PDA

View Full Version : Week 12 polls


Sniper
11-11-2007, 02:07 PM
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/football/ncaa/11/11/bc.fbc.t25.collegefbpol.ap/index.html

Illinois ahead of Michigan? I could have sworn we beat them in Champaign.

P-L
11-11-2007, 02:10 PM
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/football/ncaa/11/11/bc.fbc.t25.collegefbpol.ap/index.html

Illinois ahead of Michigan? I could have sworn we beat them in Champaign.
We also beat Penn State and have a better conference record than both. Oh well, can't say we didn't deserve to drop like we did.

Sniper
11-11-2007, 02:16 PM
We also beat Penn State and have a better conference record than both. Oh well, can't say we didn't deserve to drop like we did.

11 spots after playing on the road without your starting QB and RB is a little rough though.

jballa838
11-11-2007, 02:50 PM
Hawaii - # 13
Boise State # 17.
i hope that game is televised. great game with BCS implications.

sweetness34
11-11-2007, 02:52 PM
And we beat Wisconsin....And we just beat the #1 team in the Nation.

mqtirishfan
11-11-2007, 03:35 PM
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/football/ncaa/11/11/bc.fbc.t25.collegefbpol.ap/index.html

Illinois ahead of Michigan? I could have sworn we beat them in Champaign.


However, I see two teams with the same amount of losses. One team lost, one team won this week.

diabsoule
11-11-2007, 03:35 PM
How does Oklahoma jump Kansas? Seriously, how?

eazyb81
11-11-2007, 03:37 PM
How does Oklahoma jump Kansas? Seriously, how?

OU has been ahead of them the whole time. You're confusing the BCS standing with the human polls, as KU was ahead of OU in last week's BCS and will be again this week.

iowatreat54
11-11-2007, 03:39 PM
How does Oklahoma jump Kansas? Seriously, how?

Ummmm they didn't?

Last week:
Oklahoma = #4 in both polls
Kansas = #5 in both polls

This week:
Oklahoma = #3 in both polls
Kansas = #4 in both polls

Kansas was #4 in the BCS and Oklahoma was #5 in the BCS, so Kansas hasn't been jumped yet

diabsoule
11-11-2007, 03:42 PM
My bad. I thought KU was ranked above OU for some reason, since you know, it makes sense.

iowatreat54
11-11-2007, 03:43 PM
My bad. I thought KU was ranked above OU for some reason, since you know, it makes sense.

no I understand, because during the KU game they were #4 Kansas on the scoreboard, going by the BCS standings...I thought the same til I looked at last weeks rankings

draftguru151
11-11-2007, 03:48 PM
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/football/ncaa/11/11/bc.fbc.t25.collegefbpol.ap/index.html

Illinois ahead of Michigan? I could have sworn we beat them in Champaign.

Because head to head match ups clearly dictates the rankings. Where do you think App State should be ranked? Where you just joking around or do you actually think you beating them should get you ranked above them?

Sniper
11-11-2007, 03:49 PM
Because head to head match ups clearly dictates the rankings. Where do you think App State should be ranked? Where you just joking around or do you actually think you beating them should get you ranked above them?

That wasn't the whole reasoning, I just feel we're a better team than Illinois.

diabsoule
11-11-2007, 03:51 PM
That wasn't the whole reasoning, I just feel we're a better team than Illinois.

Well, Wisconsin spanked Michigan and Illinois beat Wisconsin so I think the teams are about equal.

Sniper
11-11-2007, 03:54 PM
Well, Wisconsin spanked Michigan and Illinois beat Wisconsin so I think the teams are about equal.

And if you watched the game instead of looking at the final score, you'd know it was 23-21 Wisconsin before Ikegwuonu picked off Mallett late and then UM went for it on 4th and like 20 from their own 5 and turned the ball over on downs, so UW walked it in. Not as bad as it looked, especially considering there was no Hart and Henne.

GB12
11-11-2007, 03:59 PM
And if you watched the game instead of looking at the final score, you'd know it was 23-21 Wisconsin before Ikegwuonu picked off Mallett late and then UM went for it on 4th and like 20 from their own 5 and turned the ball over on downs, so UW walked it in. Not as bad as it looked, especially considering there was no Hart and Henne.
It was 23-7 until the 4th quarter. We let Michigan get a couple on us and then we took them back.

Illinois, Wisconsin, Penn State, and Michigan should all be ranked right around each other.

diabsoule
11-11-2007, 04:01 PM
And if you watched the game instead of looking at the final score, you'd know it was 23-21 Wisconsin before Ikegwuonu picked off Mallett late and then UM went for it on 4th and like 20 from their own 5 and turned the ball over on downs, so UW walked it in. Not as bad as it looked, especially considering there was no Hart and Henne.

Thanks for correcting me and you caught me red handed. I didn't watch the game. I saw it was 23-7 and kept flipping. But Michigan still lost, it doesn't matter how they lost they still did.

bearsfan_51
11-11-2007, 04:06 PM
Who gives a ****? Unless you're in the top 5-6 it doesn't matter what your ranking is.

jballa838
11-11-2007, 04:08 PM
Big 10 fans like to feel that they are a good conference, besides that they were 0-2 in BCS bowls and got murdered in both.

Sniper
11-11-2007, 04:17 PM
Big 10 fans like to feel that they are a good conference, besides that they were 0-2 in BCS bowls and got murdered in both.

Pray tell, who is your team?

jballa838
11-11-2007, 04:27 PM
Pray tell, who is your team?
Washington... But i enjoy the almost the entire Pac-10, WAC, and MWC

mqtirishfan
11-11-2007, 06:50 PM
Washington... But i enjoy the almost the entire Pac-10, WAC, and MWC

Not that it even matters. A fan of one team can still objectively compare other teams that are better than his own team.

BrownsTown
11-11-2007, 06:56 PM
LSU loses to #22

OSU loses to #20

LSU is #1

OSU is #7.

I hate the SEC bias...

Sniper
11-11-2007, 06:58 PM
LSU loses to #22

OSU loses to #20

LSU is #1

OSU is #7.

I hate the SEC bias...

Yeah, it's almost fair.

sweetness34
11-11-2007, 07:13 PM
Um...Ohio State lost this week, LSU lost what, like 4 weeks ago? What are you bitching about? And Illinois was not ranked when they lost to us.

P-L
11-11-2007, 07:17 PM
LSU loses to #22

OSU loses to #20

LSU is #1

OSU is #7.

