Two great RBs,McFadden and Jones were on display

[GreenCard]

and what did we get? Some little water bug from Missouri soaking up all the limelight. What a night Temple had.

 

[NightHawk11and81]

That was the best I've seen Temple or our defense play all year.

 

[BigRedMO]

That was the best I've seen Temple or our defense play all year.

When a guy gets 282 yards rushing it can go unstated that is the best a guy looked all year. Temple is a very good back. I saw projections of rounds 2-3 I think. However, I hope the Cards dont waste a high pick on ANY RB. We dont need one. James rushed for 1200+. We have real needs and if filled would likely put us over the top. I liked Mizzou's defense againt Nebraska too.

Note: Request to others. Some of us only follow certain college conferences. I know nothing about PAC10. It would be helpful when touting someone if you would say their school and position.

 

[cardsfanmd]

and what did we get? Some little water bug from Missouri soaking up all the limelight. What a night Temple had.

Karma owed that to Petrino.

 

[NightHawk11and81]

When a guy gets 282 yards rushing it can go unstated that is the best a guy looked all year. Temple is a very good back. I saw projections of rounds 2-3 I think. However, I hope the Cards dont waste a high pick on ANY RB. We dont need one. James rushed for 1200+. We have real needs and if filled would likely put us over the top. I liked Mizzou's defense againt Nebraska too.

Note: Request to others. Some of us only follow certain college conferences. I know nothing about PAC10. It would be helpful when touting someone if you would say their school and position.

The defense was fine against the Huskers, but as we found out, Nebraska wasn't very good. I thought our best regular season performance from the defense was holding Texas Tech to 10 points.

 

[Shogun]

Tony Temple has been a big disappointment IMO, but that maybe because I've followed him since HS. I think that if he works out well he can be a 5th-7th round pick. He can be a decent COP guy, but he's not a world beater by any means.

 

[GreenCard]

He was a world beater on that one very important day. Some day his kids,grandkids and their kids will watch him play that game.

 

[BigRedMO]

He was a world beater on that one very important day. Some day his kids,grandkids and their kids will watch him play that game.

I saw a magazine that projected him as a 2nd or 3rd round pick. I liked what I saw from him this year. However, I did not follow him since HS but we will see.

I only saw a little of Arkansas against LSU and only other time I saw them was in Cotton Bowl. After seeing Cotton Bowl it really makes me wonder about quality of LSU. Ohio State losing at home late in year against Illinois makes me question their quality too. I think BCS this year is a joke.

BCS should be revamped to disqualify any team from BCS championship game that loses at home to an unranked opponent and to require a team to beat at least 2 teams that were ranked at the time they won to qualify for BCS championship game. That would encourage teams to schedule harder non-conference opponents. Currently most nonconference games are little more than exhibition games against patsies. At the very least college football fans might see a few more interesting games a year from their team.

 

[NightHawk11and81]

I saw a magazine that projected him as a 2nd or 3rd round pick. I liked what I saw from him this year. However, I did not follow him since HS but we will see.

I only saw a little of Arkansas against LSU and only other time I saw them was in Cotton Bowl. After seeing Cotton Bowl it really makes me wonder about quality of LSU. Ohio State losing at home late in year against Illinois makes me question their quality too. I think BCS this year is a joke.

BCS should be revamped to disqualify any team from BCS championship game that loses at home to an unranked opponent and to require a team to beat at least 2 teams that were ranked at the time they won to qualify for BCS championship game. That would encourage teams to schedule harder non-conference opponents. Currently most nonconference games are little more than exhibition games against patsies. At the very least college football fans might see a few more interesting games a year from their team.

That would be way too hard to implement, plus you wouldn't have enough teams eligible. Plus, upsets happen. It's already bad enough, and I think this would create more problems than it would solve. I'd be happy if they could tighten the rules for non-BCS conference schools. Hawaii had no business in the Sugar.

 

[BigRedMO]

That would be way too hard to implement, plus you wouldn't have enough teams eligible. Plus, upsets happen. It's already bad enough, and I think this would create more problems than it would solve. I'd be happy if they could tighten the rules for non-BCS conference schools. Hawaii had no business in the Sugar.

