BG Bowl Pick Em

[Akiyama]

congratulations cakeman!

Thanks! I had to mount a comeback. It's good thing I had most of my big games as big pointers and also, thank you to West Virginia and Michigan for winning your games! That helped me a lot.

[Lordender]

lol @ OSU


Better get better teams on your future schedules than michigan, LSU was more battle tested in week 6 than the entire season OSU had.

[Colm]

Congrats Akiyama. (b'-')b

[Weltall]

SEC


SEC


SEC!!!


Big 10 is shit

[octopus]

Seriously, I think the Big Ten is taking advantage of the current system by 1) finishing their season early and 2) not have a conference championship. This way their champion always have the earliest loss and the other conference teams fall by losing later than the Big Ten champ.

Unless the system changes, I believe this will continue to happen...

(I still have no idea how Michigan was able to beat Florida but look like shit against Ohio State)

[Mizango]

Congrats Akiyama. (b'-')b

Indeed!!!

[Azkarin]

The Post Season AP rankings are now out and I pasted them below.

1. LSU (60) 12-2 1,620
2. Georgia (3) 11-2 1,515
3. USC (1) 11-2 1,500
4. Missouri 12-2 1,347
5. Ohio State 11-2 1,346
6. West Virginia 11-2 1,342
7. Kansas (1) 12-1 1,303
8. Oklahoma 11-3 1,139
9. Virginia Tech 11-3 1,096
10. Texas 10-3 962
10. Boston College 11-3 962
12. Tennessee 10-4 904
13. Florida 9-4 685
14. Brigham Young 11-2 654
15. Auburn 9-4 648
16. Arizona State 10-3 587
17. Cincinnati 10-3 566
18. Michigan 9-4 508
19. Hawaii 12-1 460
20. Illinois 9-4 443
21. Clemson 9-4 353
22. Texas Tech 9-4 308
23. Oregon 9-4 253
24. Wisconsin 9-4 202
25. Oregon State 9-4 110

Others Receiving Votes
Virginia 66, Penn State 61, Kentucky 57, Wake Forest 53, Boise State 25, Arkansas 13, Utah 9, Mississippi State 7, Appalachian State 5, South Florida 5, Tulsa 4, Connecticut 3, Air Force 2, Rutgers 2.
Dropped From Rankings
Virginia 21, South Florida 23, Boise State 24, Arkansas 25.

[Koyuki]

Congrats Akiyama. (b'-')b

Indeed!!!

He just got lucky ; ;

[Byrd]

Seriously, I think the Big Ten is taking advantage of the current system by 1) finishing their season early and 2) not have a conference championship. This way their champion always have the earliest loss and the other conference teams fall by losing later than the Big Ten champ.

I'm think the Big 10 has an innate advantage, although I think having an extra two weeks off above and beyond most other teams is as big a disadvantage on the field as it is an advantage off the field. I have also heard that the Big 10 may be sliding their games back one way to reduce this gap by one week, as well. I don't know if this was confirmed or if this is going to take place in 2008, but tOSU's athletic website still lists the UM-tOSU game for the weekend before Thanksgiving through 2010.

My biggest concern is this: In 2002 (might be off a year), Iowa and Ohio State ended the year with identical undefeated conference records because they didn't play, although Iowa lost a game outside of conference. Ohio State and Iowa don't play next year; if they finish the season with identical undefeated records, they will play in the nationtal title game (barring other undefeateds). Every other conference (including the "mid-majors") has either a title game (SEC/ACC/Big 12) or a true round robin (Pac-10/Big East) -- either system is fine with me. When undefeated Ohio State/Michigan plays undefeated Iowa/Wisconsin/Penn State/Purdue/etc. in the BCS championship game, while an undefeated Big East team, a one-loss SEC, Pac-10 and Big 12 teams sit on the outside, something just might change.

