American Sports Discussion (ie, Apolyton US Sports Bar) - Page 5

Jaguar · December 9, 2002, 02:22

So his talent can waste away for several years playing 2nd string, of course!

Imran Siddiqui · December 9, 2002, 02:24

Ah... point well taken.

But in that case, just have the Bengals draft him

. After all the Seahawks might end up to be good at some time

.

Jaguar · December 9, 2002, 02:44

Quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Ah... point well taken.

But in that case, just have the Bengals draft him

. After all the Seahawks might end up to be good at some time

.

Yes! Back to their glory days! Actually, wait a minute....

Drake Tungsten · December 9, 2002, 03:11

Quote:

Because, obviously, the regular season for WAC teams doesn't matter, because they will NEVER have the strength of schedule needed, because their conference is so weak.

We've been over this several times. If your conference is weak, you can make up for it by playing a tough non-conference schedule. Just look at Fresno State's schedule for last season if you want a convenient WAC example.

Ming · December 9, 2002, 05:16

Quote:

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
You're lucky Ming is around or your side would've been beaten a long time ago.

Check out the vote in both threads... it's only you and a few others who side with the dark side and continue to support a bunch of greedy old farts who run the current bowl system. You've lost... and you just keep talking in circles and contradicting yourself with every additional post... yeah, the regular season must remain meaningful... but only if you are a top team, otherwise, you can go suck yourself. I hope you really don't believe your own propaganda

reismark · December 9, 2002, 07:37

The top two candidates for the Heisman, in my mind, will be facing off on January 2nd in the Orange Bowl - USC QB Carson Palmer and Iowa QB Brad Banks. I say the Heisman people should forget about the vote and just bestow the trophy on whichever QB wills his team to a victory in that game.

Ogie Oglethorpe · December 9, 2002, 10:24

Quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

NEW ISSUE:

All of you have heard of A&M firing Slocum and hiring Franchione. Firstly A&M is slime but I think Franchione is even bigger slime. 2 years, promising recruits he'd be there, and before one class went through, he bales ship. When he signed on, he KNEW Alabama would go on probation.

Local 680 the fan radio legend and 'Bama fan Phyllis is having a seizure.

But yes I agree he appears to be slime, OTOH I've heard when he asked for control of the program as he feared it would turn back to the dark side with questionable recruiting practices etc. he was denied.

OTOOH, his leaving TCU and comments made back 2 years ago mirrors the comments heard from him.

2 days prior to leaving TCU " I have no plans to leave TCU. It is a diamond in the rough program".

2 days prior to leaving 'Bama "As far as I know my plans are to stay with Alabama. I haven't had any discussion with Texas A&M".

SlowwHand · December 9, 2002, 10:27

I'm not an A&M fan, but Franchione didn't know about the sanctions.
His hiring will make it all the sweeter when UT, and Texas Tech, stomp A&M.

Ogie Oglethorpe · December 9, 2002, 10:29

Heisman (not that I'm biased or anything

)

Will : Johnson - PSU
Should : Johnson - PSU

No seriously,

I think McGahee will likely win and a strong case can be made for it.

Johnson put up huge huge numbers and deserves consideration but his knock is he came up too small in the big games. (OTOH we all know the running game goes out the window when you get down early).

Imran Siddiqui · December 9, 2002, 15:30

Quote:

I'm not an A&M fan, but Franchione didn't know about the sanctions.

Actually he did. Apprently, Alabama told Franchione that they might be subject to sanctions and he still signed! And then he told his players not to leave because of sanctions and they should stick it through!! What slime!

McGahee will probably win the Heisman. Those 6 TDs against VTech probably sealed it for him.

Drake Tungsten · December 9, 2002, 19:13

Quote:

and you just keep talking in circles and contradicting yourself with every additional post...

I have to talk in circles when the tag-alongs who support your side bring up issues that have already been covered. Exhibit #1...

Quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
So the regular season only matters if you play a quality schedule? OH!

Imran Siddiqui · December 9, 2002, 19:22

I will quote Ming:

Quote:

yeah, the regular season must remain meaningful... but only if you are a top team, otherwise, you can go suck yourself. I hope you really don't believe your own propaganda

The side issues have been covered, but not finished. You are still wrong

.

Hey, we already covered that the BCS allows undeserving teams to play in the national championship, but you still talk about it.

