T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
388.1 | nebraska & THE HUSKIES | WSE028::JOLMAMA | Hulk-a-Mania is dead. | Tue Oct 16 1990 14:45 | 6 |
| Nebraska- #1., cause they are undefeated, and to win #1, will have to
earn it against some good teams.
Washington- #2., cause the Huskies have only one close loss, against
Colorado, killed two strong teams, Oregon and USC, and have the top
defense against the run in the country.
|
388.2 | $$$$ | RAVEN1::B_ADAMS | It's that time again! | Tue Oct 16 1990 14:46 | 5 |
|
The one with the best record reguardless of schedule. Or the one
with the biggest booster club..a.k.a $$$$$.
B.A.
|
388.3 | | CAM::WAY | Beaten like a redheaded stepchild... | Tue Oct 16 1990 14:51 | 20 |
| Why do I think this note is gonna turn into a giant rathole....
Until there is a comprehensive playoff set up, we're gonna have
to suffer with the inadequacies of the system as is.... Which
means everyone loses, and no one is truly number one, because of
the constant arguing and bickering that the system creates.
In baseball, you win or lose the Series, in football there's the
Super Bowl, hell, even rugby has its Final Four...
College Football is one of the few sports I know of where it's
#1 comes so into question....
My choice?
Simple, it's
Wesleyan!
'Saw
|
388.4 | It's not worth worrying about until January 2 | FSOA::JHENDRY | John Hendry, DTN 292-2170 | Tue Oct 16 1990 14:54 | 1 |
|
|
388.5 | I'll consent to leave UVa there for this week only | DELNI::G_WAUGAMAN | | Tue Oct 16 1990 15:03 | 9 |
|
The winner of this weekend's Notre Dame-Miami game should vault to the
top... unless Auburn beats Florida State, then I might go with them.
Unfortunately, what happens on January 1 depends all too much on the
rankings *now*.
glenn
|
388.6 | | ROCK::GRONOWSKI | the dream is always the same... | Tue Oct 16 1990 15:32 | 3 |
|
UVa will lost to GaTech... so there's no need to worry about them.
|
388.7 | | CARP::SHAUGHNESSY | Deputy Andy keelt Laura Palmer | Tue Oct 16 1990 16:49 | 18 |
| It *is* worth worrying about now, cuz the college game has been
thrown into a crisis of conscience with the all-too-successful
craven pandering risk avoidence strategy of the womanly Cavaliers
(O what a_appropriate nickname!). It's time the subject was hammered
out and better guidlines are established to preclude rip-off jobs
like what happened yesterday, which was tantamount to a pencil-necked
geek with a cleptomania problem being chosen to artificially inseminate
the Queen.
Let's take a quick drive down Reality Lane:
1. Nebraska Best defense in history?
2. Tennessee These kids are gooooood.
3. Michigan Great young team that got hosed.
4. Washington In real world could win it all.
5. Miami But cain they win big game on road?
MrT
|
388.8 | those who have real votes | HBAHBA::HAAS | Big Smile at the Drivethrough | Tue Oct 16 1990 16:57 | 15 |
| AP says:
1 Virginia (38) 6-0-0 1,454
2 Miami (15) 4-1-0 1,414
3 Tennessee (2) 4-0-2 1,354
4 Nebraska (3) 6-0-0 1,258
5 Auburn 4-0-1 1,238
UPI says:
1 Virginia (29) 785
2 Miami (7) 736
3 Nebraska (13) 712
4 Tennessee (3) 679
5 Auburn (2) 584
TTom
|
388.9 | Remaining Schedules... | RIPPLE::DEVLIN_JO | The 24 Hour Church of Elvis | Tue Oct 16 1990 17:27 | 24 |
| Well, here are the remaining schedules for the pretenders to the crown.
Notice the cup cake schedule that Virginia has, the snack cake schedule
Miami has and the big10 loser schedule Michigan has left. Colorado and
Nebraska have to play each other, plus Oklahoma, but other than that it's
cream puff time. Auburn has Florida State and Florida left, Tennessee
has ND and that's it - pretty cream puff there, and ND has the #2, #4, and #11
teams left on their schedule, plus Penn State.
Virginia: Wake Forest, Geo.Tech, UNC,Maryland, VA. Tech
Miami: Notre Dame, Texas Tech, Pitt, Boston College, Syracuse, San Diego St.
Nebraska: Ok.State, Iowa State, Colorado, Kansas, Oklahoma
Tennessee: Alabama, Temple, Notre Dame, Miss, Kentucky, Vandy
Auburn: Florida St, Miss St, Florida, So. Miss, Georgia, Bama
Notre Dame: Miami, Pitt, Navy, Tennessee, Penn State, USC
Michigan: Iowa,Indiana, Purdue, Illinois, Minnesota, Ohio St.
Colorado: Kansas,Oklahoma,Nebraska, Oklahoma St, Kansas St
Florida St: Auburn,LSU,So.Carolina,Cincinnati,Memphis St, Florida
Schedule favors Miami (if they beat ND, they are home free and into cupcake
time_, Virginia (should stay unbeaten), Tennessee (if they beat Notre Dame)
Notre Dame has the toughest schedule by far, having Miami this week, then
Tennessee at Tenn, Penn State, and USC at USC.
JD
|
388.10 | This is why I hate college football, plain and simple. | RHETT::KNORR | Carolina Blue | Tue Oct 16 1990 20:42 | 16 |
| Couple of baffling facts:
o Virginia hasn't lost.
o Georgia Tech hasn't lost.
o Both teams have played comparable schedules.
How in the h*ll can Virginia be considered a "contender" and Tech
can't?!
Makes no sense.
- ACC Chris
|
388.11 | FURMAN UNIVERSITY #1 | RAVEN1::M_PHILLIPS | Flirting With Disaster | Tue Oct 16 1990 23:41 | 13 |
| Right now I say Tennessee should be #1. If they can stay undefeated
then for sure they should be #1. UVA, I have a feeling will lose to
G.A.Tech.
If Maimi beats ND this weekend, look for them to leapfrog to the #1
spot, if they get beat then look for ND to bounce back in the top 5 or
possibly top 3.
It's too early too say right now. In all reality, I feel University of
South Carolina should be #1, but that is a biased opinion!! :-) :-)
Nobody fall off their chairs, I'm only kidding!!!
M.J.
|
388.12 | power rating games | HBAHBA::HAAS | Big Smile at the Drivethrough | Wed Oct 17 1990 06:50 | 45 |
| Here's the power ratings of JD's Pretenders. They're from USA Today and
they have the power ratings of the teams left on the schedule and the
average of these.
Pretender PR Avg PR of Opp. Pretender PR Avg PR of Opp.
-------------------------------------- --------------------------------------
Virginia 98.02 76.25 Miami-Fl 95.43 76.78
Wake Forest 68.15 Notre Dame 87.79
Georgia Tech 88.66 Texas Tech 75.98
No Carolina 72.29 Pittsburgh 76.05
Maryland 77.16 Boston College 69.24
Va Tech 75.00 Syracuse 79.25
San Diego St 72.39
Nebraska 95.59 76.55 Tennessee 94.68 72.56
Oklahoma St 67.66 Alabama 80.84
Iowa St 71.35 Temple 64.49
Colorado 86.20 Notre Dame 87.79
Kansas 68.89 Mississippi 77.16
Oklahoma 88.63 Kentucky 68.73
Vanderbilt 56.35
Auburn 85.25 79.97 Notre Dame 87.79 82.78
Florida St 90.90 Miami-Fl 95.43
Mississippi St 70.99 Pittsburgh 76.05
Florida 84.72 Navy 58.74
Southern Miss 78.83 Tennessee 94.68
Georgia 73.52 Penn St 83.95
Alabama 80.84 Southern Cal 87.84
Michigan 89.69 77.64 Colorado 86.20 77.78
Iowa 81.73 Kansas 68.89
Indiana 86.44 Oklahoma 88.63
Purdue 65.84 Nebraska 95.59
Illinois 84.09 Oklahoma St 67.66
Minnesota 67.29 Kansas St 68.12
Ohio St 80.45
Florida St 90.90 74.90
Auburn 85.25
LSU 75.67
So Carolina 82.49
Cincinnati 50.49
Memphis St 70.78
Florida 84.72
|
388.13 | JD has given us part of the story... | DELNI::G_WAUGAMAN | | Wed Oct 17 1990 08:26 | 38 |
|
Of course the "remaining schedule" angle omits a couple of very
important factors-- like the strength of the opponents already faced.
In Miami's (BYU, Florida St.), Michigan's (Notre Dame, UCLA, Michigan
St.), Tennessee's (Colorado, Auburn), and Colorado's (Tennessee,
Stanford, Illinois, Texas, Washington) cases, that's significant. It's
no mystery that the games up front are usually non-conference games,
which to a large extent defines the toughness of schedule, especially
if you participate in a second-tier conference like the ACC or SWC.