It should be noted that the NCAA requires you to have 12 teams in order to have a conference championship. When the ACC originally expanded a few years ago from 9 to 11 by adding Miami and BC, they applied to get a championship game; the NCAA said no, forcing them to add a 12th team (Virginia Tech) as well. This is important, because it means that even if the Big 10 wanted a championship game, the NCAA would not allow them to unless they add a 12th team. Until Notre Dame gives in and joins (unlikely but becoming slowly less so), I don't think they will go out and poach Pittsburgh, Missouri (the two candidates I've heard most commonly mentioned that actually fit the Big 10's stringent academic requirements), or some other school because that would make it that much harder to land Notre Dame. They have a system that works to their advantage; why would they change it to fit the whims of people who don't matter? Unless they gain something concrete (i.e. a Notre Dame), adding a 12th team is not in their best interest.

Another issue I have with the Big 10 (and Pac-10) is the Rose Bowl. I understand that the Rose Bowl is not technically a part of the BCS but works with them to guarantee a national championship game, and that the Rose Bowl's priority is its business partnership with the Pac-10 and Big 10. This means it makes all the financial sense in the world for the Rose Bowl to line up the Big 10 and Pac 10 as much as possible. And yet they try to pawn it off as "Tradition." Nobody gives a shit about tradition, and it pisses me off that they continue to insult our intelligence by passing it off as such. At least if they said, "We make more money this way," it would annoy me, but they wouldn't be lying to us. Regarding, this gives those two conferences a huge financial advantage and ends up inviting undeserving teams like Illinois to the Rose Bowl. This year, ironically enough, the team that Illinois' Rose Bowl destination screwed was Arizona State, of the Pac-10. Yet both the Big-10 and the Pac-10 continue to support this arrangement, the Pac-10 knowing that this year's screwage is a short-term loss in the best interests of a long-term gain. As an alum of a Pac-10 school, this infuriates me. I'm all in favor of the Pac-10 champ going to the Rose Bowl if they're not in the championship game, but I could give a flying donut if they play a Big 10 team. Give me the best damn games on the field, no more of this USC vs. Illinois crap. Give me USC vs. Georgia, Kansas vs. VaTech, WVU vs. Oklahoma, and put the two worst teams (Illinois/ASU/Hawaii) in the same bowl. At least it would be competetive.

Cliff Notes: The system, although I find it fascinating, sucks. I hate the Rose Bowl.

(I still have no idea how Michigan was able to beat Florida but look like shit against Ohio State)

Any given Saturday, man, any given Saturday. There's a reason every major professional sport except football has a best-of-7. It's a better determination of the best team. You can't really do that in football with all the injuries. Or in college due to academics. The only college sports I can think of that allow best-of-X series is baseball and softball, and those are games you can play back-to-back on consecutive days (or even back-to-back on the same day in some cases).

25. Oregon State 9-4 110

YES! Two ranked years in a row! Sadly, that might be a new school record.

23. Oregon 9-4 253

Fuck.

[archibaldcrane]

Seriously, I think the Big Ten is taking advantage of the current system by 1) finishing their season early and 2) not have a conference championship. This way their champion always have the earliest loss and the other conference teams fall by losing later than the Big Ten champ.

I think the SEC is taking advantage of the current system by 1) Having a conference championship. You think there's any way that LSU would've made the national championship game without one? The Big Ten has to prove itself in 11 games, where the cushy SEC leaders get an extra 12th game, fresh on the minds of voters, to push a 2-loss team into the national championship.

(I don't actually believe this, but jesus christ QQ moar about the conference championship thingy.)

Of course, as a Wisconsin fan I'd love nothing more than to be in the Big-10 West, with Minnesota, Illinois, Iowa, Indiana, and Northwestern. Just stick Notre Dame into the East and be done with it!

(oh, and the Big-10 still has the overall winning record vs. SEC in BCS games, it's just that Ohio State sucks.)

[Byrd]

Of course, as a Wisconsin fan I'd love nothing more than to be in the Big-10 West, with Minnesota, Illinois, Iowa, Indiana, and Northwestern. Just stick Notre Dame into the East and be done with it!

