2008 College Football Discussion Thread

[Snoogans]

You know that would never happen, florida vs OU at the worst

no shit, thats the point

[SP1!]

no shit, thats the point

Personally thats hell for me, I hate florida and OU stands no chance in that game, god I hope bama wins and I hate them just about as much...............

[SP1!]

So how long till the buffalo coach is hire somewhere else?

[The Jays]

WOOO!! I'm so proud of my alma mater for winning the MAC Championship, and for beating a ranked opponent for the first time ever. I remember sitting in the stands and watching them lose games badly for years... I remember when Chad Pennington came into town with Marshall and destroyed us... this season has been a god send for us... now we have the football program to match our basketball program, it's about time we made some headway in Div I.... WOOOOO!

[razorboy]

Those Army unis are fucking hideous.

[cougarjake13]

So how long till the buffalo coach is hire somewhere else?

3 weeks

[TheGameHHH]

Can't we just call this Bama/Florida SEC Championship game the National Championship Game and end college football after this? its fucking stupid to keep playing for another month

[disneyspy]

enuf with the pregame,kick the ball!

[cougarjake13]

touchdown gators !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[cougarjake13]

http://i.cdn.turner.com/sivault/image/2006/10/07/016185307.jpg

[disneyspy]

this aint even gonna be a game,oh and CBS is usin the one poll that the gators are #2 in,most others have okla#2 and texas#3

[disneyspy]

http://i.cdn.turner.com/sivault/image/2006/10/07/016185307.jpg

damn florida used to have hot chicks

[cougarjake13]

god damn who was that blonde they just showed after jones catch and run ??


right after they showed wilson



maybe wilsons chick ??

[Creepo]

I really hope Florida loses this. I can not stand them nor Tebow

[disneyspy]

um

[cougarjake13]

touchdown tide !!!!!!!!!!!!

[disneyspy]

god damn who was that blonde they just showed after jones catch and run ??


right after they showed wilson



maybe wilsons chick ??

verne lundquist?

[cougarjake13]

verne lundquist?

nah

[cougarjake13]

touchdown gators !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[disneyspy]

chicks!

[disneyspy]

ha she had no balls

[SP1!]

I really hope Florida loses this. I can not stand them nor Tebow

I dont understand why a team just doesnt have a LB stay on teebow to shut him down like FSU did to vick in the sugar bowl that year, shut him down and florida has no shot or at least rattle him. If they get to him and start slamming him to the ground they could win, but thats not saying much since I hate both teams, I just hate bama a little less.

[cougarjake13]

I dont understand why a team just doesnt have a LB stay on teebow to shut him down like FSU did to vick in the sugar bowl that year, shut him down and florida has no shot or at least rattle him. If they get to him and start slamming him to the ground they could win, but thats not saying much since I hate both teams, I just hate bama a little less.

that could leave someone open

so then its game of who gets who first

[SP1!]

that could leave someone open

so then its game of who gets who first

He only has so many receivers and usually you have more covering than needed, it works great for a mobile QB and usually shuts him down.

Either way teebow better like his time at QB now cause I dont see how he will play QB in the NFL.

[cougarjake13]

He only has so many receivers and usually you have more covering than needed, it works great for a mobile QB and usually shuts him down.

Either way teebow better like his time at QB now cause I dont see how he will play QB in the NFL.

someone will give him a shot

he'll either become gino torretta or some team will make him into matt jones

[cougarjake13]

touchdown tide !!!!!!!!!!!!

[cougarjake13]

17-17


6:20 left in the 3rd quarter

[razorboy]

that could leave someone open

so then its game of who gets who first

I play those odds, because Tebow rarely make secondary reads.

[SP1!]

someone will give him a shot

he'll either become gino torretta or some team will make him into matt jones

I think he will end up being a TE, he has an average arm

[cougarjake13]

bama 20
gators 17

gators missed a fg to go up 20-17 on drive before bama did


end of 3rd quarter

[SP1!]

I play those odds, because Tebow rarely make secondary reads.

Yeah he seems to be the dumbest heisman trophy winner at QB, if his primary is covered he runs, its why georgia stopped him last year and now looks to be why bama is taking over the game. If their line keeps playing like this they will win.

[cougarjake13]

touchdown gators !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



gators 24
bama 20

[SP1!]

So much for that, their line gets random blocks now, I thought they would be blocking better than that in the 4th, still this game just proves how far the SEC was down this year.

[cougarjake13]

touchdown gators !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!




gators 31
bama 20

[razorboy]

Jesus Christ, could the broadcasters get Timbo's dick out of their mouths for five seconds?

[cougarjake13]

Jesus Christ, could the broadcasters get Timbo's dick out of their mouths for five seconds?




apparently not

[razorboy]

Well, it was about what I expected.

[cougarjake13]

SEC CHAMPION FLORIDA GATORS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!





SORRY BAMA

[SP1!]

Jesus Christ, could the broadcasters get Timbo's dick out of their mouths for five seconds?

Yeah I love the way they made sure they said college when they were talking about starting a team, he is going to be a huge bust in the NFL.

I am praying OU loses tonight, its the only shot they have of getting Texas in that game and I think thats the only team that will beat them, OU is a fucking joke with that crap defense.

[Snoogans]

Well the stage is set for the only 2 undefeated teams to meet in what we all know should be the REAL national Title game:


BOISE STATE VS UTAH

[epo]

Well the stage is set for the only 2 undefeated teams to meet in what we all know should be the REAL national Title game:


BOISE STATE VS UTAH

Are those schools even in Division 1?

[Snoogans]

12-0

[Dash77]

Well the stage is set for the only 2 undefeated teams to meet in what we all know should be the REAL national Title game:


BOISE STATE VS UTAH

Why not, It would be a great game

[SP1!]

Well the stage is set for the only 2 undefeated teams to meet in what we all know should be the REAL national Title game:


BOISE STATE VS UTAH

Not gonna happen, Utah is most likely going to the sugar bowl against alabama, wonder if it will be a blowout like last year, Im thinking it will be.

I am praying that somehow florida doesnt jump over texas, I know its a long shot but I fucking hate florida, otherwise Im hoping somehow OU finds a defense to stop them.

[cougarjake13]

2008-09 College Football Bowl Schedule

Bowl Game Date/Time Site Matchup Network

EagleBank Bowl Dec. 20
11 a.m. Washington, D.C. Wake Forest vs. Navy ESPN

New Mexico Dec. 20
2:30 p.m. Albuquerque, NM Colorado State vs. Fresno State ESPN

St. Petersburg Dec. 20
4:30 p.m. St. Petersburg, FL South Florida vs. Memphis ESPN2

Pioneer Las Vegas Dec. 20
8 p.m. Las Vegas, NV BYU vs. Arizona ESPN

R+L Carriers New Orleans Dec. 21
8:15 p.m. New Orleans, LA Troy vs. Southern Miss ESPN

San Diego County Credit Union Poinsettia Dec. 23
8 p.m. San Diego, CA TCU vs. Boise State ESPN

Sheraton Hawaii Dec. 24
8 p.m. Honolulu, HI Hawaii vs. Notre Dame ESPN

Motor City Dec. 26
7:30 p.m. Detroit, MI Central Michigan vs. Florida Atlantic ESPN

Meineke Car Care Dec. 27
1 p.m. Charlotte, NC North Carolina vs. West Virginia ESPN

Champs Sports Dec. 27
4:30 p.m. Orlando, FL Florida State vs. Wisconsin ESPN

Emerald Dec. 27
8 p.m. San Francisco, CA California vs. Miami (Fla.) ESPN

Independence Dec. 28
8:15 p.m. Shreveport, LA Louisiana Tech vs. Northern Illinois ESPN

Papajohns.com Dec. 29
3 p.m. Birmingham, AL Rutgers vs. N.C. State ESPN

Valero Alamo Dec. 29
8 p.m. San Antonio, TX Northwestern vs. Missouri ESPN

Roady's Humanitarian Dec. 30
4:30 p.m. Boise, ID Maryland vs. Nevada ESPN

Texas Dec. 30
8 p.m. Houston, TX Rice vs. Western Michigan NFL

Pacific Life Holiday Dec. 30
8 p.m. San Diego, CA Oregon vs. Oklahoma State ESPN

Bell Helicopter Armed Forces Dec. 31
12 p.m. Fort Worth, TX Air Force vs. Houston ESPN

Brut Sun Dec. 31
2 p.m. El Paso, TX Oregon State vs. Pittsburgh CBS

Gaylord Hotels Music City Dec. 31
3:30 p.m. Nashville, TN Vanderbilt vs. Boston College ESPN

Insight Dec. 31
5:30 p.m. Tempe, Ariz. Kansas vs. Minnesota NFL

Chick-fil-A Dec. 31
7:30 p.m. Atlanta, GA LSU vs. Georgia Tech ESPN

Outback Jan. 1
11 a.m. Tampa, FL Iowa vs. South Carolina ESPN

Capital One Jan. 1
1 p.m. Orlando, FL Georgia vs. Michigan State ABC

Konica Minolta Gator Jan. 1
1 p.m. Jacksonville, FL Nebraska vs. Clemson CBS

Rose presented by Citi Jan. 1
4:30 p.m. Pasadena, CA Penn State vs. USC ABC

FedEx Orange Jan. 1
8:30 p.m. Miami, FL Virginia Tech vs. Cincinnati FOX

AT&T Cotton Jan. 2
2 p.m. Dallas, TX Texas Tech vs. Ole Miss FOX

AutoZone Liberty Jan. 2
5 p.m. Memphis, TN East Carolina vs. Kentucky ESPN

Allstate Sugar Jan. 2
8 p.m. New Orleans, LA Utah vs. Alabama FOX

International Jan. 3
12 p.m. Toronto, Canada Connecticut vs. Buffalo ESPN2

Tostitos Fiesta Jan. 5
8 p.m. Glendale, AZ Texas vs. Ohio State FOX

GMAC Jan. 6
8 p.m. Mobile, AL Tulsa vs. Ball State ESPN

FedEx BCS National Championship Jan. 8
8 p.m. Miami, FL Oklahoma vs. Florida FOX

[SP1!]

Bowl listings (http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=3444571)
Damn you COUGAR!!!!!!

Any big surprises for anyone else? I dont think ND deserves one but they travel well so they always will get one, I dont think Ohio State deserves a BCS bid but they suck up to the big 10 every year so they got in.

I find it hilarious that Georgia got in a New Years Day bowl and will get a larger payout than Georgia Tech will receive, just one more reminder to Tech fans that even though they beat us they will always just be Tech. I am also hoping LSU kills them since they have been talking so much shit since they finally won a game against UGA in 8 tries, then I hope Auburn hires Paul Johnson away from them just to really rub salt in their wounds.

Oh and of course I am now the biggest Oklahoma fan in the world, please for the sake of my sanity, kill the gayterds, I fucking cant stand them or their pretty boy, goody two shoes quarterback.

[Tenbatsuzen]

I just saw the fiesta bowl lineup, my vacation is RUINED

[JimBeam]

Yeah he seems to be the dumbest heisman trophy winner at QB, if his primary is covered he runs, its why georgia stopped him last year and now looks to be why bama is taking over the game. If their line keeps playing like this they will win.

Yeah you're right. He's terrible.

2,515 yds passing and a QB rating of 176.7% ( better than last year's 172.47% when he won a Heisman ).

He's got 28 TDs this year w/ only 2 INTs.

Oh and by the way since that last INT he's thrown 16 TDs in 4 games against ranked teams.

Yeah I love the way they made sure they said college when they were talking about starting a team, he is going to be a huge bust in the NFL.

Who gives a shit what he does or doesn't do in the NFL ?

Where do you come up w/ this shit ?

You're letting your hatred, which you have for who knows what reason, against Tebow cloud your judgement that he is actually a unique and talented player.

In his career, for which he has 1 year left, he's got 6,159 yards passing w/ 65 TDs and only 9 INTs ( and I'm not even looking at his rushing stats ).

Compare that to Colt McCoy, everbody's Heisman hopeful this year ( which is as baffling as your utter dislike of Tebow ), who's got 9.318 yards passing w/ 83 TDs and 32 INTs in his career.

That's 18 more TD's w/ 446 more passing attempts.

My point w/ the comparison to McCoy is that f you wanna say a player is overrated it's McCoy more so than Tebow.

I am praying OU loses tonight, its the only shot they have of getting Texas in that game and I think thats the only team that will beat them, OU is a fucking joke with that crap defense.

Again not sure what you're using to form you opinion.

Oklahoma just became the first team in the HISTORY of NCAA football to score 60+ points in 5 straight games.

They did that against 3 ranked teams and another going to a New Year's Day bowl game.

They showed the stats this morning and the last team to score 60+ in straight 4 games did it back in 1920.

Sure the Big 12 seems to not be so good on defense but what makes you think that team would get blown out ?

Because the SEC defenses are so great ?

The Alabama defense that we were lead to believe was so stout surrendered 31 points to UF.

So UF stinks and are lead by a terrible QB yet they put up 30 or more points in all 8 of their SEC games.

How good could those defenses be if such a terrible QB, in your opinion, helped put up some many points ?

The OU/UF game should be interesting to watch w/ 2 very different and very good QBs.

[SP1!]

I never said he was terrible, what I said was that he will be another in a long line of washout florida QBs in the NFL, unless he switches to TE or something else, I know you like to throw up all those numbers but his numbers arent as great as most heisman trophy winning QBs that didnt start for 3 straight years and see significant playing time as a freshman. I think he has a lot of talent, so did mike vick, michael bishop, eric couch, and matt jones, only one is still playing in the NFL, the others are either in jail or sitting at home but all 4 were very mobile QBs who were thought to be great in college. And dont say vicks only down cause of his dog fighting, I watched him play every week, he was a horrible QB that couldnt make reads for shit, I thank god he got busted so the falcons could get a real QB and not a gimmick. Oh and the hatred comes from florida fans thinking college football just started in 1990 forgetting that they sucked ass until then, florida fans are the most obnoxious around the south, then bama, Tennessee, then Georgia.

And Im sorry OU? Are you serious? They gave up 450 yards and 41 pts to a very average Ok State team, if my nightmare holds true florida kills this team just like it was Ohio state. Personally I hope Im wrong and OU stomps florida but I really dont see that happening, I will be cheering for them until they get 3 TDs down.

[JimBeam]

...what I said was that he will be another in a long line of washout florida QBs in the NFL...

mike vick, michael bishop, eric couch, and matt jones

None of those guys ever won a national title and only 1 won a Heisman ( in one of the worst votes ever ).

But this is a college football thread and you were talking about what he was doing in a college game.

Maybe he never throws a single TD in the NFL but big deal.

He'll have won a national title, maybe 2 or even 3, and a Heisman ( or maybe 2 or 3 ).

That's more than a lot of guys who play in the NFL for 10+ years and never win a Super Bowl.

And Im sorry OU? Are you serious? They gave up 450 yards and 41 pts to a very average Ok State team...

Maybe Ok St is/was overrated but they were a Top 12 team when OK beat them.

It could be that the OK defense gives up a lot of points because they're on the field all the time.

When the offense scores so often and at times so quickly the defense has to go right back out there.

Again what about SEC defenses, LSU and UGA, both highly ranked to start the year that gave up 30 or more points in all of their losses ?

Those teams are/were as overrated, if not more, than Ok St.

There are some out there saying that Alabama was overrated and that when they were finally tested they failed.

I'm on the fence w/ that because I'd like to see how they do against Utah although I'd have rather seen them against a USC, Texas or Texas Tech.