Good question about Georgia Tech's ranking, which I mentioned earlier.
What we effectively have in the ACC is Virginia, Tech, and Clemson
playing a three-way round robin to determine which team will reap the
spoils come New Year's Day. The toughest non-conference opponent that
*any* of these three teams play is (take your pick) South Carolina or
Georgia. Guess which two of the ACC teams plays both and guess which
one plays neither? For all we know all three ACC teams are pretenders,
because factors like average height and weight on the lines and times in
the 40 at the skill positions become almost as important going into the
bowls than actual results on the field (affectionately known as the
"Michigan Syndrome", for consistently high rankings based on perceived
physical talent over actual performance).
As for Miami, which is a team that *does* need to play a competitive
schedule in order to make money and generally *wants* to, I'll make the
point that I've made before: no one wants to play them, so they get
who they can (and even that isn't exactly a travesty). Off the top of
my head, Oklahoma, Penn State, Florida, Michigan, and next year Notre
Dame (a pretty impressive collection) all jumped off a bandwagon that
Miami wanted to continue, when those teams realized they weren't
getting what they bargained for pre-1980. I don't like Miami, either,
but in fairness they're more a victim (especially financially) than a
beneficiary of this system. The practical banishment to this Big East
football pseudo-conference is more proof of Miami's predicament (a
possible working relationship with the SWC-- wow!).
glenn
|
388.14 | Why even worry at all, now or Jan 2? | SASE::SZABO | | Wed Oct 17 1990 10:44 | 1 |
|
|
388.15 | Good reason for worry, this year more than most. :^( | RHETT::KNORR | Carolina Blue | Wed Oct 17 1990 10:47 | 14 |
| re: .-1 (Why even worry at all, now or Jan 2?)
If this were college basketball I'd totally agree with you. The polls
don't mean a dag-blammed thing, cause a tournament selects the
national champion.
But in football the same bad method of deciding who's number one now
will decide who's number one at the end of the season, and hence the
"National Champion".
Bad. Very bad.
- ACC Chris
|
388.16 | Isn't it obvious? | SHALOT::MEDVID | my apple tree, my brightness | Wed Oct 17 1990 12:32 | 5 |
| College Football - Who's #1?
It's usually a kicker, sometimes a QB.
--dan'l
|
388.17 | My New Years Present to you Chris... | CAM::WAY | Beaten like a redheaded stepchild... | Wed Oct 17 1990 12:34 | 23 |
| ACC, you'll soon be receiving a package from me, marked
"Do Not Open Until Jan 1, 1991"
Place the package in a cool, dark place, and DON'T OPEN IT.
On January 1, 1991, open it, and eat heartily of the SPORTshrooms
you'll find inside.
Sit back, watch the colors flow. Don't be surprised if a lot of
stuff turns baby blue, that's to be expected. After a while,
Jimi will probably show up to rap with you for a bit, and lately,
Otis Redding has been makin' the rounds, and occasionally Muddy
Waters makes an appearance....
Invite them to watch the Bowl games with you. (Don't talk hoops
with Jimi, he doesn't like basketball)...
By the end of the day, if they're still there, have a couple of
beers with them. When they leave, sit back, and wonder what you
ever worried about anything for....
HTH,
'Saw 8^)
|
388.19 | Har har! | RHETT::KNORR | Carolina Blue | Wed Oct 17 1990 13:55 | 1 |
|
|
388.20 | | SALMON::SHAUGHNESSY | Deputy Andy keelt Laura Palmer | Thu Oct 18 1990 17:10 | 31 |
|
re: Sagarin
Sagarin's system is probably as good as it cain be, but its
major self-correction component is cross-referencing outside
competition and is thus probably failing badly in the case
of the 3 Almost Close "quality" teams. None of them play any
tough competition apart from each other, and Sagarin's system
is thereby stuck almost totally relying on preseason seeds,
which is more a matter of PR than anything real.
ACC, the answer to the question you axed is that Virgina had a
good preseason seed and Tech wasn't so good. Given that each
plays a vaccum schedule they're susceptible to the vagaries of
a system which forms important conclusions based on simple W-L
records with little or no regard to Reality. But Tech has no
room for complaint, for it is very likely that if they played
anybody tough they wouldn't be where they are in the first place.
JD, I disagree with your observation that Miami has a cupcake
walk after Notre Shame. Texas Tech, sPitt, and SyrExcuse all
have proven that they cain be quite dangerous against tough
competition. SyrExcuse and Tech especially are young but talented
and represent potential trouble for Miami or anybody, ftm.
No, JD, a true cupcake walk would be playing the likes of Navy
and Wm. & Mary and Virgina Tech and Duke and North Carolina...
You get the picture.
Big10 Tom
|
388.21 | | RIPPLE::DEVLIN_JO | The 24 Hour Church of Elvis | Thu Oct 18 1990 17:14 | 9 |
| MrT,
Texas Tech is 1-4 this year, and not playing well. Pittwas destroyed
by Oklahoma early and hasn't recovered. Syracuse is good, but not
great. Fact is, Miami plays 0 ranked opponents after Notre Dame.
Hence my bakery reference.
I do agree that Miami's schedule is tougher than Virginia....
JD
|
388.22 | Virginia, Tech really are excellent teams | CSCOA3::ROLLINS_R | | Fri Oct 19 1990 08:14 | 52 |
| > Sagarin's system is probably as good as it cain be, but its
> major self-correction component is cross-referencing outside
> competition and is thus probably failing badly in the case
> of the 3 Almost Close "quality" teams. None of them play any
> tough competition apart from each other, and Sagarin's system
> is thereby stuck almost totally relying on preseason seeds,
> which is more a matter of PR than anything real.
> ACC, the answer to the question you axed is that Virgina had a
> good preseason seed and Tech wasn't so good. Given that each
> plays a vaccum schedule they're susceptible to the vagaries of
> a system which forms important conclusions based on simple W-L
> records with little or no regard to Reality. But Tech has no
> room for complaint, for it is very likely that if they played
> anybody tough they wouldn't be where they are in the first place.
I can't really agree with the above. I strongly agree that the
schedules of each of the ACC contenders is weak. Virginia plays
no one difficult outside of the conference, even recognizing that
VPI is an in-state rival. Tech played South Carolina when they
were ranked near the bottom of the Top 25 list, but otherwise have
an easy non-conference schedule. Clemson also has South Carolina
on their schedule, but the Gamecocks haven't proven to be tough.
Weak schedules indeed.
Nevertheless, both Virginia and Tech have quality teams, no matter
what T says about them. Virginia has a very stron offense, especially
at the skill positions. Shawn Moore is ranked by most scouts as one
of the top five QB's in the country. Herman Moore is projected by
many pro scouts as the first WR to be picked in next year's draft,
and is rated by everyone I have seen or read as one of the top 3 receivers
in the draft. They are the best of a very talented group on offense,
and the Cavaliers would score well against just about anyone, I suspect.
Tech's offensive line is huge, biggest in the ACC, and comparable to
every line I've seen so far this year on nationally televised games,
Miami, Michigan, Notre Dame included. No one pushes them around. Their
defensive backfield is exceptionally good, with Ken Swilling as the top
secondary player in the South, IMO. They also would have an excellent
record in any conference they played in, the Big Ten included. They
would be competitive with Michigan and Illinois, and would beat everyone
else the Big Ten.
Of course, there is no way to prove it, but T's loud (loud-mouth)
assertion that the teams are fluff is unjustified. The schedules ARE
fluff, but the teams are solid teams. While I don't think Virginia has
come close to proving they are the best team in the land (they need to
have a little more competition to prove that), I think both the Cavs and
Tech are top-10 material as far as the talent and unity on their teams go.
It's more than just PR; they really are very good teams, and the people
who vote in the polls are much more knowledgeable than anyone in this
conference.
|
388.23 | outside competition | HBAHBA::HAAS | Big Smile at the Drivethrough | Fri Oct 19 1990 08:49 | 15 |
| Sagarin's system is neutral. It has some flaws and it has some good
points. If other systems are published regularly and if someone would
post these systems, I'd definitely consider them. One feature I like of
Sagarin's is that as a team you've played wins more their power rating
goes up and so does yours.
As to games outside one's conference, the ACC plays more of these than
larger conferences like the Big10. The rankings of these outside teams
comprises a larger percentage of the power rating for the ACC than for
the Big10. If the outside competition for the ACC is weak, it will, in
effect, lower the overall power rating for the ACC teams.
I'm generally agree with Rick's assessment of weak teams vs weak schedules.
TTom
|
388.24 | We're all better off if Virginia is at #2 | DELNI::G_WAUGAMAN | | Fri Oct 19 1990 08:51 | 32 |
|
> It's more than just PR; they really are very good teams, and the people
> who vote in the polls are much more knowledgeable than anyone in this
> conference.