I hate the SEC bias...
It's not an SEC bias. It's because LSU lost about a month ago and OSU lost last week. That's how it works in college football. If Ohio State lost in the middle of October and LSU lost yesterday, then their positions would be switched.

Iamcanadian
11-11-2007, 08:54 PM
It's not an SEC bias. It's because LSU lost about a month ago and OSU lost last week. That's how it works in college football. If Ohio State lost in the middle of October and LSU lost yesterday, then their positions would be switched.

Doesn't say much about who gets into the NC game. Playoffs please!!!

bustabinary
11-11-2007, 09:31 PM
There really does need to be a playoff. You can make as many arguments as you want about which conferences are the strongest, which teams are more deserving, who had an easier ride, but the fact is every year 4 of the 6 power conferences are snubbed from their chance at the title (and that's not including the 5 mid-major conferences and the independents).

The only way true parity can be established is if each conference had the same amount of teams and games and intraconference championships. Then, each champion would go on to the interconference playoffs.

It's kind of frustrating that the big wigs in college football don't see the economic potential of a playoff; just look at how successful March Madness is.

BrownsTown
11-11-2007, 09:38 PM
It's not an SEC bias. It's because LSU lost about a month ago and OSU lost last week. That's how it works in college football. If Ohio State lost in the middle of October and LSU lost yesterday, then their positions would be switched.

Ok, if it makes you feel better, when LSU lost they dropped to what? 4th? That's much better than OSU's drop.

P-L
11-11-2007, 09:40 PM
Ok, if it makes you feel better, when LSU lost they dropped to what? 4th? That's much better than OSU's drop.

LSU had also played a MUCH tougher schedule than OSU has.

BrownsTown
11-11-2007, 09:41 PM
LSU had also played a MUCH tougher schedule than OSU has.

And also has struggled with that schedule MUCH more than OSU has.

keylime_5
11-11-2007, 09:44 PM
Um...Ohio State lost this week, LSU lost what, like 4 weeks ago? What are you bitching about? And Illinois was not ranked when they lost to us.

It doesn't matter WHEN they lost, that's the stupidest thing I've ever heard. LSU beat some decent teams including Florida, Ohio State's quality wins are only Wisky and PSU, that's why LSU is ranked higher. Plus we lost at home and not on the road like LSU. I think there's a great chance both LSU and Oklahoma lose another game before bowl season though.

P-L
11-11-2007, 09:50 PM
It doesn't matter WHEN they lost, that's the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

I think it is stupid as well, but it absolutely does matter when a team loses. It's been that way for years, and I think think that is my biggest reason for wanting a playoff.

bustabinary
11-11-2007, 10:00 PM
It doesn't matter WHEN they lost, that's the stupidest thing I've ever heard.When they lose may be the biggest factor in the polls (the human ones, the computers don't take time into account). If you lose early you can recover and climb back up, but if you lose late you're done. Just look at Michigan; they lost to Appalachian State, were destroyed by Oregon, and just recently they were almost back in the top 10.

The polls are more of a systematic thing than an actual survey of who the people think the best teams are. Basically people just guess how far teams drop when they lose and how much they climb with a big win. So if you lose late in the season, then you drop in the polls and the only time polls matter are at the end.

diabsoule
11-11-2007, 11:48 PM
LSU lost on Oct. 13 to then ranked No. 17 Kentucky at Kentucky in 3 overtimes.
Ohio State lost this past weekend to an unranked Illinois team at home in regulation.

When the rankings came out people took into consideration that LSU played a conference opponent at that opponents home field and it took Kentucky three overtimes to put LSU away with that game also coming a week after LSU had played then No. 9 Florida. So LSU was ranked 5th after that loss.
The same thing happened with Ohio State. People took into consideration that a week before Ohio State had beaten No. 21 Wisconsin fairly easily at home. Then Illinois comes in and hangs with the No. 1 team in the country and ends up beating them in regulation and so they dropped to No. 7 when the rankings came out.

LSU has faced a tougher schedule than anyone else to get where they are including opening their schedule with a conference opponent (Mississippi State who is now bowl eligible) and beating 5 out of the six ranked teams they have had to play with all of those teams being ranked within the top 20.
Ohio State started their schedule against Youngstown State and all of the four ranked teams they have and will face have not been ranked higher than No. 21.

Here's an argument my friend presents when LSU was ranked No. 2:

"Yes, it is outstanding that Kansas has an undefeated season. Yes, Oregon has looked impressive lately. But do I think they should hop the Tigers? Absolutely not. Here's why."

"1) Strength of Schedules.

[a]Let's take a look at how Kansas has an undefeated season -
CENTRAL MICHIGAN - W - 52-7
SOUTHEASTERN LOUISIANA - W - 62-0
TOLEDO - W - 45-13
FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL W 55-13
at Kansas State (#24) - W - 30-24
BAYLOR - W - 58-10
at Colorado - W - 19-14
at Texas A&M - W - 19-11
NEBRASKA - W - 76-39

[b]Also, Oregon's schedule -
HOUSTON - W - 48-27
at Michigan - W - 39-7
FRESNO STATE - W - 52-21
at Stanford - W - 55-31
CALIFORNIA (#6) - L - 24-31
WASHINGTON STATE - W - 53-7
at Washington - W 55-34
USC (#9) - W - 24-17
ARIZONA STATE - W - 35-23

[c]And finally, LSU:
at Mississippi State - W - 45-0
VIRGINIA TECH (#9) - W - 48-7
MIDDLE TENNESSEE - W - 44-0
SOUTH CAROLINA (#12) - W - 28-16
at Tulane - W - 34-9
FLORIDA (#9) - W - 28-24
at Kenucky (#17) - L - 37-43 (Triple Overtime)
AUBURN (#18) - W - 30-24
at Alabama (#17) - W - 41-34"

"My argument: As far as strength of schedules, LSU has played the toughest schedule BY FAR - Six ranked opponents so far this season, and they've won five and lost one in triple overtime at Kentucky's home field. Four of those six opponents were played in succession - Florida, Kentucky, Auburn, and Alabama. I'd like to see another school go through that grinder and come away with three wins. Their out of conference schedule is mediocre, with Virginia Tech likely to play for the ACC Championship in a few weeks while Tulane and Louisiana Tech aren't even close to smelling the post-season."