Not sure what to think of Texas Tech/Ole Miss game.

[JimBeam]

Read a stat on ESPN that both OK and UF have played 1000+ games in their histories but this will be their first meeting.

[SP1!]

None of those guys ever won a national title and only 1 won a Heisman ( in one of the worst votes ever ).
Yeah hes a heisman winner but ongoing success is still measured by NFL standards, its why every talks about heisman busts in the NFL.

Maybe Ok St is/was overrated but they were a Top 12 team when OK beat them.Thats like saying bama still deserves credit for beating top 10s clemson and top 5 georgia, it doesnt really matter now.

Again what about SEC defenses, LSU and UGA, both highly ranked to start the year that gave up 30 or more points in all of their losses ?And? LSU was over rated big time, we all knew that, I dont know why they got their ranking especially after they lost their starting QB, they were bottom 25 at best.

Those teams are/were as overrated, if not more, than Ok St.

There are some out there saying that Alabama was overrated and that when they were finally tested they failed.This is essentially the same Ok St team that was stomped by a bad beginning of the year georgia team last year, so Ok st is more over rated just because they are in the big12. It wouldnt shock me one bit to see that team get beat fairly easily by oregon, they have a bad defense, hell they gave up almost 40 points to houston.

[/QUOTE]I'm on the fence w/ that because I'd like to see how they do against Utah although I'd have rather seen them against a USC, Texas or Texas Tech.[/QUOTE]Utah is going to have a long day, maybe not a blowout like hawaii had but maybe close, their linemen are some of the best I have ever seen, Utah has not seen anything like that, ever. Fuck they have a 6'8" 360lb monster anchoring their offense and thats just not fair.

Not sure what to think of Texas Tech/Ole Miss game.
Im sure TT may pull it off but maybe ole miss can win with snead at QB.

[SP1!]

Read a stat on ESPN that both OK and UF have played 1000+ games in their histories but this will be their first meeting.

Yeah thought the BCS people said it was something like 2,198 games played between them with never meeting, but then you have to remember florida sucked for most of those games.

[Freakshow]

Yeah you're right. He's terrible.

2,515 yds passing and a QB rating of 176.7% ( better than last year's 172.47% when he won a Heisman ).

He's got 28 TDs this year w/ only 2 INTs.

Oh and by the way since that last INT he's thrown 16 TDs in 4 games against ranked teams.



Who gives a shit what he does or doesn't do in the NFL ?

Where do you come up w/ this shit ?




Funny, when I used stats like that describe Vince Young and JeMarcus Russell in past years, you dismissed them as meaningless. And said they wouldn't be good pros...

[Freitag]

Funny, when I used stats like that describe Vince Young and JeMarcus Russell in past years, you dismissed them as meaningless. And said they wouldn't be good pros...

uh...

Jamarcus and Vince aren't good pros. At least, they haven't done anything to prove anything. Vince is riding pine and a head case and Jamarcus is on a very, very bad team.

[ozzie]

GMAC Jan. 6
8 p.m. Mobile, AL Tulsa vs. Ball State ESPN

I might actually go to this one this year.

I blew off opportunities to see Tomlinson play in 1999, and Leftwich play to a 64-61 double overtime in 2001.

Last year Paul Smith and Tulsa put up 63 points.

Sucks that they both lost their championship games, but it should be entertaining, if you like a lot of offense.

[Freakshow]

uh...

Jamarcus and Vince aren't good pros. At least, they haven't done anything to prove anything. Vince is riding pine and a head case and Jamarcus is on a very, very bad team.

That's not the point at all. Jim Beam said Vince Young was a 'running' quarterback, I come back and say VY had the highest QB rating in the NCAA that year and point out his TDs to Interceptions. Now this year, someone criticizes Tebow and JB points out his QB rating and TD to interceptions...


It's too soon for Russell (somehow he has more TD than ints for the Raiders, which is an accomplishment in and of itself). Vince Young was rookie of the year and his team has been to the playoffs twice. I know he's had issues this year, but honestly I think he's going to have a Kerry Collins-like career and will be good, maybe somewhere else.

[SP1!]

Funny, when I used stats like that describe Vince Young and JeMarcus Russell in past years, you dismissed them as meaningless. And said they wouldn't be good pros...

Its quite obvious hes a racist then!!!!!!!!!

[Freitag]

It's weird. Part of me wants to go to the Fiesta Bowl and part of me doesn't.

I think I'll spend the money on a Coyotes game instead.

[JimBeam]

That's not the point at all. Jim Beam said Vince Young was a 'running' quarterback, I come back and say VY had the highest QB rating in the NCAA that year and point out his TDs to Interceptions. Now this year, someone criticizes Tebow and JB points out his QB rating and TD to interceptions...


It's too soon for Russell (somehow he has more TD than ints for the Raiders, which is an accomplishment in and of itself). Vince Young was rookie of the year and his team has been to the playoffs twice. I know he's had issues this year, but honestly I think he's going to have a Kerry Collins-like career and will be good, maybe somewhere else.

I do recall saying something along those lines and wont back away from them but I believe the argument at the time was about the futures of those particular players in the NFL.

I was debating what SP was saying about Tebow while he was playing in a college game.

If you look at my posts I never once say that I think Tebow will be good in the NFL or that he even has a shot at making a team ( as a QB ).

In fact I have a few posts in this thread stating that I don't think he himself even has the idea that he'll play QB in the NFL.

[El Mudo]

It's weird. Part of me wants to go to the Fiesta Bowl and part of me doesn't.

I think I'll spend the money on a Coyotes game instead.


Enver Lisin FTW

http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/03TP8jGbwq4hB/340x.jpg

[JimBeam]

Most of the BCS match-ups are good with the exception of Cincy/Va Tech.

I think OK/UF, Penn St/USC, Utah/Alabama and Texas/Oh St will all be good games.

While I do like some of the traditional bowl ties ( Rose Bowl and Sugar Bowl ) I think the others prevent very good games.

It worked out this year that the Rose will be good but there's no argument that last year it was a terrible match-up.

I'd have liked to have seen a Bama/USC, Bama/Texas, Penn St/Texas, or Penn St/Bama games.

[Freakshow]

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/graphics/coaches_fb_poll_2008/flash.htm


How the coaches voted. Chris Peterson is out of his mind. Mike Leach, too.

Schiano voted Penn State #4...

[JimBeam]

I don't think Mike Leach is any crazier than Mack Brown.

I can see him reasoning that OK should be #1 over his team as they beat them head to head and that his team is better than UF because it lost to the now OK and UF lost to Ole Miss.

Not saying I agree w/ him but I can see his thought proess.

How does Mack Brown have the balls to put Texas Tech at #8 ?

I guess to him head to head really doesn't matter as much as he'd like us to think.

Or at least only when it suits his purposes.

[ozzie]

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/graphics/coaches_fb_poll_2008/flash.htm


How the coaches voted. Chris Peterson is out of his mind. Mike Leach, too.

Schiano voted Penn State #4...

Typical.

Urban Meyer and Les Miles vote Ole Miss #12 and #14 respectively.

Why? They lost to them, so they MUST be that good!

If you look close, most all of them put their opponents up high. Tommy Bowden's might be the best (worst?) example of that.

[JimBeam]

I could see a lot of conference bias.

SEC coaches more apt to put Alabama over Texas and Big 12 coaches doing the opposite.

At least the Boise St guy didn't put his team in the top 5.

[SP1!]

According to his mother (http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=3755344)

[Freakshow]

I don't think Mike Leach is any crazier than Mack Brown.

I can see him reasoning that OK should be #1 over his team as they beat them head to head and that his team is better than UF because it lost to the now OK and UF lost to Ole Miss.

Not saying I agree w/ him but I can see his thought proess.

How does Mack Brown have the balls to put Texas Tech at #8 ?

I guess to him head to head really doesn't matter as much as he'd like us to think.

Or at least only when it suits his purposes.

The majority of voters have TT 6 and 7, so Mack Brown at 8 is a whole lot closer than Leach at 2. If you ignore crazy old Hal Mumme, than the next highest voter for TT is 6, nothing inbetween.

I wonder what the coach at Missouri has against the Mountain West and Boise? He voted Utah, Boise, and TCU 15, 16, 17...

[KnoxHarrington]

Here's the thing: if Texas kicks Ohio State's ass, and Oklahoma wins ugly, I think we have another split championship situation.

And the BCS was supposed to have been set up to prevent that. Another fail for the BCS.

[JimBeam]

The majority of voters have TT 6 and 7, so Mack Brown at 8 is a whole lot closer than Leach at 2.

But how can Mack Brown, tell Mike Leach to his face, that Texas should be ranked higher than Texas Tech ?

If you asked Mack Brown " Hey why do you think the discussion about the tie in the Big 12 South concerns only Texas and Oklahoma and not Texas Tech ? " he'd probably say that since they lost, and lost big that they are no longer in the discussion.

He wants the benefit of OK's win against Texas Tech but wants to ignore his own loss to that same team.

It's exactly like Stoops said when he was asked about the 3 way tie right after OK beat Texas Tech.

Corso or Fowler brough up the fact that OK lost to Texas head to head to which Stoops replied " Than Texas Tech should be ranked ahead of both of them. "

Why would Leach vote a team that he beat ahead of his own team ?

I bet if Stoops had a vote that he'd vote Texas Tech ahead of Texas.

[SP1!]

Here's the thing: if Texas kicks Ohio State's ass, and Oklahoma wins ugly, I think we have another split championship situation.

And the BCS was supposed to have been set up to prevent that. Another fail for the BCS.
Actually the BCS was created to line the pockets of the old farts in charge, personally I hope OU wins but I just dont see it happening.

[Freakshow]

because Texas didn't get blown out, completely dominated, and embrassed by anyone this season.

becuase his team was one dropped interception from beating TT

because his team lost to an inferior team, on the road, at the end of a four game strectch where Texas played 4 highly ranked teams (at the time, Missou has dropped since then).


If Texas has to vote the team that beat them ahead, then Urban Meyer has to vote Mississippi ahead of them in the poll, Pete Caroll has to vote Oregon State ahead, Paterno would have to vote Iowa ahead (if he actually voted). You'd have a lot of 3 and 4 loss teams sitting at the top of people polls. Sometimes the better team just doesn't win, and you shouldn't have to rank them ahead.

[JimBeam]

Tyrone Willingham has a 4 loss Missouri team ranked 6 spots higher than a 3 loss Ok St that beat Missouri.

What I find interesting is that Kyle Whittingham, the coach of the undefeated Utah team, actually has 4 teams w/ 1 loss ranked ahead of his own team.

Same thing w/ Chris Petersen, head coach of Boise St, although he has a few more teams ahead of his own team who he has just ahead of Utah.

[KnoxHarrington]

Actually the BCS was created to line the pockets of the old farts in charge, personally I hope OU wins but I just dont see it happening.

Well, yes, of course, I was being a teensy bit facetious. The purpose of the BCS is to keep the huge majority of the bowl money in the hands of the 6 biggest conference. The bullshit about providing a "national champion" is an excuse.

[JimBeam]

becuase his team was one dropped interception from beating TT

because his team lost to an inferior team, on the road, at the end of a four game strectch where Texas played 4 highly ranked teams (at the time, Missou has dropped since then).

We're still doing the " ifs & buts " argument w/ reagrds to the supposed almost interception ?

What about the actual interception that OK had in the Texas game that was overturned ?

That interception would've prevented Texas from kicking the go ahead FG.

What about the late interception that Ok St threw against Texas ?

Why isn't it " Well Texas was an almost 2 loss team IF not for an Ok St interception " ?

Texas won a game by 4 at home that OK won by 20 on the road.

And why do people keep talking about this stretch of games that Texas played as if OK and Texas Tech didn't play the same games ?

As Stoops pointed out OK is the only team to beat 5 ranked opponents.

Also as somebody wisely pointed out a few pages ago Texas Tech lead that game for 58 minutes before Texas took the lead.

And again as I've pointed out Texas didn't lose on some freak 80 yard interception or fumble return.

They lost because they allowed Texas Tech to go 62 yards in 6 plays.

[JimBeam]

The purpose of the BCS is to keep the huge majority of the bowl money in the hands of the 6 biggest conference. The bullshit about providing a "national champion" is an excuse.

It really wasn't any different before the BCS.

The major conferences would still get all the big bowl money.

Actually in the old scenarios teams like Utah and Cincinnati wouldn't even be anywhere near the games they have the chance to play in now.

You can argue that the champion in the BCS format may or may not be more valid but at the very least the BCS has allowed lesser conferences to be more relevant ( even if they don't have a shot at winning a title ).

[Snoogans]

12-0

[JimBeam]

Snoogans who would've been in your BCS title game if Ball St remained undefeated ?

[ozzie]

It really wasn't any different before the BCS.

The major conferences would still get all the big bowl money.

Actually in the old scenarios teams like Utah and Cincinnati wouldn't even be anywhere near the games they have the chance to play in now.

You can argue that the champion in the BCS format may or may not be more valid but at the very least the BCS has allowed lesser conferences to be more relevant ( even if they don't have a shot at winning a title ).

With the exception of the Rose, Cotton, Orange and Sugar, not many had "conference affiliations" back then. And aside from those that did, the rest visited teams during the season, and some exteded "bids" (or cash offers) to get teams to play in their bowl, sometimes with weeks left in the season.

There wasn't a strict "pecking order" of bowls back then, and teams went to the highest bidder, or where they wanted to play.

With the exception of the BCS conference tie-ins, and the one "automatic" bid that Utah grabbed, this year most went to the next highest profile/paying bowl almost in order of their ranking, with the exception of Boise and TCU.

If Utah was a #6 team 15 years ago, they still would have grabbed a New Year's day bowl, and a big paycheck.

Look back at some of the opponents the SEC and Big 8 played against in the Sugar and Orange bowls. Most were the next highest ranked team they could get that wasn't already locked into another bowl game... or who they thought would bring the most fans to stay a few days in their town, and draw the largest TV audience.

Miami got screwed a few times out of the Orange and other Florida based bowls for this reason.

I agree that Cincinnati probably wouldn't have played on New Year's day... but then again, Va Tech probably wouldn't either.

[ozzie]

Forgot Utah used to be in the old WAC.

If this were... say... 1983...

Texas Tech would be in the Cotton as the SWC champ.
OU would be in the Orange as Big 8 champ.
Florida would be in the Sugar as SEC champ.
Penn State and USC would still be in the Rose.
Utah would be in the Holiday Bowl.

That's 6 of the top 8 locked into bowl games, and only 2 playing head to head.

Obviously Texas and Bama would have their pick of where to go, but there was an unofficial tie in with the SEC and the Gator Bowl. The Sugar would probably submit the highest bid for Texas. The Orange Bowl wouldn't want a re-match.

The Cotton and Orange would still be looking for opponents... and don't forget the Fiesta, Tangerine, Peach and Sun Bowls.

Teams like Boise and TCU would have done fine under this system if they had the same ranking. And Cincinnati and Va Tech could probably still find a New Year's Day bowl bid from one of these.

[Freakshow]

We're still doing the " ifs & buts " argument w/ reagrds to the supposed almost interception ?

What about the actual interception that OK had in the Texas game that was overturned ?

That interception would've prevented Texas from kicking the go ahead FG.

What about the late interception that Ok St threw against Texas ?

Why isn't it " Well Texas was an almost 2 loss team IF not for an Ok St interception " ?

Texas won a game by 4 at home that OK won by 20 on the road.