You're kidding, right? The history of the polls, Heisman Trophy votes,
All-America votes, etc. says otherwise. PR plays a huge role with the
writers, and the coaches have their own personal agendas.
My major questions with Virginia and Georgia Tech are: 1) could Virginia's
defense stop a Miami and 2) could Tech's offense score against one? I
have serious doubts on both counts.
Kansas' (the only common opponent of Virginia and Miami) coach, when
asked, answered that "Miami is a *much* better football team than
Virginia". Granted, Kansas is so outclassed in either case that it's
the old question of who left deeper tire tracks, but it is one
opinion.
If Miami lays it on Notre Dame this weekend look for them to vault over
Virginia back into the number one spot. Personally, I have no major
problem with Virginia or Georgia Tech finishing undefeated and
participating in a national championship game like West Virginia did
(although it wouldn't be my first preference), but I'd feel a whole lot
better if they were coming in from underneath after all the other
contenders have eliminated themselves, instead of calling the shots
from #1 and being limited to a choice of independent opponents only in
the Citrus Bowl (eliminating Nebraska, Tennessee, and Auburn from
consideration in a championship game).
glenn
|
388.25 | | CSCOA3::ROLLINS_R | | Fri Oct 19 1990 09:40 | 40 |
| > > It's more than just PR; they really are very good teams, and the people
> > who vote in the polls are much more knowledgeable than anyone in this
> > conference.
> You're kidding, right? The history of the polls, Heisman Trophy votes,
> All-America votes, etc. says otherwise. PR plays a huge role with the
> writers, and the coaches have their own personal agendas.
I believe that PR plays a role in boith the AP and UPI polls. I personally
have a little more confidence in the coaches poll (UPI), but I do realize
that some of the coaches in the poll have personal agendas. Nevertheless,
I think that few coaches would have much reason to rank Virginia #1 if they
didn't feel they are a quality team. While I don't feel that the nation's
top-ranked team at any time is necessarily the nation's best, I do believe
that a team ranked #1 by this time in the season is probably better then
the teams ranked in the #16-#25 range, for example. The fact that both
the AP and UPI polls rank them #1 does have something to do with their
talent level. People look at BYU in '84, but they tried to have a tough
schedule (opened with Pitt, for example, who usually was a top 10 team),
but they were ranked in the #6-#10 range for most of that year, because
they didn't appear to have as much talent. Virginia, I believe, has been
recognized as a talented team.
> My major questions with Virginia and Georgia Tech are: 1) could Virginia's
> defense stop a Miami and 2) could Tech's offense score against one? I
> have serious doubts on both counts.
Virginia's defense is better than in year's past, but I think they would
have trouble shutting down a great offense. However, Virginia might be
able to outscore Miami, or control the ball game enough on offense to
keep Miami's offense off the field much of the game.
Tech's offense would score some from anyone. As I mentioned, they have
a huge line on both sides of the ball, and the Tech QB, sophomore
Sean Jones, is a very good QB. He's very mobile, has a good arm and good
touch, very quick and good when running himself, and makes a lot of big
plays. They don't have running back's quite as good in the past, however.
I think Tech would get at least a couple of TD's against just about any
defense in the country, which may not be great, but enough to win against
almost anyone. I have not seen a team this year that could blow out Tech.
|
388.26 | Random Thoughts | FSOA::JHENDRY | John Hendry, DTN 292-2170 | Fri Oct 19 1990 10:10 | 44 |
| 1. I have read that some (if not many) coaches in the UPI poll
delegate their vote to the school's Sports Information Director; and
during the season, a coach is so focused on his own team and its
opponents he really may not have much of an idea of what other teams
are doing.
When Dick MacPherson was at UMass, he embarrassed himself at a banquet
one year for complimenting a coach at a small school on its fine record
during the season when it actually went 0-8. The next season, he had
his graduate assistant coaches prepare a no-money football pool of the
schools in New England so he would at least have an idea of what was
going on in New England college football. That's how focused these
guys are. (note I said no money, it was done for standings, bragging
rights and to keep Mac informed on what was going on)
2. The Big Ten and SWC teams play 8 league games and 3 non-league
opponents. Some PAC-10 schools play 8 league games, some play 7. No
other league plays more than 7 league games.
3. A team's rating in any sort of mathematical rating system really
depends on two things - the strength of its non-league opponents, and
the strength of all the schedules of its beaten opponents. The games
played within a league all cancel themselves out. The ACC loses out
under a mathematical system because they tend to play weak non-league
schedules. What that means is if Virginia sweeps through the ACC,
their opponents outside the league won't do all that well, and with the
possible exceptions of Tech and Clemson, no one else within the league
will have beaten a really good non-league opponent. Under a mathematical
system, an independent does have a better chance of winning a national
title since it has a better chance of playing a stronger schedule, than a
team in a conference that is stuck playing a couple of teams at the
bottom.
4. The polls actually track the number 1 team pretty accurately. From
1984-1988 (I lost interest last year), I applied a variation of the
Mass High School rating system to college football. Using that system
in 1984 put Florida as the number 1 team in the country even with a
9-1-1 record based on a brutal schedule. That was the only significant
variation. Where a mathematical rating system points out the inequity
is in bowl selection, where teams are selected for their marquee value
and their ability to draw fans than their actual quality as a football
team, in many cases.
John
|
388.27 | Miami or Notre Dame | BAUCIS::SAPP | Free the DEC 100,000 | Fri Oct 19 1990 14:32 | 20 |
| RE:.24 Miami vs Notre Dame
Question: If Notre Dame beats Miami would you give the nod to them
for first ?
The reason I asked the question is that I have read at least one
sports column which made the point that you made, but the flip
side was not made, that is Notre Dame beating Miami.
I thought that I would asked the question BEFORE the game because
some noters in here hedge their bets. Now knowing you are an
"Honorable Fan", that would be beneath you.
As for me, I have mixed emotions on this one. I have rooted for
Notre Dame since I was in elementary school. Being from Miami, I
rooted for them before they became a national power.
For once I can sit back and relax.
Edwin
|
388.28 | NO WAY! | MILPND::VLASAK | Flatliners for Mass...YES on #3 | Fri Oct 19 1990 14:38 | 9 |
|
Neither Notre Dame nor Miami deserve to be rated number one
dues to their previous losses.
Perhaps BYU and Stanford should play for #1.
Makes about as much sense.
Bob V.
|
388.29 | Yes, with a win I'd put ND #1, but the polls won't | NAC::G_WAUGAMAN | | Fri Oct 19 1990 15:19 | 21 |
|
> RE:.24 Miami vs Notre Dame
>
> Question: If Notre Dame beats Miami would you give the nod to them
> for first ?
See .5 for *my* personal opinion. The prediction in .24 is what I
think the *AP/UPI* will do. I do not believe that either poll will
elevate ND this early, but because Miami is already #2, they might jump
to the top. Don't ask me why, but if ND does win, I expect that they
will only be able to jump back to #1 with another win over Tennessee.
Wins over Michigan, Miami, and Tennessee would be too much to look past,
in my opinion, especially if you've already established a precedent by
placing a puffed-up Michigan with one loss at #1 so early in the season.
Don't worry, I won't hedge. Unless, as I suggested in .5, Auburn really
has come together under their young QB and goes out and hammers Florida
State. I don't expect that to happen, though.
glenn
|
388.30 | latest line | HBAHBA::HAAS | Big Smile at the Drivethrough | Fri Oct 19 1990 15:39 | 3 |
| FWIW, the line has moved to Miami, -3 1/2.
TTom
|
388.31 | | SALMON::SHAUGHNESSY | Deputy Andy keelt Laura Palmer | Fri Oct 19 1990 16:27 | 12 |
| That's yet another punk thing about these silly-aced polls: In
close cases it comes down to who lost most recently, which means
that the sequence of schedule plays a role in deciding who's
best!
I think it's fair to say that the chilling Virgina saga has brought
home the dangerously ugly flaws in the polling process and will
finally move the better programs to push a playoff system through
to see that nothing as horribly wrong and unfair as what has happened
to the sport this week.
MrT
|
388.32 | Last round | 34223::HUNT | No. 1 Ranked Virginia Cavaliers | Sun Oct 21 1990 11:15 | 17 |
| � I think it's fair to say that the chilling Virgina saga has brought
� home the dangerously ugly flaws in the polling process and will
� finally move the better programs to push a playoff system through to
� see that nothing as horribly wrong and unfair as what has happened to
� the sport this week.
"*If* the brain-dead Big Ten referees had bothered to open their
out-to-lunch Big Ten eyes, then numbskull Michigan and the mighty Big
Ten would still be Number 1."
Guess this'll be the last time I use this quote since Michigan decided
they really enjoy one-point losses at home to inferior conference
opponents.
