bullsfan75 said:
You're really painting yourself into a corner here, thomps. Let's see if you can fight your way out. First, let's look at Cal's OOC schedule in 2004:
@ Air Force
New Mexico State
@ Southern Miss
You may notice that these teams have something in common. What could it be? Oh, yes: NONE OF THEM ARE FROM A MAJOR CONFERENCE.
Yes, Cal is the only school in the country to do this.
Minnesota (Toledo, Illinois St, Colorado St)
Missouri (Arkie St, Ball St, Troy)
Baylor (Texas St- San Marcos, UAB, North Texas)
Texas Tech (New Mexico, SMU, TCU)
Kansas State (Western Kentucky, Fresno State, UL-Lafayette)
Auburn (Citadel, UL-Monroe, La-Tech)
Ole Miss (Memphis, Wyoming, Arkie St)
Should we expect to see threads from you berating these schools and their conferences?
bullsfan75 said:
The closest thing to a big-time program is Southern Miss. Of course, that's before lining up against the heavy hitters at Stanford, UCLA, Oregon State, Washington and the rest of the Pac-10 barnacles.
Like USC and Arizona State?
bullsfan75 said:
Funny indeed. Fresno and Hawaii will take on any team from any major conference in the nation. Last year Hawaii beat Michigan State and Northwestern, and Fresno walloped Kansas State and your mighty Washington Huskies. Meanwhile, Cal is polishing their image by playing tiddlywinks with service acadamies.
Yes, we should let Fresno in because they beat the worst Pac10 team and 4-win KState. Even with this Fresno and Hawaii played schedules that were worse than any Pac10 team, including Cal.
bullsfan75 said:
It's interesting that you're hiding behind SOS when the real issue is how poorly the Pac-10 performed against worthy foes. Take Oregon State, which had, statistically speaking, an elite SOS - possibly top-10 nationally -and was, by your composite computer rankings, the 23rd-best team in the nation. Sounds impressive, until you see that they got rolled by Boise State (another mid-major that would have thrived in the Pac-10) and just squeaked by New Mexico State.
First of all, Oregon State played New Mexico, not New Mexico State. New Mexico (the team Oregon State played) went 7-5 against a schedule that was much better than that of your darlings Hawaii and Fresno State.
This is funny. You bash Cal for playing a light OOC schedule, and then you turn around and mock OSU for struggling against their OOC schedule of @ LSU (ranked), vs. Boise State (ranked), and @ NM (bowl team). 85-90% of the country would've gone 1-2 or worse against that slate.
bullsfan75 said:
Oregon State's "big" wins? Pac-10 punching bags Washington, WSU, Stanford, Oregon and, in their bowl, a barely-conscious Notre Dame.
If Fresno State or Hawaii had beaten Tennessee and Michigan, you would have orgasmed. Yet Notre Dame is 'barely-conscious'.
Oregon State's losses were all to ranked teams (LSU, Boise, USC, Cal, and Arizona State).
bullsfan75 said:
You said that Auburn got screwed, and I'm pretty sure you meant they should've gotten USC's spot since you expected USC to lose.
Again, you'd be mistaken. I repeatedly wrote, on this board and on BN, that Auburn-USC was the most attractive bowl possible. After watching Cal get exposed (and yes, they did get exposed - badly), I thought, as did many others, that it did not bode well for USC in the OB. Obviously I, along with many other observers, was incorrect.
You really should get a medal for this spinjob. You though OU was going to beat USC, while at the same time you thought it shouldve been USC/AU? There are only 3 posts where you mention Auburn, and I only found one related to the BCS (in the thread you started entitled "Cal getting exposed"). Here is what you said in that post:
---------------------------------------------------------------------
<table class="tborder" id="post122361" align="center" border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="1" width="100%"> <tbody><tr><td class="thead">
12-31-2004, 09:03 AM <!-- / status icon and date -->
</td> </tr> <tr> <td class="alt2" style="padding: 0px;"> <!-- user info --> <table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="6" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td class="alt2">
</td> <td nowrap="nowrap">
bullsfan75 <script type="text/javascript"> vbmenu_register("postmenu_122361", true); </script>
Sophomore
</td> <!-- START POST AWARD --> <td align="left" valign="middle" width="50%">
</td> <!-- END POST AWARD --> <td align="right" valign="top" width="50%"><!-- [START HACK='Awards/Medals/Cards by AnimeWebby' AUTHOR='AnimeWebby' VERSION='2.0' CHANGEID= 2 ] --> <!--spacegirl--> <!--spacegirl--> <!-- [END HACK='Awards/Medals/Cards by AnimeWebby' AUTHOR='AnimeWebby' VERSION='2.0' CHANGEID= 2 ] -->
</td> <td nowrap="nowrap" valign="top"> Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 45 vCash: 500
<!-- -->
</td> </tr> </tbody></table> <!-- / user info --> </td> </tr> <tr> <td class="alt1"><!-- message, attachments, sig --><!-- message --> Cal defenders,
Good points all, but you're missing the major point here. Cal's big numbers and impressive offensive stats were put up against a pitiful conference and nonexistent OOC schedule.
Hawaii, Boise State and Utah aren't bad comparisons in this regard. They, and Cal, put up gaudy numbers all year long, but you wouldn't hear Timmy Chang's stats displayed the way Rodgers or Arrington's have been all year long, because everyone knows Hawaii plays in a mid-major. Well, guess what? This year the Pac-10 IS a mid-major.
As far as USC, they beat Iowa and Michigan fairly handily, but this USC team isn't the team that the 2002 and 2003 versions were. This year have a soft D and lost key playmakers, particularly Mike Williams, on O.
I wouldn't be ranting about this if I didn't hear the media's nonstop glorifying of these teams, but at this point they're fair game. It's clear now that Auburn got a royal screw-job by the BCS.
<!-- / message --> <!-- sig --> __________________
Plaque is a figment of the liberal media and the dental industry to scare you into buying useless appliances and pastes. Now, I've heard the arguments on both sides, and there is nothing to convince me of the need to brush your teeth.
- Master Shake
<!-- / sig -->
<!-- controls -->
</td></tr></tbody> </table> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Let's see, you rant and rant about Cal, USC, and the Pac10. You then mention that "It's clear now that Auburn got a royal screw-job by the BCS". But you expect us to believe that you meant that Auburn should've been playing USC? Once again, your exact quote:
I wouldn't be ranting about this if I didn't hear the media's nonstop glorifying of these teams, but at this point they're fair game. It's clear now that Auburn got a royal screw-job by the BCS.
You say that in a thread specifically about the Pac10, but you expect us to believe that you felt USC's spot was justified?