And why do people keep talking about this stretch of games that Texas played as if OK and Texas Tech didn't play the same games ?

As Stoops pointed out OK is the only team to beat 5 ranked opponents.

Also as somebody wisely pointed out a few pages ago Texas Tech lead that game for 58 minutes before Texas took the lead.

And again as I've pointed out Texas didn't lose on some freak 80 yard interception or fumble return.

They lost because they allowed Texas Tech to go 62 yards in 6 plays.

My point is Mack Brown can sleep at night voting his team ahead of Texas Tech. I'm not saying Texas should have won the game, i'm saying the case could be made that UT is the better team. You pretty much wasted a post arguing things i've never said. I never said anything about Oklahoma, it's purely Mack Brown putting Texas ahead of Tech, and why he could justify it...

[JimBeam]

Obviously Texas and Bama would have their pick of where to go, but there was an unofficial tie in with the SEC and the Gator Bowl.

Actually prior to the BCS the 2nd place team from the SEC and usually the 2nd place team from the Big 10 played in the Outback Bowl.

That's what promteted Steve Spurrier to taunt Tennessee with the line " You can't spell Outback without UT. "

I think the Gator Bowl was a 3rd place bowl w/ regards to an SEC team.

But again the payouts in the big 4 games, which conveniently enough became the BCS bowls, were much greater than any other games.

Utah bringing $6+ million back to the MWC from the Sugar Bowl is a lot better than bringing back $500K from the Holiday Bowl.

Actually most teams take a loss when they accept bids to lower bowls after you factor in travel, hotels, etc ...

That's a big reason why ND is going to Hawaii.

They can afford to and a lot of other teams would not want to make that trip.

Actually looking at the list below a few teams from various palces have made that trip :

YEAR RESULT
2007 East Carolina 41, Boise State 38
2006 Hawaii 41, Arizona State 24
2005 Nevada 49, Central Florida 48 (OT)
2004 Hawaii 59, UAB 40
2003 Hawaii 54, Houston 48 (3 OT)
2002 Tulane 36, Hawaii 28

[ozzie]

Actually prior to the BCS the 2nd place team from the SEC and usually the 2nd place team from the Big 10 played in the Outback Bowl.

That's what promteted Steve Spurrier to taunt Tennessee with the line " You can't spell Outback without UT. "

I think the Gator Bowl was a 3rd place bowl w/ regards to an SEC team.

But again the payouts in the big 4 games, which conveniently enough became the BCS bowls, were much greater than any other games.

Utah bringing $6+ million back to the MWC from the Sugar Bowl is a lot better than bringing back $500K from the Holiday Bowl.

That's why I went back 25 years and used 1983 as an example. The Outback didn't start until 1986, and things were a little clearer back then. In '83, the Gator was still a player in the bowl system, and regularly grabbed the best team they could get from the SEC.

And yes, Utah would have been obligated to the Holiday bowl as the "WAC" champion if this were 1983. But there were still prime New Year's Day bowl games that did not have both slots automatically filled by teams from any one conference.

Miami was an independent team until 1991, and look at how many MAJOR bowl invites they received in the 80's. They were a relative new comer to the bigger bowl games, and crap before Schnellenberger and Jimmie Johnson came along, and didn't have a conference tie in to get bowl bids.

Most people under 30 probably think that "The U" of Miami has ALWAYS been a National Power, but in the big scheme of things, they're still pretty young, and in the early 80's, they were right where a lot of the "crap" mid-major conference or small independent teams are now. A non-traditional school out there trying to put together a schedule and get bowl bids to prove themselves.

They were big time underdogs going into the 1983 (technically, Jan '84) Orange bowl. They'd been blown out by Florida in their opener, but worked their way back up the rankings to #5 by knocking off lesser teams, and when it came time to give out bowl bids, they were the highest ranked team on the board that didn't already have a conference tie-in to another bowl, so they got the bid.

They were in a very similar situation that year that Utah and Boise face this year. An impressive record and a high ranking, but didn't do a lot to "prove" themselves before that game.

The rest is history. Little old #5 Miami won the game. They beat the #1. #2 Texas lost to Georgia in the Cotton. #3 Auburn was stuck playing a Michigan team with a bad record, and played an un-impressive conservative game... Miami won the "MNC".

Under the current system, they would have probably earned a BCS game because of their record, but no way they would have been playing for the title.

My point about Utah and Boise was that without a tie in to a "lesser bowl" (Holiday), they would have been eligible to play in the Orange, Sugar or Cotton bowls (the BIG ones at the time), and with a #6 rank, probably still would have gotten a bid, and an outside chance at winning the game, and getting enough votes to win a championship, which they don't have now.

The problem that Utah or Boise face now is that they are locked into these "mid-majors", so they're obligated to play a slate of crap games, and will never get a chance to prove themselves year in and year out. They each won a BCS game, but then they had to go right back the next year to another schedule of cupcakes, so every year, even if they go undefeated, their record is questioned because of their strength of schedule.

Miami got a lot of respect after 1983, but being independent, they were still able to schedule tougher games and prove themselves. Playing Florida State, Florida and Notre Dame in the reg season helped their cause a ton.

If Utah can somehow beat Bama (although doubtful), that might earn them respect this year. But it probably won't last. And it won't make them anything more than "Sugar Bowl Champs 2008". Until they can schedule and win in a bigger conference, or contract some bigger schools to play them every year, they're going to face the same problem every year.

Boise beating TCU (or vice versa) won't mean shit to anyone. Neither will the winner of Ball State and Tulsa.

South Florida has the advantage of playing Big East opponents, which for now, is still a BCS conference. They've probably got the best chance of repeating what Miami was able to accomplish as far as earning respect and getting regular bowl invites.

The rest are pretty much screwed under the BCS format.

[SP1!]

I understand what you are saying ozzie but you are missing a big part of that equation, miami was and still is a huge TV market, its all about money, the NCAA can sell miami whereas they cant sell tulsa, boise, and the other small market areas unless they are close to a larger TV base.

[ozzie]

I understand what you are saying ozzie but you are missing a big part of that equation, miami was and still is a huge TV market, its all about money, the NCAA can sell miami whereas they cant sell tulsa, boise, and the other small market areas unless they are close to a larger TV base.

The fact that money or TV ratings are in any way involved in deciding a national champion... sums up the problem with the game.

The point was made that these schools are somehow better off under the BCS system then they were before... and I disagree.

YES, the BCS games pay out a hell of a lot more then the lesser bowls, but hell, they ALL pay out better now. And if you're only talking about how much money ONE team a year might make by getting a BCS bid, then yes, that's true. But with 34 bowl games now, and all of the TV contracts, everyone's making more.

But is that all that this game has become? Who makes the most money?

And I'm not sure that the NCAA "sold" Miami, as much as they were an independent team, that was able to get big name schools to play them, and, more importantly (maybe because of where they were located), get these big schools to come to them.

In '83, Purdue, #13 Notre Dame, Louisville, #12 West Virginia, and East Carolina, all traveled TO Miami to play them.

Their other games were @ Florida (Only Loss), @ Houston, @ Duke, @ Mississippi State, @ Cincinnati, and @ Florida State.

I'm sure when they made this schedule, none of these teams were concerned about losing to them because of how "mediocre" they were before then, and Schnellenberger deserves a lot of credit for playing such an aggressive schedule.

My point was that being independent allowed them to schedule enough "name" schools to earn respect, and getting the "bigger" games at home was a huge advantage. But even after going 10 - 1 with this schedule (and beating two ranked teams at home), they still only ended up #5.

But because of the old bowl system at the time, they were able to accept a bid to the Orange bowl and a chance to play the #1 team, and because they won the game, and what happened to the teams ahead of them, they were given the title.

Some might even argue that because of Miami's success, when BYU went undefeated the following year, even though it was mostly against crap teams and beat a very average 6-5 Michigan team by one touchdown in the stupid Holiday bowl... they received enough "respect" and votes, even though they were in a small conference, and were given the title in '84.

That was about the time that you started really hearing about how screwed up it was that the top teams played in different bowl games, and when people first started throwing around the ideas of a playoff, or at least a system where #1 could play #2, regardless of conference / bowl tie-ins.

(It should be noted that #3 Washington did not win the Pac 10 that year, and was given an invite to play BYU, but instead, took an invite to play Oklahoma in the Orange Bowl)

The BCS (and Bowl Coalition before that) fixed that part, but also fixed it to where the "mid-majors" lost any real hope of ever winning another national championship.

Boise, Utah, Fresno, and teams in those conferences, might be able to schedule 2 or 3 "name" schools, but most of the time they'll only agree to play them at their place, and then they still have to play the other 8 "crap" teams in their conference, so they don't have the same opportunity to prove themselves during the regular season.

And because of this, ONE might get an invite to a BCS game, but they'll never get invited to the title game, and therefore do not have a chance to win a title.

This is not about whether any of these teams SHOULD be in the title game THIS YEAR... I'm simply talking about the obstacles these teams face, and how they'll never have a legit chance to prove themselves on the field enough to ever win respect, no matter what team or non-conference schedule they put together, under this system.

[JimBeam]

Yeah I think old or new system the Cotton Bowl, Outback Bowl, etc ... would take a 2 or even 3 loss SEC, Big 12 or Big 10 team before it took an undefeated Boise St or Utah.

Remember the bowls are looking at it from a fans perspective because they need fans to make the money that they want to make.

So the bowls are in the business of putting out what they think is the most entertaining game and not necessarily what's " fair " or " earned " by a team.

It's not really apples to apples but think about it in terms of a movie theater.

They can either have 2 theaters showing the newest Harry Potter movie, which to many people may be just cookie cutter nonsense, or have that 2nd theater showing some movie that's considered more artsy and has more critical buzz.

They are gonna show the Harry Potter movie because that's what's gonna draw the most attention.

[JimBeam]

YES, the BCS games pay out a hell of a lot more then the lesser bowls, but hell, they ALL pay out better now. And if you're only talking about how much money ONE team a year might make by getting a BCS bid, then yes, that's true. But with 34 bowl games now, and all of the TV contracts, everyone's making more.

Everybody's not making money.

The money spent on travel, boarding and all of that stuff pretty much wipes out the profits a single team makes in a lesser bowl.

Plus they have to share that money w/ their conferences

I'm not sure if the conference gets money right off the top or if they divide the profits after the games.

Face it the mid-majors are never going to play for a national title until they have big non-conference wins, more than 1, or their conferences themselves play better.

It was bizzare that a 2 loss LSU team played for and won the national championship last year but even if that happened this year I'm not sure a Utah or a Boise St would get the edge.

I think even if a scenario worked out where the winners of the 6 BCS conferences all had 2 losses and you had a mid-major that was undefeated 2 teams from the BCS conferences would probably play for the title.

And I'm not sure that would be unfair.

To me it's all about the level of competition that you play.

[ozzie]

Everybody's not making money.

The money spent on travel, boarding and all of that stuff pretty much wipes out the profits a single team makes in a lesser bowl.

Plus they have to share that money w/ their conferences

I'm not sure if the conference gets money right off the top or if they divide the profits after the games.

Face it the mid-majors are never going to play for a national title until they have big non-conference wins, more than 1, or their conferences themselves play better.

It was bizzare that a 2 loss LSU team played for and won the national championship last year but even if that happened this year I'm not sure a Utah or a Boise St would get the edge.

I think even if a scenario worked out where the winners of the 6 BCS conferences all had 2 losses and you had a mid-major that was undefeated 2 teams from the BCS conferences would probably play for the title.

And I'm not sure that would be unfair.

To me it's all about the level of competition that you play.

That's exactly my point.

As screwed up as the bowls used to be, at least a team like Miami or BYU had an outside shot at the title.

They have no chance under this system.

[Snoogans]

That's exactly my point.

As screwed up as the bowls used to be, at least a team like Miami or BYU had an outside shot at the title.

They have no chance under this system.

they will be my National Champions though. UTAH AND BOISE AND EVERYONE ELSE IS SECOND RATE

[JimBeam]

That's exactly my point.

As screwed up as the bowls used to be, at least a team like Miami or BYU had an outside shot at the title.

They have no chance under this system.

Yeah but the game itself has changed so much in the last 30 years due to ESPN, the internet and everything else.

Back then an unknown was a good story because people didn't know much about them.

But now teams are dissected so much that people are more aware of how one team compares to another.

It's like the people saying " Oh Notre Dame hasn't won a national title in 20 years. "

How many differnt schools have won during that time ?

Maybe 10 ( too lazy to look it up ) ?

Remember ND's last title came just before FSU and UF became the powers that they are now.

That's 2 schools who came from out of nowhere to be perenial powerhouses playing for and/or winning at least 6 championships in the last 20 years.

Listen I'd love for ND to win a title, and I think someday they will, but I don't expect it as much as I would've 10 even 15 years ago because I know the game itself has become much more competetive.

[SP1!]

The fact that money or TV ratings are in any way involved in deciding a national champion... sums up the problem with the game.

The point was made that these schools are somehow better off under the BCS system then they were before... and I disagree.

YES, the BCS games pay out a hell of a lot more then the lesser bowls, but hell, they ALL pay out better now. And if you're only talking about how much money ONE team a year might make by getting a BCS bid, then yes, that's true. But with 34 bowl games now, and all of the TV contracts, everyone's making more.

But is that all that this game has become? Who makes the most money?

And I'm not sure that the NCAA "sold" Miami, as much as they were an independent team, that was able to get big name schools to play them, and, more importantly (maybe because of where they were located), get these big schools to come to them.

In '83, Purdue, #13 Notre Dame, Louisville, #12 West Virginia, and East Carolina, all traveled TO Miami to play them.

Their other games were @ Florida (Only Loss), @ Houston, @ Duke, @ Mississippi State, @ Cincinnati, and @ Florida State.

I'm sure when they made this schedule, none of these teams were concerned about losing to them because of how "mediocre" they were before then, and Schnellenberger deserves a lot of credit for playing such an aggressive schedule.

My point was that being independent allowed them to schedule enough "name" schools to earn respect, and getting the "bigger" games at home was a huge advantage. But even after going 10 - 1 with this schedule (and beating two ranked teams at home), they still only ended up #5.

But because of the old bowl system at the time, they were able to accept a bid to the Orange bowl and a chance to play the #1 team, and because they won the game, and what happened to the teams ahead of them, they were given the title.

Some might even argue that because of Miami's success, when BYU went undefeated the following year, even though it was mostly against crap teams and beat a very average 6-5 Michigan team by one touchdown in the stupid Holiday bowl... they received enough "respect" and votes, even though they were in a small conference, and were given the title in '84.

That was about the time that you started really hearing about how screwed up it was that the top teams played in different bowl games, and when people first started throwing around the ideas of a playoff, or at least a system where #1 could play #2, regardless of conference / bowl tie-ins.

(It should be noted that #3 Washington did not win the Pac 10 that year, and was given an invite to play BYU, but instead, took an invite to play Oklahoma in the Orange Bowl)

The BCS (and Bowl Coalition before that) fixed that part, but also fixed it to where the "mid-majors" lost any real hope of ever winning another national championship.

Boise, Utah, Fresno, and teams in those conferences, might be able to schedule 2 or 3 "name" schools, but most of the time they'll only agree to play them at their place, and then they still have to play the other 8 "crap" teams in their conference, so they don't have the same opportunity to prove themselves during the regular season.

And because of this, ONE might get an invite to a BCS game, but they'll never get invited to the title game, and therefore do not have a chance to win a title.