And Indiana looked just *awesome* against the Golden Gophers.
Bob Hunt
|
388.33 | Virginia still # 1 | 3136::SAPP | Free the DEC 100,000 | Mon Oct 22 1990 08:19 | 13 |
| According to the USA Today/CNN Poll:
1. Virginia 7-0
2. Nebraska 7-0
3. Notre Dame 5-1
4. Auburn 5-0-1
5. Houston 6-0
If the top three go undefeated for the remainder of the regular season
it sets up potentially a # 2 vs # 3 for the National Title. IMHO N.D.
would be better served by playing Nebraska than Virginia for the
Mythical National Title. Virginia would play Miami in the Citrus.
Edwin
|
388.34 | ND to play Va? | 33945::HAAS | Big Smile at the Drivethrough | Mon Oct 22 1990 08:26 | 5 |
| As soon as you say "better serverd" you know it won't turn out that way.
If all goes accordingly, ND would love to play Virginia and let Miami
worry about the mighty Huskers.
TTom
|
388.35 | Wyoming 8-0 :-) | 24910::TIRRELL | | Mon Oct 22 1990 09:07 | 2 |
| I don't know, but the 8-0 Cowboys from Laramie seem to have the best
record around....:-)
|
388.36 | | 10559::JOLMAMA | Hulk-a-Mania is dead. | Mon Oct 22 1990 09:36 | 19 |
| REGARDING .35
And the mighty Cowboys defeated Divison II weakling Weber State this
Saturday.
The Washington Huskies are #6 in the UPI poll. The Huskies should be
higher after crushing Stanford 52-16. Stanford is a quality team,
having beaten Notre Dame and outplaying Colorado and losing in the
final minutes of the game.
The rankings should read:
Nebraska- 1
Notre Dame- 2
Washington- 3
U of VA- 4
BYU- 5
|
388.37 | BYU in the top 5, great joke | CSC32::J_MANNING | Only Amiga Makes it Possible | Mon Oct 22 1990 09:57 | 15 |
|
re. 36
You are kidding about those rankings, right?
BYU does not belong in the top 10, much less the top 5.
Fortunately, the UPI poll is as follows:
1) UVA
2) Nebraska
3) Auburn
4) ND
5) Illinois
|
388.38 | | BSS::JCOTANCH | Stanford 36, Notre Dame 31!!! | Mon Oct 22 1990 10:06 | 13 |
|
> Fortunately, the UPI poll is as follows:
>
> 1) UVA
> 2) Nebraska
> 3) Auburn
> 4) ND
> 5) Illinois
Now we can only hope that the AP is as accurate and doesn't jump poor,
untalented ND over Auburn.
Joe
|
388.39 | | 10881::DEVLIN_JO | They stamp them when they're small | Mon Oct 22 1990 10:10 | 5 |
| Geez, Joe, if Miami had been in ND's position, and beaten #2, you'd
be yelling for them to be #1. ND takes 2 out of the last 3 from
the Canes.
JD
|
388.40 | Miami, team of the '80s. They certainly are! | 15558::SZABO | | Mon Oct 22 1990 10:17 | 6 |
| Good thing that the ND-Miami series is history, for Miami that is, eh
JD?
I expect to hear much more whinin' before the day is through..... :-)
Hawk
|
388.41 | ND vs Miami | CSC32::J_MANNING | Only Amiga Makes it Possible | Mon Oct 22 1990 10:21 | 10 |
|
2 of the last 3 being in South Bend has nothing to do with ND winning 2
of the last 3 does it???
When was the last time ND won in Miami? Wasn't Miami something like
7-3 against ND in the 80's?
I am sure that ND will be #3 in the AP poll since the sportswriters
tend to kiss ND butt...
|
388.42 | | 10881::DEVLIN_JO | They stamp them when they're small | Mon Oct 22 1990 10:22 | 0 |
388.43 | The polls are nonsense... | BSS::M_HENDERSON | Bart Simpson - My Hero, Man !!! | Mon Oct 22 1990 10:36 | 7 |
| IF Virginia and Nebraska go undefeated into bowls. Who do you think
will be number one??? History goes with Virginia BUT, for this to
happen the Huskers would beat Colorado and Oklahoma. This is tougher
than Virginia's schedule and NU is a perinial powerhouse. Virginia is
not.
Nebraska Marty
|
388.44 | 1985: Miami 58, ND 7 | BSS::JCOTANCH | Stanford 36, Notre Dame 31!!! | Mon Oct 22 1990 10:37 | 11 |
| > Geez, Joe, if Miami had been in ND's position, and beaten #2, you'd
> be yelling for them to be #1.
Looks like you're putting words in my mouth, JD.
> ND takes 2 out of the last 3 from the Canes.
Not to mention the TD they took away from Miami 2 years ago.
Joe
|
388.45 | The National Sweet 16 | 3135::SAPP | Free the DEC 100,000 | Mon Oct 22 1990 11:13 | 63 |
| The Nation [daily sports newspaper] believes that the future
of college football includes a playoff system, probably involving
16 teams tied to local games. This is the most current update
of a hypothetical playoff.
Virginia #1 Nebraska #2
-----------| |-----------
[Peach] |---- ----|[Hancock]
Florida #16| | | |Wyoming #14
----------- | | -----------
: |
[Sugar] | | [Holiday]
|-->[Rose] vs |
Illinois #8 | [Cotton]<---| Washington #5
----------| | | |-------------
| | | |
[Hall-fo-Fame] | | |[California]
| | | |
Houston #9| | | |Tennessee #12
----------| | |
| |
| |
BYU #6 | | | Colorado #7
------ | | | -----------
| | | |
[All-American] | | | [Liberty]
| | | |
Iowa #11 | | | Miami #10
-------- | | | ---------
| |
[Gator] |-->[Rose] vs | [Orange]
| |
| [Cotton]<---|
Auburn #4 | | Notre Dame #2
--------- | | | -------------
| | | |
[Freedom] | | | | [Citrus]
| | | |
Clemson #13 | | | Texas #15
----------- | | | ---------
--------------- | |-----------------
|
|
[Fiesta]
Enjoy,
Edwin
|
388.46 | | 39062::JHENDRY | John Hendry, DTN 292-2170 | Mon Oct 22 1990 11:31 | 11 |
| Marty,
Unfair though it may be, Virginia is probably going to hold onto the
top spot unless they lose even if the Huskers go unbeaten and even if
the Huskers play a tougher schedule than the Cavs. Once a team makes
it to the top, it's impossible for another team to catch them unless
they lose.
Sorry, but that's just the way it is.
John
|
388.47 | Mark my words! | 30670::DIGGINS | | Mon Oct 22 1990 12:00 | 7 |
|
Virginia will lose to the Ramblin' Wreck.
Steve
|
388.48 | Polls may change based on competition | 4156::G_WAUGAMAN | | Mon Oct 22 1990 12:16 | 26 |
|
> Unfair though it may be, Virginia is probably going to hold onto the
> top spot unless they lose even if the Huskers go unbeaten and even if
> the Huskers play a tougher schedule than the Cavs. Once a team makes
> it to the top, it's impossible for another team to catch them unless
> they lose.
This may not be the case, John. I believe that *some* pollsters are
voting properly: ranking teams based on their performance to date
against their schedule to date. If this is the case, and Nebraska
beats Colorado and Oklahoma, I think quite a few voters will come
around. Right now, as Mike Franscesca of CBS pointed out Saturday,
Nebraska fans have no complaint as their schedule to date has been just
as weak as Virginia's. (He also flatly stated that Virginia does not
have the players to compete with a Notre Dame or Miami.)
Right now, and as Miami's loss to ND further clarifies, the possibility
exists that #1 will *not* play #2 in the bowls if Virginia stays at #1.
This would be a shame and is another good reason that competition be
considered in the final rankings. Both Nebraska and Auburn have better
chances to remain unbeaten than Notre Dame, and neither could play
Virginia if Virginia holds onto the #1 spot.
glenn
|
388.49 | | 5176::BROOKS | Straight - no chaser ... | Mon Oct 22 1990 12:34 | 8 |
| re .48
Coem again Glenn ? UVa has an escape clause in its Citrus Bowl
contract, and the Orange Bowl will take the Big Eight winner vs.
whomever. If NU and UVa stay undefeated, then the Orange Bowl matchup
is set in stone (I hope).
Doc
|
388.50 | Big Red has no chance to be #1 | 4159::NAZZARO | Eight lbs of stupid in a 5 lb bag | Mon Oct 22 1990 12:38 | 10 |
| If Virginia stays unbeated, Nebraska cannot get to #1 even if they
finish their season undefeated and win the Orange Bowl, because they
won't get to face Notre Dame. ND has a relatively easy schedule
remaining and should finish 10-1. That would rank them no worse than
third. Give Nebraska #2, and if Virginia stays undefeated. That would
make them #1 and set Notre Dame up to play them in the Citris Bowl.
