quote:

---

Originally posted by asc85:
Among RayRay's rants include the following:

"I agree with MGE that if you take a close look at the teams, they are 80 - 90% the same as last year. Same QBs, running backs, etc., etc."

Funny. I decided to look at SI's College Football issue from a few months ago. USC has only 10 returning starters, so that's actually less than 50% of last year's starters. Four of their players were drafted from last year, and also WR Mike Williams isn't on the team this year. Then I looked at Auburn. They have 13 returning starters from last year, meaning that they have 59% of last year's starters. They also had four players picked in last year's draft.

So neither team is at the ridiculous 80-90% threshold that you (and others) seem to think. Maybe you should investigate these kinds of statements before proclaiming ridiculous "facts" that in reality are totally wrong.

And again, this argument that USC beat Auburn in Auburn last year is ridiculous with regard to how these teams would do against each other this year. If you still can't see why that's a ridiculous argument, I really have nothing more to add.

Finally, I'm not an Auburn fan (or a fan of Oklahoma or USC), but beating LSU, Georgia, and Tennessee is pretty impressive. If they win out (and that will be hard because they play 'Bama at 'Bama and then the SEC Championship game), they deserve to play for the National Championship.

---

ASC -- I'm glad you quoted RayRay exactly, and then attempt to refute him with your own silly misprepresentation of his argument. He didn't say that the STARTERS are the same.... His claim was that the TEAM was 80 - 90% the same. He said nothing about starters. SC is so deep at every position, you have to go beyond the starting lineup to evaluate that squad. Yes, they lost their top 3 starting WRs from last year - Williams ineligible, Colbert in Carolina, S.Smith injured - but they're still rolling with depth. Here's another reason why your misguided focus on the starting lineup is meaningless - Heisman Trophy candidate Reggie Bush has never started a game at USC. It's not who starts the game that matters. Norm Chow is a mastermind in the booth, and he'll bring in guys when he deems fit. Tune into the Orange Bowl for a demonstration of this.

BACK TO MY ORIGINAL ARGUMENT: Of course, Auburn is a solid team, as is OK, as is USC. Just don't tell me that Auburn is BETTER than SC without producing some factual arguments that can overcome recent history, computer rankings, strength of schedule, non-conference quality, returning players, etc. You can't make that argument.

You make a very strong case MGE, but I am going to have to put a couple words in.

quote:

---

He didn't say that the STARTERS are the same.... His claim was that the TEAM was 80 - 90% the same. He said nothing about starters

---

That is the team, nobody on the bench plays unless they are needed. So yes you have people returning to sit on the bench, but what really matters is the people on the field. This is why I agree with Sparklemotion

quote:

---

My solution to all of this: 11 game schedule for every team and a 16 team playoff using existing bowls. I don't think there'll be a lot of belly-aching from the 17 rated team who's left out....

---

very good idea, as I have stated previously there are many undefeated teams and no way to really tell who is worthy of a run at the championship.

As far as I'm concerned, "BCS Champions" are no better, in the end, than ice skating gold medalists or gymnastics world champions. Unless you can decide these things on the field and take matters out of the hands of judges, there's no legitimacy.

The crime from last year was that we didn't get to see an LSU/USC game a week after the final bowls. You had 4 playing 1, and 2 playing 3. Sound like a good semifinal?? These college presidents, whith their protestations of academic concerns & other nonfinancial considerations are so full of crap. Set up a damned playoff!

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mike:

That is the team, nobody on the bench plays unless they are needed.

---

Mike, what the hell are you talkin' bout??? The dude just told you that Reggie Bush, one of the scariest players I've ever seen, doesn't even start for Southern Cal!! And he plays every game and scores ever game...

Of course Reggie Bush is great, but most of the time what I stated is the case. You can find exceptions in anything.

One more thing. Can someone check out the NFL thread, I sort of started a new thread there and was curious about what you all think.

True, Mike, most of the time your starter case is persuasive.

Let me just take a moment to say that this kind of discussion illustrates what's so great about college football. The regional arguments, the color, the flavor. Nothing beats it!! I love sitting here in the heart of Pac-10 country going at it with the heart of SEC country. Everybody wins...

PREDICTION TIME: I predict that USC will win the Orange Bowl this year AND that they will win the Fiesta Bowl NEXT year (with Leinart, Bush, White, Jarrett, Smith back in the fold again), establishing USC's run as one of the great runs in college fb history:

2002 - Orange Bowl title - # 4
2003 - Rose Bowl title - # 1 (co-champ)
2004 - Orange Bowl title - # 1
2005 - Fiesta Bowl title - # 1

This is just my biased-as-hell opinion, but I have to put it out there so we can all look back on it with fondness in Jan of 2006....

For the record, I never said Auburn was better than USC. I really don't know who's better, and I think it would be a great final game, rather than USC/Oklahoma (assuming both USC and Auburn win out).

I DID say (and still maintain) that bringing up the USC/Auburn game from last year as a predictor to what will occur this year is silly.

Obnoxious USC fans aside, I think Carroll's done a terrific job resurrecting a once-proud program, and I think it's great for college football to have a strong Trojan team.

I agree with MGE in that Cal got a raw deal this year. Along with the shameless "lobbying", there had to be some consideration given by the voters in the polls about the implications of the HISTORY of clubs like Texas and Michigan. I thought Cal earned its Rose Bowl berth by taking USC to the edge of victory this year...AT SC!!!

It was nice to see Utah make a BCS Bowl game. But the whole system is a sham, from the post-season playoff, all the way through the arcane and somewhat arbitrary rules regarding players.