--

Btw, I don't know if you watch ESPN's Around the Horn, but it takes 4 Sports Experts from around the country and asks them things about sports.

Today, they were asked if the BCS worked. 3 out of the 4 said NO! Because they did not believe that the undefeated Ohio State belongs in the national championship game. Because they feel USC could kick the crap out of OSU.

You are not in the majority, and not even close to being right.

SlowwHand · December 9, 2002, 19:26

Ming's attitude is abominable today, isn't it?
"Go suck yourself"?

Imran Siddiqui · December 9, 2002, 19:30

Hey, he was addressing a BCS supporter. He deserved it

.

Drake Tungsten · December 9, 2002, 19:31

http://espn.go.com/ncf/columns/maisel_ivan/1473598.html

Quote:

Btw, I don't know if you watch ESPN's Around the Horn, but it takes 4 Sports Experts from around the country and asks them things about sports.

Around the Horn sucks. If the boys on PTI say the BCS didn't work, maybe I'll listen.

Quote:

Because they feel USC could kick the crap out of OSU.

Who cares? USC had their shot and blew it against Washington State. OSU, on the other hand, did everything that was expected of them. Do you really want to ignore OSU's perfect record just because you think USC might be better? I thought you were trying to get away from subjective determinations of quality...

Quote:

You are not in the majority

Who cares? The majority voted for Al Gore in 2000. What does that say about the intelligence of the majority?

Drake Tungsten · December 9, 2002, 19:33

Quote:

"Go suck yourself"?

Believe me, if I could "suck myself" I sure wouldn't be posting on a message board right now.

Imran Siddiqui · December 9, 2002, 19:42

Quote:

If the boys on PTI say the BCS didn't work

Wilbon has always said the BCS doesn't work, and he continues to say it.

Quote:

Do you really want to ignore OSU's perfect record just because you think USC might be better?

YES! USC has shown that it is a great team, only has 2 losses and just rocked Notre Dame. They are deserving of any team to be included in the discussion of national champion.

Quote:

I thought you were trying to get away from subjective determinations of quality

If you want to have the bowls and then acknowledge the national championship is totally subjective then I have no problem with that. To have the BCS say that because of its system, you have a 'true' national championship is ludicrous.

Drake Tungsten · December 9, 2002, 19:47

Quote:

To have the BCS say that because of its system, you have a 'true' national championship is ludicrous.

When have I ever said that the BCS crowns a "true" national champion? I don't care who the "best" team is and I think I've been pretty clear about that. I'm more interested in rewarding the best season, which is what the BCS does pretty well. Not perfectly, but pretty well, and certainly better than any playoff.

Quote:

YES! USC has shown that it is a great team, only has 2 losses and just rocked Notre Dame. They are deserving of any team to be included in the discussion of national champion.

Only 2 losses?!?

[/ming mode]

Hasta la vista, regular season! Imran's running the show now!

Imran Siddiqui · December 9, 2002, 19:53

Quote:

When have I ever said that the BCS crowns a "true" national champion?

That's what the people in charge of the BCS say. THAT is why there is a BCS instead of the old system.

Why have a BCS instead of the old system of bowls and polls if you simply want to reward the regular season?

Quote:

Only 2 losses?!?

With the one of the toughest schedules in the country. Oh right, Miami played Rutgers and Temple. HARD teams.

Quote:

Hasta la vista, regular season!

Because a 0-11 team can make a playoff

. Use your head.

I guess I'll just tell the NFL to stop playing. They have a playoff so their regular season means nothing. I'll inform the Bengals and Texans that they should get ready for the playoffs. Their regular seasons didn't matter

.

Secondly, if you are good enough to be considered one of the 8 best teams in the country, I DON'T GIVE A DAMN ABOUT ONE OR TWO LOSSES. The 'regular season' argument is such a crock of ****. Miami doesn't play close to as tough a schedule as Oklahoma or USC or Washington State.

The regular season means crap, because they don't play the same teams! That's why you need a playoff, to see which teams are better and which teams just benefited from an easy schedule!!

ixnay · December 9, 2002, 19:58

Maybe over the course of two straight years of non-stop football, each team could play the 116 other 1-A teams. Then the top 2 could play for the national title!

Imran Siddiqui · December 9, 2002, 20:01

That would be one way of deciding the 'true' national champion

.

Or you could have a playoff

.