Ohio State and LSU have no business being in BCS. If you cant defend your home turf against unranked opponents late in the season then you have no right to be playing for a national championship. You only need two schools for a championship game so I think it would work. It is no more complicated then it already is and eliminates the inconsistent pretenders who schedule cup cakes.

Currently, they already count wins to reach 6 needed to qualify for bowl so just add a count that says beat 2 ranked teams that were ranked at time of wins. Same process to track losses to unranked teams at home. Seems easy.

The advertisers want a big ten, sec love fest every year. I have absolute no interest in "championship" game this year and advertisers will not have me watching their ads.

 

[Stout]

Ohio State and LSU have no business being in BCS. If you cant defend your home turf against unranked opponents late in the season then you have no right to be playing for a national championship. You only need two schools for a championship game so I think it would work. It is no more complicated then it already is and eliminates the inconsistent pretenders who schedule cup cakes.

Currently, they already count wins to reach 6 needed to qualify for bowl so just add a count that says beat 2 ranked teams that were ranked at time of wins. Same process to track losses to unranked teams at home. Seems easy.

The advertisers want a big ten, sec love fest every year. I have absolute no interest in "championship" game this year and advertisers will not have me watching their ads.

The problem this season is, who would you put in the game?

 

[BigRedMO]

By my system Oklahoma, Missouri, Virgina Tech and West Virgina would qualify. I am not sure about Georgia. They lost at home to South Carolina. At time I think South Carolina was ranked. If so they would make it. Those are the only schools that I thought might qualify and researched. If anybody else interested would love to know if any other schools would qualify (win 2 games against teams ranked at the time and no home losses to teams unranked at the time). My research would indicate Oklahoma vs VA Tech based on BCS and my modifications.

 

[NightHawk11and81]

Ohio State and LSU have no business being in BCS. If you cant defend your home turf against unranked opponents late in the season then you have no right to be playing for a national championship. You only need two schools for a championship game so I think it would work. It is no more complicated then it already is and eliminates the inconsistent pretenders who schedule cup cakes.

Currently, they already count wins to reach 6 needed to qualify for bowl so just add a count that says beat 2 ranked teams that were ranked at time of wins. Same process to track losses to unranked teams at home. Seems easy.

The advertisers want a big ten, sec love fest every year. I have absolute no interest in "championship" game this year and advertisers will not have me watching their ads.

Actually, it would probably create more problems than you think, and here's why:

First, these games are scheduled years in advance. For example, in 2015, Nebraska and Tennessee will start a home-and-home series. When the teams signed the deal, it was expected to be a good series. One or both of those teams might suck in 2015. What is the other team to do? It's poor form to buy out a game because an opponent is no longer who you thought it would be. That's why Oklahoma and Texas A&M played Miami, they expected it to be a good test.

Second, this would likely eliminate altogether games between teams from different BCS conferences. Those games are played early in the year, before anyone knows anything about the teams. Suppose West Virginia, ranked No. 4 in preseason, plays its second game of the year at home against Mississippi State, who has already lost its opener at Auburn and is unranked. Mississippi State surprises West Virginia 24-23, knocking the Mountaineers to No. 8.

Mississippi State then wins 9 of its next 10 games to finish 10-2, then caps it with a win in the SEC title game to reach No. 7 overall. Meanwhile in Morgantown, the Mountaineers have steamrolled the Big East, which includes No. 13 Rutgers and then-No. 18 South Florida, who has since dropped four straight to miss a bowl. But as a reward for going 11-1, WVU, playing as well as anyone in the country, is the season-ending No. 1. Their only loss is to that Mississippi State team, unranked when they played in September but now No. 7 in the nation and SEC champion. Yet that loss keeps the Mountaineers out of the national title game because nobody thought the Bulldogs would be that good before the season.

To prevent that penalty, teams will stop scheduling middle-of-the-road BCS teams and just schedule teams who have no prayer to beat them. Nobody wins.

It's a good idea in theory, but in practice, it just doesn't work. If we aren't going to a playoff, it's a decent way to select the teams. Excluding a team for one bad loss does not work.

