2007 College Football Schedule for Week No. 14 (12/1/07)

[FLAK]

Now if there were only more UF's out there (I just threw up in my mouth)

You got what you deserved, Stryker.

[Beta]

Now who's scheduling cupcakes? What's good for the goose has to be good for the gander.

Apples to oranges. Every team is going to have some cupcakes. But having 5-6 ranked teams, then 1-2 cupcakes is marginally different than 12 cupcakes and not a single good opponent.

You excuse teams from major conferences for scheduling I-AA teams and the like because their conference schedule is sooooo tough but then condemn the little guy because they can't get a major conference team to play them. And yes, the argument that the power teams are scared does hold water...it has been evident in college basketball, where the stakes are not nearly as high, for years.

As I said, LSU having 7 ranked opponents this year, or Florida having 4 is not even comparable to a team that doesn't play anyone hard, all year, until the undeserved bowl game. The "little guys" get scheduled as cupcakes (like Ball State, Northern Illinois, etc)...but Hawaii got overlooked? Is it an anti-Hawaii conspiracy? Formulated by the likes of the SEC, ACC, Big 10, Big 12 and Ball State?

How about the mid-major conference start making (real) noise about having a playoff system? I mean, they want their chance to play ranked teams week after week....I'd love to watch that.

[Danny Hogan]

kudos to UF for scheduling the game, that UH is employing the "any game any time" mentality that will hopefully earn them some respect. Now if there were only more UF's out there

just wanted to document that in case stryker break's his "no edit" policy.

[Zeuslax]

The argument about a playoff because the fans and media want it doesn't seem 100% valid to me. There's always more to consider. A ton of coaches have come out against it (maybe more than those advocating for it from what I've seen) and so have many of the players. The season would be expanded, which a lot of schools and people aren't crazy about from an academic standpoint. Yes, I know that many continue through the length of time needed for a playoff, but it's not the same as if you're preparing for one bowl game.

The BCS defenders always cry about the lower teams losing a bowl game or the lower bowls would lose money and interest, (Like we cared about Indiana vs. Maryland anyways... sorry IU and Terp fans just an example)

I swear I'm not responding to this because I'm a Terps fan! This argument is 100% true. It's just simple math. Large schools like Purdue, Maryland, and Indiana have a very large alumni base and national followings. They pull in larger TV audiences (in comparison) and these schools often travel very well.

[StrykerFSU]

Is it an anti-Hawaii conspiracy? Formulated by the likes of the SEC, ACC, Big 10, Big 12 and Ball State?

Nope, just a fear of playing a team that actually might beat them though it blew up in Michigan's face. Look at it this way, all of the major schools pad their schedules with patsies because a bad loss is death to a season. In college basketball, where there is also fear of up and coming mid-majors, there is far less of a penalty for a big time team that loses but they are still incredibly reluctant. For example, let's say Duke hosts Southern Illinois in December and loses. It's not the end of the world because there is still the entire ACC regular season and the ACC Tournament to redeem themselves in the eyes of the selection (or BCS) committee. In football you are one and done in this scenario so why on earth would Michigan play Colt Brennan and Hawaii when they can play App. State? They knew that UH was coming off an 11-3 year, a bowl win over Az. State, and was returning a Heisman candidate...and they were scared they might lose or at least not get the blowout win they wanted.

So it's still just a question of the UH AD picking up the phone and calling up Baton Rouge to get a game?

How about the mid-major conference start making (real) noise about having a playoff system?

Not sure what you would consider "real noise" but since the power to install a playoff system is with the presidents of the BCS schools and the advertisers I don't think that teams in the WAC or MAC have a prayer of forcing a change.

PS: I had to go off-campus to post this because Big Brother Bobby denied me access to the network after my previous comments about that school in Gainesville.

[Beta]

Good points Stryker. There's a lot of behind the scenes stuff that goes on that not a lot of people (incl. players, fans) have a say in. I think it all boils down to the fact that football has a TON of diehard fans and everyone wants the best product possible.

