Corey, it's my bedtime but I did have enough time to do a little research. Since comparing scores between Florida and Utah against Alabama is fair game I looked up some scores that also might be a fair comparison. Utah beat TCU at home 13 - 10 scoring the winning td in the last minute. Oaklahoma beat TCU handily 35 - 10, then Oklahoma lost to Texas. who lost to Texas Tech who lost to Ole Miss, who lost to Vandy whom Florida beat 42-14. Good night, see you in the morning.
Wake Forest beat Ole Miss. So what?? You are extrapolating this out into the absurd. I'm not a big 'woulda coulda shoulda' with the refs because I firmly believe you play the hand you're dealt...including crappy officials. These officials were crappy. During the game, the phrase 'these officials are keeping us in this thing' was uttered after the incredibly botched false start penalty on Utah. That was on 4th and 1 with Utah marching (again) and Bama fans reeling. That penalty call was terrible. The Tide fans here laughed about it.. I believe the quote repeated ad nauseum was "Dats why da coach tells ya... Watch da ball!!... Don't listen to no count and don't watch no shift... watch da ball' They were right. The officials were wrong. Utah was not set and it was a legal shift. That is a HS play that I see every year. This is the first time I can remember it seeing called against the offense in quite some time. I'm not choosing to ignore stats... Punt returns and kick returns go in the return yardage stats.. They are there. I am choosing to focus on far more meaningful stats. That also is the only time Alabama moved the ball the length of the field. Here are the meaningful stats: Florida-Alabama First Downs: Gators 19 Alabama 18 Total Yards: Gators 358 Alabama 323 Rushing Yards: Gators 142 Alabama 136 Passing Yards: Gators 216 Alabama 187 DEFENSE Sacks: Gators 1 Alabama 0 Fumbles (fumbles lost) Florida 0(0) Alabama 0(0) INTs Florida 1 Alabama 0 Utah-Alabama First Downs: Utah 22 Bama 15 Total Yards: Utah 349 Bama 248 Rushing Yards: Utah 13 Bama 31 Passing Yards: Utah 336 Bama 177 DEFENSE Sacks: Utah 8 Bama 2 Fumbles (fumbles lost) Utah 1(1) Bama 0(0) INTs Utah 2 Bama 0
Fine call BS if you want. You dislike the BCS and have taken up the cause of the underdogs here, this year that is Utah. I can't remember a NC game you were happy with unless it contained a PAC10 team, maybe I'm wrong about that. If I remember correctly you were OK the times that USC played and won the NC. I don't remember you spending a lot of time complaining that Auburn was screwed out of the game by USC, again I could be wrong. But you guys can howl all you want about the injustice of it all, it won't change my opinion that the winner of the UF/OU game is the Nat'l Champion....no asterisk needed.
Sure. Let's overlook losing to Wake, Vandy, So. Car. and Nick Satan. Hell if one win was enough to get considered for the NC BC would have a number of trophies.
Giper, of course I don't think Ole Miss belongs up there. My real point is that those comparative scores mean squat. As does comparing the statistics of just two games. Corey, you left off some meaningful stats, like the punt return for 73 yards. That in the third quarter Alabama pulled within four points and the game was tight. That in the 4th quarter both Utah and Florida put the game away. Besides those comparing those stats is no more meaningful that comparing scores like I did. Rick :twisted: :twisted: Terry ...... nailed it!
Corey, Those stats you listed point out glaringly the game that Utah had on defense vs. Bama. Kinda supports my contention that Alabama sorely missed Smith and had no answers for his absence. Not for one minute do I believe Utah's defense is better than Florida's.
someone take a picture of this.. the UF guys defending Alabama more than any Tide fan I know of... I guess maybe that is because they had to play Utah while others get to speculate. Terry, You can't say it isn't possible since Texas was beaten by Texas Tech... who has proven more than suspect despite their 10 win season. You are correct, I haven't been happy with this BCS system..however I'd suggest that there wasn't anyone else the year it was USC-Texas, and the year it was Auburn-USC-Oklahoma, I felt that it didn't matter who played USC. Auburn was a team clubbed by the Trojans in the 2 previous seasons and OU got clubbed by USC in the title game. But it has nothing to do with the Trojans.. The Ducks were hosed one year. The Huskies were hosed another.. Utah has now finished unbeaten twice and won 2 BCS bowl games... Who else has done that? It isn't about 'taking up for the underdog'... what we have is the football comparison to a 'whites only' title section... We are discriminating against teams not because of what has happened on the field... but based upon WHO they are and WHERE they are from.
Tom, No one had a problem with that wording when it was used the first time, now I gotta be careful??
OK then why does a team with a better record have to play second fidldle? If the record doesn't count then it must be schedule. So we could look at common opponents but I guess that doesn't mean squat. So what's left? Your opinion I guess.
As I stated earlier I do think schedule strength is the issue for Utah not only in the people polls but it would have mattered in the computer polls as well. http://www.sportsline.com/collegefootball/polls/bcs The Utes came in 5th in computer rankings behind OU, Tex, Fla and Tex Tech.
That same comical list you just sent me says that Alabama is two spots better than Utah, how did that work out?
This is fun. I'd pay for this kind of entertainment, but I'm getting it for free. Don't ya just love the annual end-of-season controversies in college football? Why would you want to replace this "tradition" with something which would be controversy-free? :lol:
Why would you want to replace this "tradition" with something which would be controversy-free? Sid, that's always been one of my favorite things about the current system as well. The controversy is one of the things that makes college football so interesting. However, I also realize that it is incredibly unfair to a team like Utah who just lined up and beat everyone they played this year to not even get a chance at winning the NC. I think you'd still have controversy if you did a playoff though. I don't see how you'd do a 16 team playoff anyway. I think you could do an 8 team but then who do you pick? If you pick the champions of the BCS conferences plus two at-large you still hear people cry about another conference's champion getting left out. I think the top 8 in the BCS rankings regardless of conference affiliation might work but you'd still have controversy. Ah....it's a useless pastime..there are good arguments both ways.
I have always said that "plus one" is doable and the best. This year the Big 12 South ties took care of Texas ( not cleanly though ) and I think USC would still beef if Utah jumped over them into a plus one. It would have been nice in the plus one format if USC played Florida and OU played Utah and then the winners meet but Texas would have been in the mix.....eliminating Utah and we would still have this controversy.
of course you'd eliminate the conference champion...... I just don't understand this mindset of 'I don't know how they would make it work" The other Divisions do it with more teams... and they do it in a month. You can see the D2 bracket here: http://grfx.cstv.com/photos/schools/ncaa/sports/m-footbl/auto_pdf/2008FinalDIIFBBracket.pdf
Let's assume that there was an 8 team playoff. And we started with the winners of the BCS Conf. We'd have SC, Fla., OK, Va. Tech, Cinn. and Penn. St. Now we'd need two at large teams. Which of these three would be picked? Texas Ohio St. Utah