 

[BigRedMO]

One of the great things about the NFL is that there is centralized scheduling based on results. Each team does not schedule its opponents years in advance. College football should change their scheduling system so that it is not done so far in advance( 2-3 years max) with flexibility allowed for schedule changes prior to start of a season. Only reason it is done that way is because it has always been done that way. If the non-conference schedule actually mattered in determining national champions it would not be done so far in advance and would be done more carefully. Right now scheduling is important in determing national champions anyway because teams make sure to schedule cup cakes so they wont be challenged before the conference schedule. This would stop that.

Ohio State and LSU losing at home late to unranked schools and now playing in "natl championship" is so bush league. This will really result in an accidental and undeserving "champion".

 

[Stout]

By my system Oklahoma, Missouri, Virgina Tech and West Virgina would qualify. I am not sure about Georgia. They lost at home to South Carolina. At time I think South Carolina was ranked. If so they would make it. Those are the only schools that I thought might qualify and researched. If anybody else interested would love to know if any other schools would qualify (win 2 games against teams ranked at the time and no home losses to teams unranked at the time). My research would indicate Oklahoma vs VA Tech based on BCS and my modifications.

Well, Oklahoma, VA Tech, and WVU all had 2 loses and won their conference, just like LSU, so the same argument can be made for each of them. You can cut and slice evidence and stats until the cows come home, but when you're wrangling about 2-loss teams, it's bad.

Ohio State won a major conference and only lost one game. You CANNOT leave them out and let a 2-loss team in. That's a no-brainer. Then look at Hawaii. Sure, they had a weak schedule. Sure, they won a small conference. Sure, they got killed in their BCS game. They still deserved to be in the title game.

We've built a system that eliminates about half of the schools from contention before they've even played a single game. It's wrong. Without a playoff, most schools will never, ever have a chance to win the title. Without a playoff, we'll always argue about woulda, coulda, shouldas, because some team made it and another didn't. Let's be realistic: the only way to fix the system is with a playoff.

 

[BullheadCardFan]

Ohio State and USC have agreed to play home and home non conference games starting next year .. that should help their strength of schedule ...

 

[BigRedMO]

Thanks Stout for the critique of my plan. I was tired in my wordy response. Thank you for bring up valid weakness. If I could sum up the point you made though I would say every game should matter. If you win or lose early or late it should not be discounted. It seems the way it is now it is just a carousel that whoever is at the top when it stops spinning is in the game. If Big Ten had played conference championship maybe Ohio St would not be there now. I just dont like the carousel effect. Lastly scheduling should matter. Schools that get it right should be rewarded.

Playoff would be best way to go. Until NCAA and the Bowls think they can make more money with a playoff system it wont happen though. Very sad, That they resist what the fans want in the name of money. Be nice to see a boycott or some other kind of protest that hurts them where it counts. I am doing my own personal boycott tonight out of lack of interest.

Bull head that is good info that does help both teams and the BCS.

 

[BigRedMO]

Well, Oklahoma, VA Tech, and WVU all had 2 loses and won their conference, just like LSU, so the same argument can be made for each of them. You can cut and slice evidence and stats until the cows come home, but when you're wrangling about 2-loss teams, it's bad.

Ohio State won a major conference and only lost one game. You CANNOT leave them out and let a 2-loss team in. That's a no-brainer. Then look at Hawaii. Sure, they had a weak schedule. Sure, they won a small conference. Sure, they got killed in their BCS game. They still deserved to be in the title game.

We've built a system that eliminates about half of the schools from contention before they've even played a single game. It's wrong. Without a playoff, most schools will never, ever have a chance to win the title. Without a playoff, we'll always argue about woulda, coulda, shouldas, because some team made it and another didn't. Let's be realistic: the only way to fix the system is with a playoff.

I think it has to be more than just number of wins and losses. Hawaii getting in kept out Missouri which played a harder schedule and deserved it more. To my knowledge HI never beat a ranked team. HI needs to come to the mainland and play ranked teams if they want to contend for a natl championship. Ohio State lost to an unranked team at home late in the year with it all on the line. They did not have to pay a conference championship. I am curious how many ranked teams Ohio State beat? Oklahoma and VA Tech did not lose at home to a nobody. Going on the road and winning is tougher than winning at home.