This is not about whether any of these teams SHOULD be in the title game THIS YEAR... I'm simply talking about the obstacles these teams face, and how they'll never have a legit chance to prove themselves on the field enough to ever win respect, no matter what team or non-conference schedule they put together, under this system.
Its not that they are an independant, its the market they are in, just like the NCAA salivated when rutgers were getting good, they would love for the NY market to get interested in college football. Its sad but its all about ratings but certain markets make people stand up and take notice cause it will bring in a ton of money. Its not about who will be best its about making sure they get as much of the nation watching and drive those ratings up to charge a shitload for advertising time.

That miami team was ok but to say most of that schedule was tough is a little bit of a stretch, florida used to suck and usually only played spoiler for other SEC teams till the late 90s, hell they couldnt even cheat right. Even FSU wasnt that good back then, they were average, really for the times only miss state, ND, and WV were the only real teams but college ball wasnt nearly as big then as it is now. Like I have said, its all about money now.

Miami built up a good program so if Utah, boise, and the others keep this up and play better teams they will get their shot.

[Freakshow]

It's like the people saying " Oh Notre Dame hasn't won a national title in 20 years. "

How many differnt schools have won during that time ?

Maybe 10 ( too lazy to look it up ) ?

.

15 different teams have won MNC since 1989, thanks to several split titles--Miami (3), Colorado, Georgia Tech, Washington, Alabama, Florida St. (2), Nebraska (3), Florida (2), Michigan, Tenneessee, Oklahoma, Ohio State, LSU, USC (2), Texas.

This doesn't include uncrowned undefeated seasons by Penn State and Auburn...

[JimBeam]

Yeah and wasn't the title by Texas their 1st one since the 60's ?

So if a giant football factory in one of the top 3 states for recruits, with essentially only a few step brothers competeing w/ them for in state talent, only wins titles once every 30+ years why should a private school be expected to keep up ?

I know ND has the rich tradition but if you look back to the olden days when they made a lot of that history you see that teams like Army and Navy were good and we know they can no longer compete for national titles.

I'd hate for ND to lower educational standards for the preceived chance at competeing for certain recruits.

It may be time for ND fans to be happy w/ making it to BCS bowl games because competeting for a title every year with whatever the flavor of the time is ( right now it appears to be USC, UF and Oklahoma ) a bit unrealistic.

Again I'm not saying ND doesn't have a chance of ever winning a title but it's a lot harder now than it was a few years ago regardless of the coach and recruting ranking.

[Freakshow]

so you're saying lower your expectations. :lol:

[JimBeam]

15 different teams have won MNC since 1989, thanks to several split titles--Miami (3), Colorado, Georgia Tech, Washington, Alabama, Florida St. (2), Nebraska (3), Florida (2), Michigan, Tenneessee, Oklahoma, Ohio State, LSU, USC (2), Texas.

Quick review shows me that some of these same schools played for titles and lost during that same timeframe :

Miami to Oh St
FSU to OK
Nebraska to Miami
UF to Nebraska
Nebraska to Miami
Oklahoma to both LSU and USC
Oh St to both LSU and UF
USC to Texas

[Snoogans]

Miami got FUCKED in that Ohio State game. pass interference my ass, that game was over

[JimBeam]

so you're saying lower your expectations. :lol:

No because you can expect to win a title going into every year but know that the 4 Horseman, while they make for a good story and motivation, can't help you.

I wouldn't suggest that at the start of any season a fan have such a bleak outlook but I would suggest they don't blame a coach or any one player on them not playing for a title.

What they can blame them for is sucking and failing to get it done in games which they should win.

Clausen blows !!!

[JimBeam]

No Heisman invite for Harrell.

They were saying on Mike & Mike that's it's possible he didn't even come in 4th place and that's why he wasn't even invited to the presentation.

[pennington]

http://us.mg202.mail.yahoo.com/ya/download?mid=1%5f135738%5fAG%2betEQAAJc7SUWxswFa2k VNsuY&pid=1.2&fid=Inbox&inline=1

[Tenbatsuzen]

Not that any of you care, but because of the yellow journalism of the Star-Ledger, Rutgers fired AD Mulcahy.

This in turn has created a shit-storm of bad publicity for the school, because EVERYONE saw that Mulcahy was making the tough decisions to create a good athletic program. The people who DIDN'T like it where the Academia of Rutgers and the students and families of the sports he contracted to get the budget in order to build the football program.

Now the Senate Majority leader of the State senate is calling for McCormick's head (he's the president of Rutgers... and Dick Codey isn't far behind).

Stay tuned. This is going to get awesome. If Schiano leaves, there will be aa clusterfuck of epic proportions in Piscataway.

[SP1!]

Not that any of you care, but because of the yellow journalism of the Star-Ledger, Rutgers fired AD Mulcahy.

This in turn has created a shit-storm of bad publicity for the school, because EVERYONE saw that Mulcahy was making the tough decisions to create a good athletic program. The people who DIDN'T like it where the Academia of Rutgers and the students and families of the sports he contracted to get the budget in order to build the football program.

Now the Senate Majority leader of the State senate is calling for McCormick's head (he's the president of Rutgers... and Dick Codey isn't far behind).

Stay tuned. This is going to get awesome. If Schiano leaves, there will be aa clusterfuck of epic proportions in Piscataway.

So what exactly happened? I know rutgers hasnt exactly put a lot of money in their program in the past 20-30 years so did he get in shit for trying to take money and move it into the program?

If thats the case you can kiss schiano goodbye.

[pennington]

So what exactly happened? I know rutgers hasnt exactly put a lot of money in their program in the past 20-30 years so did he get in shit for trying to take money and move it into the program?

The main thing seems to be the $250,000 a year Mulcahey got Nelligan Sports (they license the Rutgers products) to kick in towards Schiano's pay. Normal practice in other parts of the country and Nelligan didn't mind since business is way up under Schiano.

This is bad for the school. The "Rutgers 1000" (not really 1000 but a bunch of disgruntled academics who don't like the football program) won. There's a lot of internal politics too. Mulcahey used to run the Meadowlands before he went to Rutgers; the guy who replaced him, Zoffinger, is on the Rutgers board of Directors and has been a very vocal critic of Mulcahey.

I graduated from Rutgers and have been a supporter of McCormick (past presidents have been more concerned with left wing politics rather than running things). But it's time for him to move on and write that book I'm sure he's always thought about. He'll never be able to fix the mess he created.

[JimBeam]

I don't know much about the Auburn hiring but every article I read seems to imply that it was one of the dumbest moves ever.

[ozzie]

I don't know much about the Auburn hiring but every article I read seems to imply that it was one of the dumbest moves ever.

Yeah, doesn't make a lot of sense on the surface. We lost around 5 top recruits after Tommy left. Chizik's first move was to clean house, and ax the rest of the staff, including those who had been busting their ass to keep what was left of the class together.

Raymond Cotton decommitted, and will not accept a visit from Chizik.

Not a good start.

Unless he can bring in a TOP O-coordinator (and SOON), and put together a staff of names that people are familiar with, there's not much time to salvage the recruiting class this year.

[JimBeam]

Yeah and they really can't afford to fall behind Alabama too much more.

Didn't the guy have a losing record at Iowa St ?

I also thought that I heard on Friday that Muschamp had accepted the job.

Chalking that up probably to internet rumor I guess.

[Coach_Mac]

The Chizik hiring doesn't make much sense to anyone. On one hand, he was very unsuccesful in a Big 12 north that wasn't that good the past 2 years (and Iowa State can be good- remember the Seneca Wallace days) but on the other hand, only 2 years at a school means he wasn't playing with his recruits. So then there's the assistant aspect...I think Miss State got a great coach just because he has worked with Urban Meyer for 10 years so he knows what it takes to win. Chizik has worked with Mack Brown...who is probably the most overrated coach out there and Terry Bowden(I think) so that's a good one. Overall I think it was a bad hire which makes the SEC 1 for 3 in coaching hires.

[El Mudo]

Yeah and they really can't afford to fall behind Alabama too much more.

Didn't the guy have a losing record at Iowa St ?

I also thought that I heard on Friday that Muschamp had accepted the job.

Chalking that up probably to internet rumor I guess.


There's no reason for Muschamp to leave Texas ever

the University of Texas has announced that Muschamp would succeed Mack Brown as head coach of the Longhorns, though no timetable has been set for him to take over the program.[6]

Probably the most plum job in the country....unlimited budget, massive facilities, and absolutely no criticism

[JimBeam]

Probably the most plum job in the country....unlimited budget, massive facilities, and absolutely no criticism

I don't know about that.

If Mack Brown hadn't won that title in 2005 I think he'd have been gone.

People were very unhappy w/ his performances against Oklahoma.

Even when he was at UNC he was looked at as a coach that couldn't win the big game.

If not for Reggie Bush and his ill advised lateral USC would've won that game, Vince Young wouldn't have been looked at as a great player and Mack Brown would be coaching somewhere in the MWC.

[ozzie]

There's no reason for Muschamp to leave Texas ever



Probably the most plum job in the country....unlimited budget, massive facilities, and absolutely no criticism

A local station here leaked the "story" about Muschamp being hired Friday morning.

Supposedly, all he has is a "handshake" deal with Texas right now, and even then, he'll be promoted to the "head coach in waiting" status like Jimbo Fisher has at FSU. His salary doubles from a little over $400k to somewhere around $900k, and there is no time table for when he will be given the HC job. At least Fisher has a buyout agreement that he receives a lump sum payment if he is not the HC by 2010 or so.

So with all that, it was plausible that Muschamp could have considered taking the AU job (which would have paid him over $2MIL) instead of choosing to wait. But, as everyone knows, there was nothing to the story.

Chizik was at AU in 2004 when they went 13 - 0, and was one of the top coordinators in the nation. His defense was overshadowed by Cadillac and Ronnie and Co., but they were ranked in the top 10 scoring D's that year.

The next year, he was the DC at Texas when that team went 13 - 0.

(Muschamp replaced him at AU... and then at Texas)

So, naturally, the HC job offers started coming in, and he eventually took the ISU job.

If this were 2006, this hire might have made more sense.

It's only clouded by the fact that his ISU teams went 5 - 19 during his two years there.

They were 2 - 10 this year, including 0 - 8 in the Big 12.... and they didn't play OU, Texas or TT.

Sure, it was mostly with someone else's players, but that's still not very impressive.

Again, if he was still the hot shot DC that AU was hiring from Texas, this would be going over better. But after already having a chance as the HC and blowing it... it's making people wonder why the AD at AU would think he could do any better inheiriting a 5 - 7 SEC team.

Like I said before... I just pray that he can snag a big time OC to bring in, and salvage this recruiting class. We've got a ton of holes to fill, and it starts with somehow convincing Raymond Cotton or another big time QB to re-commit, and then hope that the rest still follow.

He was in the process of interviewing OC candidates at ISU before he left, so he should already be started on the process.

I just wish he had interviewed the remaining coaching staff at AU, and given James Willis and one or two others a chance to keep their positions, before coming in and cleaning house the way he did.

[El Mudo]

I don't know about that.

If Mack Brown hadn't won that title in 2005 I think he'd have been gone.

People were very unhappy w/ his performances against Oklahoma.

Even when he was at UNC he was looked at as a coach that couldn't win the big game.

If not for Reggie Bush and his ill advised lateral USC would've won that game, Vince Young wouldn't have been looked at as a great player and Mack Brown would be coaching somewhere in the MWC.



Considering the man's teams CHOKED every single year before that (at North Carolina AND at Texas), and its being floated around that things are so "easy" and the fans are so "nice" that its hurting the development of players in the NFL in regards to handling criticism (see Young, Vince, Benson, Cedric, Williams, Ricky etc etc.) and the aforementioned amenities, I would take that job in a heartbeat over any program in the country.


From what i'm reading Brown's contract runs through 2016

[Freitag]

The main thing seems to be the $250,000 a year Mulcahey got Nelligan Sports (they license the Rutgers products) to kick in towards Schiano's pay. Normal practice in other parts of the country and Nelligan didn't mind since business is way up under Schiano.

This is bad for the school. The "Rutgers 1000" (not really 1000 but a bunch of disgruntled academics who don't like the football program) won. There's a lot of internal politics too. Mulcahey used to run the Meadowlands before he went to Rutgers; the guy who replaced him, Zoffinger, is on the Rutgers board of Directors and has been a very vocal critic of Mulcahey.

I graduated from Rutgers and have been a supporter of McCormick (past presidents have been more concerned with left wing politics rather than running things). But it's time for him to move on and write that book I'm sure he's always thought about. He'll never be able to fix the mess he created.

Pretty much the issue was the following:

1) an internal report saying Mulcahy had unchecked spending but NOTHING illegal - Ledger blew it up that Mulcahy was spending money on useless things, which was baseless.

2) Mulcahy gave a no-bid contract to Nelligan Sports (and his son works there) - two shocking things, that 1) a son would be doing the same kind of business (sports marketing and administration) that his father does and 2) Nelligan made the contract with Rutgers when Rutgers was AWFUL and nobody wanted them.

3) Mulcahy contracted sports from the Rutgers varsity, which pissed off some parents, but there were money-losing sports. Meanwhile, the baseball, women's basketball, football, and soccer programs excelled.

4) The extra money that Schiano was getting from Nelligan. Ledger was saying this was "off the books", like some kind of dirty money that Mulcahy was setting up and Schiano was getting under the table. That wasn't the case at all, it was just money that he was getting from Nelligan for his radio show, which every other coach in a big program gets.

Total, complete hatchet job by the Ledger.

[pennington]

Pretty much the issue was the following:

1) an internal report saying Mulcahy had unchecked spending but NOTHING illegal - Ledger blew it up that Mulcahy was spending money on useless things, which was baseless.

2) Mulcahy gave a no-bid contract to Nelligan Sports (and his son works there) - two shocking things, that 1) a son would be doing the same kind of business (sports marketing and administration) that his father does and 2) Nelligan made the contract with Rutgers when Rutgers was AWFUL and nobody wanted them.

3) Mulcahy contracted sports from the Rutgers varsity, which pissed off some parents, but there were money-losing sports. Meanwhile, the baseball, women's basketball, football, and soccer programs excelled.

4) The extra money that Schiano was getting from Nelligan. Ledger was saying this was "off the books", like some kind of dirty money that Mulcahy was setting up and Schiano was getting under the table. That wasn't the case at all, it was just money that he was getting from Nelligan for his radio show, which every other coach in a big program gets.

Total, complete hatchet job by the Ledger.

This isn't anything different than what I wrote. The Nelligan money was the "offense" everybody hung their hat on. It didn't matter that McCormick knew about it or that this sort of deal is standard procedure in every big time college football program.

I agree, this was definitely over-hyped by the Star-Ledger. It wasn't Sports Page news, they made it Front Page news. But this is internal Rutgers politics.

Bottom line, Mulcahey backed Shiano 100% but McCormick hung Mulcahey out to dry. From what I hear from someone I know who works high in the Rutgers administration and was part of that internal report, Shiano is a bit of a whiny baby, Mulcahey really did make things easier for him. He also told me McCormick got rid of Mulcahey in an attempt to hold on to his own job.

If everything falls apart Schiano will take the next attractive offer while he's still marketable. Then that's going to be it for Rutgers in big-time football. Those tenured professors who think sports is beneath them will have gotten their way.

[Freakshow]

Chuck is outraged at the Auburn hire (http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=3770769)

not really front page news either, but espn is making it that...

[Freitag]

This isn't anything different than what I wrote. The Nelligan money was the "offense" everybody hung their hat on. It didn't matter that McCormick knew about it or that this sort of deal is standard procedure in every big time college football program.