The winner of that game would be #1 and Nebraska will be #2. It's that
simple.
NAZZ
|
388.51 | $ lock it up | 33945::HAAS | Big Smile at the Drivethrough | Mon Oct 22 1990 12:39 | 8 |
| If Virginia is number 1, the Citrus can force them to stay if they meet
the money that any other bowl would offer. The only one that looks like
it could be close would be the Orange Bowl. The SEC has to go to the
Sugar. Only if Nebraska loses and Auburn wins the rest of their games
would the Sugar Bowl have any part of settling which teams people will
vote for.
TTom
|
388.52 | Check the next edition of your dictionary! | 4159::NAZZARO | Eight lbs of stupid in a 5 lb bag | Mon Oct 22 1990 12:39 | 4 |
| Unbeated = a new word, made from a combination of unbeaten and
undefeated.
NAZZ
|
388.53 | | BSS::JCOTANCH | Stanford 36, Notre Dame 31!!! | Mon Oct 22 1990 12:52 | 9 |
| UVA does have that escape clause in their contract, but they only get
out of the Citrus Bowl if they are ranked 2, 3, or 4 by AP. And if
Nebraska goes undefeated, they would be tied into the Orange. What may
happen though is if UVA finishes undefeated but has some lackluster
wins and NU beats CU and OU, NU could jump over UVA and therefore UVA
could get out of their Citrus Bowl contract and meet NU in the Orange
Bowl. #1 vs. #2 for the national title, and the hell with ND.
Joe
|
388.54 | | 10881::DEVLIN_JO | They stamp them when they're small | Mon Oct 22 1990 13:08 | 9 |
| Nazz,
How can you say ND has a relatively easy schedule left?
They play Tennessee at Tenn, they home vs. Penn State, then away
at USC in the last 3 games of the season. Name another top 10 team
with a harder 3 games at the end of the season...
JD
|
388.55 | Still wide open... | 4156::G_WAUGAMAN | | Mon Oct 22 1990 13:21 | 14 |
|
Agreed. ND has plenty of opportunity left to lose another game.
But if they don't, and they get to play Virginia in the Citrus only
because Auburn and/or Nebraska are locked in, chalk another one up in
the travesty column. A lot of ifs, but it could happen.
However, right now, given their performance in the Miami game, I think
Notre Dame is the best team in the country. Nebraska has got to show
me, and Auburn has to play a full 60-minute football game. Virginia
has to actually play a football game.
glenn
|
388.56 | Geez, gimme a break, willya | 34223::HUNT | No. 1 Ranked Virginia Cavaliers | Mon Oct 22 1990 13:26 | 6 |
| � Virginia has to actually play a football game.
They have. Seven of 'em. Won 'em all, too. Can't ask much more of a
team than to win the games it plays.
Bob Hunt
|
388.57 | | 10529::METZGER | Head Northwest young man.... | Mon Oct 22 1990 13:27 | 19 |
|
I think you take all the teams that are undefeated playing weak schedules
and have them play all the teams with tough schedules with 1 or 2 defeats..
You'd end up with a schedule like
Virginia vs. ND
Nebraska vs. Miami
Auburn vs. Washington
Then you have a great chance of showing how weak the undefeateds actually are.
You end up with a bunch of teams with 1 or 2 losses and the whole polling system
is exposed as such a scam that you force some sort of playoff system into place.
And then I woke up and realized that this makes too much sense...
Metz
|
388.58 | UVa - ND matchup | 33945::HAAS | Big Smile at the Drivethrough | Mon Oct 22 1990 13:30 | 5 |
| Better brace for it, Bob - like you haven't heard from them yet, right?
Based on what I've seen, ND and Virginia would be a very good ballgame.
TTom
|
388.59 | Huskies out of it | 33945::HAAS | Big Smile at the Drivethrough | Mon Oct 22 1990 13:32 | 4 |
| re: .57 If all continues, Washington is stuck in the Rose Bowl playing
Iowa or Illinois, as it looks now.
TTom
|
388.60 | Not as bad as YOU make it sound... | BSS::M_HENDERSON | Bart Simpson - My Hero, Man !!! | Mon Oct 22 1990 13:59 | 20 |
| re: .388
>I think you take all the teams that are undefeated playing weak schedules
>and have them play all the teams with tough schedules with 1 or 2 defeats..
>You'd end up with a schedule like
>Virginia vs. ND
>Nebraska vs. Miami
>Auburn vs. Washington
I think you will find that Auburn has played FSU and has some other
tough teams on the schedule.
Nebraska had a weak pre-season schedule but still can prove themselves
vs Oklahoma and Colorado. Huskers have no control over the rest of the
weak Big-8 schedule such as Kansas, kansas State etc... Unless they
move to another conference.
Nebraska Marty
|
388.61 | USC, Tennessee, Penn State - good names, average teams | 4159::NAZZARO | Eight lbs of stupid in a 5 lb bag | Mon Oct 22 1990 14:48 | 18 |
| Penn. State - Lucky to beat BC Saturday, thanks to an incredible
15 yard "taunting" penalty with 3 minutes left in a 6 point game.
Not ranked in Top 25.
USC - routed by Arizona 35-26, after leading 17-7 at the half. Out
of the Rose Bowl picture already. Rated a generous #20 by USA today.
Tennessee - lost at home to an uncharacteristically poor Alabama
team 9-6. Haven't been able to win a big game all year. Somehow
with a loss and two ties still ranked #11.
To sum up - no Top Ten teams left for Notre Dame to face. Teams that
looks formidable early in the season or in pre-season are proving to
be pretenders to national apsirations. With Notre Dame's depth and
talent, they should waltz their way to a national championship game
against Virginia, providing Virginia can stay undefeated.
NAZZ
|
388.62 | | 16400::HEISER | diet := set taste/none | Mon Oct 22 1990 16:09 | 4 |
| > USC - routed by Arizona 35-26, after leading 17-7 at the half. Out
> of the Rose Bowl picture already. Rated a generous #20 by USA today.
GO WILDCATS!!
|
388.63 | N.D. and Who ? | 3230::SAPP | Free the DEC 100,000 ! | Mon Oct 22 1990 17:41 | 6 |
| RE:.53
> #1 vs. #2 for the national title, ...
Could just mean ND and somebody else.
Edwin
|
388.64 | Huskers vs Irish ?? Sounds good... | BSS::M_HENDERSON | Bart Simpson - My Hero, Man !!! | Mon Oct 22 1990 20:05 | 9 |
| Personally, I'd like to see ND vs Nebraska in the Orange Bowl for
number 1. Not because I like ND but because this would be a game
full of good ole tradition. Huskers and Irish being long time
college football powers.
Plus, if Nebraska plays the Cav's then after a Nebraska victory people
would say that it is hollow because of Virginia's schedule.
Nebraska Marty
|
388.65 | ? | 33864::B_ADAMS | Rocky Horror is on his way! | Mon Oct 22 1990 20:52 | 8 |
| .64� Plus, if Nebraska plays the Cav's then after a Nebraska victory people
.64� would say that it is hollow because of Virginia's schedule.
What would they say after a UVa win? It was nothing, we didn't want
to win anyway?
B.A.
|
388.66 | Be careful what you ask for, you might get it!!!! | 33864::M_PHILLIPS | Flirting With Disaster | Mon Oct 22 1990 23:10 | 15 |
| I would hope Osborne would be man enough to accept a defeat by UVA if
that becomes the case. And not be like Switzer and cry after being beat
by an ACC team(Clemson).
You NU fans may want to think back a few years, when you guy's were
asking...........CLEMSON, Where the H*ll is Clemson????? Ya'll found
pretty quick, if I remember correctly. UVA might do you guy's
the same way. I like NU!! I have been to university twice and enjoyed
my visit, people are friendly and the place is big. I especially liked
the museum, I spent over half a day in there, the girl I went to see at
N.U. got mad and left me in there and it was hell trying to find my
back to her dorm, but I did and all was fine.:-) You guy's have some
nice women there also. Anyway thats another matter.
M.J.
|
388.67 | addition to last reply | 33864::M_PHILLIPS | Flirting With Disaster | Mon Oct 22 1990 23:18 | 11 |
| Marty, when I was there I got alot of funny stares. I quess it had
nothing to do with me wearing my University South Carolina shirt. One
guy came up to me and said that USC was the hardest hitting team he had
ever seen and we talked for alittle while longer and after he left I
asked the girl I was with who that was and she said he was the QB. I
went up there a few months after they played each other. That was a
good game as I remember.
Sorry people, didn't mean to bore you!!!!!!!!!!!
