NCAA 2009

[PDH]

The only real solution to this is simple: Let the MWC into the BCS group and continue to exclude all the rest.

[Berkut]

Screw all this arguing about conferences and polls and computers. Who fucking cares?

Arizona is going into the next 4 games controlling their own destiny, and they can win every single game. Who would have thought that was possible?

Me, actually - I was rather surprised that Arizona got so little respect after their finish last year.

I didn't really think they would be 4-1 in the conference though, much less in a position to win it outright if they take care of business. Beating Oregon and USC is a pretty tall order though, not to mention Cal at home and of course ASU. I am sure ASU would just love to be a spoiler for a change.

Here is to hoping OU drops the game to nOSU.

[dps]

I think beating a patsy by any number tells you nothing about a team.

Beating a mediocre team however, tells you that you beat a mediocre team. Which means that you are, at least in theory, better than mediocre.

I agree on the first point. There shouldn't be any real upside to beating a team you're expected to blow out.

And that is the problem with the human polls - there is upside to it - you get to continue to be talked about as a national title contender for blowing away a bunch of them every year. The way the system works now, the Pac-10 is foolish to play such a strong OOC schedule, and not load up with yet another patsy in place of a conference game.

At least from the perspective of getting into BCS bowl games. Why risk having a bad day against a decent team when you can just pummel some joke of a school like the SEC does? Much less playing another conference opponent.

Of course, the upside is if you can go undefeated, then a good strenght of schedule will put you into the BCS title game.

BTW, I agree with you that the Pac-10 overall plays the best OOC schedule.

[Eddie Teach]

And the real kicker is not comparing 3 OOC games to the SECs three - it is comparing that 4th OOC games that they play against Arizona playing USC/Oregon/OSU/Cal/Stanford. That is why the Pac-10 has such a strong SOS, compared to the SEC, that 4th game is being played against a top-50, if not top-25 team, rather than another blowout against some patsy.

That 9th game against a conference foe makes the individual schools have a tougher strength of schedule but it says nothing about the conference overall. One team will win and one team will lose. For conference comparisons, out of conference games are the only ways to measure success. Does the Pac 10 have a tougher out of conference schedule than the SEC? That's fairly likely, though I'm not going to go check out all 22 teams schedules right now to analyze it. Is it tough enough to claim they've done better winning 70% of those games to the SEC's 85%? I doubt it.

And the funny thing about the statement that started this discussion: The SEC is clearly better at the top, and I'd say better at the bottom as well. It's the middle parts where the Pac-10 is arguably better this year; lots of 2 and 3 loss teams. Though of course that's helped by USC/Oregon/Arizona losing some games to those teams in the middle.

[Berkut]

Of course the Pac-10 winning 70% of fewer games against better opponents is better than the SEC winning 85% of their games, when they play 1 extra game each against some chump.

Take away 12 of those games that are sure wins, and where are they?

And playing those games against in conference opponents certainly does say something about the conference overall - it says that a Pac-10 team with 2 losses is NOT clearly inferior to a SEC team with ones loss (or 3 vs 2, or whatever).

Because the SEC team basically took a buy that week, instead of actually playing a game like the Pac-10 does. That should be worth something - it isn't, of course, but it should be.

[Ed Anger]

The only real solution to this is simple: Let the MWC into the BCS group and continue to exclude all the rest.

Go back to the old system.

[katmai]

Deep thoughts.
The Big East has four teams in this week's top 25 (Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, South Florida and West Virginia), tying the Pac-10 and Big Ten for the most of any conference.
The SEC has three teams (tying it with the Mountain West and ACC), but all three are in the top eight, even though Alabama and Florida's only victories over another top-20 team are over LSU, and LSU has no wins over another team in the top 25.
The Big 12 has two teams, Texas and Oklahoma State.

[Ed Anger]

I miss the Oklahoma and Nebraska game meaning something. The game Saturday was a shadow of its former self. 

[MadBurgerMaker]

Have you guys seen the new Nike "Pro Combat" uniforms they're slowly unveiling?  TCU and VT so far:

http://www.nike.com/nikeos/p/usnikefootball/en_US/

Hm.  Wonder what the other teams are (Oregon is probably one, I guess).

[katmai]

I miss the Oklahoma and Nebraska game meaning something. The game Saturday was a shadow of its former self. 

Osborne vs Switzer or even earlier than that old man?

[Ed Anger]

Ohio State better not fuck with their uniforms.

I've already got a bad feeling about the Michigan game with the throwbacks.

[Ed Anger]

I miss the Oklahoma and Nebraska game meaning something. The game Saturday was a shadow of its former self. 

Osborne vs Switzer or even earlier than that old man?

My memory only goes back so far.

[MadBurgerMaker]

Ohio State better not fuck with their uniforms.

I've already got a bad feeling about the Michigan game with the throwbacks.

Hell I thought that was Ohio State when I first opened the page.

Edit:  Florida State is one: http://www.seminoles.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/110509aac.html

[katmai]

I miss the Oklahoma and Nebraska game meaning something. The game Saturday was a shadow of its former self. 

Osborne vs Switzer or even earlier than that old man?

My memory only goes back so far.

Who was the Oklahoma QB in mid 80's? All i can recall from those teams were the Boz and Keith Jackson.

[katmai]

And dammit I miss Lemonjello not being around to hear the lamentations of his Noles.