I agree, this was definitely over-hyped by the Star-Ledger. It wasn't Sports Page news, they made it Front Page news. But this is internal Rutgers politics.

Bottom line, Mulcahey backed Shiano 100% but McCormick hung Mulcahey out to dry. From what I hear from someone I know who works high in the Rutgers administration and was part of that internal report, Shiano is a bit of a whiny baby, Mulcahey really did make things easier for him. He also told me McCormick got rid of Mulcahey in an attempt to hold on to his own job.

If everything falls apart Schiano will take the next attractive offer while he's still marketable. Then that's going to be it for Rutgers in big-time football. Those tenured professors who think sports is beneath them will have gotten their way.


Well, yes, I was just explaining it more for people who wanted more information... nothing against you.

I agree if Schiano goes, the program is done. Knowing people who work at Rutgers, that place is just as screwed up as the rest of the state government.

I really don't understand why the Rutgers 1000 teamed up so much against football. It's like a bizarro Revenge of the Nerds.

[Freitag]

Chuck is outraged at the Auburn hire (http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=3770769)

not really front page news either, but espn is making it that...

Let's be honest here, the entire Auburn situation is crazy. I think bringing race into is stupid, but you do have to wonder why they didn't hire Gill.

[Coach_Mac]

What a freaking idiot Barkley is. Yes, it is possible that it could be that Auburn wanted a white coach, but he has no proof of that so he should keep his stupid mouth shut. And to say that the black coaches only get the bad jobs? That's insane.
Tyrone Willingham- Washington is a great job and Notre Dame was even better- he sucks.

Randy Shannon- Miami...yea terrible job, they've never been good.

Ron Prince- Kansas State dominated the Big 12 north before he got there.

Sylvester Croom- Miss St. probably can't be consistantly good but shouldn't be as bad as he made them.

The other black coaches this past season were
Turner Gill- Buffalo. Has done a great job and will move up soon.

Kevin Sumlin- Houston. Done well but who cares.

The bottom line is it's not like all the black coaches are doing well in the NCAA. In fact, all the ones at BCS schools suck. It has nothing to do with them being black or white but Chuck has no argument. I'm sick of hearing it.

[JimBeam]

Maybe they didn't think Gill could make the jump from Buffalo to Auburn/SEC.

Sure Chizik wasn't great at Iowa St but he was in a BCS conference and has some idea of how to recruit in that arena.

Not saying that should've completely ruled out Gill but it could've been a factor.

Also it might be better for Gill that he didn't get the job.

That team might not get turned around too quickly and if it took more than 4 or 5 years he'd probably get fired and have lost those years.

Maybe a job comes up next year that is a smoother transition.

[ozzie]

Alabama caught a lot of grief from Jesse Jackson, and a "black coalition" when they hired Mike Shula.

They had interviewed Sylvester Croom (who played for the bear), but chose instead to go with Shula.

The arguement was that Croom was more qualified, but wasn't given the job because of his race.

Barkley seems to be trying to use the same argument about Gill.

Being a slow news week, it will be interesting to see where this goes, or if anyone else gets invloved... but, yeah, it's another "black" eye that Auburn didn't need right now.

[Freakshow]

the article says he was on the advisorary board for the basetball coach hiring, that he had 3 black candidates, they dismissed him from the board and hired the least qualified coach, who happened to be white.

Now they pass on Gil, who he had talked to about the job, and hire a seemingly less qualilfied white coach. So he's upset...

[cougarjake13]

and barkley thinks he's getting elected ??

[JimBeam]

You can't win consistently at Kansas State.

Really ?

I think Bill Snyder would disagree.

Say they did hire Gill, and he didn't get the job done in that fictional 5 year timeframe, would they have to hire another black coach to replace him ?

What did Gill win 13 games in 2 years playing against nobodies ?

Big deal. Let's not make the guy out to be Bear Bryant.

[cougarjake13]

i love it how they dont see it as reverse racism to have these rooney rules in place

[pennington]

Well, yes, I was just explaining it more for people who wanted more information... nothing against you.

I didn't take it personally. The anger in my post is about the situation.

Knowing people who work at Rutgers, that place is just as screwed up as the rest of the state government.

Perceptive point. I've had this theory for years that there should be a rule that before people are eligible for a job in the public sector they must have at least 5 years experience in the real world. The arrogance of some of these Rutgers employees (yes, I said employees) is baffling. Contributions are at an all-time high; student applications are at an all-time high.

I really don't understand why the Rutgers 1000 teamed up so much against football. It's like a bizarro Revenge of the Nerds.

They've got a high-paying prestigious job with great benefits for life. There are no consequences for their actions. Can you imagine people in corporate management actively working against their company because they don't think it's important for the company to have greater recognition and funds coming in?

[SP1!]

Pretty much the issue was the following:

1) an internal report saying Mulcahy had unchecked spending but NOTHING illegal - Ledger blew it up that Mulcahy was spending money on useless things, which was baseless.

2) Mulcahy gave a no-bid contract to Nelligan Sports (and his son works there) - two shocking things, that 1) a son would be doing the same kind of business (sports marketing and administration) that his father does and 2) Nelligan made the contract with Rutgers when Rutgers was AWFUL and nobody wanted them.

3) Mulcahy contracted sports from the Rutgers varsity, which pissed off some parents, but there were money-losing sports. Meanwhile, the baseball, women's basketball, football, and soccer programs excelled.

4) The extra money that Schiano was getting from Nelligan. Ledger was saying this was "off the books", like some kind of dirty money that Mulcahy was setting up and Schiano was getting under the table. That wasn't the case at all, it was just money that he was getting from Nelligan for his radio show, which every other coach in a big program gets.

Total, complete hatchet job by the Ledger.
So these people have no concept that winning sports programs bring millions into their budgets? It makes for better student facilities and a better campus, I hate stuffy professors.


The auburn job was a huge fucking mistake, I dont see him getting more than the 5 wins tuberville got this year and I could really see the AD and the coach getting the axe in 2 years. Hell if you go by the auburn boards, they have lost 8 of their top recruits who have decommitted and are now visiting other campuses.

As a georgia fan, I still support this hire 110%, it makes for easier recruiting and an easy game on our schedule every year.

[Freakshow]

Really ?

I think Bill Snyder would disagree.

Say they did hire Gill, and he didn't get the job done in that fictional 5 year timeframe, would they have to hire another black coach to replace him ?

What did Gill win 13 games in 2 years playing against nobodies ?

Big deal. Let's not make the guy out to be Bear Bryant.

I don't think you understand just how awful a program Buffalo was. I think Temple scheduled them because they wanted an easy win.

[JimBeam]

I know how bad Buffalo was and I know how bad they still are.

Gill's got 1 win against a ranked team and that was the last game against Ball St.

He has not beaten a team from a BCS conference ( but I will give Buffalo credit for scheduling some games against good teams including Missouri and Penn St ).

Winning in the MAC is not winning in the Big East let alone the SEC.

In the interests of full disclosure Chizik isn't great against ranked teams ( 0-8 ) but he does have 3 wins against BCS schools.

What is everybody gonna say if Gill goes 4-9 next season ?

Was he still the best person for the job if he could only win 4 MAC games ?

Just throwing black coaches at open jobs isn't going to help there be succesful black coaches.

Gill will get a shot at a good program when he has more experience and that will help him be a better coach.

Putting him in a situation now, which he's not equiped to handle, would do more harm than good.

I do no believe that Chizik is in any way a far better choice or that he will help that program but I don't think Gill would do any more.

[Freakshow]

Was Urban Meyer not that good a coach because he was only playing Mountain West teams? Was Jim Tressel not ready for the Big Ten because he could only win against IAA schools? At some point, these guys are good coaches and they will win at the next level.

[JimBeam]

For every Urban Meyer and Jim Tressell there's 10 Ron Zooks and Gerry Dinardos.

2 guys given programs, one successful when he took it over ( Zook @ UF ) and the other successful after he left ( Dinardo @ LSU ), that were surrounded by high school talent that every top team in the country recruited.

These guys were run off before their contracts ended.

Urban Meyer was also a head coach at 2 other schools before he got the job at UF.

Tressel was a head coach for 14 years before he got the Oh St gig.

Actually I didnt realize that Gill just fininshed his 3rd year w/ Buffalo going a combined 15-22.

I'm not saying that what Gill has done and is doing isn't worth noting I'm just putting it in perspective.

He'll be better off waiting for the next gig.

[Freakshow]

you're saying it's not even remotely possible that Turner Gill could be Urban Meyer? Meyer was a MAC coach with Bowling Green. Everybody starts somewhere.

Ron Zook was D coordinator with the Saints when Florida hired him. I have no idea why you would bring him up, he wasn't a head coach ever prior to being hired.

you realize Gil is making $160,000 dollars at Buffalo. I think there are people working on my floor that make more than that. The Auburn job is rumored to be $2 million. I don't think Gil would want to 'wait for the next gig.'

And his 15-22 record? 2-10, 5-7, 8-5... You'd be crazy to find any fault at all with that progression. He was MAC coach of the year last year, even before he won the conference. That's how amazing an accomplishment wining 5 games with Buffo was.

[JimBeam]

He was MAC coach of the year last year

OK so then why shouldn't JD Brookhart ( Akron ), Bill Cubit ( Western Michigan ) and Frank Solich ( Ohio ) be considered for the Auburn job ?

They're all former Coaches Of The Year in the MAC.

Akron's gone 14-22 in the last 3 years.

Western Michigan's gone 22-15 in those 3 years.

Ohio's 19-19 over that same time.

All of those, based on their records, sound like as good, if not better, choices than Gill from his own conference.

So I ask you is Gill a better coach than Bill Cubit even though Cubit's got a better record over the same timeframe in the same conference ?

And if so why ?

[Freakshow]

Frank Solich was a decent coach at Nebraska, he never had a losing season. No one that followed him has done as well there.

Akron was 7-5 the year before Brookhart took over, so he wasn't exactly rebuilding the program.

Western Michigan has been a decent program for years before Cubit took over. He had seniors that the previous guy recruited named Greg Jennings and Tony Scheffler, maybe you've heard of them? Two NFL skill players would make a world of difference to any MAC team.

Gill taking the very worst program in Division IA to a conference title is like him taking Vanderbilt or Baylor and winnning a MNC with them. Feel free to ignore the rest of my post and make a big deal of the previous sentence...

[JimBeam]

You listed being MAC coach of the year as Gill qualifications for getting the Auburn job.

So regardless of what those other MACs schools records were when their current coaches took over they've been better coaches than Gill in the same time.

Because Gill can out recruit Syracuse he'll now spin that charm and have Auburn out recruit Alabama ?

A win over an over-rated Ball St team and the color of his skin made this guy the flavor of the month.

I've already said I'm not saying he can't do the job I just disagree with the premise that because he got a team in a league which is virtually irrelevant to 8 wins quailifies him for running a team in a league that's won the last 2 national championships and is poised to win another one.

[JimBeam]

Gill taking the very worst program in Division IA to a conference title is like him taking Vanderbilt or Baylor and winnning a MNC with them.

And since it was such a ridiculous comment I will comment on it.

So a Vandy knocking off UF and UGA as well as several other teams in the SEC, and then beating another team in the SEC title game, and then beating another BCS team in a title game is equivalent to Buffalo beating the likes of Temple and Kent St and then knocking off Ball St ??

Ditto for Baylor running that same gauntlet in the Big 12.

How are the 2 even closely related.

[JimBeam]

After being pulled over by police, Mississippi prep star shoots self

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/highschool/news/story?id=3760848

I think this kid had committed to LSU.

[Freakshow]

And since it was such a ridiculous comment I will comment on it.

So a Vandy knocking off UF and UGA as well as several other teams in the SEC, and then beating another team in the SEC title game, and then beating another BCS team in a title game is equivalent to Buffalo beating the likes of Temple and Kent St and then knocking off Ball St ??

Ditto for Baylor running that same gauntlet in the Big 12.

How are the 2 even closely related.

well, when the head coach of Temple is getting interest from Syracuse (who he basically turned down) and UCLA I think the coach of Buffalo should be getting a decent shot at the Auburn job.

[JimBeam]

And what's the word w/ Tubberville ?

Is he just gonna sit this one out and wait for next year's gigs ?

I'm not sure any of the jobs that are currently available would be up his alley.

[ozzie]

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/highschool/news/story?id=3760848

I think this kid had committed to LSU.

He was only a Junior, so he hadn't committed anywhere, but according to his mother, he planned on playing for Auburn.

Nothing about this story makes any sense, and I don't think we've heard the last from it.

From all accounts, he was a bright kid, and obviously a talented athlete, with a very promising future. Friends and family can not think of any reason he would have had to take his own life. Especially over a routine traffic stop for running a stop sign.

He was a known hunter, who would often hunt on weekends and sometimes before school, which accounts for the shotgun in his possession. And being a hunter, he was familiar with the weapon, and the idea of this being an "accidental" shooting inside his vehicle, seems unlikely.

The patrol car was not equipped with an in car camera, so the only witness was the deputy sheriff who stated that he only heard a shot, then saw him lying on the ground.

The State has not completed their investigation, but the family has asked the NAACP to conduct their own investigation and autopsy.

[JimBeam]

Prosecutor: Too soon to determine how football player died

http://sports.espn.go.com/highschool/rise/football/news/story?id=3773712

But the state chapter of the NAACP said its own investigation had determined that Johnson did not commit suicide

And their qualifications in this are ........................

They have different facts based on ??????

Guess it wouldn't be the craziest thing in the world to find out that he was killed by the cop but do we have any reason to believe that other than that the kid was black and the cop, I presume, is white ?

Yeah clearly w/ those 2 factors in place there has to be a cover-up.

[JimBeam]

I guess there was some talk of Gill possibly taking Chizik's gig at Iowa State but that's not the case anymore as he's getting a raise and an extension at Buffalo.

http://collegefootball.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=889935

[SP1!]

Gill is crazy for not going somewhere else, most of those schools cant support top programs and will die eventually, rutgers is a good example since they seem to be trying to kill that program from the inside.

[JimBeam]

But outside of the Auburn job how many of the open spots are ideal ?

Would he really want to go to Iowa St and have to build his program while every year playing Missouri and some combination of Oklahoma, Oklahoma St and Texas ?

The top 3 jobs in my opinion would've been Tennessee, Auburn and Washington and they were all gone fairly quickly.

[Freitag]

So these people have no concept that winning sports programs bring millions into their budgets? It makes for better student facilities and a better campus, I hate stuffy professors.




Gill is crazy for not going somewhere else, most of those schools cant support top programs and will die eventually, rutgers is a good example since they seem to be trying to kill that program from the inside.

You really can't compare the Rutgers and the Buffalo situation.

Rutgers has long prided itself on being an unofficial Ivy school. Buffalo has nowhere near the long-term academic tradition that Rutgers has.

The Rutgers 1000 sees themselves as the end-all be-all of the school, and they feel... I don't know, threatened by the Football program? They don't want to see the school, and by nature, the academic rep of the university tarnished.

Buffalo, meanwhile, sees an asset in Gill and is trying to build their program to give kids a reason to go there.

[JimBeam]

Rutgers has long prided itself on being an unofficial Ivy school.

Isn't it essentially the state university of NJ ?

Not sure that the real Ivy League schools would consider them to be similar.

I went to LSU, the flagship school of the Louisiana State system, and I don't think they ever considered themselves Ivy League.

Could be some northern bias I guess.

[Freakshow]

Isn't it essentially the state university of NJ ?