M.J.
|
388.68 | Average my butt... | 33864::RJONES | | Tue Oct 23 1990 03:39 | 10 |
| RE:.61 Get real pal.. 'Bama has a better football team then their
record shows. They have had a bunch or injuries to key players, and
have been hurt by special teams play. Let ND bring their irish ass into
Knoxville and we'll show them and you why we are still ranked #11. I
would expect as much from a person who thinks BYU should be in top 10.
It's obvious you don't know a horse from a mule...
RJ
SEC football is #1
|
388.69 | :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) This is great!!!! | 33864::M_PHILLIPS | Flirting With Disaster | Tue Oct 23 1990 03:59 | 3 |
| And on the seventh day.............................. :-) :-)
M.J.
|
388.70 | Vols vs. Irish | 33864::T_OSBORNE | | Tue Oct 23 1990 04:57 | 5 |
| Re:.61
Remember Stanford???? Vols a much better team. I hope the Irish team
feels the same as you do. Look for Vols to open it up against Irish,
they have nothing to lose.
|
388.71 | Cavs for real? I dont think so! Hommie dont play that! | 5734::WORRALL | | Tue Oct 23 1990 08:48 | 11 |
| Virginia reminds me of the West Virginia squad a few years back. You
remember same type of team Major Harris at Quarterback a few fleet wide
receivers and running backs. Well remember what happened to that West
Virginia squad, they got there butt kicked by Notre Dame. I like the
current pressure in recent years for the #1 team to play a high rated
team. Several years ago BYU won the national championship by beating
a 6-5 Michigan team. At least in the last few years the #1 or #2 ranked
team had to play a very high ranked tough opponent.
Greg
|
388.72 | Vols are no pushovers | 33864::D_SMITH | | Tue Oct 23 1990 08:48 | 14 |
| .61� Tennessee - lost at home to an uncharacteristically poor Alabama
.61� team 9-6. Haven't been able to win a big game all year. Somehow
.61� with a loss and two ties still ranked #11.
What do you call the big blowout over Florida (45-3) ?? The two
ties were with two top ten teams (Colorado,Auburn), with Auburn ranked
#2 and CU ranked #10. Notre Dame will not be at home Nov. 10 also so
there will be no Irish luck that day.
Waiting for ND,
Dave
|
388.73 | Not BYU's fault | 34223::HUNT | No. 1 Ranked Virginia Cavaliers | Tue Oct 23 1990 09:20 | 11 |
| � Several years ago BYU won the national championship by beating a 6-5
� Michigan team.
BYU won the WAC conference championship that year and were thus locked
into going to the Holiday Bowl in San Diego. They had no option that
would allow them to go to a "bigger" bowl.
The other schools went off to the bigger bowls for the bigger money and
BYU ended up beating a mediocre Michigan team.
Bob Hunt
|
388.74 | | 8750::JOHNSTON | LegitimateSportingPurpose?E.S.A.D.! | Tue Oct 23 1990 09:20 | 8 |
| How `bout:
Nebraska loses to CU and OU
Wahoos drop to Tech
Auburn and Notre Dame in the (?) Bowl
Mike JN
|
388.75 | More facts about Notre Dame's "tough" schedule | 4159::NAZZARO | Eight lbs of stupid in a 5 lb bag | Tue Oct 23 1990 09:52 | 25 |
| Let's take a closer look at Notre Dame's schedule. So far, they are
5-1, and ONLY MIAMI OF THE TEAMS THEY HAVE PLAYED THUS FAR HAS A BETTER
THAN .500 RECORD!!!!!!
Michigan 3-3
Michigan State 2-3-1
Purdue (!) 1-5
Stanford (LOSS) 2-5
Air Force 3-4
Miami 4-2
-------------------
TOTAL RECORD 15-22-1 NOT VERY IMPRESSIVE!!!!!!!!!!!
The teams left on ND's schedule are playing slightly better than those
they have played thus far, but not by much. Here are their records:
Pittsburgh 3-3-1
Navy (!!) 3-3 (Lost 24-7 to Air Force!!!)
Tennessee 4-1-2
Penn State 4-2
Southern Cal 5-2
___________________
TOTAL RECORD 19-11-3
NAZZ
|
388.76 | Pat Dye for another tie!!! | 5734::WORRALL | | Tue Oct 23 1990 09:54 | 5 |
| Auburn would be a real great bowl catch. Maybe Pat Dye could go for
another tie. A few years back he kicks a field goal vs Syracuse in the
Sugar Bowl and ties, give me a break folks.
|
388.77 | | 10881::DEVLIN_JO | Burma? Why'd you say Burma? | Tue Oct 23 1990 10:56 | 14 |
| Nazz,
What were the records of the teams when they played Notre Dame???
ANd, who has a tougher schedule, Nazz - back up the bashing - Auburn?
HawHawHaw. Florida State? They've played 2 tough teams and lost
both times - overrated tothe max. Florida?/ A wimp schedule.
And ND doesn't play any division 1-AA teams, like certain other
schools.
The 3-3 Michigan team is probably better than a hail of alot of
4-1 and 5-2 teams that play creampuff schedules.
JD
|
388.78 | Even Brent knows | 10550::JOLMAMA | Hulk-a-Mania is dead. | Tue Oct 23 1990 11:30 | 14 |
| Brent Musburger of ABC during the Huskies 52-16 romp over Stanford:
"You know, what I've come to realize is the Eastern bias toward the
Pac-10. I don't think the Pac-10 get the credit it deserves. If
Washington played Virginia and USC played Georgia Tech, I think
you'd have to favor Washington and SC."
Brent is correct. If Brent were privy to this notes file, he'd
take even a stronger position on this issue.
|
388.79 | | 16565::MAY_BR | Put a muzzle on Marge | Tue Oct 23 1990 11:32 | 5 |
|
Wouldn't a Cal-Minnesota Rose Bowl be great? It could happen,
especially if Cal can beat Washington this week.
I guess parity is the nemesis
|
388.80 | Or is it Brent doesn't know, again? | NAC::G_WAUGAMAN | | Tue Oct 23 1990 12:13 | 11 |
|
> "You know, what I've come to realize is the Eastern bias toward the
> Pac-10. I don't think the Pac-10 get the credit it deserves. If
> Washington played Virginia and USC played Georgia Tech, I think
> you'd have to favor Washington and SC."
Same would apply to the SEC, in at least as big a way.
glenn (still trying to figure out how Oregon STATE beat Arizona who
then beat USC in a two-week stretch)
|
388.81 | | PNO::HEISER | Ibanez: the axe built to blast! | Tue Oct 23 1990 12:27 | 6 |
| > glenn (still trying to figure out how Oregon STATE beat Arizona who
> then beat USC in a two-week stretch)
The Wildcats took them too lightly. Simple as that.
Mike
|
388.82 | | BSS::M_HENDERSON | Bart Simpson - My Hero, Man !!! | Tue Oct 23 1990 13:53 | 14 |
| re: .65
> What would they say after a UVa win? It was nothing, we didn't want
> to win anyway?
Well, if the Huskers did loose in the Orange Bowl to Virginia, then the
only thing we could say is what every good Husker says after Nebraska
looses...
...DAGGUMMIT, another national championship down the drain !!!!!
Nebraska Marty
|
388.83 | Brent sucks............... | RAVEN1::M_PHILLIPS | Flirting With Disaster | Tue Oct 23 1990 21:53 | 5 |
| What does Brent know???????????????????? Not much!!! IMO!!!!
We need to ask Bo!!! :-)
M.J.
|
388.84 | For Sale - Johnny Majors | RAVEN1::RJONES | | Wed Oct 24 1990 02:42 | 9 |
| Mike, Such talk. Brent is a big Cock fan isn't he....
What about Auburn to win it all... They have to go to Florida and
Alabama and they have Georgia at home. They could be undefeated, but
who would they play in the sugar bowl ?? Why should UVa want to go and
play in another bowl and take a chance of being beaten. They can go
play a 7-4 Oklahoma or Penn state, win and be national champions.
RJ (Nebraska may have the best hand... lot of football left)
|
388.85 | That don't mean I agree with the man!!! | RAVEN1::M_PHILLIPS | Flirting With Disaster | Wed Oct 24 1990 04:14 | 24 |
| Yea!!! Brent likes the Cocks, but that don't mean I have to agree with
the guy.
One can look at one's schedule and say what they may, but like I said
before.......ANY team can be beat by ANY team at ANY time. Look at how
many times this has happened this year. BYU/MAIMI, ND/STANFORD,
UT/ALABAMA, S.Carolina/CITADEL........clearly lesser football teams
have been better on that particular day and beat the "better" team. And
for someone to say that Nebraska and S.Cal are better than UVA and
G.A.Tech is clearly ones opinion and CAN'T be proven till they play the
other.
True UVA isn't playing a tough schedule, but h*ll Nebraska hasn't
played not one ranked team as of yet and they are ranked high 'cause of
their reputation and until they beat some known teams, i.e UC, Oklahoma
I think they are overranked. As I feel UVA is, also. But, I'm not
taking anything away from them, they are undefeated and deserve the
credit that is given to them and until they are beaten the polls will
remain the way they are..............F*cked Up!!!!!!!
