Matt39 Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 Utah up 14-0 early. Crazy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aec4 Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 Not crazy.. Easily predictable. Utah is better than Alabama. Only difference is Utah doesn't play in the SEC. Alabama has to be the most overhyped team. They win 13-10. That's perfect for Utah. Florida would blow Utah's doors off.. Utah wouldn't be able to stop them. Alabama stops themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted January 3, 2009 Author Share Posted January 3, 2009 Will they get votes if they win this game? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
124 Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 Utah should've been in the National Title game. THIS IS WHY WE NEED A ****ING PLAYOFF!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 This is ****ing beautiful. Saban looks like he did when he was coaching the Dolphins. Jackass doesn't have a clue what to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted January 3, 2009 Author Share Posted January 3, 2009 And the rout is on! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aec4 Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 Utah should've been in the National Title game. THIS IS WHY WE NEED A ****ING PLAYOFF!!! Playoff would make perfect sense. Right now, there is a playoff, it's a 2 team playoff. We need 8 or 16. Don't give me "the athletes don't have time..." So Division 1-AA, 2 and 3 Athletes have time but D-1A does not? The Networks would EAT THIS UP if there was a playoff. If you think the BCS just netted big coin from ESPN, wait to you see what December Madness nets. I wrote an entire college thesis on this, and the entire voting theory of the teams. This needs to be done. That was 13 yrs ago. Use the BCS rankings to get the top 8 or 16, and play. If you're 9th or 17th and miss out, TFB. Play round 1 at the home field of the higher ranked team. Play round 2 in the bowls, and then play round 3 (finals in the 8 team scenario) the next week, on Monday night.. All the games would be played during the majority of college's winter break, so don't give me this exams crap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted January 3, 2009 Author Share Posted January 3, 2009 Playoff would make perfect sense. Right now, there is a playoff, it's a 2 team playoff. We need 8 or 16. Don't give me "the athletes don't have time..." So Division 1-AA, 2 and 3 Athletes have time but D-1A does not? The Networks would EAT THIS UP if there was a playoff. If you think the BCS just netted big coin from ESPN, wait to you see what December Madness nets. I wrote an entire college thesis on this, and the entire voting theory of the teams. This needs to be done. That was 13 yrs ago. Use the BCS rankings to get the top 8 or 16, and play. If you're 9th or 17th and miss out, TFB. Play round 1 at the home field of the higher ranked team. Play round 2 in the bowls, and then play round 3 (finals in the 8 team scenario) the next week, on Monday night.. All the games would be played during the majority of college's winter break, so don't give me this exams crap. Obama approves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
afosomf Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 jpw looks like **** without andre smith OL is playing awful DEF looks like crap oh my!!!!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 Playoff would make perfect sense. Right now, there is a playoff, it's a 2 team playoff. We need 8 or 16. Don't give me "the athletes don't have time..." So Division 1-AA, 2 and 3 Athletes have time but D-1A does not? The Networks would EAT THIS UP if there was a playoff. If you think the BCS just netted big coin from ESPN, wait to you see what December Madness nets. I wrote an entire college thesis on this, and the entire voting theory of the teams. This needs to be done. That was 13 yrs ago. Use the BCS rankings to get the top 8 or 16, and play. If you're 9th or 17th and miss out, TFB. Play round 1 at the home field of the higher ranked team. Play round 2 in the bowls, and then play round 3 (finals in the 8 team scenario) the next week, on Monday night.. All the games would be played during the majority of college's winter break, so don't give me this exams crap. Do not use the BCS rankings. The BCS rankings are horse****. This is how you fix college football: http://ainteasybeingreen.wordpress.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lil Bit Special Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 You want to fix college football? Stop watching games that dont involve your team. The first and only bowl game I will be watching is the International Bowl with University at Buffalo. F#ck the rest of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aec4 Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 Do not use the BCS rankings. The BCS rankings are horse****. This is how you fix college football: http://ainteasybeingreen.wordpress.com/ BCS rankings are not terrible for ranking 8 or 16 teams. They are bad for ranking 2. Very "biased" to the human rankings when you only want the top 2. I think you need a human element and you need a computer element. You can't go all human (too easily manipuilated) and you can't go all computer (too subject to the stats and stats alone). When the BCS fails between team 8 and 9 or 16 and 17, we'll all get over it. When it fails on team 2 and 3, there is a problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