"Kansas has played no decent opponents so far this season. One of their wins out of the nine include SOUTHEASTERN LOUISIANA, the tiny 1-AA school from Hammond, LA that will perhaps be one of the worst teams in their conference this year, which puts them high in the running for worst college football program of the year. Out of conference wins include such teams as Central Michigan, Toledo, and Florida International (who hasn't won a game in nearly two years). The Big XII Conference is not exactly having it's greatest year, and Kansas' schedule reflects this as they have such games as Baylor, Colorado, Nebraska, and Iowa State. Their toughest scheduled opponent this year is Missouri, which will likely determine who wins the Big XII North. The only saving grace that Kansas will have is playing a championship game against another ranked opponent, assuming they beat Missouri. Playing one scheduled ranked opponent in a season is not exactly what I would call championship caliber. If that's the case, then why isn't Hawaii ranked higher or in contention for the BCS Title Game?"

"Oregon has played a tougher schedule as it seems that the Pac-10 has stepped it up a notch. The problem is that those teams that were clogging up the #10-#25 spots have since fallen from grace. The win over Cal doesn't look to great now that Cal has dropped out of the top 25 with other losses. Unlike Kansas or LSU, they do not have to play a championship game against a ranked opponent and that should hurt their chances in the long run. Oregon fans will be touting a win over Michigan, but App State fans can do the same."

"2) "Quality of wins". This is a new argument to me because it's being used as an excuse to drop LSU from #2. People are saying that LSU hasn't been taking care of business against these teams while others have.
[a]- Neither has Oregon. Arizona State and USC were on the march to make comeback wins against the Ducks that came up short. The last minute march against California came up short.
[b]- Kansas hasn't played anyone to be included in this argument."

"3) Points against in the games played - LSU, who has played six ranked teams and three unranked, has given up a total of 157 points. Oregon has played three ranked opponents and six unranked, and has give up a total of 198. Kansas, who has played no ranked opponents all year long has given up 121."

"So which is better? Giving up an average of 17.4 points per game against six ranked and three unranked opponents, 22.0 points against three ranked and six unranked opponents, or 13.4 points against nine unranked opponents?"

"4) Conference strengths of the three teams (I'll throw in Ohio State for fun). These are the rankings by Rivals.com which have the top four as Ohio St, Oregon, LSU, then Kansas. This was the only place I could find a complete ranking of all top 120 teams. Statistically proven, the SEC is the toughest conference in 1-A, and should back up my argument about toughest in-conference schedules.

[a] SEC - average ranking of all teams is 30, including 7 teams in the top 25. Cellar dwellers are Ole Miss and Vanderbilt.
[b] Pac10 - average ranking of all teams is 37, including 4 in the top 25. Cellar dwellers are Stanford, Washington, and Washington State
[c] Big 12 - average ranking of all teams is 41, including 4 teams in the top 25. Cellar dwellers are Nebraska, Baylor, and Iowa State.
[d] Big 10 - average ranking of all teams is 44, with 2 teams in the top 25. Cellar dwellers are Minnesota and Northwestern."

"What's the coincidence of this? Look at the cellar dwellers of the conferences - those are teams that Oregon, Kansas, and Ohio State have played. LSU hasn't had a chance to play the weakest teams in their conference."

Chaucer
11-12-2007, 01:15 AM
http://bp1.blogger.com/_jgyugzLdbng/Rzfjpdf_EeI/AAAAAAAAA-M/5I0bbT0RLGo/s320/koolaid1.jpg

Iamcanadian
11-12-2007, 10:42 AM
LSU lost on Oct. 13 to then ranked No. 17 Kentucky at Kentucky in 3 overtimes.
Ohio State lost this past weekend to an unranked Illinois team at home in regulation.

When the rankings came out people took into consideration that LSU played a conference opponent at that opponents home field and it took Kentucky three overtimes to put LSU away with that game also coming a week after LSU had played then No. 9 Florida. So LSU was ranked 5th after that loss.
The same thing happened with Ohio State. People took into consideration that a week before Ohio State had beaten No. 21 Wisconsin fairly easily at home. Then Illinois comes in and hangs with the No. 1 team in the country and ends up beating them in regulation and so they dropped to No. 7 when the rankings came out.

LSU has faced a tougher schedule than anyone else to get where they are including opening their schedule with a conference opponent (Mississippi State who is now bowl eligible) and beating 5 out of the six ranked teams they have had to play with all of those teams being ranked within the top 20.
Ohio State started their schedule against Youngstown State and all of the four ranked teams they have and will face have not been ranked higher than No. 21.

****First let me start by saying that I believe that LSU deserves to be ranked #1. However your statement is full of holes that need to be pointed out. It is the current rankings that need to be examined not some ranking from a month ago that mean nothing today. LSU has beat 2 currently ranked top 25 teams, Virginia Tech at home, and Florida at home, and lost to the #23 ranked team Kentucky on the road. You expect a top team to win at home and that is what they did. South Carolina, Auburn, and Alabama are no longer top 25 teams so stop talking about them as if they are.

Here's an argument my friend presents when LSU was ranked No. 2:

"Yes, it is outstanding that Kansas has an undefeated season. Yes, Oregon has looked impressive lately. But do I think they should hop the Tigers? Absolutely not. Here's why."

"1) Strength of Schedules.

[a]Let's take a look at how Kansas has an undefeated season -
CENTRAL MICHIGAN - W - 52-7
SOUTHEASTERN LOUISIANA - W - 62-0
TOLEDO - W - 45-13
FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL W 55-13
at Kansas State (#24) - W - 30-24
BAYLOR - W - 58-10
at Colorado - W - 19-14
at Texas A&M - W - 19-11
NEBRASKA - W - 76-39

[b]Also, Oregon's schedule -
HOUSTON - W - 48-27
at Michigan - W - 39-7
FRESNO STATE - W - 52-21
at Stanford - W - 55-31
CALIFORNIA (#6) - L - 24-31
WASHINGTON STATE - W - 53-7
at Washington - W 55-34
USC (#9) - W - 24-17
ARIZONA STATE - W - 35-23

[c]And finally, LSU:
at Mississippi State - W - 45-0
VIRGINIA TECH (#9) - W - 48-7
MIDDLE TENNESSEE - W - 44-0
SOUTH CAROLINA (#12) - W - 28-16
at Tulane - W - 34-9
FLORIDA (#9) - W - 28-24
at Kenucky (#17) - L - 37-43 (Triple Overtime)
AUBURN (#18) - W - 30-24
at Alabama (#17) - W - 41-34"

"My argument: As far as strength of schedules, LSU has played the toughest schedule BY FAR - Six ranked opponents so far this season, and they've won five and lost one in triple overtime at Kentucky's home field. Four of those six opponents were played in succession - Florida, Kentucky, Auburn, and Alabama. I'd like to see another school go through that grinder and come away with three wins. Their out of conference schedule is mediocre, with Virginia Tech likely to play for the ACC Championship in a few weeks while Tulane and Louisiana Tech aren't even close to smelling the post-season."

