College Football Discussion 09

Student Lounge College Life
141

<p>sam lee,</p>

<p>didn’t you say this?

</p>

<p>Always? All I’m trying to say is it’s not always true. </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>That is so wrong. Why do you think NC State (or Notre Dame, an independent for that matter) with a 6-6 record last year went to a bowl? (and no their conference record was not 2-6, it’s 4-4). Why would they choose NC State or Notre Dame over some cupcakes with 7-6 or 6-6 record? Because they play tougher/ranked opponent. </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I used them as examples because they just happened last year. But I wasn’t very far off. If you want some stats. Here are the rankings for washington and washington state last year. Let me breath a bit before I write this novel:</p>

<p>Washington State - rushing offense, passing offense, total defense, total offense, scoring offense, rushing defense, total defense, scoring defense, punt returns, turnover margins, passing efficiency, and sacks allowd all ranked 100th or higher.</p>

<p>Washington - rushing offense, passing offense, total defense, total offense, scoring offense, rushing defense, total defense, scoring defense, net punting, kickoff returns, punt returns, turnover margins, passing efficiency, sacks, tackles, sacks allowed are all ranked 100th or higher. The only stat left that isn’t over 100th or higher is pass defense (why bother passing when you are up 4 TDs, just run out the clock) What # you think washington was ranked?</p>

<p>Joking aside, I think washington is a better team this year. Washington state is the same. Looking at their schedule the only 1 win Washington St can get is next week vs SMU and Washington can have probably 2 or 3 wins at most.</p>

142

<p>Tougher OCC schedule: 2/3 games against majors/quasi-majors vs 2/4 games against majors/quasi-majors. 66.6% > 50.0%.</p>

<p>I said "pretty much all about ", not “all about”/“100% all about”. 6-6 is the minimum requirement for consideration so W/L is a much bigger deal than anything else. If you are 5-7, nobody cares whom you beat or how tough your schedule was.</p>

<p>Those statistics don’t take the strength of schedule into the account. To think you can rank #1 through #120 with those stats alone is just plain silly. I am sure if Florida Atlantic/Florida International/Western Michigan were put into anymajor conference, they would have far worse stats than WSU.</p>

<p>

Maybe ESPN 360 still has UW vs LSU game. WATCH IT!</p>

143

<p>

</p>

<ol>
<li>Well, because most importantly, it reached the 0.5-mark, 6-6. :rolleyes:</li>
<li>Which cupcakes played 13 games? Isn’t that NC state (6-6) was picked over another “bowl eligible” 6-6 team (there’s no 7-6 with a 12-game schedule)? Being eligible doesn’t necessarily mean you will go bowling; the key word is “eligibie”. If the team doesn’t reach the 6-6 mark, it won’t even be considered at the first place. So W-L is the “primary” criteria before anything else as far as whether a team will go to a bowl or not.</li>
</ol>

144

<p>Washington State and Duke are not the worst teams in the FBS, that title’s been held by North Texas (although they’re getting a little better), Western Kentucky, New Mexico St., Utah St., and Idaho, any of which would be crushed by Washington St. or Duke any year.</p>

145

<p>

</p>

<p>Meaningless statement. You can’t play that game without doing it for other conferences too. For example without Texas the Big-12 doesn’t have any legit national title contender this year.</p>

<ul>
<li><p>The Pac-10 is 6-2 vs. BCS+MWC conferences this year (best out of all conferences)</p></li>
<li><p>Since 2000, the Pac-10 is 11-8 vs. the SEC.</p></li>
<li><p>Since 2000, if you take out USC and LSU, the Pac-10 is 7-3 vs the SEC</p></li>
</ul>

<p>

Fresno State went 7-6 last year, without bowl (though I would not call them a cupcake). Any team that plays @Hawaii plays 13 games.</p>

146

<p>

</p>

<p>They did play a bowl, they lost to Colorado St.</p>

<p>Boise St. plays 13 games this year.</p>

147

<p>Go Gators! 10 char</p>

148

<p>

</p>

<p>My bad, I assumed Colorado State was in the WAC (not the MWC)</p>

149

<p>

</p>

<p>I already watched that game. Jake Locker might look like washington’s savior but he’s not that good. LSU has problem on offense, and they were traveling across the country to play a non conference game where they know they’ll win, you think every player and coach were up for that game? LSU can’t score that much against vandy at home. They’re a rebuilding team from the national champs couple years ago… But seriously, you think washington would get 4 or more wins? Look at their schedule and tell me who they will beat this year? They might play a closer game with USC than people thought this week but will be back to their last year state after the game</p>

