Thanks

Mattius · Post by **Mattius** » Tue Sep 19, 2006 9:57 am

THere really isnt any games coming up this weekend that screams this could be an upset. The only possiblity would be the OSU Penn St. game, but thats played in "The Horseshoe" so I dont think it will even be close. (Sorry PSU fans)

Louisville is done. Brahm out 2 to 4 weeks. If I am not mistaken the WVU game is in Morgantown this year and thats not the easiest places to play.

USC 2 losses minimum. No need to worry bout them on the outside looking in. They will lose to Cal, and either UCLA or ND. Both these are huge rivalries and I dont see this USC team being able to win both, especially in back to back weekends.

Look for Auburn to go undefeated in the SEC. There really isnt anyone left to stop them. The top 2 teams are both in the western half of the conference and they played last weekend so the stage is set. Florida and UT are just marginal teams this year. I have never like Leak as QB he doesnt seem to have any touch on the ball, and Phillip Fulmer is an ass and players are starting to realize it and not go to UT.

I think Auburn is an almost lock to get there, OSU will probably lose to Michigan in the last weekend and will knock them out of that last spot even with that being their only loss. But if I had to pick it right now they are the second team in.

Sheymalra · Post by **Sheymalra** » Tue Sep 19, 2006 11:33 am

USC 2 losses minimum. No need to worry bout them on the outside looking in. They will lose to Cal, and either UCLA or ND. Both these are huge rivalries and I dont see this USC team being able to win both, especially in back to back weekends.

I will take that bet. PM me, let's wager -- Fucla is crap. Simply stated. When they beat Utah on the arn of their new QB sensation Ben Olson, they had the audacity to proclaim him "Touchdown Jesus" and the "second coming of Matt Leinart!" Wtf? So what did he do the next week against Rice? Came out and got spanked -- he was awkwark in the pocket, threw INTs, was flustered, etc., but their spin was that the running game improved

I think they won by 10 and Rice kept it close for the 3.5 quarters -- We are talking about RICE! Yes it is our cross-town rivalry, but they are not even in USC's league anymore, honestly. Except for a close game two seasons ago at the Rose Bowl, USC has won the last 7 in EXTREMELY convincing style (after losing the 8 before that) -- last year was 66-19 for example when they had the Other Olso at QB, Maurice Drew at QB, Marcedes Lewis at TD -- all of them are gone now. Their offense is brand new except 1 WR. This year we will match that 8, which will tie the record for most consecutive wins in the series. Trust me, that fact is not lost on USC.

ND will be tougher. No matter how good USC or ND is it is always a great game. Last year was the game of the century having won it with like 4 seconds left. I had tears in my eyes when it was 4th and 9 at the ND 22 (or something like that) with less than a minute left to go... I knew we were done. Somehow the luck of the Irish fell upon us that day. But this year will be much different. At the beginning of the season I would say that ND was going to be our most difficult game and would probably beat us. Now after seeing them struggle against GT and then get hammered by Michigan, who I'm not convinced yet is a top 10 team, I am not so sure. We play at home which gives us a huge advantage. The ND defense is slow as malassas (sp). I am confident we will win, but I am not as confident it will be as close. I need to see ND more -- see how they respond after getting pasted against Michigan. They are too up and down right now. Incredible win against Penn State followed by an atrocious loss to Michigan, tough to know how good or bad they are.

As far as Cal is concerned? See above. They have no QB, their defense is not good. Marshawn Lynch is good, but without a passing game, our D, which is already good against the run, will load the box. Normally I would say that Jeff Tedford has our #. But after thrashing them the last two seasons I am not so sure. It will be a good agame, I just think USC will outlast them. Again, it's at home.

What can you say about the Oregon / Oklahoma debacle? Nothing. That was garbage and I'm surprised the officiating crew was suspended one game. That game was given to Oregon and I think they know it. It's a shame nothing can be done about the W-L column tho.

I might have to cruise over to QC -- was not aware there was a college FB discussion going on over there.

Mattius · Post by **Mattius** » Tue Sep 19, 2006 12:28 pm

I am not saying that UCLA is good, nor is ND. It's just that no matter how you slice it those are the biggest games on the schedule for USC. Rivlary games take on a whole new meaning in college football. You pick any 2 players on that team and ask them what their biggest 2 games are this year and I would be astonished that if they didnt list one of those 2.