In addition to what PE said, another terrible thing about the BCS is the fact that somes divisions are under contractual agreements to send whoever wins that division to a bowl game. So if you play just well enough win your division, you are going to a bowl game. That is the only way to explain why 12-0 Auburn is playing 10-2 Virginia Tech.

I think the BCS is full of crap. I really don't like the system. I am mad cause of the Rose bowl screw up that happened. I am anti-Michigan and Michigan never beat teams from the west. Michigan was going to play Cal but now they must face Texas, this gives michigan an openning to win the Rose bowl

The game to watch: Iowa vs. LSU new years day!

It's gonna be dirty. But the Tigers are going to be no match for the Hawks!!!

27-7 Iowa

LET'S GO HAWKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

A move which I hope will be serve as a harbinger of the BCS's demise -- the Associated Press has officially withdrawn from participation in the Bowl Championship Series starting in 2005. Now, it's down to the coaches (a joke!...thanks for screwing Cal, Mack Brown...) and the Computers. Play the damned thing off, idiots!

I love this game. It's chaos in motion.

This is probably my final BCS posting of the year. I'm watching all of these meaningless bowl games, pondering what COULD have been. Picture this perfectly reasonable and DOABLE PLAYOFF scenario:

ROUND 1 - DEC 18 WEEKEND

Central to any playoff scenario is eliminating the "kickoff classics" and starting the full college football season the last weekened in August, which will allow us to play the first round of a 16-team playoff the weekend of December 18 (including games on Thursday and Friday of that weekend, which would allow for maximum TV coverage), and allowing the higher seeded teams to have home field advantage. The match-ups for this year, using the BCS rankings, would have been as follows:

# 16 Florida State at # 1 USC (Wow!)
# 15 Tennessee at # 2 Oklahoma (Great game)
# 14 Miami at # 3 Auburn (Who wouldn't watch this?)
# 13 Michigan at # 4 Texas (same as the Rose Bowl, but actually meaningful in this secenario)
# 12 Iowa at # 5 Cal
# 11 LSU at # 6 Utah
# 10 Louisville at # 7 Georgia
# 9 Boise State at # 8 Virginia Tech

I don't know about you, but there are some spectacular matchups there that EVERYBODY is going to watch. Play a game on Thursday night, one on Friday night, and the rest spread out on Saturday.


Round 2 - New Year's Day and following

Central to this playoff scenario is maintaining the Rose, Fiesta, Orange, and Sugar Bowls as the Round-Of-8 Bowls, to be played at their traditional times and dates: Rose & Fiesta on Jan 1, Sugar on Jan 3, Orange on Jan 4. Key to this round would be the officials from each bowl "selecting" their teams after the first round is complete based on traditional affiliations as much as possible. So, for example, if higher seeds won in the first round, the selections might go as follows:

ROSE BOWL: USC vs. Virginia Tech
ORANGE BOWL: Oklahoma vs. Georgia
SUGAR BOWL: Auburn vs. Utah
FIESTA BOWL: Texas vs. California

Round 3 - "Final Four" - Jan 13/14

Location to be determined, possibly at the BCS bowl locations, but perhaps in other domed stadiums, you play 2 massively important games on a Thursday and Friday night so as not to conflict with NFL wild card games:

USC vs. Texas
Oklahoma vs. Auburn


True National Championship Game - Jan 22

Saturday, Jan 22, the day before the NFC/AFC championship games is wide open, perfect for the "big one".

USC vs. Oklahoma


I want to hear some initial reactions to this scenario. I have many arguments as to why this is better than the current situation, and why many MORE people would watch each individual game. And before you ask, yes, teams # 17 to # 52 would still play their own traditional bowl games. They were meaningless before, they will be meaningless now.

I like it, seems very do-able and exciting. But while we are on the BCS subject, Cal lost which, unfortunately, proves yet again that the BCS no matter how bad and unfair it is, works. And until something proves otherwise the BCS will be a part of NCAA football for years to come.

How can you say the BCS "works" when undefeated Auburn can't play for the national title? That's completely beyond me. And how is it that Cal kills Stanford while Texas is idle, and Texas still gans points on them?? Nonsense. Kudos to the AP for getting their proud name out of the BCS gutter.

I'm obviously a USC fan, but I'll admit that this "BCS" championship on Tuesday is NOT a true national championship. It will only be a true championship when it's won ON THE FIELD!

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Metacritic Games Editor,

Look, I am no fan of the BCS as I have already displayed in some of my previous posts. However, even you have OK and USC playing for the championship in your hypothetical playoff. It is unfortunate for Auburn, but someone has to be "screwed." Just like you would Tennessee, Virginia, and Florida (Numbers 17, 18, and 19) with your playoff.

No, Tennessee, Virginia, and Florida have no legitimate claim to the national title like the teams ahead of them. Yes, there will be some jockeying at the 15-20 area, but nothing like the controversy that exists in the top 5 and 10. If you're undefeated, you deserve a shot. If you're ranked 15-20, you obviously didn't play a tough schedule or take care of your business on the field.

I know you're no fan of the BCS, Mike, but you absolutely kill me when you throw around statements like "The BCS worked" simply because Cal lost.... What a joke! The BCS can never "work" by definition.

HAPPY NEW YEAR!!!! And holy crap! did anyone else see the Iowa LSU game?!!!! That was maybe the best game I have ever seen in my life. It brought a tear to my eye. What a beautiful ending. Watch out, our QB is going to be competing for the Heisman in the next two years.

GO HAWKS!!!!!!

Unless a natural disaster occurs, and I shouldn't be flippant about that right now, I SHOULD have bet every free dollar on the Trojans, and my New Zealand trip would have been paid for. Gee, I hope this ain't no jinx!

P.S. Jackie, that was incredible, but some of the worst "prevent" defense I've ever seen!