Because it was off before: College Football 09!

[FNH]

refs this year fucking suck. Receiver pushes the corner to the ground and they call defensive interference? thankfully for that official Boise fumbled or he would have been lynched.

[Akiyama]

I expect a blowout by the 2nd half. Also going for it on 4th and 1 and you throw the ball?

[Koyuki]

Was not expecting this from Boise St.

[Plow]

lol @ "Boise's not a state we looked it up"


This is bout how I expected it to be. Tulsa can run with your basic top 25 team like Boise, this Boise team couldn't begin to keep up with a Bama, Florida, Texas, OU, Miami, VaTech probably even Iowa, USC, etc. At least not the way they're playing atm.


Unfortunately I'm getting about 3 out of every 6 seconds thanks to 5 mile thick cloud cover, <3 directv.


That 4th and 1 was one of the worst decisions I ever saw... before I saw them decide to throw for it. Lucky as all hell they got the stop there, if Boise scores a TD you just handed them a ton of momentum and they probably run away with it.

[Akiyama]

To be quite honest, if it was like 18-14 at halftime and Boise had like three turnovers, I'd say that's fine.. but it's been a fairly clean game for the most part, and Boise State just looks so..unimpressive.

[Plow]

Like I said, Tulsa's not a bad team.


Damn I'm sick of cfb coaches that think they're 12 year olds playing madden, though.

[Akiyama]

Haha. I don't get early 'going for 2' scenarios. Either way, only up 28-14 on Tulsa (who I still defend to not be that great against real programs) is pretty bad. It could still end up at 42-14 or something, but eh.

[archibaldcrane]

This is shaping up to be a quality win for Boise.
amirite?

[Insanecyclone]

uuuuuuugh tulsa damnit

[Akiyama]

Saaaved by the fact that Tulsa's QB is crap.

[Koyuki]

Boise st looked really unimpressive tonight.

[Plow]

Well, that was disappointing.


But, like I said, 45-0 against that Tulsa team is most definitely a quality win.

[archibaldcrane]

But, like I said, 45-0 against that Tulsa team is most definitely a quality win.

Again, you have no idea what a "quality win" means, in college sports parlance.

45-0 vs. Tulsa is a "good job", not a quality win. No reputable analyst, at all, is going to look back at their Tulsa win come bowl time and say "when you consider their quality wins against (for example) Oklahoma State, Texas, and Tulsa, they really should be going to XXX bowl!"

Quality wins are against currently ranked teams, teams that were ranked when they played, or nearly ranked/rivalry teams in away games.

Tulsa is none of those. At all.

[Plow]

Yeah, beating a team 45-0 whose only other loss is by 7 to the #5 team in the country?


Totally meaningless.


Clearly the pollsters agree with you 100%, too.

[archibaldcrane]

I agree that beating Tulsa, or anyone in D-1A College football, 45-0 is a good win. It's good. There's nothing bad about dropping 45 points in a shutout.

But you're the only one that uses the term "quality win" - when that term is reserved for something other than what you're talking about.

Also, you're using the "quality loss" argument (this time for Tulsa) again and it's annoying.

[Plow]

I'm sorry that when your team plays anybody good they get smashed so you can't make any argument whatsoever for them actually being good, but how the games actually go matters.


You may not have noticed, but the actual game happens on the field, not on rivals.com.

[archibaldcrane]

Right, because Wisconsin's offense didn't outscore the Buckeye's offense and outgain them by DOUBLE the yards, and we didn't in fact make Ohio State look so bad on offense that there were front-page articles about how much OSU sucks and how the 31-13 "smashing" on the scoreboard was illusory, considering that over 2/3rds of OSU's points were on defensive and special teams TDs.

How am I accused of not caring how the games go, and you're the one saying that OSU "smashed" Wisconsin again? Watch a game sometime Plow, you hypocritical bastard.

Don't get mad at me because you're misusing the popular expression "quality win".

Semantics.

[Plow]

Right, Ohio State played horribly, and still beat the hell out of Wisconsin.

Grats dawg.



You're the one arguing bullshit about 45-0 against a team that just played the #5 team to a 7 point game not being a quality win.


Semantics indeed.



Say what you will about "quality loss" bullshit, the #5 team in the country couldn't come remotely close to doing what a team you claim should be unranked did.


edit: not only that, but what a team you claim should be unranked did... with their backup QB. And missing multiple other key players as well.

[archibaldcrane]

The #5 team in the country doesn't have 2 losses, and has beaten the #13 team in the country - two things Oklahoma can't claim.

My point is -weather- you win or lose is more important than -how- you win or lose. That is, in fact, pretty much my only argument.

[archibaldcrane]

And I still don't understand why you had such a hard-on for defending the Bradford-less Sooners. They were overrated by the polls considering they were without their star, best-in-the-nation QB.