But we all know the real reason Ohio State and LSU is in. It comes down to money. The advertisers think the east coast wants Big Ten and SEC. In professional sports they bitch if midwest teams make championships because of ratings. Since that is the way they feel they should just say winner of Big Ten plays winner of SEC every year for natl championship. That is more honest and that is what they want.

 

[Stout]

I think it has to be more than just number of wins and losses. Hawaii getting in kept out Missouri which played a harder schedule and deserved it more. To my knowledge HI never beat a ranked team. HI needs to come to the mainland and play ranked teams if they want to contend for a natl championship. Ohio State lost to an unranked team at home late in the year with it all on the line. They did not have to pay a conference championship. I am curious how many ranked teams Ohio State beat? Oklahoma and VA Tech did not lose at home to a nobody. Going on the road and winning is tougher than winning at home.

But we all know the real reason Ohio State and LSU is in. It comes down to money. The advertisers think the east coast wants Big Ten and SEC. In professional sports they bitch if midwest teams make championships because of ratings. Since that is the way they feel they should just say winner of Big Ten plays winner of SEC every year for natl championship. That is more honest and that is what they want.

Illinois wasn't a nobody. I'm not sure if they were ranked at the time, but at one time this season they were highly ranked and beat some quality teams. LIke it or not, no conference championship or not, Ohio State only lost one game and won one of the top onferences. Nobody can really make a valid argument excluding them.

And if you don't even want Hawaii in a BCS game, you're not only telling half of the NCAA teams they don't have a shot at the title, you're telling them they don't even have a chance to play in a big bowl game. I believe Hawaii has tried to play bigger teams. The problem is that teams don't want to play them--they're worried about that insane Hawaii offense.

 

[NightHawk11and81]

One of the great things about the NFL is that there is centralized scheduling based on results. Each team does not schedule its opponents years in advance. College football should change their scheduling system so that it is not done so far in advance( 2-3 years max) with flexibility allowed for schedule changes prior to start of a season. Only reason it is done that way is because it has always been done that way. If the non-conference schedule actually mattered in determining national champions it would not be done so far in advance and would be done more carefully. Right now scheduling is important in determing national champions anyway because teams make sure to schedule cup cakes so they wont be challenged before the conference schedule. This would stop that.

Ohio State and LSU losing at home late to unranked schools and now playing in "natl championship" is so bush league. This will really result in an accidental and undeserving "champion".

Again, no, it wouldn't stop that. What it would do is stop teams from scheduling difficult opponents altogether, as well as kill the mid-majors even more. Right now, some teams are willing to schedule mid-majors to play a home-and-home with mid-majors. Examples are Kansas and Iowa State agreeing to play at Toledo, and Missouri and Oregon willing to play at Wyoming. If you force this on the schools, you'll see the big schools start refusing to play these games. What will happen is it'll be like basketball, a mid-major will have to take a one-way to even be given a chance.

Plus, moving up in the rankings at a downtrodden BCS program will be made all the more difficult. Say you're Michigan State, a decent team that wins about 6-7 games a year and is never ranked. You want a good test for your young team, who you feel is ready to step up in the Big Ten, so you call Georgia and offer a home-and-home series. You even agree to begin the series in Athens when it starts, and you're in a good mood, thinking you're going to get a shot to face a quality SEC team.

Then Georgia calls back and says, "We don't want to play you, because you're an unranked team that could be good this year. As you know, under this new system, any loss to an unranked team at home automatically eliminates you from the national championship picture. That's not a chance we're going to take with you, so we're going to schedule Georgia Southern instead because there's no chance they can end our title dreams." How does that make any sense? How does that help the game?

Now, on to the Illinois argument: No, they weren't ranked at the time, but the Illini ended up 13th at the end of the year and made the Rose Bowl. How is Ohio State penalized for that loss? Personally, I think the Buckeyes are only about the sixth or seventh best team in the nation, but you can't exclude OSU based on a loss to a team that played in the Rose Bowl!