****The CPU ranking which are the only ones that officially take SOS into consideration for BCS purposes actually rank Kansas as the #2 school in the country behind LSU and ahead of Oregon. How they detemine that I don't know, go ask the computers. Tell me why would you use Rivals.com to compare teams instead of BCS rankings. Rival.com doesn't even count for BCS purposes.

"Kansas has played no decent opponents so far this season. One of their wins out of the nine include SOUTHEASTERN LOUISIANA, the tiny 1-AA school from Hammond, LA that will perhaps be one of the worst teams in their conference this year, which puts them high in the running for worst college football program of the year. Out of conference wins include such teams as Central Michigan, Toledo, and Florida International (who hasn't won a game in nearly two years). The Big XII Conference is not exactly having it's greatest year, and Kansas' schedule reflects this as they have such games as Baylor, Colorado, Nebraska, and Iowa State. Their toughest scheduled opponent this year is Missouri, which will likely determine who wins the Big XII North. The only saving grace that Kansas will have is playing a championship game against another ranked opponent, assuming they beat Missouri. Playing one scheduled ranked opponent in a season is not exactly what I would call championship caliber. If that's the case, then why isn't Hawaii ranked higher or in contention for the BCS Title Game?"

"Oregon has played a tougher schedule as it seems that the Pac-10 has stepped it up a notch. The problem is that those teams that were clogging up the #10-#25 spots have since fallen from grace. The win over Cal doesn't look to great now that Cal has dropped out of the top 25 with other losses. Unlike Kansas or LSU, they do not have to play a championship game against a ranked opponent and that should hurt their chances in the long run. Oregon fans will be touting a win over Michigan, but App State fans can do the same."

"2) "Quality of wins". This is a new argument to me because it's being used as an excuse to drop LSU from #2. People are saying that LSU hasn't been taking care of business against these teams while others have.
[a]- Neither has Oregon. Arizona State and USC were on the march to make comeback wins against the Ducks that came up short. The last minute march against California came up short.
[b]- Kansas hasn't played anyone to be included in this argument."

"3) Points against in the games played - LSU, who has played six ranked teams and three unranked, has given up a total of 157 points. Oregon has played three ranked opponents and six unranked, and has give up a total of 198. Kansas, who has played no ranked opponents all year long has given up 121."

"So which is better? Giving up an average of 17.4 points per game against six ranked and three unranked opponents, 22.0 points against three ranked and six unranked opponents, or 13.4 points against nine unranked opponents?"

"4) Conference strengths of the three teams (I'll throw in Ohio State for fun). These are the rankings by Rivals.com which have the top four as Ohio St, Oregon, LSU, then Kansas. This was the only place I could find a complete ranking of all top 120 teams. Statistically proven, the SEC is the toughest conference in 1-A, and should back up my argument about toughest in-conference schedules.

[a] SEC - average ranking of all teams is 30, including 7 teams in the top 25. Cellar dwellers are Ole Miss and Vanderbilt.
[b] Pac10 - average ranking of all teams is 37, including 4 in the top 25. Cellar dwellers are Stanford, Washington, and Washington State
[c] Big 12 - average ranking of all teams is 41, including 4 teams in the top 25. Cellar dwellers are Nebraska, Baylor, and Iowa State.
[d] Big 10 - average ranking of all teams is 44, with 2 teams in the top 25. Cellar dwellers are Minnesota and Northwestern."

****Of course Cal did play a top 25 team from the SEC and killed them yet sit fourth in their own conference. H..mmmm. By the way the SEC has 5 top 25 teams not 7. Please don't exaggerate.

"What's the coincidence of this? Look at the cellar dwellers of the conferences - those are teams that Oregon, Kansas, and Ohio State have played. LSU hasn't had a chance to play the weakest teams in their conference."

****Good argument just before they finish the season with Louisiana Tech, Mississippi and Arkansas while Kansas plays Missouri and perhaps Oklahoma, 2 currently ranked top 10 teams. I don't see anything in your argument that says Kansas cannot jump both Oregon and LSU if they finish undefeated even though I doubt they do.

dabears10
11-12-2007, 10:46 AM
I think the main reason Ohio State dropped so far is because nobody was convinced they were a number one team. It seemed, at least to me, that people had put Ohio State by default.

However, LSU was the media darling powerhouse type team so they got more leinent(sp) supporters.

Iamcanadian
11-12-2007, 10:52 AM
I'd still argue that there are at least 6 teams that have a record that indicates they can beat anybody in a 1 game standoff and whoever gets left out of the NCG will be robbed whoever it is.

Turtlepower
11-12-2007, 11:22 AM
Am I the only one who cries BS when a 2 loss Georgia team jumps an Arizona State team that's 1 loss came to arguably the best team in the country?

Sniper
11-12-2007, 01:04 PM
Am I the only one who cries BS when a 2 loss Georgia team jumps an Arizona State team that's 1 loss came to arguably the best team in the country?

Ahem, Georgia plays in the best conference in the world. Come on, you're better than that.

nfrillman
11-12-2007, 02:38 PM
LSU loses to #22

OSU loses to #20

LSU is #1

OSU is #7.

I hate the SEC bias...

Ummmm. Excuse me, if you are going to start looking at who has the best one "loss" all season OSU and LSU aren't even close.

Missouri @ #4 Oklahoma
Arizona St @ #2 Oregon

But I forgot, those aren't traditional powers, so they deserve zero respect.

kwilk103
11-12-2007, 03:00 PM
Am I the only one who cries BS when a 2 loss Georgia team jumps an Arizona State team that's 1 loss came to arguably the best team in the country?

i would too; wvu dropped 4 straight weeks without losing

bearsfan_51
11-12-2007, 03:05 PM
Ummmm. Excuse me, if you are going to start looking at who has the best one "loss" all season OSU and LSU aren't even close.

Missouri @ #4 Oklahoma
Arizona St @ #2 Oregon

But I forgot, those aren't traditional powers, so they deserve zero respect.
Well try and remember next time.

soybean
11-12-2007, 03:10 PM
alabama, kentucky and auburn are/were overrated. which leaves LSU with about 1 quality win, florida.

