick play... wow is all I can say.
This is a true Cinderalla story and in my mind is definatly an inspiring story.

What are your opinions on this game? I am not here to beat a dead horse, but do you think that this is more of a supporter for the Fista Bowl, or more ammo for playoff proponents?

I can only hope that the national title game is half as exciting.

[Jeremiah Johnson]

First of all... I watched every down of this game as I had a few bucks riding on BSU (I don't condone gambling but when I dislike OU this much I can't help but bet against them).

'Twas the most exciting game since the 1998 National Championship game.

BSU should be considered a contender next year for the big dance if they go undefeated again. However, I have a feeling they won't do that.

Lastly, the NC Game won't be half as exciting as this game. tOSU will whipe my arch-nemesis off this planet. The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

[Alexa Stott]

I think that with all these bowl games, many teams that have been underestimated have been pulling off some upsets, as well as some underestimated conferences (*cough* Big East *cough*). The Boise State game was definitely something to see. It's great to see some of the under dogs finally getting their chance to shine.

So...way to go, BSU!

Also, when talking about Cinderella stories, you can't leave out the Rutgers University Scarlet Knights. They have gone from a 1-11 team five years ago to a 10-2 team this year, with a huge win over Louisville.

I definitely think that college football needs to get rid of the BCS system and just have a playoff. There are too many bowl games as it is and teams that aren't even in the top 25 are playing in bowls (not BCS bowls, but still). I was reading either ESPN Mag or SI about a month ago and they proposed having a playoff that incorporated the current BCS bowls into rounds in the playoff.

Also, I think that bowls shouldn't have their "conference tie-ins." After those 3 big schools left the Big East, everyone thought that conference was dead. And just look at it now, they've got 3 teams in bowls this year, and produced a few exciting games this year on national television. Because of the tie-ins, teams that are ranked 2 or 3 in their conference are playing against teams ranked much lower in other conferences.

[santosh]

I wish I had money on Boise St. lol.
I also think the BCS is pretty unfair to teams that play in riculously hard conferences like the SEC who has teams like Auburn, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, South carolina, Arkansas, etc. where as you have the Pac 10 who only has USC and Oregon St.

[Jeremiah Johnson]

Originally Posted by santosh

I wish I had money on Boise St. lol.
I also think the BCS is pretty unfair to teams that play in riculously hard conferences like the SEC who has teams like Auburn, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, South carolina, Arkansas, etc. where as you have the Pac 10 who only has USC and Oregon St.

Completely agree... It's sad but true. However, South Carolina and Arkansas don't have incredibly hard schedules for SEC teams.

[Cory]

Originally Posted by santosh

I wish I had money on Boise St. lol.
I also think the BCS is pretty unfair to teams that play in riculously hard conferences like the SEC who has teams like Auburn, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, South carolina, Arkansas, etc. where as you have the Pac 10 who only has USC and Oregon St.

Compare the SOS of the Pac-10, where every team is in the top 15 (all but one in the top 10) and you've got a different story. USC, Cal, and Oregon State are all very good. UCLA is pretty good. Oregon is solid.

Alabama sucked this year, and so did UGA and SoCar, compared to how they were predicted to perform.

[Alexa Stott]

One team that was definitely over-rated this year was Notre Dame. I'm not denying that they are a good football team, because they are. But their schedule this season is absolutely ridiculous! They covered all of the armed forces (though Navy wasn't bad this year), Penn State, and UNC. For their schedule, they were ranked way too high, in my opinion.

The BCS system is extremely flawed. Teams like Penn State get to play in New Year's Day bowl games when they have a record of 8-4 and are ranked only 4th in their conference. PSU played Tennessee, who went 9-3 this season. Another example of a team that didn't deserve to even be in a bowl game would be Miami, who was 6-6 this year. Teams ranked as high as 2nd or 3rd play in some of the less important bowls, though they deserve to be playing in better bowl games. I will again use Rutgers as an example, since I've been following them for 15 years. They went 10-2 in 2006 and played in the Texas Bowl, which was aired on the NFL Network, only accessible to people with satellite until a last-minute agreement was reached with Cablevision. They played a team that was 7-5!

Hopefully, the NCAA would have realized that the schools, players, coaches, and fans are not totally thrilled with the error-ridden BCS system.

[Billfred]

<offtopic>All criticism of USC thus far seems to ignore one key thing: We beat Clemson. All else is secondary. </offtopic>

I watched the game starting around the third quarter. Great game--but I've been in favor of a real playoff system long before this bowl.

[Cory]

Originally Posted by AtalanteStar25

One team that was definitely over-rated this year was Notre Dame. I'm not denying that they are a good football team, because they are. But their schedule this season is absolutely ridiculous! They covered all of the armed forces (though Navy wasn't bad this year), Penn State, and UNC. For their schedule, they were ranked way too high, in my opinion.