Should USC beat these teams, yes. But I just dont see that team being able to rise up 2 weeks in a row. If USC beats ND, they are ripe for a let down game against cross town rival and huge underdog UCLA. USC better be on upset alert when ND comes calling because of last years game.

I believe that the most likeliest of scenario's would be the ND win followed by the USC defilement of UCLA on national TV.

The Oregon Oklahoma debacle is inconsenquential. Neither of these teams will be vying for BCS bids. If ND stays in the top 10 they get a BSC berth and that only leaves 1 at large spot. That will most likely go to a conference winner that should not win their conference championship game, ie Texas, Auburn, Va Tech. If they do win then LSU, Clemson, 2nd in PAC 10 (tbd by the USC CAL game), and Louisville would come into play.

Oh and -50 posts for post farming.

Dalla · Post by **Dalla** » Tue Sep 19, 2006 12:54 pm

Here is the Quellious Collective link for you Shey.

You know the best thing about College football is that you still have to play the game. The best team does not always win. How many times over the years has a team with more emotion, better prepared, and completely unmatched in talent & speed gone in to someone else's home and beat them?

Games like UM-FSU, FSU-UF, USC-ND, ND-Mich, OSU-Mich, USC-Cal, OK-Texas, OK-Nebraska always have that chance of being an upset. The ball has a funny shape to it and tends to bounce in weird ways and its amazing how one or two plays determine the outcome of games. USC may be significantly better than UCLA and ND both, but the simple fact of the matter is anything can happen. If you don't believe me, go back to the FSU-Clemson game and watch that second half how FSU absolutely dissected Clemson up and down the field and how their defense caused them to go 3 & out on every single 2nd half possession except one........the one where Tommie Bowden took advantage of the fact that the FSU D always looks over to the sidelines for audibles and did a quick snap and ran down the weak side for 65 yards. That was simply taking a group of guys that were under talented and preparing them better. It was also just one play that put them in a position to win the game.

I love this year though, it is the first year in a long long time where there is no clear favorite or two or even really three to win the Championship. There is about 7 teams that could, but no one team that should. This is gonna be a good year.

Mattius · Post by **Mattius** » Tue Sep 19, 2006 1:09 pm

Totally agree with that about the 7 teams that could win.

Who would have thought that Kenutcky would win their first SEC opener in 19 years.

GO CATS!!!

Heemann · Post by **Heemann** » Tue Sep 19, 2006 1:16 pm

Cats winning their SEC opener just shows how more pathetic Ole Miss was.

I think Louisville is the real deal this year. I mean if UL can go find themselves a real coach and be top contenders for a prestigious bowl, why can't UK?

Now all the talk about OSU, it's all hype. Yes they beat TExas who was the #2 in the country but jesus christ Texas looked like a pop warner team out there with the bonehead plays and turnovers they allowed. OSU will get pummeled against a real team. USC hasn't impressed me as of yet, and neither has Auburn. But I do agree that the hardest conference to win is the SEC. Teams like USC, OSU, and certain others have maybe 1-2 big rivals in their conference where as the SEC always has 5-7 top 25 teams. Going undefeated in SEC should auto bid for NC game.

Sheymalra · Post by **Sheymalra** » Tue Sep 19, 2006 5:26 pm

USC may be significantly better than UCLA and ND both, but the simple fact of the matter is anything can happen.

Truer words have never been spoken... I would never guarantee anything when it comes to football because you are right, "anything can happen."

Not sure why there were 3 posts from me unless I inadvertently hit it 3 times. WTF. Don't remember doing that. I deleted the other two.

Dalla · Post by **Dalla** » Tue Sep 19, 2006 7:30 pm

It's okay Shey, you are simply being like a QB in the Pete Carroll system. If you miss the TD toss the first time, you still have two more chances to throw it!

Mcpally · Post by **Mcpally** » Wed Sep 20, 2006 12:27 am

Dont be so quick to say Oregon will not be vying for a BCS game. Becareful what you say, it could come back to haunt you.

Mcpally · Post by **Mcpally** » Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:17 am

Ok I took some time to think about this.

SEC, solid confrence but realistically not any better than any other. Yes they beat the hell out of eachother all year long but so does every other confrence.

In my mind the NC is way up in the air atm. Too many top 20 teams have huge land mines in thier season, mostly with eachother.

ND? HOLY CRAP OVERFREAKINRATED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Just because Charlie Wies is your coach does not make you an auto favorite to win anything. I said it on QC and Ill say it here, ND goes 8-4 this year with one game up in the air that could go either way.