I've thought about this at length, how they would divide up the Big 10 into divisions were it to go to 12 teams (leave me alone, I have a long commute). I don't think they would go with an East-West, it wouldn't be competetively balanced from a "traditional power" perspective. Something like this makes a little more sense and seems a little more balanced:

North: Michigan, Michigan St, Notre Dame, Wiconsin, Minnesota, Iowa
South: Illinois, Northwestern, Purdue, Indiana, Ohio State, Penn State

Those would be relatively balanced, you could keep all your traditional rivalries by having one guaranteed opponent from the other division. I'm thinking in particular Ohio State-Michigan and Notre Dame-Purdue, this would allow Notre Dame to maintain all its traditional rivalries with the Big 10 teams they always play (Michigan, MSU, Purdue). They might also go by the ACC model, throw out geography, and do something like:

Big 10 Red: Michigan, Michigan St, Illinois, Purdue, Notre Dame, Minnesota
Big 10 Blue: Ohio State, Iowa, Northwestern, Indiana, Penn State, Wisconsin

Each team would play everyone in its own division and the team directly below it. Natural rivals would be in opposite divisions, but still play every year. The other 2 opponents from the opposite division would rotate, but that would mean you would see teams from the opposite division at home only once every 5 years... but that's how the ACC does it.

[Plow]

tOSU

rofl, god I hate osu

[Akiyama]

Congrats Akiyama. (b'-')b

Indeed!!!

He just got lucky ; ;

I really did get lucky, too. =P If it weren't for Oklahoma and Florida choking the way they did, I'd have lost because my confidence in them was not as high as the others. Thanks though for the praise. for you all.

My thoughts about the whole BCS thing is I pretty much agree with Byrd. The BCS games this year were horrible. You'd think the score between OK/WVU would have been lopsided in the other direction, but no. They came out and laid a big friggin egg. We all saw Hawaii getting destroyed from a mile away, especially with the way Georgia finished the season and should have been playing for the National title.

My thoughts about the Big-10 and PAC-10 obviously are they should bite the bullet, get a Championship game so people can't complain about their ridiculous long wait times. If they had a Championship game, that'd shave off about 2 weeks of wait time, so that'd be helpful to OSU (maybe.. unless they play a SEC team.) I'm just sick of hearing them complain about time. If they have just as long a wait as the team they play and still get owned, then people would just realize the Big-10 is overrated.

Also, watching ESPN College Gameday and I swear to fucking god, Mark May sucks so much USC cock it's not even funny. How the fuck is he ranking USC preseason #1 with all the guys they are losing off of defense and even offense? Give me a fucking break. The young class of Georgia is looking good though and I feel they should be the Preseason #1 followed by Florida, imo. Throw USC at 3 or 4, I don't care.

lol, arch. D: QQ moar about the SEC. If they have a winning record against the SEC, it certainly isn't them against the top 1-2 SEC teams in BCS games. The Big-10 has the Outback Bowl and Capital One bowl game so they're getting the #3-4 (or 5) not exactly sure which one it is. This year they split 1-1 with Michigan winning and Tennessee beating your Wisconsin, but I've never liked the two bowl games. Granted Wisconsin beat Arkansas last year (who never has a QB) and beat Auburn the year before that (you guys destroyed Auburn..), but I wouldn't exactly brag about the Big-10 just because they have a winning record against the SEC, because as you said.. Ohio State just sucks. It goes to show that the Big-10 #1 can't beat the SEC #1, but oh well. I'm not trying to fanboy the SEC though, I promise. I'm just a big college football fan all around and wish there was a way to even things up. There will never be a solid argument to prove one conferance is better than another. I think we can just all agree and say the Big-10 stunk up the National Championship game once again and shall wait another year to see what happens.

[archibaldcrane]

Nobody wants to see the Big-10 poach some shitty team like Pitt. Honestly. Just give Notre Dame another 10 years of laughable suckery, make them lose their sweetheart TV deal, and they'll come crawling.