That would be equivalent to saying that a loss to 7-6 Cal in September is better than a loss to 12-1 Kansas in September because the Bears were in the Top 10 at the time, while the Jayhawks were unranked. That's just crazy.

A playoff would solve all of the problems. This idea would create new ones to go with the current ones.

 

[BigRedMO]

We all know that everythijng is personal no matter if we deny it. I did not give much thought about BCS till Mizzou got f**ked. It pisses me off that Mizzou beats Illinois, Kansas, Texas Tech. All bowl teams and ranked at one time or another. They beat A&M not sure if they were ranked. They won at CU after Oklahoma lost there. They do all this. They schedule the hard teams and they get f**cked for their effort. Why reward the easy schedulers and punish the hard schedulers? Mizzou played two top ten schools in back to back weeks in last two weeks of season and beat #3. Mizzou brings back lots of veterans this year but they are f**ked again before the season even begins. They play KU (likely ranked highly again next year) and if like this year will play another top ten team for Big12 championship that next week. They have to maintain that high entensity and quality of play late in the year while other teams coast.

Tell me about Ohio States best victory. Mizzou's was against undefeated #3 KU on neutral site. KU's only lost.

As for the big boys scheduling mid majors. You can call it that if you want I call it scheduling automatic wins. I have no interest in seeing Mizzou pummel Toledo.

 

[Skkorpion]

Well, BigRedmo, your disgustingly vile explosion violates the rules of the board but the mods have been told to back off bannings. If I was still a mod, you'd certainly be gone from ASFN for a while.

Please show enough grace and respect for other posters and go back and edit your post, removing the f-bombs.

Thank you. Also, we have an increasingly active group of college boards and your bitter Mizzou rants would be more appropriately placed there.

 

[NightHawk11and81]

We all know that everythijng is personal no matter if we deny it. I did not give much thought about BCS till Mizzou got f**ked. It pisses me off that Mizzou beats Illinois, Kansas, Texas Tech. All bowl teams and ranked at one time or another. They beat A&M not sure if they were ranked. They won at CU after Oklahoma lost there. They do all this. They schedule the hard teams and they get f**cked for their effort. Why reward the easy schedulers and punish the hard schedulers? Mizzou played two top ten schools in back to back weeks in last two weeks of season and beat #3. Mizzou brings back lots of veterans this year but they are f**ked again before the season even begins. They play KU (likely ranked highly again next year) and if like this year will play another top ten team for Big12 championship that next week. They have to maintain that high entensity and quality of play late in the year while other teams coast.

Tell me about Ohio States best victory. Mizzou's was against undefeated #3 KU on neutral site. KU's only lost.

As for the big boys scheduling mid majors. You can call it that if you want I call it scheduling automatic wins. I have no interest in seeing Mizzou pummel Toledo.

No, they aren't. I'm a Missouri student, and I've followed this team all season long. Missouri had their chances to get to the title game. They were set up perfectly, all they had to do was beat Oklahoma. The Tigers didn't do it. They have nobody to blame but themselves for their inability to reach the national title game.

By the way, since we're talking about rewarding the easy schedulers and punishing the hard schedulers, as much as I hate Ohio State, the Buckeyes are far more willing to take chances with their schedule than the Tigers are. Missouri turned down a home-and-home deal with Georgia, because the school's athletic department only wants to play one BCS team a year, and that is Illinois. Ohio State recently played Texas, and will start playing USC next year. In 2010, the Buckeyes will welcome Miami-Florida to Columbus. By contrast, our toughest game in the non-conference schedule will continue to be Illinois for all of those years. The hardest team we scheduled this year was again, Illinois.

In conference play, the Buckeyes defeated Penn State, Purdue and Michigan, all ranked teams when they met on the field. Missouri also defeated three teams, as you said, who were ranked when we played them.

Ohio State did not play a great schedule, but to say that Missouri did at the same time is a biased and inaccurate opinion. Neither team deserves to be in the national title game. It should probably be USC and Georgia, but we're stuck with this.