I vote playoff.

Any team that could win 4 games in a row against the Top 16 would be undisputed.

ESPN released their bowl predictions...assuming their regular season predictions come true.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?page=bowlprojections13

[Dan Wishengrad]

I vote playoff.

Any team that could win 4 games in a row against the Top 16 would be undisputed.

And on this we agree completely, Joe. AND it would be more fun than a barrel of monkeys to watch!

Re: the ESPN predictions, there's still some regular season football left to play first, and I'll go on the record with the following prediction which could prevent one intriguing BCS projected matchup between LSU and UH:

Washington upsets Hawai'i in Honolulu.

The Huskies have been underacheivers all season long, never quite putting together sixty full minutes of consistent football, despite playing well at times even against Ohio State, Oregon and USC, among others. This game could be an absolute offensive explosion, both teams could scoring 50 without even overtime periods to add to the total. And I just have this weird feeling that the Dawgs will finally put together a good 4th quarter in the hopes of saving Ty's job for at least one more season. It will be a huge mistake, in my eyes, for U-Dub to fire a class act like Willingham based solely on wins and losses. But the drum-beat from disillusioned alums is growing louder every day, and a 4-9 season may doom poor Ty no matter how much integrity the man possesses.

[TheBearcatHimself]

I said that perhaps Hawaii could try to get into the PAC-10 with Boise, then the PAC-10 could get a championship game.

The Pac-10 has long needed to add two more teams and several years ago a proposal went forward to add BYU and Colorado. However this made no sense adding two teams from two different conferences and was quickly rejected and forgotten.

Sadly no proposal was ever put forth to add BYU and Utah which would make the most since for all schools and conferences involved for several reasons:

1) The Pac-10 would be gaining 12 teams thus gaining a championship game and the two 6 team division format that allows other conferences (ahem SEC) to claim hegemonic superiority.

2) It only decimates one conference, Mountain West, which already gets no respect, but they can then add Boise and Hawaii and then Hawaii doesn't have this weak schedule issue and the WAC disappears like it should.

3) The Pac-10 would be adding a natural 6th rivalry and traveling partner that is still in the Pacific region (this of course includes the Pac-10's liberal definition of Pacific pertaining to Arizona )

4) The two teams they would be adding would have rich football traditions that extend further back than 2003 like Hawaii and Boise's. They also do not take hundreds of academic non-qualifiers like Boise and Fresno St. so they bring an instant credibility to the Pac-10.

This is the best solution to many problems with the conference system on the west coast but sadly it may never happen and despite BYU and Utah's rich athletic traditions they will be mired in mediocrity in the intermountin west.

[Sonny]

The Pac-10 would be gaining 12 teams thus gaining a championship game ...... (snip)

It's great to speculate about this stuff on message boards. But the real question to be asked is would the additional revenue created by the addition of a Pac-10 Conference Championship game be greater then the amount required to "feed" two more conference members.

In the case of BYU & Utah, does adding the primary media market of Salt Lake City (# 35 in the rankings per Wikipedia) add more overall dollars per conference member when you divide by 12 (not 10 as it is right now).

The Pac-10 could probably care less about the Mtn West or any other team or conferences. It's about $$$$.

[Sonny]

Briles goes from U of Houston to Baylor.....

FORT WORTH, Texas -- Houston coach Art Briles is next to take on the task of pulling Baylor out of the Big 12 basement.

Briles confirmed he was leaving in a news conference Wednesday at Houston after meeting with his players.

Baylor spokesman Nick Joos said a news conference was scheduled later in the day on the Waco campus to announce the school's new football coach.

Briles led Houston to four bowls in his five seasons. He was offered the job Wednesday, a day after meeting with Baylor athletic director Ian McCaw in Dallas.

"Life is full of decisions. Sometimes, you have to look at things from a professional, personal standpoint," Briles said. "Professionally, [Houston] ... is great university with a situation I'm proud to be a part of. Personally, the move allows a person of my nature a little more security. When you're getting up in my age, that's an important factor in life."