RyanLeaf#1
11-12-2007, 03:12 PM
Am I the only one who cries BS when a 2 loss Georgia team jumps an Arizona State team that's 1 loss came to arguably the best team in the country?

Im sure if ASU beats USC they will be jumping some people, and rightfully so.

Sniper
11-12-2007, 03:17 PM
alabama, kentucky and auburn are/were overrated.

BLASPHEMY! All SEC teams should be ranked 1-12 and everyone else can start at 13. Oregon is really 13th.

iowatreat54
11-12-2007, 03:43 PM
BLASPHEMY! All SEC teams should be ranked 1-12 and everyone else can start at 13. Oregon is really 13th.

QFT...actually, bowl games are just novelties...the real NC is the SEC Championship

P-L
11-12-2007, 04:17 PM
alabama, kentucky and auburn are/were overrated. which leaves LSU with about 1 quality win, florida.
If you believe that then you must also believe that Ohio State has zero quality wins.

diabsoule
11-12-2007, 06:19 PM
QFT...actually, bowl games are just novelties...the real NC is the SEC Championship

Let more teams start having conference championships. That means the Big 10, Big East, and Pac-10 need to get their acts together and expand. All this bickering is nonsense until you look at quality of wins.

It's going to mean a lot for whichever team wins the Kansas/OU match but teams will also have to start scheduling tougher non-conference teams and no teams like Southeastern Louisiana University, a Div. II school that is one of the worst in the Southland conference. Oregon lost a close one to California who was ranked 6th when they played but Cal is no longer ranked in the top 25.

OH St. deserves more credit for beating a Div. II school because at least Youngstown St. is a Div. II powerhouse. SLU, not really, not even close.

This column offers a little insight.
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/columns/story?columnist=schlabach_mark&id=3106287

Turtlepower
11-12-2007, 10:11 PM
Let more teams start having conference championships. That means the Big 10, Big East, and Pac-10 need to get their acts together and expand. All this bickering is nonsense until you look at quality of wins.

The reason why the PAC-10 does not need a conference championship is because we play every team in our conference. Yeah, the conference championship is big, but it shouldn't matter if you play the conference championship week 14 or week 11.

BrownsTown
11-12-2007, 11:25 PM
The reason why the PAC-10 does not need a conference championship is because we play every team in our conference. Yeah, the conference championship is big, but it shouldn't matter if you play the conference championship week 14 or week 11.

And the reason the big 10 doesn't is because 90% of the time OSU-Michigan is the championship anyway.

Turtlepower
11-12-2007, 11:31 PM
And the reason the big 10 doesn't is because 90% of the time OSU-Michigan is the championship anyway.

Still would have been nice if OSU played Wisconsin last year. That was pretty much BS. Your conference needs to play at least 1 more game like the PAC-10 decided to do.

Sniper
11-13-2007, 04:41 AM
Still would have been nice if OSU played Wisconsin last year. That was pretty much BS. Your conference needs to play at least 1 more game like the PAC-10 decided to do.

Why? Wisconsin lost three conference games anyway, not like it would have changed whether or not this was for the Big 10 title.

Turtlepower
11-13-2007, 10:13 AM
Why? Wisconsin lost three conference games anyway, not like it would have changed whether or not this was for the Big 10 title.

If I'm not mistaken, Wisconsin was 11-1 last year and their only loss was to Michigan...

BrownsTown
11-13-2007, 02:07 PM
If I'm not mistaken, Wisconsin was 11-1 last year and their only loss was to Michigan...

The championship game would have been a rematch of OSU Michigan. That decided the championship. Michigan and Wisconsin had the same record and big 10 record, and Michigan had the head to head tiebreaker. No point.

nfrillman
11-13-2007, 02:13 PM
The championship game would have been a rematch of OSU Michigan. That decided the championship. Michigan and Wisconsin had the same record and big 10 record, and Michigan had the head to head tiebreaker. No point.

He is saying that if Wisconsin played Ohio St and beat them it would have looked like this:

Ohio St defeats Michigan
Michigan defeats Wisconsin
Wisconsin defeats Ohio St

All with one loss.

Sniper
11-13-2007, 03:36 PM
He is saying that if Wisconsin played Ohio St and beat them it would have looked like this:

Ohio St defeats Michigan
Michigan defeats Wisconsin
Wisconsin defeats Ohio St

All with one loss.

That's assumption though. Wisconsin was terribly overrated last year, the product of a cake schedule. They got whacked by Michigan by two TDs

nfrillman
11-13-2007, 06:16 PM
That's assumption though. Wisconsin was terribly overrated last year, the product of a cake schedule. They got whacked by Michigan by two TDs

Yeah, just figured I'd clear up what he meant.

diabsoule
11-13-2007, 08:37 PM
That's assumption though. Wisconsin was terribly overrated last year, the product of a cake schedule. They got whacked by Michigan by two TDs

I have heard that the Big 10 is thinking hard about expansion with possible contenders being Syracuse, Pitt, Rutgers, Nebraska, and Missouri. I think the perfect fit would be Missouri. What do you guys think?

Turtlepower
11-13-2007, 08:40 PM
I have heard that the Big 10 is thinking hard about expansion with possible contenders being Syracuse, Pitt, Rutgers, Nebraska, and Missouri. I think the perfect fit would be Missouri. What do you guys think?

I don't think Mizzu would ever leave the Big 12 for the Big 10 because Mizzu plays an easier schedule (here comes an argument) in the Big 12 than in the Big 10, plus they are doing pretty damn well for themselves.

diabsoule
11-13-2007, 09:08 PM
I don't think Mizzu would ever leave the Big 12 for the Big 10 because Mizzu plays an easier schedule (here comes an argument) in the Big 12 than in the Big 10, plus they are doing pretty damn well for themselves.

I think pulling from the Big 12 would be tough, however, I don't think it is impossible. I also think Missouri plays a fairly easy schedule as the talent level in the Big 12 is not on par with the Big 10, at least I don't think it is. However, I do not see what the Big 10 has to gain by recruiting either Syracuse, Rutgers, or Pitt. Obviously the Big 10 wants more viewers for the Big 10 network and football is the main reason for them wanting to expand but none of the aforementioned teams are that great in football.

