2009 Polls - Regular and Pre-Season

[Woody1968]

Why? You want to 1 or 2 earn it. Playing the schedule the Tigers/Plainsmen/War Eagles played you took the chance that your SOS score would do you in.

Same probelm I have with Boise State at #5 and all for a win over Oregon and then games with the 12 dwarfs.

Snow White could only do seven and she had more talent.

Boise State's problem is not so much OOC as it is their conference is a joke. Auburn plays in the SEC. I'm not making the argument that Auburn was the best team that year or deserved to be #1, but if the AP is balls enough to vote USC #1, when USC is not in the championship game, they should at least be consistant in their flippancy. I'd rather have two champions than a situation where another team has a legitimate complaint and whines about how the BCS needs to be "scrapped" or "fixed." Remember that the BCS was changed after 2002-2003 because of complaints due to the Buckeyes getting into the title game, (quite a few people said it should have been USC) and we fricking WON THE GAME. That was a total disrespect when the system actually worked!

 

[Gatorubet]

at the dead possum.

 

[LordJeffBuck]

Usually when something is widely considered irrelevant, that's a loss in prestige.

The threepeat crap infers - hell it downright proclaims that the two are of equal and indistinguishable merit. That is not so.

The AP title will continue to be relevant, equal, and indistinguishable (sounds kinda Catholic somehow) as long as the NCAA continues to recognize it as a college football national championship.

 

[HineyBuck]

at "Snow White could only do seven and she had more talent."

 

[cincibuck]

Boise State's problem is not so much OOC as it is their conference is a joke. Auburn plays in the SEC. I'm not making the argument that Auburn was the best team that year or deserved to be #1, but if the AP is balls enough to vote USC #1, when USC is not in the championship game, they should at least be consistant in their flippancy. I'd rather have two champions than a situation where another team has a legitimate complaint and whines about how the BCS needs to be "scrapped" or "fixed." Remember that the BCS was changed after 2002-2003 because of complaints due to the Buckeyes getting into the title game, (quite a few people said it should have been USC) and we fricking WON THE GAME. That was a total disrespect when the system actually worked!

BB73 could jump in here and list the OOC games Auburn put on their resume that year.

The BCS NCG was not changed, the system for voting on who got in was changed.

The point is the conferences and their member schools signed on the dotted line to create the voting system and to accept its outcome(s). Boise State, Auburn and USC have tried to create the impression that they are not bound to that contract when it does not favor them due to situations they themselves create --well, not so much Boise State as they didn't sign, weren't invited to sign, the contract.

Auburn knew the rules and continued to load their schedule with lightweights. USC lost games against teams they should have killed for reasons only Pete Carroll knows. Those things happen every season to good teams and they have consequences.

In the meantime, by contract, #1 and #2 are selected, play and the winner is, by contract, the National Champ. The AP, seeking to sell papers and magazines may be motivated to print whatever they want, but it is outside the agreed system/contract and therefore so much hot air.

 

[jwinslow]

Boise State's problem is not so much OOC as it is their conference is a joke. Auburn plays in the SEC. I'm not making the argument that Auburn was the best team that year or deserved to be #1, but if the AP is balls enough to vote USC #1, when USC is not in the championship game, they should at least be consistant in their flippancy.

USC was #1 in the polls before the bowl game. Auburn was always a clear-cut #3. That's a gigantic difference between the two.

 

[Dryden]

BB73 could jump in here and list the OOC games Auburn put on their resume that year.

UL-Monroe, Citadel, and La Tech. They also played Tennessee twice, once in the regular season when they smoked them, and then again in the SEC CCG.

 

[Woody1968]

USC was #1 in the polls before the bowl game. Auburn was always a clear-cut #3. That's a gigantic difference between the two.

But still based on arbitrary "conference strength." So are you saying that the AP result the year USC won was somehow more valid?

 

[Woody1968]

The BCS NCG was not changed, the system for voting on who got in was changed.

Yes, If I remember, they changed it so that strength of schedule would count for more, or margin of victory - at any rate, they wanted the polls to count for less. I believe the proponents of this change included a lot of supporters of USC, who claimed the Trojans should play in the NCG, because they were "playing better than anyone in the country." I believe the list of people who thought USC should have been in the NCG against Miami included Mark May, Jim Rome, and that irritating lady from the Los Angeles Times who I sent a nasty email to. The bottom line is, there was NO REASON for the change, since the system worked pretty perfectly. Ironically, it may have cost USC the next year, when they won the split championship with LSU.