Imran Siddiqui · December 9, 2002, 20:10

Just curious, but:

Quote:

I don't care who the "best" team is and I think I've been pretty clear about that

If you don't care about the best team, then why have a national champion?

Why not go back to the bowls and polls and say national champion is just a popularity contest? I'd have more respect for you that way.

Drake Tungsten · December 9, 2002, 20:46

Quote:

Secondly, if you are good enough to be considered one of the 8 best teams in the country, I DON'T GIVE A DAMN ABOUT ONE OR TWO LOSSES.

Why don't you just admit that you want college football to be like the NFL? I'd have more respect for you that way.

Imran Siddiqui · December 9, 2002, 20:59

Quote:

Why don't you just admit that you want college football to be like the NFL?

I don't deny it. I'd like college football to be like the best run league in the country.

I want college football to be more like the NFL. Though I don't want it totally to be like the NFL, that would be impossible. Furthermore, having 12 teams make the playoffs out of 32 (37.5%) is MUCH greater as a percentage than having 8 teams out of 116 (7%) make the playoffs. And there is something about having conference championships, with as many conferences as are in college football.

There, do I get my respect now?

Drake Tungsten · December 9, 2002, 21:06

Quote:

There, do I get my respect now?

I guess. At least you're honest.

Imran Siddiqui · December 9, 2002, 21:12

So why back the BCS? Seriously?

Why not just go with the Bowls and Polls? I mean, if you really don't care about the best team winning national championship, the BCS doesn't mean anything to you!

Drake Tungsten · December 9, 2002, 21:22

Quote:

So why back the BCS? Seriously?

Because it was sometimes impossible under the old system to determine which team had the best season. If a Big Ten team went undefeated and a Big 12 team went undefeated, they would be locked into different bowls and not play each other.

The BCS fixes this by placing the two unbeatens in a national title game. The BCS allows you to determine which team had the best season in situations that the old system couldn't handle. Pretty simple, really.

Imran Siddiqui · December 9, 2002, 21:27

Quote:

Because it was sometimes impossible under the old system to determine which team had the best season. If a Big Ten team went undefeated and a Big 12 team went undefeated, they would be locked into different bowls and not play each other.

But if you don't care if the best team wins the national championship, what does that matter? It is all a matter of subjectivity isn't it?

Quote:

The BCS fixes this by placing the two unbeatens in a national title game. The BCS allows you to determine which team had the best season in situations that the old system couldn't handle.

Doesn't that basically mean the BCS determines a 'true' national champion, so there are no arguments for the other teams?

Drake Tungsten · December 9, 2002, 21:41

I don't think you understand my argument. Maybe I didn't make it clear, so I'll try to expand on it here.

When you mentioned a "true" national champion, I took that to mean that the "best" team in the country (best = most talented) was the national champ. I don't think it is possible to determine who the most talented team in the country is, given the huge number of teams in Division I, so I don't believe that it is an adequate yardstick. Hence this statement...

Quote:

I don't care who the "best" team is and I think I've been pretty clear about that. I'm more interested in rewarding the best season, which is what the BCS does pretty well

When I said this, my point was that I don't think the national championship should be given to the "best" team, since that is impossible to determine in college football, even with a playoff.

I believe that the national championship should be given to the team that had the best season. This is relatively easy to determine and the BCS does a good job of it. This is also the way it has always been done and is one of the reasons college football is unique from other sports.

College football rewards teams for consistent performance over the entire course of the regular season. Other sports reward whatever team is playing best at the end of the season. I know that you prefer the latter, but I don't. I like college football's emphasis on the regular season and don't want to see it destroyed by a playoff.

I hope that was clear enough...

Ming · December 9, 2002, 21:54

Again... please explain how a playoff system of 8 teams takes ANYTHING away from the regular season.

And again... you are talking out of both side of your mouth again...

Quote:

OSU, on the other hand, did everything that was expected of them. Do you really want to ignore OSU's perfect record just because you think USC might be better?

But you claim that if Bowling Green had gone undefeated they didn't deserve a chance because they didn't play a hard enough schedule. Well guess what... MANY teams played a harder schedule than OSU did...

You seem pretty willing to dismiss another teams perfect schedule because YOU think they aren't that good, but come on... they did EVERYTHING THAT WAS ASKED OF THEM...

I love how these FEW supporters of this crappy system keep talking in circles tryig to defend a system that sucks...