13-11-2002 04:04									#301
	Suffering from ads?

I can't believe that anyone would consider giving a share of the national title to an undefeated Nebraska team a "gift"...

	13-11-2002 04:11									#302
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Drake Tungsten I can't believe that anyone would consider giving a share of the national title to an undefeated Nebraska team a "gift"...

Thats the whole point. Technically in '94 Nebraska ended up with both the AP and coaches poll Championships. They deserved neither IMHO.

PSU was left with a recognition from a minor polling (ESPN perhaps) but was not recognized in the majority of the country as the true champs (or even for that matter co-champs) as they again IMHO deserved. Certainly from a BCS ranking perspective they should have.

A head to head would have solved the problem and in my estimation in favor of PSU.

	13-11-2002 04:13									#303
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

Amazing. 302 posts while continuing on-topic has to be a record or something.

And we're nearly at 29% of the vote!

	13-11-2002 04:18									#304
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Thats the whole point. Technically in '94 Nebraska ended up with both the AP and coaches poll Championships. They deserved neither IMHO.

I thought PSU got the AP title, but I must be confused; I must have the 97 split title on the brain. Not that the AP title matters much. The coach's poll has the good trophy.

At any rate, Nebraska deserved the title. It's PSU's fault for playing in a conference that relegated them to the irrelevant Rose Bowl, not anyone else's.

quote: Amazing. 302 posts while continuing on-topic has to be a record or something.

True dat.

	13-11-2002 07:30									#305
	Get a bigger avatar today!

It's because certain posters (he says while thinking of Turkish headware) haven't bothered to visit this thread.

	13-11-2002 09:16									#306
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

So should DanS get an award for starting the longest on-topic Off-Topic thread, or should I get an award because his starting post was a quote of me from another thread?

Or should we (gasp) split an award?

	13-11-2002 09:18									#307
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

Don't blow it now guys

	13-11-2002 09:22									#308
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Still on-topic, Ming... sharing awards and whatnot.

Anyway, if we really want to get back on-topic:

Dan, even at 29%, this is still bigger butt-whoopin' than 2002 Election Day. Or, for that matter, 2001 Colorado-Nebraska.

	13-11-2002 09:31									#309
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Or 2002 Notre Dame-Boston College.

	13-11-2002 17:03									#310
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by Drake Tungsten At any rate, Nebraska deserved the title. It's PSU's fault for playing in a conference that relegated them to the irrelevant Rose Bowl, not anyone else's.

I unfortunately can't argue this point as apparently a number of Nebraska syncophants agreed with your position in '94 and histroy is what history is. It is however interesting that the 'objective' BCS rating clearly shows PSU as the real champion that year based upon strength of schedule.

By the by the arguement "look at what Nebraska did in '95" doesn't hold for me. Two different teams and two different leagues (with the graduationof the '94 senior classes in the NCAA ranks). Even if you say the Nebraska team of '94 had the same make up as the team in '95 it would tend to figure that the '95 team would be a better team as they have more time to work as a team, take larger doses of steriods and allow Lawrence Phillips better girlfriend beating techniques.

Just doin my part to keep an On Topic thread going.

	14-11-2002 01:19									#311
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: By the by the arguement "look at what Nebraska did in '95" doesn't hold for me.

Don't look at '95. Look at '93. Nebraska outplayed Florida State in the national title game in 1993 and barely lost. Then they came back in 1994 and won the title. Then they came back again in 1995 and had one of the greatest seasons of all time. The title in '94 came right in the middle of one of the most dominating three-year periods ever put together by a college football team.

To claim that Nebraska didn't deserve the title in '94 is absurd. I've come to expect absurdity out of Big Ten fans, however. They have to ***** about past title games that they could've won if they hadn't been hiding out in the Rose Bowl. I don't believe it for a second. How many title games have the Big Ten been to since they joined the BCS?

	14-11-2002 01:40									#312
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Your going to use '93 as an example. Hah!

First off they lost pure and simple in '93. Second banana same as should have been in '94. If you don't think the Osborne sympathizer vote was in full effect and that allowed Nebraska to go into the post season bowl ranked #1 due largely to an impossibly easy schedule thats your opinion certainly not mine.

Secondly giving credence from one year to the next about the strength of a college team is a stretch at best as the core of the team should be changing by at least 30% every year. 30% senior class turnover. 30% juniors 25% sophmores the 15% remainder being freshmen. Over a two year period thats normally over half the team being different starters. (In Nebraska's case it could have been even more depending on ability to meet eligibility and staying out of jail.)

As for the Rose Bowl, if the Pac 10 was a real confrence there wouldn't be an issue would there. I hated the fact PSU ended up inthe Big 10. Matter of fact I predicted PSU would face just such a reality as the PAC10 has historically been as woeful as the Big 10 is in the last decade.