Sniper
11-14-2007, 09:17 AM
I have heard that the Big 10 is thinking hard about expansion with possible contenders being Syracuse, Pitt, Rutgers, Nebraska, and Missouri. I think the perfect fit would be Missouri. What do you guys think?

I'd like Missouri or Rutgers. Penn State would self-destruct before they ever allowed Pitt in, and 'Cuse is just terrible. Nebraska is in complete shambles and Mizzou seems to have the most stability right now.

RyanLeaf#1
11-14-2007, 09:32 AM
I have heard that the Big 10 is thinking hard about expansion with possible contenders being Syracuse, Pitt, Rutgers, Nebraska, and Missouri. I think the perfect fit would be Missouri. What do you guys think?

Missouri or Nebraska will never leave the Big 12, and Syracuse, Rutgers, or Pitt will never leave the Big East. Why would any of them teams leave the conference their in now? Especially the 3 Big East Teams. Atleast they can compete in the Big East if you threw any of them teams into the Big 10 they would get crushed. I think if they were looking to expand they should look to teams like : Boise State, BYU..etc.... Teams that are in lower conferences not teams that are already in big time conferences.

diabsoule
11-14-2007, 12:11 PM
Missouri or Nebraska will never leave the Big 12, and Syracuse, Rutgers, or Pitt will never leave the Big East. Why would any of them teams leave the conference their in now? Especially the 3 Big East Teams. Atleast they can compete in the Big East if you threw any of them teams into the Big 10 they would get crushed. I think if they were looking to expand they should look to teams like : Boise State, BYU..etc.... Teams that are in lower conferences not teams that are already in big time conferences.

The Big 10 wants to expand in territory next to or currently in Big 10 territory. That's why the aforementioned teams are mentioned.

RyanLeaf#1
11-14-2007, 12:22 PM
The Big 10 wants to expand in territory next to or currently in Big 10 territory. That's why the aforementioned teams are mentioned.

Well they are going to have to use teams that arent already in BCS conferences to get them to switch.

diabsoule
11-14-2007, 12:53 PM
Well they are going to have to use teams that arent already in BCS conferences to get them to switch.

Hinting at Notre Dame?

Sniper
11-14-2007, 12:55 PM
Hinting at Notre Dame?

ND won't do it. They've got their precious contract with NBC.

RyanLeaf#1
11-14-2007, 12:58 PM
Notre Dame already plays 3 to 4 Big Ten teams a year. I dont think they should go to the Big Ten. I think a team like Boise State who has proven they can beat teams outside of their conference would really jump at the opportunity.

Turtlepower
11-14-2007, 01:37 PM
The Big Ten cannot add a team from a state not connected to a current Big Ten state. Therefore, Boise State and BYU cannot join. As for the best team to join, why not Iowa State? I've always felt Iowa and Iowa State should be in the same conference.

nrk
11-14-2007, 01:45 PM
The Big Ten cannot add a team from a state not connected to a current Big Ten state. Therefore, Boise State and BYU cannot join. As for the best team to join, why not Iowa State? I've always felt Iowa and Iowa State should be in the same conference.

There's no way the Big Ten is going to take a team from the Big 12.

Turtlepower
11-14-2007, 01:55 PM
There's no way the Big Ten is going to take a team from the Big 12.

You're probably right. I think the best bet fir the Big 10 is to suck it up and take a team from the MAC.

diabsoule
11-14-2007, 02:03 PM
You're probably right. I think the best bet fir the Big 10 is to suck it up and take a team from the MAC.

I agree that Iowa State and Iowa should be in the Big 10 together. The Big 12 could then add TCU. I have also wondered about the possiblity of adding Cincinnati from the Big East.

RyanLeaf#1
11-14-2007, 02:06 PM
I agree that Iowa State and Iowa should be in the Big 10 together. The Big 12 could then add TCU. I have also wondered about the possiblity of adding Cincinnati from the Big East.

Cincy just left CUSA to go to the Big East. They actually have a chance to compete in the Big East they arent going anywhere.

iowatreat54
11-14-2007, 02:21 PM
IMO if the Big Ten ever does add a 12th team they will not be from a current BCS Conference...most likely to be added is from the MAC

RyanLeaf#1
11-14-2007, 02:27 PM
IMO if the Big Ten ever does add a 12th team they will not be from a current BCS Conference...most likely to be added is from the MAC

Couldnt agree more.

diabsoule
11-14-2007, 02:32 PM
Couldnt agree more.

Which team from the MAC could the Big 10 possibly want? It doesn't expand recruiting or provide a new market for the Big 10 Network.

Scotty D
11-14-2007, 02:45 PM
Who from the MAC would be the best choice? Central Michigan?

RyanLeaf#1
11-14-2007, 02:45 PM
Which team from the MAC could the Big 10 possibly want? It doesn't expand recruiting or provide a new market for the Big 10 Network.

I dont know... Central Michigan maybe? I just dont see the Big 10 expanding at all, but if they do. They have to get a team like Boise or Utah. Is there a rule that a team cant be from the West?

diabsoule
11-14-2007, 02:47 PM
Who from the MAC would be the best choice? Central Michigan?

Central Michigan, Bowling Green, Akron, Toledo? Probably nobody in the MAC could possibly compete in the Big 10. I'm fairly sure the Big 10 would pull from the Big East and although a big more difficult to pull off, the Big 12.

I'd read a bunch of articles on the possible expansion of the Big 10 and that's the consensus is that they'd pull from either one of those two conferences, with the Big East being the most likely.

diabsoule
11-14-2007, 02:52 PM
I dont know... Central Michigan maybe? I just dont see the Big 10 expanding at all, but if they do. They have to get a team like Boise or Utah. Is there a rule that a team cant be from the West?

According to the commissioner of the Big 10 there is. Do a google search on Big 10 Expansion and you will read that Mike Delaney does not want to expand into a state that is not currently in or next to Big 10 country. He also wants to land a team that will be able to pull in a decent audience for the new Big 10 Network. That's why the supposed list consists of these teams:

1) Syracuse (upper New York expands the Big 10, offers new recruiting ground and pull in NY viewers).

2) Rutgers (expands recruiting grounds and possibly NY/NJ viewing audiences)

3) Missouri (expands recruiting grounds, and St. Louis viewing area)

I can provide links that show the pros and cons of each and every school that is a likely candidate.