I also heard that Furman and Wofford University's are going to schedule
S.Carolina for their homecoming's next year!!! :-) :-) :-)
M.J.
|
388.86 | | BSS::M_HENDERSON | Bart Simpson - My Hero, Man !!! | Wed Oct 24 1990 08:54 | 7 |
| Say what you want about Nebraska's schedule, and it has been weak, they
will get the chance to prove themselves Nov. 3 vs Colorado and Nov. 23
at Oklahoma. I dont think the Huskers should be as high as number 2
right now. But if they win those 2 games I believe they SHOULD then be
# 1.
Nebraska Marty
|
388.87 | | BSS::JCOTANCH | Stanford 36, Notre Dame 31!!! | Wed Oct 24 1990 09:03 | 5 |
| re -1
Considering the fact that UVA is ranked #1 with their schedule, Nebraska
DOES deserve to be ranked #2.
Joe
|
388.88 | | RIPPLE::DEVLIN_JO | Perhaps it came from next door | Wed Oct 24 1990 10:08 | 14 |
| USA TOday listed possible Bowl matchups (IF all the participants
win the games they must...)
Virgina vs. Auburn in SUgar
Notre Dame vs. Nebraska in the Orange
Wash vs. Illinois in Rose
Tenn. vs. Iowa in Fiesta
Texas vs. Miami in Cotton
Florida State vs. COlorado in the Citrus
CLemson vs. Penn State in Hall of Fame
Georgia Tech vs. Michigan in the Gator
JD
|
388.89 | | QUASER::JOHNSTON | LegitimateSportingPurpose?E.S.A.D.! | Wed Oct 24 1990 10:25 | 21 |
| Although it's great for the `Hoo fans. UV doesn't deserve to be ranked
#1
Being unbeaten has little to do with it.
Wyoming is 8 - 0
Why not make them #1?
It won't happen, because A) Wyoming doesn't play a tough schedule
(although they'll get BYU) and B) They aren't on the East Coast.
Since UV has a weak schedule, also... I can only attribute the #1
ranking to reason B).... They are on the East Coast.
So again we have pinhaided, weevilbrained, comsymp, neoliberal,
Eastern, bleedin heart-types determining the contenduhs for the
Mythical.
This is a sad day
Mike JN
|
388.90 | Even their coach has said they've been lucky | NAC::G_WAUGAMAN | | Wed Oct 24 1990 10:32 | 11 |
|
> So again we have pinhaided, weevilbrained, comsymp, neoliberal,
> Eastern, bleedin heart-types determining the contenduhs for the
> Mythical.
Hahaha! Maybe those 21-12 beatings of your Weber States and your 52-51
defensive struggles against San Diego St. has something to do with it.
At least I'll give credit to Virginia for thrashing their competition.
glenn
|
388.91 | | QUASER::JOHNSTON | LegitimateSportingPurpose?E.S.A.D.! | Wed Oct 24 1990 10:49 | 16 |
| � Hahaha! Maybe those 21-12 beatings of your Weber States and your 52-51
� defensive struggles against San Diego St. has something to do with it.
� At least I'll give credit to Virginia for thrashing their competition.
Snot the point, Walkman.
Point tis... they're 8 - 0
Best record in the nation.
Since quality of opponent seems to have little or no bearing on the
ranking.... Wyoming has a legitimate claim.
Point tis... they're not even looked at as a top tenner.
Point tis... UV's East Coast affiliation seems to me to be a key
factor in their ranking.
KnowhatImean, Jellybean?
Mike JN
|
388.92 | Wow | SHALOT::HUNT | No. 1 Ranked Virginia Cavaliers | Wed Oct 24 1990 11:09 | 9 |
| � Point tis... UV's East Coast affiliation seems to me to be a key
So now it's the physical location of the school that's the crime.
Sheesh, you guys are amazing. I guess if that's true, we can all be
thankful that T doesn't do the rankings because I'm sure that some
school in Norfolk playing in the SEC would be ranked No. 1.
Bob Hunt
|
388.93 | Even Fresno State cracked the Top 25 | NAC::G_WAUGAMAN | | Wed Oct 24 1990 11:42 | 12 |
|
That may be AP logic, Mike, but it's not mine. I'm trying to be as
objective as is possible without a playoff. Agreed, it's far from
perfect.
Personally, I think 6-0 Houston at #6 is the most overrated team in
the country right now. Undefeated means a lot to the pollsters. Once
a lesser-regarded undefeated team that doesn't play the tough
competition loses, they drop a mile. Watch and see.
glenn
|
388.94 | Thanks! | MILPND::VLASAK | Flatliners for Mass...YES on #3 | Wed Oct 24 1990 11:53 | 5 |
|
Anyone have the latest UPI ratings?
Bob V.
|
388.95 | blind right coasters | WSE037::JOLMAMA | Hulk-a-Mania is dead. | Wed Oct 24 1990 12:01 | 15 |
| regarding note .89
Right on. Even mush mouthed, East-Coast bigoted Brent, sees the
errors of his ways. And you, our east-coast brethern don't.
Why?
In all the babble, no mention is made of Washington, Houston, Wyoming.
Wyoming's schedule cannot be much weaker than U of VAs. Why not
consider Wyoming as #1? Nebraska is undefeated? Dito with Nebraska.
Washington's only loss is to Colorado, yet they are not considered
in this file with the likes of Notre Dame, Miami, Tennessee, et. al.
Football does exit west of the Mississippi.
|
388.96 | | QUASER::JOHNSTON | LegitimateSportingPurpose?E.S.A.D.! | Wed Oct 24 1990 12:07 | 27 |
| � So now it's the physical location of the school that's the crime.
� thankful that T doesn't do the rankings because I'm sure that some
Bubba Hunt,
Yo! You mean T DOESN'T do the rankings?!?!?
Hmmmmph!
PS - The location of the school isn't a crime... but IS a reason, I
think, for the ranking. I felt the Wyoming analogy is fairly apt. We
have a perennial `less than a powerhouse' school in Wyoming that
suddenly spouts an 8-0 record against admittedly weak opponents. We
have a perennial `less than a powerhouse' East Coast school that
suddenly spouts an unbeaten record against admittedly weak opponents.
The East Coast school is ranked #1 in the country, the Wyoming school
barely makes the top twenty five.
So... yes... I think location is a factor.
Also... I still like the Hoos. I'm not real fanatic about ANY college
football teams (kinda like ND, CU... a few others [love the Seminole
fight song]) so if Virginia wins the mythical, I'll probably be real
happy, as long as it's a good game. (But I'll probably still come in
here and think up a ration of excrement to give you about how they
didn't deserve it. ;'D)
Mike JN
|
388.97 | Isn't it a national vote? | KEPNUT::DIGGINS | | Wed Oct 24 1990 13:36 | 7 |
|
Excuse me, but aren't the writers that vote for the #1 team from
all over the country? Any one have a breakdown?
Steve
|
388.98 | | RIPPLE::DEVLIN_JO | Perhaps it came from next door | Wed Oct 24 1990 13:52 | 18 |
| Steve,
One of the kicks I get listening to Mr. KNow-It-ALL is following
the press reports of College Football out here onthe West Coast.
Last weeks' Miami-ND game was buried deep in the sports section.
And the hype of Notre Dame is virtually non-existant (amazingly,
Washington gets all the hype - they must have ND alums in their
PR department). And When I was in Oregon, the papers didnt' hype
the Rocket or the Irish. In fact, here in Seattle, they dropped
the Rocket from their "Heismann hopeful" list after the first week.
Ah yes, that coast-to-coast hype that someone insists permeates
everyone, everywhere.
As for a breakdown of voters: The AP is writers, and the UPI is
a coaches poll.
JD
|
388.99 | Coaches poll is less tainted. | KEPNUT::DIGGINS | | Wed Oct 24 1990 14:22 | 8 |
|
You mean Dandetta(tm)! 8^) I would put more faith in the UPI
poll, I can't imagine idiots like Bob Ryan or Dan Shaughnessy
voting for the #1 college team in the nation.
Steve
|
388.100 | biases in both polls | CNTROL::CHILDS | Don't be fooled, vote YES on #3 | Wed Oct 24 1990 15:04 | 10 |
|
Except Steve, not all the coaches even vote. They hand their slips to
the team manager or one of the assistant coaches. Some coaches do
vote but what's to keep them from being anymore bias that the writers?