afosomf Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 javy TD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 BCS rankings are not terrible for ranking 8 or 16 teams. They are bad for ranking 2. Very "biased" to the human rankings when you only want the top 2. I think you need a human element and you need a computer element. You can't go all human (too easily manipuilated) and you can't go all computer (too subject to the stats and stats alone). When the BCS fails between team 8 and 9 or 16 and 17, we'll all get over it. When it fails on team 2 and 3, there is a problem. You don't need votes or computers. All you need is a fair scheduling system. If you had one, then no one would be surprised at Utah punching Bama in the mouth because they probably would have beaten two or three "top" teams prior to the playoff even beginning. Does the NFL need computers and polls? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JiFtheOracle Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 Not crazy.. Easily predictable. Utah is better than Alabama. Only difference is Utah doesn't play in the SEC. Alabama has to be the most overhyped team. They win 13-10. That's perfect for Utah. Florida would blow Utah's doors off.. Utah wouldn't be able to stop them. Alabama stops themselves. LOL. This is the most incoherent nonsense I have ever read. I have never seen so many contradictions in a single paragraph. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aec4 Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 You don't need votes or computers. All you need is a fair scheduling system. If you had one, then no one would be surprised at Utah punching Bama in the mouth because they probably would have beaten two or three "top" teams prior to the playoff even beginning. Does the NFL need computers and polls? You're not getting a fair scheduling system with 119 teams, and an 11 or 12 game regular season. It's impossible. That's why I just looked right by it. Do we need better scheduling to take out subjectivity? Yes.. With 119 teams there is no way it can be safe enough to not to need rankings/computers/polls. Doesn't happen. Good luck breaking D1-A into a smaller subset. Again, not happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 You're not getting a fair scheduling system with 119 teams, and an 11 or 12 game regular season. It's impossible. That's why I just looked right by it. Do we need better scheduling to take out subjectivity? Yes.. With 119 teams there is no way it can be safe enough to not to need rankings/computers/polls. Doesn't happen. Read it ****head! It's actually ridiculously simple to create a fair scheduling system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aec4 Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 Read it ****head! It's actually ridiculously simple to create a fair scheduling system. and extremely impractical. I did read it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 and extremely impractical. I did read it. How the **** is it impractical? It's based on what the NFL already does and has done for 35+ years. As usual, you make no sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aec4 Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 How the **** is it impractical? It's based on what the NFL already does and has done for 35+ years. As usual, you make no sense. How? 119 teams, with tradition and scheduling conflicts. You'd have to take scheduling away from the schools themselves (goodluck). Not agreeing with you does not necessarily mean someone doesn't make sense. As soon as you go to the namecalling though, I know the argument is over and I've won. Thanks. Your best bet is to just put the conference winners in a tournament.. You aren't going to get to reschedule all of college football. They can't even agree to a playoff that effects at most 16 teams, and you want to effect all 119. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 How? 119 teams, with tradition and scheduling conflicts. You'd have to take scheduling away from the schools themselves (goodluck). Not agreeing with you does not necessarily mean someone doesn't make sense. As soon as you go to the namecalling though, I know the argument is over and I've won. Thanks. You clearly didn't read my piece you idiot and this is proof. One of the first things I said was to kick 11 teams out of D1. End of argument. You can't read. The reason I insult you is because its the only way to get through to your dip**** brain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aec4 Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 You clearly didn't read my piece you idiot and this is proof. One of the first things I said was to kick 11 teams out of D1. End of argument. You can't read. The reason I insult you is because its the only way to get through to your dip**** brain. That's about when I stopped. You aren't going to get to kick 11 teams out of D1 because you feel like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aec4 Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 You clearly didn't read my piece you idiot and this is proof. One of the first things I said was to kick 11 teams out of D1. End of argument. You can't read. The reason I insult you is because its the only way to get through to your dip**** brain. Actually, the reason why people tend to throw insults is when their argument doesn't have enough ability to convince someone on it's merits... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 That's about when I stopped. You aren't going to get to kick 11 teams out of D1 because you feel like it. They've done it in the past. Teams have been moved down for a variety of reasons, including the most obvious: an inability to compete. Oh and if the NCAA really wanted to, they could make this work easily. Using an exclusionary system like the BCS which arbitrarily ranks teams higher simply because they play in certain conferences is pure stupidity and tonight's game is proof. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aec4 Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 That's about when I stopped. You aren't going to get to kick 11 teams out of D1 because you feel like it. Truth be told, I read the entire thing. Some of your arguments may make sense BUT you are NOT taking into account the history of college football. You can't just discount it. This is a group that doesn't want to make simple change, and you want it to make radical change. Baby steps! You're going to try to fit a playoff schedule into what's already there. Those conferences make TONS OF FRIGGEN COIN. You aren't going to dismantle them, or force teams in the SEC, for instance, to schedule the Utahs of the world. It's NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. The colleges themselves schedule their out of conference schedule. How do you think you are going to now control that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aec4 Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 They've done it in the past. Teams have been moved down for a variety of reasons, including the most obvious: an inability to compete. Oh and if the NCAA really wanted to, they could make this work easily. Using an exclusionary system like the BCS which arbitrarily ranks teams higher simply because they play in certain conferences is pure stupidity and tonight's game is proof. And there is a morotorium (sp) on movements right now until 2012 at the earliest. Know what's going on man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 Actually, the reason why people tend to throw insults is when their argument doesn't have enough ability to convince someone on it's merits... You have yet to make a merit based argument. You simply dismiss things out of hand without explanation, which is maddeningly arrogant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aec4 Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 They've done it in the past. Teams have been moved down for a variety of reasons, including the most obvious: an inability to compete. Oh and if the NCAA really wanted to, they could make this work easily. Using an exclusionary system like the BCS which arbitrarily ranks teams higher simply because they play in certain conferences is pure stupidity and tonight's game is proof. BCS can be redesigned to not be as exclusionary. ANY SYSTEM will be exclusionary to a degree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 And there is a morotorium (sp) on movements right now until 2012 at the earliest. Know what's going on man. There is a moratorium on teams moving UP because there are already too many teams. If the NCAA were to grow a pair and step in to overhaul, they could easily make the argument that D1 needed to be contracted. YOU need to know what's going on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aec4 Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 There is a moratorium on teams moving UP because there are already too many teams. If the NCAA were to grow a pair and step in to overhaul, they could easily make the argument that D1 needed to be contracted. YOU need to know what's going on. and they aren't going to grow such a pair.. which is the problem in the entire argument. They aren't going to be able to move a mass of D1-A teams out of D1-A just because they feel like it. The movement you've seen has, in 95% of cases, been voluntary. The logistics of 119 teams, or 108 if you want to kick out your 11 is still impossible when schools want to schedule their OWN non-conference games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 Truth be told, I read the entire thing. Some of your arguments may make sense BUT you are NOT taking into account the history of college football. You can't just discount it. This is a group that doesn't want to make simple change, and you want it to make radical change. Baby steps! You're going to try to fit a playoff schedule into what's already there. Those conferences make TONS OF FRIGGEN COIN. You aren't going to dismantle them, or force teams in the SEC, for instance, to schedule the Utahs of the world. It's NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. The colleges themselves schedule their out of conference schedule. How do you think you are going to now control that? Actually, I am taking the history of college football into account much more than the people who argue for the "sanctity" and "tradition" of the bowls. The Rose Bowl was created as a national championship game because teams from the west felt they were being disrespected by the voters from the east who never saw the teams out there play. Then came the Sugar and Cotton Bowls because the teams in the south and southwest felt the same way. In other words, the bowls were created to settle this very argument. Somewhere along the way the argument got bastardized from determining a national champion into protection of phony tradtition. A game like tonight will force teams to accept a scheduling system because after tonight, the SEC won't have a leg to stand on when they claim superiority. You want to claim superiority? Prove it on the field. If they really believe they are that good, they should accept a system like the one I proposed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aec4 Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 Actually, I am taking the history of college football into account much more than the people who argue for the "sanctity" and "tradition" of the bowls. The Rose Bowl was created as a national championship game because teams from the west felt they were being disrespected by the voters from the east who never saw the teams out there play. Then came the Sugar and Cotton Bowls because the teams in the south and southwest felt the same way. In other words, the bowls were created to settle this very argument. Somewhere along the way the argument got bastardized from determining a national champion into protection of phony tradtition. A game like tonight will force teams to accept a scheduling system because after tonight, the SEC won't have a leg to stand on when they claim superiority. You want to claim superiority? Prove it on the field. If they really believe they are that good, they should accept a system like the one I proposed. Trust me, I agree 100% with the premise.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JiFtheOracle Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 Julio Jones is a beast. And I will laugh my ass off at both of you goobers if Bama comes back and wins this game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klecko73isGod Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 Julio Jones is a beast. And I will laugh my ass off at both of you goobers if Bama comes back and wins this game. That's because you are a lame SEC fan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aec4 Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 Julio Jones is a beast. And I will laugh my ass off at both of you goobers if Bama comes back and wins this game. REGARDLESS of whether or not Tide come back, the Utes proved their point. Boise did a couple years ago too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.