USC's biggiest problem this year is far too many RB's. Why is that a problem? You have to run different plays for each one because no two have the same style. It prevents the offense from finding a rythme, becoming a cohesive unit, and puts too many faces on the offensive side of the ball. Its asking for mistakes which is why Booty and Jarrett are doing so well as a tandem. Atleast the offense can rely on Jarrett as he is a constant in the scoring attack and thats the mind set that offense will have untill one of the young backs step up and takes a true starting role.

At this time, I like Ohio State and Auburn for the NC but wont rule out USC untill after Oregon beats them in LA. As far as Cal is concerned, lol thanks. The entire Pac-10 outside of Berkley just got a great giggle from your faith in Cal. They are not a great team. They have talent on both sides of the ball, too bad they havnt met eachother yet.

Freeks · Post by **Freeks** » Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:58 am

Only reason SEC wont win a national champion ship when another team in new conference goes undefeated is cause no sec team will be undefeated. Such a tough conference to get thru =\ Too many good schools with strong recruiting programs.

Sheymalra · Post by **Sheymalra** » Wed Sep 20, 2006 3:30 am

I just don't buy it Freeks, sorry man. I respect the SEC, but I get a kick out of that argument that the SEC is so tough and they beat eachother up. In my heart of hearts I don't view it as this huge powerhouse where the teams are killing each other. They have good defenses but mediocre boring offenses. And when the SEC does not play anyone out of conference, with few exceptions, and ALL OOC games are at home it's hard to judge whether they are as good as the SEC fans would have the world believe. I think they would get longer BCS consideration if they actually played someone out of conference on the road. But The Citadel? Lousiana-Monroe? Louisiana-Lafayette? Chelsea's School of Cosmetics? I mean please... some of their games are against 1AA teams.. barely scrimmages -- and the excuse? The in conference play is too hard so they schedule patsies.

Come on now.

Mattius · Post by **Mattius** » Wed Sep 20, 2006 8:32 am

Generally speaking, its the bottom half of the conference scheduling more of the patsies. UK is playing 2 this year, which is up from 1 the last few years. They dropped the Indiana game and added that 12 game to thier schedule. They still play Lousiville, and they got Central Michigan coming to town and they have been a decent team as of late, that game should be a good one to watch.

Almost every team has an instate or border state rival thats not in the conference they play at the end of the season. UT and LSU are the only 2 that come to mind that might only have 1 AA school out of their 12 games.

All schools schedule these games, usually early so they can use them as an exhibition game. Plus this helps the 1AA schools cause they get paid handsomly for the game, and they will get some TV time for playing a school from a power conference.

Freeks · Post by **Freeks** » Wed Sep 20, 2006 9:13 am

Yup, look at georgia southern, (wherei am from) btw... they played georgia lasst year, they got about 3.5million from the game for the program

GSU vs miami (fl) a few years ago, got about 2 for the program, for scholarships and recruitng scholarships. gotta gagree with matt here =)

Sheymalra · Post by **Sheymalra** » Wed Sep 20, 2006 12:14 pm

All schools schedule these games, usually early so they can use them as an exhibition game. Plus this helps the 1AA schools cause they get paid handsomly for the game, and they will get some TV time for playing a school from a power conference.

I agree and if $$$ is the priority then by all means. But my point is that when you want to be considered for a national title, you cannot be bragging about an undefeated season (like Auburn did in 2004) when you have teams like the Citadel or those other teams on your schedule. That's not even a game -- that's a scrimmage.

Of, for example, in 2003 when USC was co-national champion with LSU... When the regular season was over, USC was #2 and LSU was #3 (0.16 points behind). BUT, LSU got to play an extra game, the conference championship game against Georgia, which it had already played. That win allowed them to jump USC and make it to the Sugar Bowl against OU (which should not have been there in the game becuase they lost their conference championship game against K-State). My point is -- LSU was not penalized in strength of schedule for playing a team it already beat once during the season and/or playing a 1AA team or two (which did not even count for BCS purposes). Moreover, they needed an extra game to jump USC. After USC/LSU were declared co-NC, LSU cried like babies, but most of the media responded that it had games on its schedule it should not have counted AND needed an extra game.

In all honesty though, that was more a problem with the BCS than anything else. Not LSU's fault. Nor was it USC's though.

At the same time, elite programs usually don't want to play other elite programs early on because of the increased chance of losing ground in the national title hunt, but still... 1AA teams?