PonyFans.com

this is unbelievable

SMU?

This has been an amazing year for college football. The teams in the #2 ranking have taking a pounding this year.

i dont understand how there could be any way to describe such an insane year

it's just because there's no powerhouse team this year and there are a lot of fairly even teams. people are getting ranked highly just because they haven't lost and then they are "upset" when they finally lose.

SMU might have won more games this year if we had one or more #2 ranked teams on our schedule.

Mustang1991 wrote:SMU might have won more games this year if we had one or more #2 ranked teams on our schedule.

i get the feeling it would be a bad idea playing teams like WVU, UF, LSU, and USC

QuikSStang wrote:

Mustang1991 wrote:SMU might have won more games this year if we had one or more #2 ranked teams on our schedule.

i get the feeling it would be a bad idea playing teams like WVU, UF, LSU, and USC

I think teams like Pitt and Stanford said that very same thing How many #2s or even top 5 teams got beaten by unranked opponents this year? Amazing

Mustang1991 wrote:

QuikSStang wrote:

Mustang1991 wrote:SMU might have won more games this year if we had one or more #2 ranked teams on our schedule.

i get the feeling it would be a bad idea playing teams like WVU, UF, LSU, and USC

I think teams like Pitt and Stanford said that very same thing How many #2s or even top 5 teams got beaten by unranked opponents this year? Amazing

5

Does a season like this beg the question of whether the BSC cartel is actually vastly superior to the Mid Majors? If the Cartel schools don't present a vastly superior team, doesn't it question the delusion that cartel schools are the supreme of the country? Should not the Mid Majors have a greater roll since the BSC cartel schools are not producing the mythical super teams?

well, if it works out that Ohio St plays LSU in the title game, you just might have the two best teams in the country coing together after all. Of course, USC, OU and a couple of others might disagree...but this is the system we are living with.

Realistically, as much as everyone complains about the BCS system, it does keep a lot of people interested and this year they will continue the debate of "who's #1" long after the title game is played

IMO, USC and Oklahoma have the top teams this year. USC's losses came because Booty was hurt. They are back up to snuff now and would be more than a match for anyone except OU. OU lost to Tech because their QB was hurt that game. The Colorado loss can only be explained by overconfidence early in the year and the fact that the game was played at altitude (Denver's elevation is 5,280 ft), which can make a difference if you are not acclimated to it.

BTW, USC has a 11-9-1 record against Ohio State and have not lost to them since 1974. (Ohio State has lost the last 5 games played against USC.)

http://usctrojans.cstv.com/auto_pdf/p_h ... 07-history

[quote="Charleston Pony"]well, if it works out that Ohio St plays LSU in the title game, you just might have the two best teams in the country coing together after all. Of course, USC, OU and a couple of others might disagree...but this is the system we are living with.

Realistically, as much as everyone complains about the BCS system, it does keep a lot of people interested and this year they will continue the debate of "who's #1" long after the title game is played[/quote]

I still would like a 16 team playoff. It would give a team like Hawaii a shot at proving just how good they are. It's easy for arrogent BCS schools to say that Hawaii's record is a fluke due to the conference they play in. Okay, prove it. Let Ohio State (or LSU, or OU, etc) play Hawaii and see who comes out on top. I wouldn't bet on the outcome of the game. The fact is that those BCS schools don't want to face a team like Hawaii. They don't want to prove it on the field. They want to have an exclusive little club and keep all the money in the game for themselves. It's time the non-BCS schools did something about that.

Is Kansas' record any more of a fluke? I mean they managed to lose the only good team they played. They scheduled the four blind mice in non-conference then dodged UT and OU and Texas Tech due to the Big 12's non-divisional schedule. Yet they have a shot at BCS- at least Hawaii actually scheduled decent non-conference BCS teams who backed out of games because they might lose. The BCS computer must penalize teams for playing non-competitive non-conference programs. Kansas is the least deserving team ever to be considered for the BCS. Plus they are the only undefeated team in the country.

I cannot imagine USC-OU playing OSU / Missouri / Kansas / WVirginia at a neutral site and Vegas not making the Trojans-Sooners a heavy favorite.

I was rooting for WV and Mizzo to both win yesterday. Once 1 lost and OSU was guaranteed a spot, I was rooting for BOTH to lose.

Let LSU take on Ohio State. The Buckeyes do not deserve a NC this year.