The reason that is usually provided for the Big 10 wanting to raid the Big East for an additional team is because the ACC did it just a few years ago and the Big East did nothing to stop them. A con, though, for the Big 10 raiding the Big East and why it is considering the Big 12 is because if the Big East is raiding another time it might lead to the downfall of the conference by further diluting it's competitiveness.

nrk
11-14-2007, 03:25 PM
According to the commissioner of the Big 10 there is. Do a google search on Big 10 Expansion and you will read that Mike Delaney does not want to expand into a state that is not currently in or next to Big 10 country. He also wants to land a team that will be able to pull in a decent audience for the new Big 10 Network. That's why the supposed list consists of these teams:

1) Syracuse (upper New York expands the Big 10, offers new recruiting ground and pull in NY viewers).

2) Rutgers (expands recruiting grounds and possibly NY/NJ viewing audiences)

3) Missouri (expands recruiting grounds, and St. Louis viewing area)

I can provide links that show the pros and cons of each and every school that is a likely candidate.

The reason that is usually provided for the Big 10 wanting to raid the Big East for an additional team is because the ACC did it just a few years ago and the Big East did nothing to stop them. A con, though, for the Big 10 raiding the Big East and why it is considering the Big 12 is because if the Big East is raiding another time it might lead to the downfall of the conference by further diluting it's competitiveness.

Have these three teams even showed interest? I'll guarantee that Missouri will not leave. Pulling a team from the Big 12 is going to be almost impossible for the Big 10. Who cares about Iowa State, give them to Big 10 and we'll take TCU.

nfrillman
11-14-2007, 03:36 PM
Well first off I highly doubt that Missouri or Nebraska would leave the Big 12. I have mixed feelings as a Missouri fan about that because as I have mentioned before I think the Big 12 is better than the Big 10 so that would be an easier road for Missouri, but the Big 12 also just feels like home.

If a Big 12 school were to go I think Iowa St is the most likely. The Big 12 would then have to add a team to continue having a CC. Adding TCU doesn't make a lot of sense though because it doesn't expand the Big 12 territory, puts more teams in Texas, and they would need a new team for the North Division not the South. I think that Boise St and Colorado St would be the most likely. Preferably Boise St if they have the kahunas to join a real conference.

I do agree that any mid major conference team (besides Boise St) would have an extremely hard time competing in a major conference. That includes Hawaii too, I'm not sold that they would even compete this year with their best team ever. Waayyyyy too many close games against horrible teams.

eazyb81
11-14-2007, 04:06 PM
Missouri to the Big Ten is tough because half the state would probably love it and half the state would hate it. The St. Louis side sees a ton of Big Ten games, has a strong rivalry with Illinois, and generally has more of a Big Ten "feel".

Meanwhile, the Kansas City side is in the heart of traditional Big 8 country and would be pissed about losing the rivalry with Kansas, Nebraska, etc.

I could see a scenario where Missouri might leave because they are pissed about Texas having so much control of the current Big 12, but in all likelihood I see them staying put.

diabsoule
11-14-2007, 04:40 PM
If a Big 12 school were to go I think Iowa St is the most likely. The Big 12 would then have to add a team to continue having a CC. Adding TCU doesn't make a lot of sense though because it doesn't expand the Big 12 territory, puts more teams in Texas, and they would need a new team for the North Division not the South. I think that Boise St and Colorado St would be the most likely. Preferably Boise St if they have the kahunas to join a real conference.

I do agree that any mid major conference team (besides Boise St) would have an extremely hard time competing in a major conference. That includes Hawaii too, I'm not sold that they would even compete this year with their best team ever. Waayyyyy too many close games against horrible teams.

I could see Iowa St. leaving as well, however, looking from it from a Big 10 point of view what does the addition of Iowa St. add? Iowa is in the Big 10 so that adds an in-state rivalry that would count as a conference game but other than that it doesn't add much.

Boise St. would be a nice addition, however, their athletic program does not sponsor a baseball team which would be a hindrance if it was propositioned to join the Big 12. Colorado St. also presents a problem as it is a downgrade from having Iowa State in the conference as far as I'm concerned. A team to consider if Iowa State or Missouri were to leave the Big 12 would be BYU to join. They are usually very competitive in football, it would add another state to recruit from (Utah), and it would help maintain the balance in the Big 12 North.

RockJock07
11-14-2007, 07:01 PM
What about Kentucky? They might want to move because they have been getting killed year in and year out, this would bring a new dynamic to the Big Ten while still holding on to it's roots. Tubby T could also stick it to his old friends back in Rupp every season.

I don't know who the SEC would take to replace them, maybe Virgina or Clemson but it's just a thought.

diabsoule
11-14-2007, 07:33 PM
What about Kentucky? They might want to move because they have been getting killed year in and year out, this would bring a new dynamic to the Big Ten while still holding on to it's roots. Tubby T could also stick it to his old friends back in Rupp every season.

I don't know who the SEC would take to replace them, maybe Virgina or Clemson but it's just a thought.

There have been small rumors about Arkansas thinking about leaving the SEC for the Big 12 but I don't see why they would want to leave.

nfrillman
11-14-2007, 07:33 PM
Kentucky would be a nice option for the Big 10. I never even thought about taking a team from the SEC.

Boise St. not having a baseball team would present a problem, and they are also not geographically connected to the Big 12, though pretty close.

I'm looking at a US map right now and if the Big 12 did lose Missouri that would be a devestating loss because the conference would losing an entire state since that is the only major football program in Missouri.

Adding Iowa St. really wouldn't make much since from a Big 10 perspective, don't know why I didn't see that in the first place. But if their main goal is to get enough teams for a CC then they could accomplish that if nothing else.

As for taking a team from the Big East I think that is unlikely. They are already down to 8 teams, which I believe is the fringe of even being considered a conference.

In conclusion, I'm not sure who the best, possible addition to the Big 10 would be. I am still thinking Iowa St. even though it wouldn't add geographically to the conference. As a result of that I think the Big 12 would likely add Colorado St, or possibly TCU then shift Oklahoma St. to the North.

However it plays out, if indeed anything does happen, I think we can all agree in saying, "SCREW YOU CORNELL!!!! SCREW YOU!!!!"

nfrillman
11-14-2007, 07:35 PM
There have been small rumors about Arkansas thinking about leaving the SEC for the Big 12 but I don't see why they would want to leave.

To join an obviously superior conference of course.

Iamcanadian
11-14-2007, 08:04 PM
Central Michigan, Bowling Green, Akron, Toledo? Probably nobody in the MAC could possibly compete in the Big 10. I'm fairly sure the Big 10 would pull from the Big East and although a big more difficult to pull off, the Big 12.