Hopefully we'll have a national championship playoff by then.

[octopus]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/f ... index.html

Sounds like a 4 team playoff may be sooner than we think?

[Mizango]

Playoffs? Don't talk about playoffs. Are you kidding me? Playoffs?

Nah but seriously, It would be nice to see a D-1 playoff system but I doubt it will come to fruition for many reasons. One can always hope though.

[Byrd]

My thoughts about the Big-10 and PAC-10 obviously are they should bite the bullet, get a Championship game so people can't complain about their rediculous long wait times. If they had a Championship game, that'd shave off about 2 weeks of wait time, so that'd be helpful to OSU (maybe.. unless they play a SEC team.)

One important thing to remember: the NCAA will not let them have a championship game unless they have 12 members. So it's not really as simple a choice as "deciding to hold one." I would honestly think both of those conferences would have one if they could as is, as it's a ridiculously large cash cow.

But to do so, they have to expand. Obviously, the Big 10 is waiting for Notre Dame, and who would the Pac-10 invite? Utah? UNLV? Boise State? BYU? Fresno State? San Diego State? Colorado State? Hawaii? Colorado? New Mexico? With the exception of Utah, BYU, and Colorado all of those schools have an awful lot of minuses to go with their positives. I don't think the Pac-10 wants two new teams in the same market (Utah/BYU) and I'm doubtful that Colorado would leave the Big 12. Hawaii is a decent sized market, but the Pac-10 probably doesn't want games two hours later than they already are. Boise State is good in football, but a small market (Idaho), and a non-entity at every other sport. New Mexico is a small market with without the national reputation of Boise State in football. Fresno State is somewhere between the two athletically, but not really a new market. San Diego State is a good market, but very little athletic presence. With UNLV, I don't think the Pac-10 wants any part of Las Vegas and the "evils of gambling." Colorado State is too far of a geographic stretch for the size of the school. There is also snobbish academic standards which some of the above schools may not meet.

Prediction: Unless the Pac-10 can get Colorado and Utah, they don't expand any time soon.

[Gregorio]

This year, ironically enough, the team that Illinois' Rose Bowl destination screwed was Arizona State, of the Pac-10. Yet both the Big-10 and the Pac-10 continue to support this arrangement, the Pac-10 knowing that this year's screwage is a short-term loss in the best interests of a long-term gain.

I agree with pretty much all of your analysis except this. It would hold more water if USC didn't absolutely smoke Arizona State at home the 2nd to last game of the season. At least playing Illinois there was a chance to see a game we hadn't already seen, even if most people knew the outcome before it was even played.

And yes, if all the bowls cooperated and selected the best teams to play eachother and the not-so-best to play in a different BCS bowl it might make for better games, but it'll never happen because money and conference tie-ins rule everything.

[Gregorio]

My thoughts about the Big-10 and PAC-10 obviously are they should bite the bullet, get a Championship game so people can't complain about their rediculous long wait times. If they had a Championship game, that'd shave off about 2 weeks of wait time, so that'd be helpful to OSU (maybe.. unless they play a SEC team.)

One important thing to remember: the NCAA will not let them have a championship game unless they have 12 members. So it's not really as simple a choice as "deciding to hold one." I would honestly think both of those conferences would have one if they could as is, as it's a ridiculously large cash cow.

One more thing to remember: The Big 10 currently does not allow a buy week during the regular season. I remember Paterno bitching about this a lot the past couple years.

[Akiyama]

Well, I know the rule and all, I'd just think they'd like to try anything they can to get a conferance championship. If they can't get a championship, then what about just adding another regular season game so they can at least play another week? Not sure it'd help though. They'd probably schedule some cupcake. I still think Ohio State was completely overrated this year. It's not fair to rank a team #1 in all those defensive categories, especially when more than half of them are against Northwest Southeastern Kent State Bluff U or something. -.-

Also yeah. Wtf is up with that? Give em a bye week. (It's bye, btw.)