The BCS system is extremely flawed. Teams like Penn State get to play in New Year's Day bowl games when they have a record of 8-4 and are ranked only 4th in their conference. PSU played Tennessee, who went 9-3 this season. Another example of a team that didn't deserve to even be in a bowl game would be Miami, who was 6-6 this year. Teams ranked as high as 2nd or 3rd play in some of the less important bowls, though they deserve to be playing in better bowl games. I will again use Rutgers as an example, since I've been following them for 15 years. They went 10-2 in 2006 and played in the Texas Bowl, which was aired on the NFL Network, only accessible to people with satellite until a last-minute agreement was reached with Cablevision. They played a team that was 7-5!

Hopefully, the NCAA would have realized that the schools, players, coaches, and fans are not totally thrilled with the error-ridden BCS system.

Thats a problem with the Big Least, not the BCS.

It's up to the conference commissioner to get favorable bowl tie-ins. Until this year the Big East has completely sucked, and even this year it looks so good on paper because of weak SOS.

If Rutgers wants to go to better bowls, they need to schedule tougher opponents, and the conference commissioner needs to make a deal with better bowls.

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by Cory

Thats a problem with the Big Least, not the BCS.

It's up to the conference commissioner to get favorable bowl tie-ins. Until this year the Big East has completely sucked, and even this year it looks so good on paper because of weak SOS.

If Rutgers wants to go to better bowls, they need to schedule tougher opponents, and the conference commissioner needs to make a deal with better bowls.

I completely agree with Corey (with the exception of his earlier comment about UGA sucking this year, any team that beats GT, Auburn, and VT definitely doesn't suck). Rutgers played a mild schedule at best. The marquee win was at home vs. Lousiville (who struggled against the 2nd or 3rd best team, yet somehow champion, in the ACC, Wake Forest). The only other notable teams they played were Navy (who lost to ACC opponent Boston College) and West Virginia (who also stuggled against an ACC foe, GT, who didn't even have their starting QB). The Big East got alot of credit this year for having 3 teams that stayed in title contention into the late part of the season, but this is primarily because the lack of competition they faced. None of these teams played a non-conference game against a team ranked in the Top 25 at the end of the season. Additionally, the Big East lacked depth beyond Lousiville, WVU, and Rutgers. None of the other teams even breached the top 25 during the season. Compare that to the SEC (6), Big 10 (6), and ACC (8), who each had half (or more) of their teams penetrate the Top 25 at one point during the season. And notice what happened when the Big East powerhouses started playing eachother, they all suffered at least one loss (2 for WVU and Rutgers), and fell lower in the standings. That is what was happening in the other major conferences (especially the SEC, Pac 10, and ACC) all season. The Big East is still the worst conference with a BCS tie-in.

As for the actual topic of discussion. I'm glad I picked Boise State to win that game (although they had me worried after OU returned that Int for a TD with 1:30 left). We saw it with Utah in 2005, GMU in 2006 (in NCAAB), and now again with BSU in 2007, mid-majors can win against the big conferences. I have never seen a team respond in the pressure like Boise State did. With that ability to come through in the clutch (and against a team that only had one real loss), I think BSU could have competed with anyone in the nation, even Ohio State.
Which brings me to my final point. I'm not calling for a play-off, but...
we had two undefeated teams, Boise State University, and The Ohio State University (stupid schools that put "The" in their name ). When we have two, and only two, nothing else should matter, they should play for the National Championship. Period.

[santosh]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

Which brings me to my final point. I'm not calling for a play-off, but...
we had two undefeated teams, Boise State University, and The Ohio State University (stupid schools that put "The" in their name ). When we have two, and only two, nothing else should matter, they should play for the National Championship. Period.

I wouldn't say that they should 100% be playing Ohio State becuase clearly even though Florida had one loss, their schedule was waaaay tougher. I think they should have a shot at them as they would have with a playoff system, but I don't think they 100% should play OSU. does that make sense?

Yes the Boise St. game made for one of the most exciting games I have ever seen in my life and
somwhat maks a case for keeping the bowl games, but it also shows that the little guys can play too and many of them should have a shot of being the national champions which they would with a playoff system.


What is the pac-10's record for the bowl games this year? All I know about is UCLA and USC's games.

[Jeremiah Johnson]

Pac 10 only won three bowl games and lost three games... .500. The SEC is 4-3 with one game to go. However, the SEC didn't lose any games to Mid-Major conference teams like Oregon and Arizona State did.

I'm not sure that Boise State could make it to a championship game in a playoff. Kind of reminiscent of George Mason in last years Final Four. Valiant effort, but in the end they would be too tired.

[ThomasP]

Originally Posted by Budda648

Pac 10 only won three bowl games and lost three games... .500. The SEC is 5-3 with one game to go. However, the SEC didn't lose any games to Mid-Major conference teams like Oregon and Arizona State did.

I'm not sure that Boise State could make it to a championship game in a playoff. Kind of reminiscent of George Mason in last years Final Four. Valiant effort, but in the end they would be too tired.

Fixed


I don't see why it'd be so hard to do a playoff system, there are 32 bowls and it spans over nearly 4 weeks... with just one round per week, you could have a 16 team playoff, use 15 of the currently established bowls for playoff games, and have 17 bowls left over for 34 teams that didn't make playoffs. It'd probably cut out 14 6-6 teams that don't deserve a bowl game anyway... of course, rambling here has absolutely no effect on the BCS... so I'm going to go find something productive to do :-/