Finally, I simply stated the obvious. The so called 'objective' BCS historical ranking shows PSU as the #1 ranked team based upon strength of schedule. You seem to think it all boils down to one final bowl game. In a playoff system resulting in a head to head that would be correct. In the era of pre BCS and now BCS it doesn't

Again, the need exists for a playoff system.

	14-11-2002 01:51									#313
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: First off they lost pure and simple in '93.

Phantom clip...

quote: If you don't think the Osborne sympathizer vote was in full effect and that allowed Nebraska to go into the post season bowl ranked #1

It wouldn't have mattered if the Huskers had gone into the Orange Bowl ranked #2. When you beat the #3 team in the country in your bowl, it looks a hell of a lot more impressive than beating whatever patsy the Pac 10 produces for the Rose Bowl. PSU being in the Big Ten is what screwed them, not some sort of pro-Osborne conspiracy. Once Nebraska beat Miami, there was no question that they should be #1.

quote: In a playoff system resulting in a head to head that would be correct. In the era of pre BCS and now BCS it doesn't

The BCS doesn't pick the champion; it simply sets up the best possible title game. The BCS works perfectly as long as there aren't 3 or more quality unbeatens. JohnT's info shows how rare that is, so I'm pretty confident that we don't need a playoff.

	14-11-2002 02:20									#314
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by Drake Tungsten The BCS works perfectly as long as there aren't 3 or more quality unbeatens.

Uhhh... it doesn't work very well if there is only one quality unbeaten team either. Because there is still the simple matter of which of the Quality one loss teams gets to play. And heaven help us if no Quality team goes unbeaten

The currrent system sucks. Again, it was devised by a bunch of greedy old fart bowl committees to keep themselves in control of the money. It has NOTHING to do with the best interest of College Football

	14-11-2002 02:54									#315
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Uhhh... it doesn't work very well if there is only one quality unbeaten team either.

Why? If you win all your games, you control your own destiny. If you lose one, then you leave yourself at the mercy of the polls. Seems like a pretty good system to me. It makes every game count.

	14-11-2002 03:00									#316
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Drake, I believe Ming answered your "why" in the very next sentence of his post: because then you are still left with the problem of which 1-loss team to pick.

	14-11-2002 03:06									#317
	Get a bigger avatar today!

Why is that such a huge problem? If a team wasn't even good enough to win all of its games, I don't really have a problem with them being left out of the title game because of what the polls decided.

Look at last year. Neither Oregon or Nebraska really deserved to be in the title game. Neither of them had perfect seasons. They sacrificed the right to be in the title game by losing; Nebraska was just the one that the BCS decided should back into the title game so Miami could play someone.

If you lose, then you future is out of your hands. It's that simple, so you better be ready to play every week.

	14-11-2002 03:40									#318
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by Drake Tungsten Nebraska was just the one that the BCS decided should back into the title game so Miami could play someone.

Yeah... it was "decided" by the BCS and not on the field.
What gives them the right to decide which of the one loss teams goes... Many other teams deserved the same chance Nebraska had... but didn't get it. If they are going to lose that chance, let them lose on the field.

A playoff system will give those teams the chance.

	14-11-2002 03:54									#319
	Got spare money?

quote: Many other teams deserved the same chance Nebraska had... but didn't get it.

That's bullshit. Once you lose a game, you don't deserve anything. You don't want to worry about going to the national title game? Then don't lose any games. It's pretty damn simple.

quote: If they are going to lose that chance, let them lose on the field.

They did lose that chance on the field, when they lost a game.

I don't see why so many people on this thread find the idea of a one loss team not getting a shot at the title to be such a travesty. They messed up, so why should they be guaranteed a second chance at the title? It makes the season less meaningful.

	14-11-2002 04:05									#320
	Tired of ads?

:sigh:

Drake: But why should any one-loss team deserve a chance over the others?

	14-11-2002 04:12									#321
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Drake: But why should any one-loss team deserve a chance over the others?

It's almost impossible to determine which one-loss team is the best team, especially since most of them don't play each other, but someone has to play the one undefeated team in the title game. It's a necessary evil. The BCS, though it has problems, is still the best way of deciding which one-loss team goes to the title game.

I'd prefer to have two undefeated teams in the title game every year, but it isn't going to happen. Hopefully Miami and Ohio State will both win out this year so we don't have to hear all the whining by one-loss teams about why they deserve a title shot.

	14-11-2002 04:48									#322
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Drake Tungsten I don't see why so many people on this thread find the idea of a one loss team not getting a shot at the title to be such a travesty. They messed up, so why should they be guaranteed a second chance at the title? It makes the season less meaningful.

I find it a travesty when ANOTHER one loss team DOES get the chance and the other similar deserving teams don't.

I find it a travesty when a computer system decides which two teams play for the championship when many deserving teams may be left out when a simple alternative of giving 4 or 8 of the best teams a shot at it would be far better. This would minimize the chances of leaving a deserving team out of the mix.

I find it a travesty that College Football has let a bunch of greedy bowl committees dictate to the them how their national champion will be detemined, all in the name of money.