150

<p>

</p>

<p>Nobody says Locker is “that good” yet. I was just puzzled where you got the notion that UW is that bad. It’s interesting how you gave no credit to UW for keeping the LSU game close by making excuse and baseless claim. You don’t need 2 years to be a strong team when you have good coaching staff and one of the most talented recruiting classes in the country year in and year out. They already got one year to rebuild. They killed GA Tech 38-3 at the end of last bowl season. If USC can reload right away, LSU can certainly be a strong team after one year of “rebuilding”. As for “they know they’ll win”, I don’t see how you could draw that conclusion without talking to the players. I can’t really tell the mental state of each player. If you can bring us some psychological or behavior theories to explain why they weren’t up for this game but more up for another, please go ahead. Were they up for Vandy game? </p>

<p>By the way, no matter how bad you think UW is, at least it looks better than UVA, MD, and Duke, though it doesn’t really matter to the original point I made.</p>

151

<p>

</p>

<p>Perhaps you don’t see enough sports, psychology is very important. When you play an out of conference game with a weaker opponent, you tend to overlook. You might even reserve your best players. It happens all the times in sports. It happened last year when Cal traveled to Maryland as a huge favorite and lost. It happens this year when Ohio State almost lost to navy. When you play teams in your conference, you’re gonna be more focus and prepare. Even in pro football last year, dallas cowboys went to St. Louis, which is one of the worst team in the NFL and lost in a blow out style. Why? Because it’s out of conference, they don’t care as much and they were not prepare for the game. There are certain psychological trends in sports that people analyze all the times.</p>

<p>I doubt that UW / Washington state will have better records than Maryland by the end of the year.</p>

152

<p>You said that LSU isn’t a very strong team and that it got problem with offense (well, actually UW gave their DEFENSE a fit that day and got over 400 yards of offense). Then you said it’s so strong that it overlooked UW. Seems like you have an excuse for everything.

UW plays 3 OOC games and two of them are LSU and Notre Dame. MD plays Cal, JAMES MADISON, MIDDLE TENNESSEE, and Rutgers, which got blown by Cincinnati (15-47) and is probably the weakest from the Big East. As if that’s not easy enough, it manages to skip 3 of the top-4 ACC teams (GA Tech, Miami, UNC) AND get Duke/UVA on its schedule! Other than Cal, the only ranked team on its schedule is VT (not even as good as LSU). You must have looked at the schedules for both. I don’t know about you but to me, it’s a pretty unfair comparison.</p>

<p>I will let you have WSU and give your school some respect. :rolleyes:</p>

153

<p>

</p>

<p>Standard SEC apologist… I’d still like to hear the excuse for the scoreboard (since 2000, pac-10 vs SEC: 11-8)</p>

154

<p>

</p>

<p>The schedule is set prior to this year, you don’t just see a good/bad opponent and then schedule a game with them immediately. Last year notre dame was horrible they went 6-6 and lost to syracuse at home. Idaho was just bad, the only good one Washington has is against LSU. Last year Rutgers was one of the hottest team in the nation with 7 game winning streak at the end. Maryland plays middle tenn almost every year and they lost last year so I wouldn’t consider that an easy win on their schedule. Cal was considered a better team than Maryland. The only weaker team is Div IAA J Madison. So based on last year strength, Maryland scheduled 3 stronger opponents and 1 weaker vs Washington 2 stronger opponents and 1 weaker.</p>

<p>And for the ACC games, the committee sets it. I wouldn’t consider Gtech and UNC top ACC teams. Maryland beat them both last year and the year before.</p>

<p>Does it look better if you schedule stronger opponent and lose? no, what matters is the number of wins you can get based on your schedule strength. Don’t take harder classes and fail then complain. Sign up for easier ones so you can at least take step by step up.</p>

155

<p>

</p>

<p>Maryland got lucky. Georgia Tech and UNC are currently ranked in the top 25 (although Tech is likely on the way out), which is better than most other ACC teams. UNC and Tech are still favorites to win the Coastal.</p>

156

<p>
[QUOTE=Sam Lee]
Rutgers, which got blown by Cincinnati (15-47) and is probably the weakest from the Big East.

[/quote]

Yes, they got blown out, but they got blown out by a ranked team that has had their number in their past few meetings.</p>

<p>Unless you’re still stuck in 2001, Rutgers is most certainly NOT the weakest team from the Big East. They got a good share of top 25 votes in the preseason. They’ve won bowl games the past four years!</p>

<p>Seriously… “weakest”?!</p>

157

<p>weakest in the big east has been syracuse for quite a while</p>

158

<p>Washington 16, USC 13 Final</p>

<p>So beautiful</p>

159

<p>Well, that’s what happens when your starting QB gets hurt…along with your starting WR, RB, FB, and all-america safety.</p>

<p>Not to mention how terrible Pac-10 refs are…they totally blew the call when Havili got whalluped helmet-to-helmet…</p>

160

<p>Florida 32 Tennessee 13 </p>

<p>Go Gators! SEC!</p>