-
Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
- Thread starter BB73
- Start date
I hope we get to see it actually played out because I'm of the opinion Hawaii isn't going to fuck up ANY big time BCS school it plays.
They'll score some but imo the one thing the stats can't show in this case is how UH hasn't seen line play or athletes on defense anywhere in their season like they will if they square off against a UT/UGA etc.
I could very well be wrong but if UT were to play a focused angry game, I just don't think UH has seen 4 athletes along the DL that will be coming after Brennan like they will see vs UT.
Problem is no matter how much they should respect them, or how big the game it seems the big boys never come out breathing fire vs the smaller schools.
I'm not trying to slight UH and I'm not forgetting about Boise last year. I still think that big picture the "mid major" teams have enough talent to compete with the "major" teams in skill position players every few years when they get that special player and other to compliment him. Where mid-majors do not stack up imo is in depth of talent, linemen or recruiting enough athletes to the defensive side. Not to sound SECish but there is no way they could handle the week in week out of any major BCS conference.
So essentially every few years when they have that special team, they stand a punchers chance against anyone if its just one game. Due to the hype given an upset by one of these teams when it happens, it seems like it happens all the time. No one makes a big deal of it on SC when bum fuck U gets rolled by 40 points 20 different times on a Saturday. You never hear the end of it when bum fuck U pulls one out.
The smaller schools are a lot more competitive than they used to be and I think they gap will continue to narrow because kids are so advanced coming out of HS today. That being said I don't ever see the day they can go athlete for athlete on both sides of the ball with the UT's of the world.
They'll score some but imo the one thing the stats can't show in this case is how UH hasn't seen line play or athletes on defense anywhere in their season like they will if they square off against a UT/UGA etc.
I could very well be wrong but if UT were to play a focused angry game, I just don't think UH has seen 4 athletes along the DL that will be coming after Brennan like they will see vs UT.
Problem is no matter how much they should respect them, or how big the game it seems the big boys never come out breathing fire vs the smaller schools.
I'm not trying to slight UH and I'm not forgetting about Boise last year. I still think that big picture the "mid major" teams have enough talent to compete with the "major" teams in skill position players every few years when they get that special player and other to compliment him. Where mid-majors do not stack up imo is in depth of talent, linemen or recruiting enough athletes to the defensive side. Not to sound SECish but there is no way they could handle the week in week out of any major BCS conference.
So essentially every few years when they have that special team, they stand a punchers chance against anyone if its just one game. Due to the hype given an upset by one of these teams when it happens, it seems like it happens all the time. No one makes a big deal of it on SC when bum fuck U gets rolled by 40 points 20 different times on a Saturday. You never hear the end of it when bum fuck U pulls one out.
The smaller schools are a lot more competitive than they used to be and I think they gap will continue to narrow because kids are so advanced coming out of HS today. That being said I don't ever see the day they can go athlete for athlete on both sides of the ball with the UT's of the world.
Upvote
0
billmac91;1009194; said:
I agree completely about Uconn coaches fucking that game up early. I've even had moments of that same crazy, Shady McCoy will run wild stuff in my head untill I remember who Pitts coach is and that I've watched them try and play defense. :(
BB73 is dead on, if the game were played at Heinz Field right now I'd feel a lot better. Too bad this is a Morgantown year.
Upvote
0
BuckeyeNation27;1009488; said:
It is much better than a win/win IMHO: WVU gets exposed, by extension the Big East gets exposed, and we get a universally disrespected title.
As little as you and I care about the disrespect that would come with the title; you don't have to listen to the OSU players for very long before you realize that they are motivated by the current national disrespect for them. They would be highly motivated by derision for their title. If there is a better way to keep a National Championship team hungry, by all means let Jim Tressel know.
Upvote
0
daveeb
Hall of Fame
How UCONN was able to run the ball shows a weakness in the West Virginia defense. LeSean McCoy is a much better running back than Donald Brown or Andre Dixon. Hand the ball off to him all day long, and watch the West Virginia defense get worn out. They will eventually stack 8 men in the box to try and stop LeSean, and then Pitt can stretch the field vertically.
Upvote
0
WolverineTX
All-American
DaddyBigBucks;1009298; said:
Good points -- however while the offense is quite potent, I don't see them delivering a rout outside the WAC. I'm not hopping on the OMG SEC! bandwagon here so don't get me wrong, they're just not the typical conference pushover Hawaii's accustomed to. The disparity between opponents faced (e.g.: if we can approach Sagarin's SOS calculations with any confidence -- the Vols rank #25 while Hawaii places #142) leads me to believe that accounts for a significant amount of the defensive discrepancies on paper. That said, I wouldn't assume they'd demolish a Tennessee team that's found its stride. I certainly wouldn't complain though if my hunch is wrong.
Upvote
0
WolverineTX;1009525; said:Good points -- however while the offense is quite potent, I don't see them delivering a rout outside the WAC. I'm not hopping on the OMG SEC! bandwagon here so don't get me wrong, they're just not the typical conference pushover Hawaii's accustomed to. The disparity between opponents faced (e.g.: if we can approach Sagarin's SOS calculations with any confidence -- the Vols rank #25 while Hawaii places #142) leads me to believe that accounts for a significant amount of the defensive discrepancies on paper. That said, I wouldn't assume they'd demolish a Tennessee team that's found its stride. I certainly wouldn't complain though if my hunch is wrong.