The Houston Chronicle reported on its Web site that Briles will get a seven-year contract for about $1.8 million per season. Briles, who turns 52 Monday, had four years left on his Houston contract with a base salary of $900,000 annually.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=3131738

[swampthing]

Now if there were only more UF's out there (I just threw up in my mouth)

... no one would ever pass Organic Chemistry 2. D*** you Dr. S!!!

[FLAK]

Briles goes from U of Houston to Baylor.....

Is that a promotion?

[StrykerFSU]

From John Feinstein's column:

Everyone now knows that if Missouri beats Oklahoma on Saturday and West Virginia beats Pittsburgh that they will play for the national championship on January 7th in New Orleans. Okay, fine. It still says here that any system that allows a team to go undefeated (Boise State last year; Hawaii, at the moment, this year) and not have a chance to play for a championship, it should be blown up. Plus, it really gets old hearing the network apologists for the BCS conferences shrugging off Hawaii as having not beaten anybody. One of those apologists was heard to say last weekend in a dismissing, condescending tone, "Please don't tell me Hawaii belongs in the top twenty-five."

Question: how does he know where Hawaii belongs? None of his -- or his network's -- beloved power teams will play Hawaii or Boise State in the regular season. How'd Boise State do against Oklahoma in the Fiesta Bowl last January? Hawaii might be a fraud or it might be George Mason. The problem is, under the current system, we'll never know.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/27/AR2007112701050_2.html

[Sonny]

Apply for the Michigan job here

[Beta]

John Feinstein is a frigging moron when it comes to rankings. Does he even watch football? Or know anything about college football in general?

So why is Ohio State automatically better than Kansas? Because it lost sooner than Kansas?

Yes that's one reason, losing at the beginning of the season is better than losing at the end. Since, you can keep winning and move up. But losing at the end means that you have less time (if any) to make up for it.

Because the BCS poll says so?

Yes, we are currently and unfortunately using the BCS system. But look at the Coaches Poll, the AP, US today, hell...even the ESPNU poll says that Kansas shouldn't be up there. But what would the college coaches know? It's not like they actually play those teams...oh wait...they do. Weird! Unless you're Hawaii...then you play no one.

Why is Ohio State's 11-1 better than Kansas's 11-1?

So besides the COLLEGE FOOTBALL COACHES THAT AGREE and the fact that Ohio State lost earlier in the season...in addition, here are a few lil' tidbits o' fun, the CBS strength of schedule rankings:

Florida 3
Illinois 6
Georgia 9
VaTech 11
Missouri 13
Auburn 20
Clemson 22
BC 25
LSU 27
West Va 29
Tennessee 30
Ohio State 43
Cincinnati 45
Arizona State 47
Wisconsin 50
Brigham Young 53
Oklahoma 59
Arkansas 60
Texas 67
Virginia 71
USC 74
Kansas 75
Boise State 111
Hawaii 119
Memphis 120 (dead last)

And the fact that Ohio State has played twice as many ranked teams as Kansas has. Ohio State played 8 of the 10 other Big Ten teams (did not play Iowa and Indiana). Kansas played all of the Big 12 BAD North Teams, and the bottom 3 Big 12 South teams but left off Oklahoma, Texas and Texas Tech (1,2,3 in Big 12 South respectively).

What's so hard for people to understand that when you have 2 teams that don't play each other with the same, or similar records is that the most important criteria is how good their opponents are. For example, if I go undefeated against the BCS ranked 2-12 teams in a 10 week stretch...that should hold more water than going 10-0 against high school teams.

There are too many bowls and too many 6-6 teams getting there by playing lousy non-conference schedules.

Why play a hard non-conference (2-3 games) schedule when you play 6+ top 20 teams in your conference schedule? So that you can have more losses and teams that don't play a single ranked team all year can get a BCS game? Sounds awesome, sign me up.

::cue the 1:1000 Boise State hook and ladder over a bad Oklahoma team in the fiesta bowl last year, comments::