In the meantime, by contract, #1 and #2 are selected, play and the winner is, by contract, the National Champ. The AP, seeking to sell papers and magazines may be motivated to print whatever they want, but it is outside the agreed system/contract and therefore so much hot air.

The AP has been declaring national champions for years before the BCS. I do not think their system is invalid for counting championships. They are not part of the BCS, and are not bound by it. They are a respected organization, and the occasional split championship gives rise to a lot of productive debate. (like we are having right now) :)

 

[martinss01]

the uc hate strikes me as a bit odd to be honest. uc isn't in our conference. they aren't on our schedule. they can't keep us out of the rose bowl no matter what they do. we win out, we go to the rose bowl. period. no debates, no questions, no arguements.

hate to break it to you guys but its virtually impossible for us to play for a nc this year. if we had beat usc we would have had a shot. but as weak as the big 10 is perceived to be its really unlikely that we could ride our big 10 schedule to the ncg.

 

[(o) IoI /o\ (o)]

the uc hate strikes me as a bit odd to be honest. uc isn't in our conference. they aren't on our schedule. they can't keep us out of the rose bowl no matter what they do. we win out, we go to the rose bowl. period. no debates, no questions, no arguements.

hate to break it to you guys but its virtually impossible for us to play for a nc this year. if we had beat usc we would have had a shot. but as weak as the big 10 is perceived to be its really unlikely that we could ride our big 10 schedule to the ncg.

I don't know about that. At the end of the season when we play two top ten teams(if PSU and Iowa win out to our games), with one of them on the road, I think that plays very well into our hand. Especially since scUM seems to be a media favorite at the moment, they might even reach the Top 25 by the time we play them...who knows, which equals another top 25 win on the road. Of course with all of that, we still have to win out.

I think our resume at the end will be nice. Virtually 4-1 against top 25 teams (if you count Wiscy). Possible 2-1 on top 10 teams. Also looking forward, a possible 4 shut-outs (Ill, Toledo, Purdon't and NMST). IMHO I think we may have a shot.

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

The AP title will continue to be relevant, equal, and indistinguishable (sounds kinda Catholic somehow) as long as the NCAA continues to recognize it as a college football national championship.

Yep. I guaran-fucking-tee everyone that if we were to go into a BCS bowl ranked #3, destroy our opponent, have #2 squeak by #1 in the BCS NCG, and get voted #1 in the AP poll, not a single person here would clamor for us to give the AP trophy back.

 

[Woody1968]

I don't know about that. At the end of the season when we play two top ten teams(if PSU and Iowa win out to our games), with one of them on the road, I think that plays very well into our hand. Especially since scUM seems to be a media favorite at the moment, they might even reach the Top 25 by the time we play them...who knows, which equals another top 25 win on the road. Of course with all of that, we still have to win out.

I think our resume at the end will be nice. Virtually 4-1 against top 25 teams (if you count Wiscy). Possible 2-1 on top 10 teams. Also looking forward, a possible 4 shut-outs (Ill, Toledo, Purdon't and NMST). IMHO I think we may have a shot.

Texas must lose. Virginia Tech, LSU, and USC would have to lose again, and either Florida or Alabama would have to lose twice. Boise State probably not a factor.

 

[Woody1968]

Yep. I guaran-fucking-tee everyone that if we were to go into a BCS bowl ranked #3, destroy our opponent, have #2 squeak by #1 in the BCS NCG, and get voted #1 in the AP poll, not a single person here would clamor for us to give the AP trophy back.

Not only that, we'd all be arguing why the AP is the only poll that matters.

 

[(o) IoI /o\ (o)]

Texas must lose. Virginia Tech, LSU, and USC would have to lose again, and either Florida or Alabama would have to lose twice. Boise State probably not a factor.

Texas, Boise, USC and VT all have the potential to lose this weekend. Florida and Bama will probably meet in the SECCG and I think Bama wins and it won't be that close. Doesn't that automatically eliminate LSU cause they won't make the SECCG? Things have a way of working out sometimes and it is all very possible.