I find it a travesty that the current system could leave a qualified and quality team out of the mix if three or more teams finish undefeated...

I consider the whole BCS system a travesty.

Does that answer your question Drake

	14-11-2002 05:00									#323
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: I find it a travesty when a computer system decides which two teams play for the championship when many deserving teams may be left out when a simple alternative of giving 4 or 8 of the best teams a shot at it would be far better. This would minimize the chances of leaving a deserving team out of the mix.

If you give the top 4 or 8 teams a shot every year, then what is the point of going undefeated? Hell, you might be able to make the tourney with two losses! Why would a loss be important if you can make the playoffs anyway? The regular season would lose its meaning.

quote: I find it a travesty when ANOTHER one loss team DOES get the chance and the other similar deserving teams don't.

Fine, have your playoff, but only for one-loss teams. They can fight it out so you can find out which team is the most "deserving". Then the winner of that tourney can play the undefeated team who actually earned their title shot. And if there are two undefeated teams, then too bad. No chance for the one-loss teams.

quote: I find it a travesty that the current system could leave a qualified and quality team out of the mix if three or more teams finish undefeated...

This is the only thing we agree on. If three quality teams go undefeated, the BCS doesn't work. It's something that needs to be fixed, but a playoff isn't the only answer.

	14-11-2002 05:06									#324
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

But what if the only undefeated team this year was Bowling Green (yeah, I know they lost and Miami and OSU haven't yet.. it's just an example)... Then what?

You really can't say that they should be ignored, whether you like it or not, they are a 1A team. Yet the BCS system doesn't even consider teams like these

	14-11-2002 05:12									#325
	Got spare money?

"If you give the top 4 or 8 teams a shot every year, then what is the point of going undefeated? Hell, you might be able to make the tourney with two losses! Why would a loss be important if you can make the playoffs anyway? The regular season would lose its meaning."

Put another way, it is unfair to the team who went undefeated. The 2-loss teams are getting unfair shots at the national title.

	14-11-2002 05:12									#326
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

A whole lotta teams ought to be out of Division 1-A football. At most there should be about 50 teams, at most that are viable for the NAtional Title. The rest should form a lower division with their own title game.

	14-11-2002 05:27									#327
	Tired of ads?

A 4 to 8 team tournament doesn't have to include 2 loss teams, as suggested in earlier proposals...

And Walrus, you are probably right. But right now, there are 117 or so 1A teams, and the current system doesn't allow teams that aren't from the power conferences a chance a the title. (with the exception of ND)... If you are going to have a championship game for 1A... each team should have a shot at the start of the season.

If Bowling Green were to go undefeated, and not get a shot at the championship... that sucks. They proved it on the field, and would be aced out by a computer

	14-11-2002 05:28									#328
	Remove this text

quote: A whole lotta teams ought to be out of Division 1-A football. At most there should be about 50 teams, at most that are viable for the NAtional Title. The rest should form a lower division with their own title game.

That the smartest thing that has been said on this thread in a long time.

	14-11-2002 05:32									#329
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: If Bowling Green were to go undefeated, and not get a shot at the championship... that sucks. They proved it on the field, and would be aced out by a computer

They did not prove it on the field. Going undefeated is only half the equation; playing against a real schedule is the other. Is winning the 100 meters at the Special Olympics equal to winning the 100 at the real Olympics?

If you want to see how a minor conference team should go about getting into the big time, look at Fresno State last year. They played a tough non-conference schedule to make up for the weakness of the WAC. If they went undefeated, they would've deserved a title shot. Bowling Green and other teams who don't play a quality schedule don't.

	14-11-2002 05:32									#330
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

It could be worse, it could be Canadian football.

quote: Remple admits he was drunk at time of incident -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Associated Press WINNIPEG, Manitoba -- Admitting he had too much to drink and yielded to peer pressure, a CFL fan says he deserved his on-field beating after he attacked a player during a game. Jody Remple, a 22-year-old construction worker, left the stands during a CFL West semifinal Sunday between the Winnipeg Blue Bombers and B.C. Lions. With seven seconds left and Winnipeg ahead 30-3, Remple ran on the field and jumped on Lions cornerback Eric Carter. He was promptly kicked and beaten by players. "I was looking to tackle him down, I guess,'' Remple said in the Winnipeg Free Press on Wednesday. "But I'm 5-foot-8, 175 pounds, what was I thinking?'' Remple was fined $180 for causing a disturbance. He understood why he was pummeled. "I pretty much deserved everything I got there,'' he told the newspaper. "I feel like a goof. I look at it on TV and I just shake my head. I couldn't believe it. Nobody wants to get humiliated like that in front of millions of people.'' Remple said his actions were spurred by alcohol while friends and a rowdy crowd goaded him. "At the time I thought it must be cool. I'll be a hero,'' Remple said. "But I'm pretty ashamed of myself now.''

Damn canadians can't even do hooliganism properly.