Not sure that the real Ivy League schools would consider them to be similar.

I went to LSU, the flagship school of the Louisiana State system, and I don't think they ever considered themselves Ivy League.

Could be some northern bias I guess.

There was a book called 'public ivys' that identified top public universities--UVA, Michigan, Berkley, Chapel Hill, etc. They later extended the list to include Penn State, UW-Madison, UIUC, Georgia Tech, and I guess Rutgers.

[Freitag]

Isn't it essentially the state university of NJ ?

Not sure that the real Ivy League schools would consider them to be similar.

I went to LSU, the flagship school of the Louisiana State system, and I don't think they ever considered themselves Ivy League.

Could be some northern bias I guess.

not "essentially" - It is the State University of New Jersey.

They were offered an invitation to the Ivy League but declined it because they'd have to get rid of the land grant for Cook.

[drjoek]

not "essentially" - It is the State University of New Jersey.

They were offered an invitation to the Ivy League but declined it because they'd have to get rid of the land grant for Cook.

You arent actually trying to claim that Rutgers was ever considered in or even near the Ivy league are you?
come on Jersey pride is one thing but thats crazy talk:wacko:

[JimBeam]

Maybe it was like an NIT invite.

All the other schools were doing something better.

In all honesty I never heard of Rutgers being considered so highly from an academic perspective but then again I'm for NY so why would I.

That invite thing is an intersting tidbit though.

[drjoek]

Test Score Distribution: Rutgers
SAT Math:
700-800 4%
600-699 24%
500-599 50%
Below 500 22%
SAT Verbal:
700-800 2%
600-699 14%
500-599 44%
Below 500 40%
Test Score Distribution:Harvard
SAT Math:
700-800 74%
600-699 24%
500-599 2%
Below 500 0%
SAT Verbal:
700-800 69%
600-699 27%
500-599 4%
Below 500 0%

:lol:

Harvard 97% SAT > 600
Rutgers 18%

Rutgers Ivy league is about the funniest thing ever posted

[Snoogans]

You arent actually trying to claim that Rutgers was ever considered in or even near the Ivy league are you?
come on Jersey pride is one thing but thats crazy talk:wacko:

you can go on a conquest all you want bro, but it is a fact that the ivy league offered Rutgers a spot, i believe in like the mid 90's. It's true, regardless

[JimBeam]

I was believing it until I heard it was in the 90's.

The 1890's ??

They invited Rutgers before a school like William & Mary ?

[Snoogans]

Test Score Distribution: Rutgers
SAT Math:
700-800 4%
600-699 24%
500-599 50%
Below 500 22%
SAT Verbal:
700-800 2%
600-699 14%
500-599 44%
Below 500 40%
Test Score Distribution:Harvard
SAT Math:
700-800 74%
600-699 24%
500-599 2%
Below 500 0%
SAT Verbal:
700-800 69%
600-699 27%
500-599 4%
Below 500 0%

:lol:

Harvard 97% SAT > 600
Rutgers 18%

Rutgers Ivy league is about the funniest thing ever posted

ok you obviously have ZERO clue about how things work. Rutgers is a public state college, there fore having certain entrance requirements. had they accepted the Ivy league invite, they would be an Ivy League school with Ivy league entry requirements. Again this happened like 15-20 years ago, so SAT numbers you post from the past year or so really dont mean shit to anything. once again proving that NOBODY FUCKIN STOPS TO THINK OR LOOK UP SHIT FOR ONE SECOND BEFORE THEY SHOOT THEIR MOUTHS OFF LIKE THEY KNOW

[Snoogans]

I was believing it until I heard it was in the 90's.

The 1890's ??

They invited Rutgers before a school like William & Mary ?

the people who founded rutgers way long time ago were ivy people. Rutgers had alot to do with the forming of it and had been long time rivals with some of the schools. i think it was an invite based more on historical ties then at the time shit. plus again, you join the league, requirements change. it wouldnt be the school it is now had it gone down.

Maybe it was late 90's too Im not sure exactly when. I remember it coming up when I was in HS but i dont know how long before I heard about it that it happened

[drjoek]

ok you obviously have ZERO clue about how things work. Rutgers is a public state college, there fore having certain entrance requirements. had they accepted the Ivy league invite, they would be an Ivy League school with Ivy league entry requirements. Again this happened like 15-20 years ago, so SAT numbers you post from the past year or so really dont mean shit to anything. once again proving that NOBODY FUCKIN STOPS TO THINK OR LOOK UP SHIT FOR ONE SECOND BEFORE THEY SHOOT THEIR MOUTHS OFF LIKE THEY KNOW

You couldn't for a second be more wrong!
One your confusing being a member of an athletic league with being considered in the Ivy League. The Ivy league is the 8 original universities most of which go back <200 years. While rutgers was asked 100 years ago to participate in a program to formailze football rules and therefore play with these schools that does not admit them into that rarified realm.
Rutgers has never had the academic standards to be added to the Ivy league 15 years ago or now. Its academic standards are pretty mediocre at best. You NJ people are believing an urban myth.

[Snoogans]

You couldn't for a second be more wrong!
One your confusing being a member of an athletic league with being considered in the Ivy League. The Ivy league is the 8 original universities most of which go back <200 years. While rutgers was asked 100 years ago to participate in a program to formailze football rules and therefore play with these schools that does not admit them into that rarified realm.
Rurgers has never had the academic standards to be added to the Ivy league 15 years ago or now. Its academic standards are pretty mediocre at best. You NJ people are believing an urban myth.

AGAIN. IT DOES HAVE TO DO WITH A LEAGUE NOW. If you join the Ivy league, you CANT GIVE athletic scholarships. The price would go up, and the ENTRY REQUIREMENTS CAN CHANGE

Obviously, LIKE I ALREADY SAID, Rutgers would not be what it is now if that had happened. It was shortly after that they unified all the state schools and made common requirements. YOU CAN CHANGE THOSE THINGS YOU KNOW

[Snoogans]

ok i heard about this in HS and assumed it had recently happened. Apparently it happened in the 1950's:



^ Several articles 1948-1956 in the The Daily Targum (Rutgers University's campus newspaper), located in The Targum, The Rutgers Targum and The Daily Targum (then printed weekly) Microfilm records (1) v.87-v.94:no.35 OCT 17,1945-APR 10,1953, and (2) v.94:no.36-v.104:no.58 APR 17,1953-DEC 5,1972 (2 rolls) and Walton R. Johnson Papers (1949-2001), Special Collections and University Archives, Archibald S. Alexander Library, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey.

Now if you ask the Ivy League, their official response is "We have no records of any invitation being extended." Which is different from, "we never extended an invitation." My understanding is that the offer was conditional on Rutgers foregoing the state university/land grant designation which would have required them to split off the Ag school on Douglass Campus. RU said no thanks. So the negotiations probably never got past that point into more formal negotiations.

[drjoek]

What exactly would be the benefit for the 8 most exclusive schools in the country to lower their standards?If you think that Ivy league schools agendas are driven by athletics your sadly mistaken. Athletics is so far down on the importance scale to be nearly meaningless. Besides if they are reaching out ot schools they are going to find schools that are academically close like say West Point Duke,ND etc. It alsotakes a lot longer than 10-15 years to change the academic profile.
Lets agree to disagree.
Go Rutgers!

[Freitag]

Test Score Distribution: Rutgers
SAT Math:
700-800 4%
600-699 24%
500-599 50%
Below 500 22%
SAT Verbal:
700-800 2%
600-699 14%
500-599 44%
Below 500 40%
Test Score Distribution:Harvard
SAT Math:
700-800 74%
600-699 24%
500-599 2%
Below 500 0%
SAT Verbal:
700-800 69%
600-699 27%
500-599 4%
Below 500 0%

:lol:

Harvard 97% SAT > 600
Rutgers 18%

Rutgers Ivy league is about the funniest thing ever posted

You better cite where you got those stats from, because I'll guaran-damn-tee those scores are from Rutgers Camden or Rutgers Newark, not the main campus.

[Snoogans]

What exactly would be the benefit for the 8 most exclusive schools in the country to lower their standards?If you think that Ivy league schools agendas are driven by athletics your sadly mistaken. Athletics is so far down on the importance scale to be nearly meaningless. Besides if they are reaching out ot schools they are going to find schools that are academically close like say West Point Duke,ND etc. It alsotakes a lot longer than 10-15 years to change the academic profile.
Lets agree to disagree.
Go Rutgers!

HOLY SHIT BRO YOU CANT READ. It wouldnt be them lowering standards. Rutgers would have went private and RAISED THEIR STANDARDS TO THE OTHER IVY LEVELS. Not the other way around, ass. Stop arguing just cause you want to, i feel like im fighting with BDC. And how about you read how I just posted it was actually the mid 50's. FUCKIN READ AND RESEARCH

[drjoek]

You better cite where you got those stats from, because I'll guaran-damn-tee those scores are from Rutgers Camden or Rutgers Newark, not the main campus.

The fact that you even have to say that only reinforces my arguement. I dont think theres a Harvard -Lowell branch:lol:

and for what its worth it from fastweb.com
Ive been involved in college search and admissions for the last 2 years with my kids

[Snoogans]

The fact that you even have to say that only reinforces my arguement. I dont think theres a Harvard -Lowell branch:lol:

Holy fuck you are the dumbest person ive ever met. Seriously. The ignorance in all of tehse statements are just hilarious. IT WOULD BE PRIVATE, NOT A STATE SCHOOL AND THEIR WOULDNT BE THE OTHER RUTGERS SCHOOLS. RUTGERS WOULD HAVE MATCHED THE IVY. WHAT THE FUCK ABOUT THIS CANT YOU UNDERSTAND

[PhishHead]

drjoek you are wrong on one point. The ivy league is not the original 8 universities as the original 8 are:

Harvard
W&M
Yale
Penn
Princeton
Columbia
Brown
Rutgers


The Ivy League is:
Brown
Columbia
Cornell
Dartmouth
Harvard
Princeton
Penn
Yale

W&M and Rutgers are the only two colonial schools that later became public universities.

[Freitag]

According to MSN:

Average SAT score for Rutgers: 1203

http://encarta.msn.com/colleges_701830151/rutgers_university-rutgers_college.html

[Freitag]

The fact that you even have to say that only reinforces my arguement. I dont think theres a Harvard -Lowell branch:lol:

and for what its worth it from fastweb.com
Ive been involved in college search and admissions for the last 2 years with my kids

Did you get your dental degree from the Hollywood Upstairs Medical College?

Rutgers has multiple separate schools. Just like Penn State and other schools. The main campus is "Rutgers University". The others are Rutgers Newark and Rutgers Camden, which are "lesser" schools in the Rutgers system.

It's a LOT easier to get into Rutgers-Newark and Rutgers-Camden. They are basically two steps up from a community college, but not as prestigous as the main school.

[drjoek]

According to MSN:

Average SAT score for Rutgers: 1203

http://encarta.msn.com/colleges_701830151/rutgers_university-rutgers_college.html

As I said mid level school
Harvard 1450
Princeton 1453
ND 1350

[Snoogans]

As I said mid level school
Harvard 1450
Princeton 1453
ND 1350

again this is rutgers today as a public school. Not as they would have been PRIVATIZED WITH STRICTER ADMISSION STANDARDS

[JimBeam]

That Rutgers issue was informative but I'll at least try and get us back on the college football topic.

I actually heard an interesting thing a few weeks ago about how when the Big 12 was being formed that Texas had a lot to say about things.

They wanted the newly formed conference to raise their academic standards to meet what Texas was doing which was evidentally higher than that of the schools in the Big 8.

Texas also wanted to limit the number of partial qualifiers that were getting scholarships.

I'd have thought a fotball factory like Texas would wanna lower standards but that wasn't the case.

[Freitag]

And JoeK, nice to cite a website you need a login and password to get in to. You fail on many, many levels. You're lucky the wife hasn't seen this yet.

[Snoogans]

And JoeK, nice to cite a website you need a login and password to get in to. You fail on many, many levels. You're lucky the wife hasn't seen this yet.

oh jesus. This could get ugly

[drjoek]

Did you get your dental degree from the Hollywood Upstairs Medical College?

Rutgers has multiple separate schools. Just like Penn State and other schools. The main campus is "Rutgers University". The others are Rutgers Newark and Rutgers Camden, which are "lesser" schools in the Rutgers system.

It's a LOT easier to get into Rutgers-Newark and Rutgers-Camden. They are basically two steps up from a community college, but not as prestigous as the main school.

We get it you guys love New Jersey
But Rutgers is moderately competitive at best.

and it was the Downstairs Medical College I couldn't get into Upstairs

[drjoek]

And JoeK, nice to cite a website you need a login and password to get in to. You fail on many, many levels. You're lucky the wife hasn't seen this yet.


I am a member of that site because I have been working on college admissions for the lsat two years and it is convenient. If I had more time I would find any stat you need to back up my stance

And what another NJ person will try to tell me that NJ is "more gooder"
I can handle it.

[Snoogans]

We get it you guys love New Jersey
But Rutgers is moderately competitive at best.

and it was the Downstairs Medical College I couldn't get into Upstairs

Rutgers is also an originator of the Ivy league. Dont you think that would also have had something to do with it? Im sure your teeth are quite nice but you should really find yourself an eye doctor

[drjoek]

Rutgers is also an originator of the Ivy league. Dont you think that would also have had something to do with it? Im sure your teeth are quite nice but you should really find yourself an eye doctor

What does that even mean?
The first part, I get the insult part

[PhishHead]

We get it you guys love New Jersey
But Rutgers is moderately competitive at best.

and it was the Downstairs Medical College I couldn't get into Upstairs

Drjoek, I am going to take a stab and explaining this, because Snoogans is just typing in all caps and I can understand skipping his posts, I do all the time, but he makes great points.

The stats you are looking at is Rutgers today as a Public University. If Rutgers had joined the ivy league those stats would be more inline with other ivy league schools because they would have to meet their standards. Not the other way around.

The other reason they were invited as because they were one of the first universities and it was more about tradition than anything else.

This is coming from someone who hates Rutgers and could careless about them.

[Freitag]

NO ONE IS SAYING THAT A RUTGERS EDUCATION IS AS GOOD AS AN IVY LEAGUE SCHOOL.

The point is, it IS one of the better PUBLIC STATE SCHOOL EDUCATIONS you can get. Which is why the academia freaked out because that's the reputation they have, which they were threatened by because of the football team's success. They thought plugs were going to be pulled on their budgets to help supplement the football program.

[Snoogans]

Drjoek, I am going to take a stab and explaining this, because Snoogans is just typing in all caps and I can understand skipping his posts, I do all the time, but he makes great points.

The stats you are looking at is Rutgers today as a Public University. If Rutgers had joined the ivy league those stats would be more inline with other ivy league schools because they would have to meet their standards. Not the other way around.

This is coming from someone who hates Rutgers and could careless about them.

you dont skip my posts bitch. YOU READ EVERY WORD AND YOU LIKE IT

[drjoek]

Drjoek, I am going to take a stab and explaining this, because Snoogans is just typing in all caps and I can understand skipping his posts, I do all the time, but he makes great points.

The stats you are looking at is Rutgers today as a Public University. If Rutgers had joined the ivy league those stats would be more inline with other ivy league schools because they would have to meet their standards. Not the other way around.

This is coming from someone who hates Rutgers and could careless about them.

And if Id married Elle MacPhersen Id have beautiful babies. Neither thing happened. Actually my kids are kinda cute thank God

[Snoogans]

NO ONE IS SAYING THAT A RUTGERS EDUCATION IS AS GOOD AS AN IVY LEAGUE SCHOOL.