Don't get me wrong here: When I'm saying that Colt Brennan would light-up the Fightin' Fulmers, I'm assuming that it goes without saying that he would light-up the defense, which is the part of Tennessee that he plays against.
I don't doubt that Ainge the Younger and Friends will move the ball up and down the field all day long against Hawaii. I would expect the game would be close for that reason. Again, that part of the match-up is so obvious that to me it should go without saying to anyone on the mainland.
Back to the other side of the match-up: While Jax makes a good point about the match-up of the lines, I'm not convinced that the difference will be dramatic enough to make a big difference until well into the second half. By then, Hawaii will have scored enough points that Tennessee will officially be "lit-up" (though I may have used more colorful language earlier).
Upvote
0
WolverineTX
All-American
DaddyBigBucks;1009551; said:
Right on -- with the focus on Brennan & company vs. Vols D I misconstrued your sentiment. But we're on the same page. :)
Upvote
0
Zurp
I have misplaced my pants.
I was just thinking (yes, I know how to do that, from time to time) that if Ohio State were to get into the national championship game, despite having the #192 strength of schedule, there may be enough of a public outcry that the BCS formula might be changed. Again.
And then I figured it out: The BCS isn't there to figure out which two teams should battle for the championship. The smarty-smart-pants media and fans already know which two teams should play for the championship. The BCS is just there to confirm their beliefs. And when it doesn't confirm it, "RARR RARR RARR!!! THE SYSTEM SUCKS!!! KILL ALL HUMANS!!! CHANGE THE FORMULA!!!"
A lot of people were unhappy with the results the first few years of the BCS. And they tweaked the formula each year, I believe. They added "quality wins." They decreased its significance the next year. They made the computers remove the scores from games from their considerations of the rankings. It seemed that every year, they changed something. Why? If something is working, do you change it? No - they must have felt that it wasn't working.
Finally, after USC got "left out" in 2003, the nuclear explosion could be heard from Uranus. "How could the team that is #1 in both human polls be left out?" So they changed the formula from having the human polls making up 20% of the results, to approximately 66.66666666666666666666667% of the results. They took out a bunch of other crap, saying that it is still in there, but now it's part of human voters' ranking process and in the computer formulas.
Now, if Missouri or West Virginia loses this weekend, Ohio State is likely in. And the outcry RIGHT NOW (neither of those teams has lost, yet) is almost as loud as it was in 2003. Will they change the formula again, to prevent this from happening again? If they do, maybe they should start to consider using a team's win-loss record to help determine which two teams should be in the national championship game.
And then I figured it out: The BCS isn't there to figure out which two teams should battle for the championship. The smarty-smart-pants media and fans already know which two teams should play for the championship. The BCS is just there to confirm their beliefs. And when it doesn't confirm it, "RARR RARR RARR!!! THE SYSTEM SUCKS!!! KILL ALL HUMANS!!! CHANGE THE FORMULA!!!"
A lot of people were unhappy with the results the first few years of the BCS. And they tweaked the formula each year, I believe. They added "quality wins." They decreased its significance the next year. They made the computers remove the scores from games from their considerations of the rankings. It seemed that every year, they changed something. Why? If something is working, do you change it? No - they must have felt that it wasn't working.
Finally, after USC got "left out" in 2003, the nuclear explosion could be heard from Uranus. "How could the team that is #1 in both human polls be left out?" So they changed the formula from having the human polls making up 20% of the results, to approximately 66.66666666666666666666667% of the results. They took out a bunch of other crap, saying that it is still in there, but now it's part of human voters' ranking process and in the computer formulas.
Now, if Missouri or West Virginia loses this weekend, Ohio State is likely in. And the outcry RIGHT NOW (neither of those teams has lost, yet) is almost as loud as it was in 2003. Will they change the formula again, to prevent this from happening again? If they do, maybe they should start to consider using a team's win-loss record to help determine which two teams should be in the national championship game.
Upvote
0
WolverineTX
All-American
Zurp;1009850; said:
That's what happens when west-coasters eat chili.
Upvote
0
Palpie
Legend
One of the funniest things about the whole 2003 thing was the BCS did exactly what it was designed to do. There were 3 1-loss teams and the two most worthy, by the formula jointly agreed upon before the season, were picked. But since the mighty all-knowing media's favorite USC was the one rejected, the BCS had the be worng and was ripped. I heard one AP voter on one of the ESPN radio shows say he wasn't going to watch LSU/OU and was turning in his final AP ballot after the USC/scUM game. I don't think there was a single member of the media to even question if maybe the BCS had it right. I mean it took a lot for the consensus #1 in the polls to be jumped by 2 teams, there was clearly reason to doubt USC. Yet no one even considered that maybe the voters were the ones that were wrong.Zurp;1009850; said:
As for changes to the formula next year. I believe a speed factor will be added. All SEC teams will have their score multiplied by 1000 to properly represent the advantage southern speed gives them. USC's score will be calculated by adding .01 to the highest non-USC score. Big ten teams, except Illinois; they now have speed because their coach used to be in the SEC, will have a speed penalty of -100 added to their score. This should result in the proper championship pairing of the best SEC team vs USC for the foreseeable future while keeping unworthy slow Big 10 teams out of the way.
Upvote
0