Tebow4ReElection

quote:

---

I agree on this, but they had a decided speed advantage over Ohio State in the Rose Bowl and lost. Alabama would have no trouble at all sustaining long drives, keeping that high powered offense off the field. JMO.

And where the SEC speed shows is in the front lines of both sides of the ball. I don't think the SEC has a speed advantage when it comes to skill positions, but I think they have a huge advantage when it comes to DL,OL & LBs.

---

No one ever backs these kinds of claims up. What makes anyone think Oregon has faster players than Ohio State? The type of offense they run? The fact that Oregon scores lots of points? Does Vanderbilt have SEC speed? If the trenches are where the SEC has that athletic advantage, why is offensive line the one position where the Big Ten has produced more NFL talent than the SEC?

quote:

---

A conference season is only 2/3 or 3/4 of the entire season. Teams should be judged on their whole seasons without any outsider giving any special designation to a fraction of their season.

---

A conference championship is only a prerequisite, not an automatic bid. You can't have 6 teams play in 1 championship game. It only prevents those who could not even win their own conference from being able to hold a national title for the same year that they do not have a conference title.

I'd prefer a simple set of rules that determines who plays in the BCS NC game.

1. Both teams must be the outright champions of their respective (BCS) conferences or own the primary share of a conference co-championship. The special rule for Notre Dame would be that they have to own 1 of the 2 best win percentages among BCS schools going into bowl season. Politics would probably prevent non-BCS schools from being excluded de jure, but this is just what I would prefer. The non-BCS schools can just form their own division and hold their own Division I-FBS Non-BCS NC game for all I care.

2. From the teams that are still eligible after applying rule 1, the two with the highest season win percentage would be the participants in the NC game.

3. If there is a tie after applying rule 2, head-to-head results would be the first tie-breaker in the unlikely event that they exist. After that either computer polls or strength of schedule (opponents' win percentage) should be the next tiebreaker.

I would want to keep the human element out of the selection as much as possible. I'd like the individual teams ultimatley to have complete control over whether they play for the championship.

quote:

---

I would take 5-3 over like say....3-1

You have to get there to win the games

---

I would take 5-3 over 5-0.

It is pretty common to criticize powerhouse programs by pointing out the low rate of successful transitions their players make from college to the NFL. But the critics usually ignore the fact that that rate of success is not all that great for almost any university.

Miami players from the late 90s and early 2000s seem to be an exception. Other than that... the rate of hits and misses from any school is not that stellar.

quote:

---

You are correct about your scores you just have the seasons wrong. OU did lose to LSU in 2003
(2002-2003 season). The other two games were the 2003-2004 season bro.....different teams. The 2002-03 OU team wouldn't have been squashed by kansas st. I will refrain from cursing you out and saying you are stupid like some peeps will. BTW.....LSU did kill notre dame. Let em score 14 in the first half and let them score 0 in the second half while allowing 30 yards of offense to that great offensive juggernaut.

---

1. My information is correct. A quick fact check would prove that.

2. I agree that LSU beat Notre Dame badly.

Short answer: both.

I had not really thought of it as penalizing the SEC, but I get what you mean. The new rule will certainly cause the average SEC school to have fewer recruits to choose from as they whittle down their class between February and August to meet the NCAA's 85 and 25 limits.

In the 4 years from 2004-2007, Big Ten programs averaged 85 recruiting commitments. In that same period, SEC schools averaged 101 signings. That is a difference of 16. So for a 4 year period, the average SEC school signs practically an entire extra recruiting class.

Now that SEC schools will not be able to oversign quite so egregiously, those extra recruits will have to choose another school if they want a football scholarship. Many of them undoubtedly will choose Big Ten schools.

This will also have an effect on the SEC's use of junior colleges as a sort of farm system. In the past, oversigned recruits would often resort to junior college after being removed from the program of their choice in that program's effort to comply with the NCAA's 85 and 25 limits and/or as a result of their own academic or legal problems. Although not required to do so, those recruits would typically use junior college to prepare for another shot at joining the program to which they originally committed.

Those junior college relationships have been very important to several SEC schools because they can basically pick and choose from their former recruiting casualties who went the juco route to better prepare themselves, physically and mentally, for Division I FBS football.

Another way schools have managed to stay within the NCAA's 85 scholarship limit despite oversigning is to decide not to renew the scholarship of a current player who is unlikely to contribute significant playing time to make room for a new recruit with better potential. That is just another advantage that should be reduced somewhat by the SEC's new rule.

If you made a composite of the final Coaches' Poll from every season since 2000, the list would be:

1. Texas (1 No. 1, 6 Top 10, 9 Top 25)
2. USC (1 No. 1, 7 Top 10, 7 Top 25)
3. Oklahoma (1 No. 1, 6 Top 10, 8 Top 25)
4. Ohio State (1 No. 1, 5 Top 10, 7 Top 25)
5. Georgia (0 No. 1, 6 Top 10, 8 Top 25)
6. LSU (2 No. 1, 5 Top 10, 6 Top 25)
7. Miami (1 No. 1, 4 Top 10, 6 Top 25)
8. Florida (2 No. 1, 3 Top 10, 9 Top 25)
8. Virginia Tech (0 No. 1, 4 Top 10, 8 Top 25)
10. Michigan (0 No.1, 4 Top 10, 7 Top 25)

Mathematically, only Texas, USC, and Oklahoma are still in contention for the top spot with 1 season left to play.

FWIW, I think 2006 Ohio State is actually underrated in a lot of people's minds as an overreaction to the result of the title game.

It reminds me of the 52-20 spanking that Florida gave Florida State in the 1996 bowl game. The difference is that no one would expect 96 Florida to beat 96 Florida State 10/10 times because the two actually did meet another time in the regular season with a much different result (24-21 Florida State win).

quote:

---

No goddamnit.

2006 was the year we beat the living frick out of Notre Dame in the Sugar Bowl. A Notre Dame team that Ohio State was probably 7 point better than.

---

2006, the season LSU beat Notre Dame by 27 in the Sugar Bowl is the same season Michigan beat Notre Dame by 26 at Notre Dame.