The point is, it IS one of the better PUBLIC STATE SCHOOL EDUCATIONS you can get. Which is why the academia freaked out because that's the reputation they have, which they were threatened by because of the football team's success. They thought plugs were going to be pulled on their budgets to help supplement the football program.

which makes me laugh cause if the football program gets huge, they get BIGGER budgets

[Snoogans]

And if Id married Elle MacPhersen Id have beautiful babies. Neither thing happened. Actually my kids are kinda cute thank God

yea but you have argued it was insane to even consider that way in the past it was offered and tried to back it up with today facts, which have zero relavance. You said noway were they ever considered for it, and yet, they were. Why cant you just accept you were wrong on that. Cause you were

[drjoek]

NO ONE IS SAYING THAT A RUTGERS EDUCATION IS AS GOOD AS AN IVY LEAGUE SCHOOL.

The point is, it IS one of the better PUBLIC STATE SCHOOL EDUCATIONS you can get. Which is why the academia freaked out because that's the reputation they have, which they were threatened by because of the football team's success. They thought plugs were going to be pulled on their budgets to help supplement the football program.

See thats where we differ. This all started with an arguement that Rutgers is as good as an ivy league school and that it was invited to be an Ivy league school. Neither thing is true.
If the arguement is that its a good State school we could have avoided this.

[drjoek]

which makes me laugh cause if the football program gets huge, they get BIGGER budgets


And the bigger the athletics get the lower the academic standards go. See ND football for proof of this they hold the academics the football fades

[PhishHead]

See thats where we differ. This all started with an arguement that Rutgers is as good as an ivy league school and that it was invited to be an Ivy league school. Neither thing is true.
If the arguement is that its a good State school we could have avoided this.

But they were invited to join the ivy league. Like I said it was more based on tradition than anything else since they would have had to change their academic standards and give up scholarships.

These negotiations were at the very beginning stage and were basically backed off of once Rutgers had to give up the land grants they receive.

[Snoogans]

See thats where we differ. This all started with an arguement that Rutgers is as good as an ivy league school and that it was invited to be an Ivy league school. Neither thing is true.
If the arguement is that its a good State school we could have avoided this.

Except as was posted, in the 50's, they did have discussions to join the ivy league but didnt consider it cause they would have to go private. No one said it was as good as an ivy league school, all we said was at one point they could have became one. Ive even said multiple times obviously they arent as good as an ivy school today cause they are public. But since you dont bother to read anything, you have no idea. You were WRONG

[PhishHead]

And the bigger the athletics get the lower the academic standards go. See ND football for proof of this they hold the academics the football fades

That is a misconception. ND has ALWAYS had high academic standards and were winning before these 2 past years.

Explain how ND has the top 2 recruiting classes the past 2 years and how the basketball program, hockey program, girls basketball, and baseball program keep winning with such high standards.

[Snoogans]

And the bigger the athletics get the lower the academic standards go. See ND football for proof of this they hold the academics the football fades

Stop arguing shit no one brought up. All I said was it would make the budgets bigger. And so far, it hasnt done anything negative to the academic level of the school, which is rated very very highly among 1A schools. You are just making up arguements to keep fighting for something. You are Bulldogcakes

[Freakshow]

Public Ivys (starred are on the original list of 8)

Eastern

*College of William & Mary (Williamsburg, Virginia)
Pennsylvania State University (State College)
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey (New Brunswick, New Jersey)
State University of New York at Binghamton
University of Connecticut
University of Delaware (Newark)
University of Maryland (College Park)
*University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
*University of Virginia (Charlottesville)

Western

University of Arizona (Tucson)
University of California (6 of 10 campuses):
*Berkeley, Davis, Irvine, Los Angeles, San Diego, and Santa Barbara
University of Colorado at Boulder
University of Washington (Seattle)

Great Lakes & Midwest

Indiana University (Bloomington)
*Miami University (Oxford, Ohio)
Michigan State University (East Lansing)
Ohio State University (Columbus)
University of Illinois (Urbana-Champaign)
University of Iowa (Iowa City)
University of Minnesota (Minneapolis-St. Paul)
University of Wisconsin (Madison)

Southern

University of Florida (Gainesville)
University of Georgia (Athens)
*University of Texas

I don't know why but this list doesn't contain *UVT, *Michigan, Georgia Tech, and the New College of Florida which were in the original book

[Snoogans]

Public Ivys (stared are on the original list of 8)

Eastern

*College of William & Mary (Williamsburg, Virginia)
Pennsylvania State University (State College)
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey (New Brunswick, New Jersey)
State University of New York at Binghamton
University of Connecticut
University of Delaware (Newark)
University of Maryland (College Park)
*University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
*University of Virginia (Charlottesville)

Western

University of Arizona (Tucson)
University of California (6 of 10 campuses):
*Berkeley, Davis, Irvine, Los Angeles, San Diego, and Santa Barbara
University of Colorado at Boulder
University of Washington (Seattle)

Great Lakes & Midwest

Indiana University (Bloomington)
*Miami University (Oxford, Ohio)
Michigan State University (East Lansing)
Ohio State University (Columbus)
University of Illinois (Urbana-Champaign)
University of Iowa (Iowa City)
University of Minnesota (Minneapolis-St. Paul)
University of Wisconsin (Madison)

Southern

University of Florida (Gainesville)
University of Georgia (Athens)
*University of Texas

I don't know why but this list doesn't contain *UVT, *Michigan, Georgia Tech, and the New College of Florida which were in the original book

Florida? Really? I didnt know you had to even be able to read to get into Florida

[PhishHead]

Public Ivys (starred are on the original list of 8)

Eastern

*College of William & Mary (Williamsburg, Virginia)
Pennsylvania State University (State College)
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey (New Brunswick, New Jersey)
State University of New York at Binghamton
University of Connecticut
University of Delaware (Newark)
University of Maryland (College Park)
*University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
*University of Virginia (Charlottesville)

Western

University of Arizona (Tucson)
University of California (6 of 10 campuses):
*Berkeley, Davis, Irvine, Los Angeles, San Diego, and Santa Barbara
University of Colorado at Boulder
University of Washington (Seattle)

Great Lakes & Midwest

Indiana University (Bloomington)
*Miami University (Oxford, Ohio)
Michigan State University (East Lansing)
Ohio State University (Columbus)
University of Illinois (Urbana-Champaign)
University of Iowa (Iowa City)
University of Minnesota (Minneapolis-St. Paul)
University of Wisconsin (Madison)

Southern

University of Florida (Gainesville)
University of Georgia (Athens)
*University of Texas

I don't know why but this list doesn't contain *UVT, *Michigan, Georgia Tech, and the New College of Florida which were in the original book

You are quoting from the Greene guide which is the new one, which includes Rutgers.

The original one Moll written in like 85 did not include Rutgers it was :
Berkeley
W&M
Miami University (Oxford, Ohio)
Michigan
UNC
Texas
Vermont
UVA

[Freitag]

And the bigger the athletics get the lower the academic standards go. See ND football for proof of this they hold the academics the football fades

WHAT

ND football took a nosedive because of bad coaching, not stricter academia. They are three years removed from a pretty decent season

[PhishHead]

He then updated that with like new contenders or whatever but I do not remember that list.

[Freakshow]

Florida? Really? I didnt know you had to even be able to read to get into Florida

Florida, not Florida State.

[Snoogans]

I also love how he thinks this is some Jersey pride arguement, as if we are bringing up nonsense about how awesome FDU is or the academic merits of the worldly awesome Stockton St.

[Freakshow]

You are quoting from the Greene guide which is the new one, which includes Rutgers.

The original one Moll written in like 85 did not include Rutgers it was :
Berkeley
W&M
Miami University (Oxford, Ohio)
Michigan
UNC
Texas
Vermont
UVA

Hence the stars next to those 8 schools in my post. And a note that says there are stars next to the original 8 from the book. :)

[drjoek]

Public Ivys (starred are on the original list of 8)

Eastern

*College of William & Mary (Williamsburg, Virginia)
Pennsylvania State University (State College)
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey (New Brunswick, New Jersey)
State University of New York at Binghamton
University of Connecticut
University of Delaware (Newark)
University of Maryland (College Park)
*University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
*University of Virginia (Charlottesville)

Western

University of Arizona (Tucson)
University of California (6 of 10 campuses):
*Berkeley, Davis, Irvine, Los Angeles, San Diego, and Santa Barbara
University of Colorado at Boulder
University of Washington (Seattle)

Great Lakes & Midwest

Indiana University (Bloomington)
*Miami University (Oxford, Ohio)
Michigan State University (East Lansing)
Ohio State University (Columbus)
University of Illinois (Urbana-Champaign)
University of Iowa (Iowa City)
University of Minnesota (Minneapolis-St. Paul)
University of Wisconsin (Madison)

Southern

University of Florida (Gainesville)
University of Georgia (Athens)
*University of Texas

I don't know why but this list doesn't contain *UVT, *Michigan, Georgia Tech, and the New College of Florida which were in the original book

Public Ivy's is a bullshit term
There is Ivy's and the rest.

[Snoogans]

Florida, not Florida State.

I fully understood when it said GAINESVILLE. From what I've heard, although mostly about the football players, you dont exactly have to go to class to play at Florida. Esp since urban Meyer showed up

[Freakshow]

Public Ivy's is a bullshit term
There is Ivy's and the rest.

George W Bush went to an Ivy League school. Case closed.

I'll take a hard-working public ivy person over an overprilvedged trust-fund ivy league person any day of the week.

[drjoek]

WHAT

ND football took a nosedive because of bad coaching, not stricter academia. They are three years removed from a pretty decent season

Bad example and I dont have the time to argue that line of questioning

[Freitag]

Public Ivy's is a bullshit term
There is Ivy's and the rest.

you do realize that this started because I used the term "unofficial ivy", right?

[Freakshow]

I fully understood when it said GAINESVILLE. From what I've heard, although mostly about the football players, you dont exactly have to go to class to play at Florida. Esp since urban Meyer showed up

we're not talking about football players. I think UF has a decent academic reputation, I didn't write the book, so I don't really know. The US News & World Report deal (which is pretty much bullshit) ranks them 49, so that's in the conversation.

[drjoek]

When you posters have kids who are college application age kids you will look back and see that i was right on most points here.

You can tell me then how great your public college is compared to the elite private Universities.

Im going to bookmark this thread and I took names,damn it:wink:

[Snoogans]

we're not talking about football players. I think UF has a decent academic reputation, I didn't write the book, so I don't really know. The US News & World Report deal (which is pretty much bullshit) ranks them 49, so that's in the conversation.

you want a quality florida education, you go to the U. Nothing but class down there in Coral Gables

[Snoogans]

When you posters have kids who are college application age kids you will look back and see that i was right on most points here.

You can tell me then how great your public college is compared to the elite private Universities.

Im going to bookmark this thread and I took names,damn it:wink:

you were wrong completely cause the whole arguement you made was against rutgers ever being considered for ivy league. NO ONE SAID ANYTHING ABOUT TODAYS STANDARDS

[EliSnow]

George W Bush went to an Ivy League school. Case closed.

I'll take a hard-working public ivy person over an overprilvedged trust-fund ivy league person any day of the week.

Bush went to Yale at a time when it was more blue blood than it is now. Back then, the most important thing was money and connections. You still get dumb blue bloods now, but nowhere near what it was back then.

And the hardest working people I know are my Yale classmates, working 70-100 hours in a given week. The idea that Ivy League kids are all overprivileged trust fund kids is bullshit. Yes, there are a few, but most are kids that belong there because they have achieved the high academic standards. That includes the football players.

[drjoek]

Bush went to Yale at a time when it was more blue blood than it is now.

And the hardest working people I know are my Yale classmates, working 70-100 hours in a given week. The idea that Ivy League kids are all overprivileged trust fund kids is bullshit.

Read back a few pages about how Rutgers was essentially almost an Ivy League school. Its hilarious

[Freakshow]

Read back a few pages about how Rutgers was essentially almost an Ivy League school. It's hilarious

!

[Freakshow]

Bush went to Yale at a time when it was more blue blood than it is now. Back then, the most important thing was money and connections. You still get dumb blue bloods now, but nowhere near what it was back then.

And the hardest working people I know are my Yale classmates, working 70-100 hours in a given week. The idea that Ivy League kids are all overprivileged trust fund kids is bullshit. Yes, there are a few, but most are kids that belong there because they have achieved the high academic standards. That includes the football players.

you have to protect the reputation of you precious ivy league school, and I can understand that. But is it possible to fail out of an ivy league school (as long as the check clears)? Frankly the hardest working people i've met went to the service academies, but that's a subject for another time. :)

[EliSnow]

you have to protect the reputation of you precious ivy league school, and I can understand that. But is it possible to fail out of an ivy league school (as long as the check clears)? Frankly the hardest working people i've met went to the service academies, but that's a subject for another time. :)

Yes, it is possible, and I saw it happen.

And whether service academies alumni may or may not worker harder, it is doesn't mean that Ivy Leaguers are overprivileged slackers. Shit, even the trust fund kids I know work harder than the average person I grew up with, worked with, etc.

[Freakshow]

I do get a bit carried away on this thread. Just look back a few pages at the Turner Gill discussion. :lol:

[Snoogans]

Read back a few pages about how Rutgers was essentially almost an Ivy League school. Its hilarious

Seriously bro. you couldnt be MORE wrong about what you are arguing and yet you keep arguing it. I think you are worse then Bulldogcakes. At least he would keep tryin to change the argument so that he had a chance to be right about something.

[SP1!]

you were wrong completely cause the whole arguement you made was against rutgers ever being considered for ivy league. NO ONE SAID ANYTHING ABOUT TODAYS STANDARDS

Considering the only record that was posted was citing the Rutgers school newspaper I wouldn't put a lot of stock into that proof

Also they should at least link the source (http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080523192940AAAJsgp)

Yahoo answers is even less reputable than Wikipedia.

That being said, it still sounds like a few snobs just want to keep them from being decent in football, probably because they're racist and don't want those kinds on their campus!

See the writing Gill and schiano, jump now while you still can.

Oh and FYI, Rutgers isn't even high enough to make it into the top public universities SAT scores. (http://collegeapps.about.com/od/sat/a/SAT_Public_Univ.htm)

[razorboy]

I still think Richmond has the coolest unis ever.

[SP1!]

I still think Richmond has the coolest unis ever.

You mean the only real college football champion this year?

[razorboy]

You mean the only real college football champion this year?

I have a feeling Mike London gets a D-I job sooner rather than later.

[cougarjake13]

I still think Richmond has the coolest unis ever.

got pics ??

[cougarjake13]

I still think Richmond has the coolest unis ever.

ahh they kinda look like the denver broncos

[razorboy]

ahh they kinda look like the denver broncos

I think the giant red spider sells it for me. That's a bad-ass logo.

[cougarjake13]

I think the giant red spider sells it for me. That's a bad-ass logo.

yeh its cool


although it looks very xfl-ish

or those uni's they use in pro football movies but dont use real team names



http://www.mghelmets.com/helmets/NCAA/a10/richmond.gif

[SP1!]

I love how some BYU fans were saying how they were under rated and now they get beat by a middle of the pack pac 10 team, this is why I say certain teams do not deserve automatic bids in a playoff scenario.