I'd read a bunch of articles on the possible expansion of the Big 10 and that's the consensus is that they'd pull from either one of those two conferences, with the Big East being the most likely.


I agree that the Big East would be the likely target especially due to the east having a potentially huge TV market although Boston College could be of interest as well.

Iamcanadian
11-14-2007, 08:07 PM
There have been small rumors about Arkansas thinking about leaving the SEC for the Big 12 but I don't see why they would want to leave.

I could see Arkansas bolting the SEC for the Big 12 although you would have to wonder if the Big 12 could match SEC's TV revenue. Arkansas has no natural rivals in the SEC while Texas and Oklahoma would be natural rivals for the once proud program.

diabsoule
11-14-2007, 08:14 PM
One thing I thought of was if Missouri left then the Big 12 could go after BYU. It adds another state to the Big 12 after the loss of Missouri and BYU is traditionally pretty good.

I doubt Kentucky would leave the SEC. They were one of the founding members of the conference back in 1932. If Arkansas were to leave the SEC, I think then the SEC would go after either TCU, Georgia Tech, West Virginia, Louisville, Florida State, Miami, or Clemson.

I came up with a proposal for a way to make the Big East a little stronger than it is while not losing any members but it takes a little bit of luck and other things. The Big East would have to lure a team from C-USA (UCF in this case) as well as all three of the independents (Army, Navy, and ND) to join the conference. Army and Navy would be football only teams. The Big East would then have 12 teams and really solidify their BCS bid.

Iamcanadian
11-14-2007, 08:14 PM
According to the commissioner of the Big 10 there is. Do a google search on Big 10 Expansion and you will read that Mike Delaney does not want to expand into a state that is not currently in or next to Big 10 country. He also wants to land a team that will be able to pull in a decent audience for the new Big 10 Network. That's why the supposed list consists of these teams:

1) Syracuse (upper New York expands the Big 10, offers new recruiting ground and pull in NY viewers).

2) Rutgers (expands recruiting grounds and possibly NY/NJ viewing audiences)

3) Missouri (expands recruiting grounds, and St. Louis viewing area)

I can provide links that show the pros and cons of each and every school that is a likely candidate.

The reason that is usually provided for the Big 10 wanting to raid the Big East for an additional team is because the ACC did it just a few years ago and the Big East did nothing to stop them. A con, though, for the Big 10 raiding the Big East and why it is considering the Big 12 is because if the Big East is raiding another time it might lead to the downfall of the conference by further diluting it's competitiveness.

I agree that TV markets will decide who the Big 10 will approach. These 3 teams have real attractions but I doubt it's Rutgers unless they stay competitive for the next 5 years. They simply lack the tradition the Big 10 would be looking for although the NYC market would be attractive. Iowa St., Boise St,. Utah etc. have absolutely no chance at being approach. They offer zero TV markets and money talks in college football today.

diabsoule
11-14-2007, 08:16 PM
I agree that TV markets will decide who the Big 10 will approach. These 3 teams have real attractions but I doubt it's Rutgers unless they stay competitive for the next 5 years. They simply lack the tradition the Big 10 would be looking for although the NYC market would be attractive. Iowa St., Boise St,. Utah etc. have absolutely no chance at being approach. They offer zero TV markets and money talks in college football today.

Exactly. That's why I'm thinking Syracuse, Missouri, and to a lesser extent, Nebraska are the three teams the Big 10 is considering the most.

RyanLeaf#1
11-14-2007, 08:26 PM
I would be willing to bet money that Missouri or Nebraska dont leave the Big 12 and Syracuse, Rutgers or Pitt dont leave the Big East. Now I could see a team like West Virginia making the jump.

TigerBait45
11-14-2007, 08:34 PM
On another note..am I the only one that can see Troy becoming an SEC school eventually?

They're really building a solid program.

diabsoule
11-14-2007, 08:57 PM
On another note..am I the only one that can see Troy becoming an SEC school eventually?

They're really building a solid program.

I think it's possible but not until years down the road. I think if the SEC expands they would do so because another school left (i.e. - Arkansas). If Arkansas were to leave I have a feeling the SEC would try to lure in a big time school that could compete competitively in all sports (basketball, baseball) and not just football.

I don't know how recent this grid is but it is interesting nonetheless to look at and take in what is has to offer.

http://collegesportsinfo.com/conference-realignment-grid/

Turtlepower
11-14-2007, 09:45 PM
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/specials/collegefootball_front/votes/WOLF.html?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME

1 Oklahoma
2 LSU
3 West Virginia
4 Oregon
5 Missouri
6 Texas
7 Georgia
8 Kansas
9 Florida
10 Virginia Tech
11 Ohio St.
12 Arizona St.
13 Kentucky
14 Southern Cal
15 Boston College
16 Hawaii
17 Tennessee
18 Boise St.
19 Virginia
20 Illinois
21 Clemson
22 Michigan
23 Penn St.
24 Auburn
25 Wisconsin

Scott Wolf should never be an AP voter again...

Texas at #6, SERIOUSLY!!!!!

diabsoule
11-14-2007, 09:59 PM
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/specials/collegefootball_front/votes/WOLF.html?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME



Scott Wolf should never be an AP voter again...

Texas at #6, SERIOUSLY!!!!!

That poll is whack.

Turtlepower
11-15-2007, 12:06 AM
That poll is whack.

My favorite is that a 2 2-loss teams and a 3-loss team are ahead of two 1-loss teams in OSU and ASU (who only lost to arguably the best team in America).

Iamcanadian
11-15-2007, 10:14 AM
I would be willing to bet money that Missouri or Nebraska dont leave the Big 12 and Syracuse, Rutgers or Pitt dont leave the Big East. Now I could see a team like West Virginia making the jump.

There is no loyalty any longer in college football. Money talks that's why Miami, Virginia Tech and Boston College left the Big East and why Texas, Arkansas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech and Baylor left the SWC. College football is big business today with revenues over 100 million dollars for a major school and when you add in endowments generated by successful teams, the figures can approach a billion dollars over a few years. The long range prognosis for college football is based on TV markets and the Big 12 just doesn't have enough of them. Many teams would seriously consider a move to the Big 10 if they could generate more income. I can guarantee you that Syracuse, Pitt and Rutgers would jump in a minute if they got the offer.

RockJock07
11-16-2007, 12:05 AM
Goodbye Oregon, hello Oklahoma. What a season in college football, bowl season will be real interesting.