[cougarjake13]

I love how some BYU fans were saying how they were under rated and now they get beat by a middle of the pack pac 10 team, this is why I say certain teams do not deserve automatic bids in a playoff scenario.

its also why i dont bet


i picked byu in the yahoo bowl pick em in 3 leagues

[mindbenderspoonbender]

Mountaineers

[SP1!]

its also why i dont bet


i picked byu in the yahoo bowl pick em in 3 leagues

Watching them play this year it was obvious that they would have problems against a team with a decent line, they didnt block very well at all this year.

[Coach_Mac]

BYU is actually a very good team this was just not a good matchup for them. Their D had been suspect the last few weeks of the season and Arizona is not a middle of the road Pac 10 team, they are a well above average Pac 10 team...The Pac 10 is the thing that's middle of the road. AZ was playing for something being their first bowl in 10 years and BYU was on a let down after thinking BCS all year.

[SP1!]

W-L PF PA W-L PF PA STRK
USC 8-1 325 80 11-1 450 93 W9
Oregon 7-2 373 249 9-3 503 336 W3
Oregon St 7-2 307 217 8-4 394 300 L1
California 6-3 293 169 8-4 400 242 W2
Arizona 5-4 306 204 7-5 445 256 W1
Arizona St 4-5 214 209 5-7 274 272 L1
Stanford 4-5 257 260 5-7 315 329 L3
UCLA 3-6 154 229 4-8 212 348 L2
Washington St 1-8 77 453 2-11 165 570 L1
Washington 0-9 111 347 0-12 159 463 L12

I know that wont turn out right so here is the actual link of them being an average middle of the road pac 10 team. 5-4 is not a good record, no matter what conference you are in. (http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/conferences/standings?confID=9&confId=9)

And yeah BYU had problems which they had every time they played a team that had a decent line, their QB got killed tonight, he was hurting by the end of the game.

[Coach_Mac]

[QUOTE=SP1!;2021123] W-L PF PA W-L PF PA STRK
USC 8-1 325 80 11-1 450 93 W9
Oregon 7-2 373 249 9-3 503 336 W3
Oregon St 7-2 307 217 8-4 394 300 L1
California 6-3 293 169 8-4 400 242 W2
Arizona 5-4 306 204 7-5 445 256 W1
Arizona St 4-5 214 209 5-7 274 272 L1
Stanford 4-5 257 260 5-7 315 329 L3
UCLA 3-6 154 229 4-8 212 348 L2
Washington St 1-8 77 453 2-11 165 570 L1
Washington 0-9 111 347 0-12 159 463 L12

QUOTE]

I'm not talking about wins and loses. I am talking about the quality of the team. I am in no way a Pac 10 or an Arizona fan but they were probably the 2nd or 3rd most talented team in the conference. Look at their schedule, the games they lost were very close and they games they won were blow outs. Plus they played USC the toughest (other that Oregon St. obviously). My whole point was BYU is a very good team, Arizona was just underrated and overlooked.

[JimBeam]

I have a feeling Mike London gets a D-I job sooner rather than later.

Isn't this his first year at the school ?

Let's give him a few more years before we think he'll coach in the FBS.

[JimBeam]

I got into a bowl pick'em for work but didn't pick the teams until the last minute so I didn't get to do the Yahoo one.

Fresno St screwed me and cost me one of my high 20's confidence picks.

I actually did a little research on some of the teams that I didn't know anything about or hadn't see and w/ that info I went w/ Fresno St.

They had beaten 2 teams from BCS schools while Colorado St hadn't beaten any.

They both had losses against any ranked teams.

Fresno St had won 5 games by more than the spread.

I even looked at the team defensive stats and while Fresno St did appeared to give up a lot of yards on the ground, Colorado St was giving up more passing yards.

Oh well.

Got the other 3 games right.

[SP1!]

[QUOTE=SP1!;2021123] W-L PF PA W-L PF PA STRK
USC 8-1 325 80 11-1 450 93 W9
Oregon 7-2 373 249 9-3 503 336 W3
Oregon St 7-2 307 217 8-4 394 300 L1
California 6-3 293 169 8-4 400 242 W2
Arizona 5-4 306 204 7-5 445 256 W1
Arizona St 4-5 214 209 5-7 274 272 L1
Stanford 4-5 257 260 5-7 315 329 L3
UCLA 3-6 154 229 4-8 212 348 L2
Washington St 1-8 77 453 2-11 165 570 L1
Washington 0-9 111 347 0-12 159 463 L12


I'm not talking about wins and loses. I am talking about the quality of the team. I am in no way a Pac 10 or an Arizona fan but they were probably the 2nd or 3rd most talented team in the conference. Look at their schedule, the games they lost were very close and they games they won were blow outs. Plus they played USC the toughest (other that Oregon St. obviously). My whole point was BYU is a very good team, Arizona was just underrated and overlooked.

They gave up the 3rd most points in their league and were barely above .500 in conference and out of conference, hell ND only had 1 less win than them.

They are barely middle of the road, if they would have played a top 3 team from a conference of a real conference they would have gotten smoked, BYU was massively over rated just like most of the MWC.

[Coach_Mac]

[QUOTE=Coach_Mac;2021276]

They gave up the 3rd most points in their league and were barely above .500 in conference and out of conference, hell ND only had 1 less win than them.

They are barely middle of the road, if they would have played a top 3 team from a conference of a real conference they would have gotten smoked, BYU was massively over rated just like most of the MWC.

You can throw whatever numbers you want at me but you obviously never saw either Arizona or BYU play this year. And if you did, you just don't know college football.

[SP1!]

You can throw whatever numbers you want at me but you obviously never saw either Arizona or BYU play this year. And if you did, you just don't know college football.

Yeah I watched them, I watched BYU get pushed around the field by any team with an average line, I watched Arizona get shut down by teams with average lines and decent pass coverage.

To say arizona is not middle of the pack on the pac 10 is just crazy, if they werent they would have been in the hunt at the end, they are good but dont even think they were ever in contention to win the pac 10. They played above their heads and almost caught USC napping, that is all. BYU has nobody on their line that can get a push against a top flight line, this is a far cry from when mcmahon was there.

[TigerWoods]

Yeah I watched them, I watched BYU get pushed around the field by any team with an average line, I watched Arizona get shut down by teams with average lines and decent pass coverage.

To say arizona is not middle of the pack on the pac 10 is just crazy, if they werent they would have been in the hunt at the end, they are good but dont even think they were ever in contention to win the pac 10. They played above their heads and almost caught USC napping, that is all. BYU has nobody on their line that can get a push against a top flight line, this is a far cry from when mcmahon was there.

I would put USC, Oregon and Oregon St above Arizona just off my head right now. Thats 4th best at least in a 10 team conf

And you know whats sad? NONE OF THEM hit 350+ yards like TIGER WOODS



yea Snoogans forgot to log out again. So what of it?

[Coach_Mac]

Yeah I watched them, I watched BYU get pushed around the field by any team with an average line, I watched Arizona get shut down by teams with average lines and decent pass coverage.

To say arizona is not middle of the pack on the pac 10 is just crazy, if they werent they would have been in the hunt at the end, they are good but dont even think they were ever in contention to win the pac 10. They played above their heads and almost caught USC napping, that is all. BYU has nobody on their line that can get a push against a top flight line, this is a far cry from when mcmahon was there.

I never said they were contenders to win the conference. I said they were above average in the Pac 10...I put them behind USC and Oregon in terms of talent. My point from the beginning was that BYU is a quality football team and the reason is that they came in 3rd behind 2 very good teams in a good conference. The M West was superior to the Pac 10 this year...and the Big East and Big Ten for that matter.

[SP1!]

I never said they were contenders to win the conference. I said they were above average in the Pac 10...I put them behind USC and Oregon in terms of talent. My point from the beginning was that BYU is a quality football team and the reason is that they came in 3rd behind 2 very good teams in a good conference. The M West was superior to the Pac 10 this year...and the Big East and Big Ten for that matter.

I wouldnt go that far, in one of those other conferences BYU has 4 loses easy. MWC has 1 decent and 2 average teams, they are good enough to beat each other but they got lucky that their OOC games were against terrible teams. UCLA is really bad and Co state has no defense, hell ucla won 4 games this year, if it wasnt for the state of washington they would be in even deeper shit.

BYU did not deserve to be in the top 15, maybe they will get back there but those lines are not good, until that improves they will be a bottom 25 team. Arizona is average, they didnt beat anyone notable and even lost to fucking stanford, arizona is the recipient of the state of washington having crap football teams this year.

[Coach_Mac]

I wouldnt go that far, in one of those other conferences BYU has 4 loses easy. MWC has 1 decent and 2 average teams, they are good enough to beat each other but they got lucky that their OOC games were against terrible teams. UCLA is really bad and Co state has no defense, hell ucla won 4 games this year, if it wasnt for the state of washington they would be in even deeper shit.

BYU did not deserve to be in the top 15, maybe they will get back there but those lines are not good, until that improves they will be a bottom 25 team. Arizona is average, they didnt beat anyone notable and even lost to fucking stanford, arizona is the recipient of the state of washington having crap football teams this year.


Im not saying the mountain west are world killers Im saying the other conferences I mentioned are below them...this year. Even Wyoming, who is the bottom of the M West beat Tennessee who was not good this year but play in what some think is the strongest conference.

[SP1!]

Im not saying the mountain west are world killers Im saying the other conferences I mentioned are below them...this year. Even Wyoming, who is the bottom of the M West beat Tennessee who was not good this year but play in what some think is the strongest conference.

I still believe its one of the strongest conferences and year in year out probably the strongest conferences, Tennessee was down this year but that was expected, auburn was a slight surprise they were that bad but at the end it proved what turmoil was really seething under the surface. Its funny, they fired tuberville for only winning 5 games, hell if they win that many next year I will be surprised. But I still believe that the MWC was below those conferences top to bottom.

My biggest problem with these other conferences is that once you get below the top 2 or 3 their conferences usually suck, I can accept that the SEC was down last year but I would easily say any of our top 5 could have won that NC game last year. I am still pissed that the rose bowl picked a shitty team instead of a game that could have went down as one of the greats if they would have had UGA vs USC. I think they didnt do it because they may have had another split title if either one had won by more than 10, its pretty obvious those two were playing the best at the end of the season last year.

[Coach_Mac]

I still believe its one of the strongest conferences and year in year out probably the strongest conferences, Tennessee was down this year but that was expected, auburn was a slight surprise they were that bad but at the end it proved what turmoil was really seething under the surface. Its funny, they fired tuberville for only winning 5 games, hell if they win that many next year I will be surprised. But I still believe that the MWC was below those conferences top to bottom.

My biggest problem with these other conferences is that once you get below the top 2 or 3 their conferences usually suck, I can accept that the SEC was down last year but I would easily say any of our top 5 could have won that NC game last year. I am still pissed that the rose bowl picked a shitty team instead of a game that could have went down as one of the greats if they would have had UGA vs USC. I think they didnt do it because they may have had another split title if either one had won by more than 10, its pretty obvious those two were playing the best at the end of the season last year.

Georgia definately was playing the best at the end of the year last year and was unfortunate that they had to play the worst team ever to be put in a BCS game. I think the whole point of the BCS conferences are that they are SUPPOSED to be solid top to bottom as opposed to the non BCS conferences- including M West. This obviously is not the case. There will never be a conference with good teams top to bottom..including the Big 12 (Baylor, Iowa St) and the SEC (it changes year to year- this year seemed to be many more than usual). Who is your team by the way?

[SP1!]

Georgia definately was playing the best at the end of the year last year and was unfortunate that they had to play the worst team ever to be put in a BCS game. I think the whole point of the BCS conferences are that they are SUPPOSED to be solid top to bottom as opposed to the non BCS conferences- including M West. This obviously is not the case. There will never be a conference with good teams top to bottom..including the Big 12 (Baylor, Iowa St) and the SEC (it changes year to year- this year seemed to be many more than usual). Who is your team by the way?

I have been a georgia fan since I saw Herschel play against TCU in '80. I am really disappointed with them this year though since its obvious to most that willie martinez is a horrible defensive coach.

Im not a typical SEC fan, I dont give a shit if the other schools win and I certainly will not be rooting for bama or florida, if they both lose I will be happy.

[SP1!]

Well boise lost any argument thay had this year for being a top 5 team and now to add further embarrassment to the WAC with ND laying a beating down on hawaii, yeah its surprising me as well.

[disneyspy]

this UNC/WVU game has been pretty fuckin great

[Epschtein]

yeah that was a hell of a game!

[SP1!]

Pat White may actually make it as an NFL QB, he showed me a few decent passes today with touch and speed on the ball, congrats WVU.

[JimBeam]

Pat White may actually make it as an NFL QB, he showed me a few decent passes today with touch and speed on the ball, congrats WVU.

It was suprised that he had such a good passing day, actually his best ever if I heard correctly, against a team that had so many takeaways in the secondary.

NC sucks !!

Late in the game they pin WVU deep in their own territory, then they stop them on a 4th in short still in WVU territory but then they fumble the ball away AND allow them to go 70 yards or so for the go ahead score.

Screwed me in my bowl pick'em pool.

[SP1!]

It was suprised that he had such a good passing day, actually his best ever if I heard correctly, against a team that had so many takeaways in the secondary.

NC sucks !!

Late in the game they pin WVU deep in their own territory, then they stop them on a 4th in short still in WVU territory but then they fumble the ball away AND allow them to go 70 yards or so for the go ahead score.

Screwed me in my bowl pick'em pool.

They are better than they were a few years ago but they cant stop an offense that can pass and run so I knew this game would be close.

[JimBeam]

That Jahvid Best for Cal is one fast bastard.

I think I put a lot of confidence points on Cal winning this game.

Hopefully the current momentum will continue all game.

[Snoogans]

Can someone explain to me how Miami can let 40 seconds run off the clock with 3 time outs and under a min to go in the half, near midfield?

[JimBeam]

Or how, as he announcers pointed out, Longshore would throw well short of the 1st down on 4th & 7 ?

[SP1!]

Well miami does have quite a few suspended for this game, one being their starting quarterback so you cant be too hard on him, it shouldnt even be this close in this game.

[sailor]

It was suprised that he had such a good passing day, actually his best ever if I heard correctly, against a team that had so many takeaways in the secondary.

NC sucks !!

Late in the game they pin WVU deep in their own territory, then they stop them on a 4th in short still in WVU territory but then they fumble the ball away AND allow them to go 70 yards or so for the go ahead score.

Screwed me in my bowl pick'em pool.

69 yards on 3 plays. the team had a somewhat down year, but 4 straight bowl victories is something to build on. sanders and devine will be fun to watch next year, but it's really sad to see white go.

[Snoogans]

Well miami does have quite a few suspended for this game, one being their starting quarterback so you cant be too hard on him, it shouldnt even be this close in this game.

more the coaches. Someone has to call a timeout. They wasted 45 seconds

[JimBeam]

Longshore for Cal sucks balls.

You see that reaction from one of the O-linemen when he called that timeout ?

That looked like a guy not happy w/ his QB.

Looks like I'm gonna lose this one in the bowl pick'em.

Cal's giving 7 points and they might not even win the game outright.

[ozzie]

Can someone explain to me how Miami can let 40 seconds run off the clock with 3 time outs and under a min to go in the half, near midfield?

And again to end the game. Terrible clock management.

Hard to tell if this falls on Shannon or Pat Nix.

[SP1!]

more the coaches. Someone has to call a timeout. They wasted 45 seconds

And again to end the game. Terrible clock management.

Hard to tell if this falls on Shannon or Pat Nix.

Yeah that was horrible, they wasted too much time, they had a shot but let it go.