Writers obviously vote stronger for who they see but hopefully the
fact they're spread out across the country adds some balance to the
scales. As for coaches do you really think Jimmy Johnson voted ND
#1 in 88?
mike
|
388.101 | Here son...you pick. | KEPNUT::DIGGINS | | Thu Oct 25 1990 06:48 | 8 |
|
Gee Mike, can we trust anyone nowaday's? The towel boy is
voting for the coach! I love it! 8^)
Steve
|
388.102 | the alternative canidate | CNTROL::CHILDS | Lou Duffy's looking for change, spare change | Thu Oct 25 1990 08:45 | 6 |
|
You can trust me Steve... ;^)
also Lou Duffy!!!
mike
|
388.103 | HA HA! | KEPNUT::DIGGINS | | Thu Oct 25 1990 09:39 | 10 |
|
Did you hear the one this morning? A classic Lou Duffy!
"Steal from ya?" "I can't even find my ass wit both hands!"
Lou Duffy's looking for change...spare change. Lou Duffy for
govenor! I was rollin'!
Steve
|
388.104 | NUVSUVA | MILPND::VLASAK | Flatliners for Mass...YES on #3 | Sat Oct 27 1990 21:03 | 9 |
|
IF, and that's a big if, Nebraska beats Colorado next week
and Virginia continues to win, it will be a crime if they are
hooked up in a Bowl game!
Notre Dame should play the only other team Stanford could beat!
Bob V.
|
388.105 | NU by 7 or more... | BSS::M_HENDERSON | Bart Simpson - My Hero, Man !!! | Sun Oct 28 1990 15:46 | 6 |
| I'm goin on-line with this right now !!!
Mighty Huskers will beat Colorado this week at Nebraska. After this game
Huskers * SHOULD * be ranked number 1.
Nebraska Marty
|
388.106 | Nebraska <> #1 | CSC32::J_MANNING | Only Amiga Makes it Possible | Sun Oct 28 1990 15:52 | 3 |
|
I guess you are assuming that UVA will lose to GT?
|
388.107 | | BSS::M_HENDERSON | Bart Simpson - My Hero, Man !!! | Mon Oct 29 1990 09:45 | 18 |
| Hey Auburn John,
No I'm not Assumeing anything. I used the word * SHOULD * !!! That
dosent mean they will.
This weeks poll:
AP UPI
Virginia Virginia
Nebraska ND
ND Nebraska
Auburn Aubrun
Is that correct? Auburn 4th in BOTH polls? I'm not tryin to dig at ya
John, I just cant remember for sure.
Nebraska Marty
|
388.108 | Result of barely losing ground after Stanford loss | HOTSHT::SCHNEIDER | Voted for whatsisname... | Mon Oct 29 1990 12:47 | 6 |
| ND jumped over AUburn in the polls even though both teams won their
games. They've accomplished this "miracle" many times over the course
of my college football fandom. Has ND ever been jumped over in similar
fashion. I don't remember it ever happening.
Dan
|
388.109 | Every week interesting with Notre Dame | NAC::G_WAUGAMAN | | Mon Oct 29 1990 13:25 | 20 |
|
> Has ND ever been jumped over in similar fashion. I don't remember it
> ever happening.
I'm sure it's happened, but probably never when ND was in the Top 5,
which is the situation here. I'm not sure if the pollsters bothered to
watch the ND-Pitt game, but ND as usual played down to the level of the
opponent. Maybe your average voter just caught the score and
highlights of Ismail ripping off two long runs, but otherwise they
didn't play very well, in my opinion. Pitt killed themselves with
penalties as Van Pelt was ripping apart the Irish secondary, a problem
I thought ND had partially solved in the Miami game.
Notre Dame is good, damn good, and probably better than Auburn, but this
particular team does not seem to have the killer instinct the past two
have had. I can see them getting up and beating Tennessee and USC, but
maybe being upset by Penn State at home if they're not careful.
glenn
|
388.110 | Maybe it just happened | NAC::G_WAUGAMAN | | Mon Oct 29 1990 13:30 | 12 |
|
> I'm sure it's happened, but probably never when ND was in the Top 5,
> which is the situation here.
Oops! If Nebraska really is #2 in the AP as was implied in an earlier
note, then Nebraska jumped ND even as both won. And ND beat the
tougher opponent.
Can anyone confirm?
glenn
|
388.111 | Even the priest didn't once mention ND in his sermon! | SASE::SZABO | | Mon Oct 29 1990 13:55 | 5 |
| I didn't even know that ND played this weekend, let alone won! I even
scoured the college football section in the sunday paper and nothing!
The Notre Dame hypesters must've taken a day off...... :-)
Hawk
|
388.112 | | BSS::M_HENDERSON | Bart Simpson - My Hero, Man !!! | Mon Oct 29 1990 13:57 | 10 |
| I placed note .107 in as I remembered hearing it on KOA radio
this morning on the way to work. Therefore what I wrote in that note
might not be accurate.
Also, dosent one of the polls normally come out later today? If so
then how did KOA report on it?
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Nebraska Marty
|
388.113 | Huskies would stop Virginia and ND... | DECWET::METZGER | Quoth the raven,"Eat my shorts" | Mon Oct 29 1990 14:28 | 14 |
|
I can't figure why anybody would jump ND after this weeks victory. I'm a ND
f(d)an and I admit they looked pretty lousy. They've been playing up and down
all season to the level of their competition.
BTW- the paper was full of PItt's praise for the rocket after his 4th quarter
this week. It wasn't coming from a hype machine, it was coming as
direct quotes from the opposition.
Metz - who wishes that the Washington Huskies weren't tied into the Rose Bowl
and could play whomever they wanted to on new Years day. The week big 10
competition isn't going to do anything for them in the Polls.
|
388.114 | | FSOA::JHENDRY | John Hendry, DTN 292-2170 | Mon Oct 29 1990 14:29 | 5 |
| Hawk, ND at Pitt was a night game and if you got an early edition of
whatever paper you read, you wouldn't have seen anything. ND beat Pitt
31-22.
John
|
388.115 | Huh ??? | SHALOT::HUNT | No. 1 Ranked Virginia Cavaliers | Mon Oct 29 1990 14:44 | 15 |
| � The week big 10 competition isn't going to do anything for them in
� the Polls.
I think you meant "weak Pacific 10" competition, didn't you ???
Regardless, how do you see Washington getting the shaft in the polls
when their conference brethern are weak but Virginia benefits when
their conference foes are just as weak, if not weaker ???
I know, I know, it's an East Coast bias, right ???
You guys kill me with your "reasons" why teams are where they are in
the polls. On the field in the dirt is where it's at, boys.
Bob Hunt
|
388.116 | Says Who? | MILPND::VLASAK | Flatliners for Mass...YES on #3 | Mon Oct 29 1990 14:49 | 18 |
| re .110
>Oops! If Nebraska really is #2 in the AP as was implied in an earlier
>note, then Nebraska jumped ND even as both won. And ND beat the
>tougher opponent.
What makes you think ND beat the tougher oppenent?
Pitt was blown away by Oklahoma, a team Iowa St beat the week before.
Iowa State has also played Iowa and Colorado tough. Both had 3-3-1
records going into their respective games. Who has Pitt beaten?
Pitt has a big name...I'd think YOU wouldn't fall into that crap trap.
On top of that Nebraska blew Iowa State away 45-13, N.D. could well
have lost!
Bob V.
|
388.117 | Exactly what *has* been settled on the field? | NAC::G_WAUGAMAN | | Mon Oct 29 1990 15:02 | 30 |
|
> I think you meant "weak Pacific 10" competition, didn't you ???
I think the implication was their Rose Bowl opponent won't help them.
> Regardless, how do you see Washington getting the shaft in the polls
> when their conference brethern are weak but Virginia benefits when
> their conference foes are just as weak, if not weaker ???
Because Washington has a loss and Virginia is undefeated, which as
explained previously is magic to the pollsters. If Washington was
undefeated with their schedule, they'd undoubtedly be #1.
> You guys kill me with your "reasons" why teams are where they are in
> the polls. On the field in the dirt is where it's at, boys.
C'mon, Bob, don't misrepresent us all. There has been some very
rational discussion around this issue. Washington's schedule and
performance to date arguably have shown them to be as good "on the
field and in the dirt" as Virginia or any other team. If you don't
agree based on record completely regardless of schedule, then you at
least need to respond to the issue of the Nebraskas, Houstons, and
Wyomings. Virginia has not beaten any of these undefeated teams on
grass, turf, or any other surface. Guess what? Without a playoff,
they're not going to, leaving the whole thing up for argument.
Virginia is not exempt from that argument, and anyone who disagrees
with the polls is not the conspiratorial dolt you imply.
glenn
|
388.118 | | RIPPLE::DEVLIN_JO | My lasted week as a bachelor | Mon Oct 29 1990 15:04 | 24 |
| I thought Pitt scored a late TD, making the score closer than it
really was (didn't Pitt score 2 td's in the 4th?) I didn't watch
the game.
Re -1: The Big Eight is just chock full of tough opponents. yep.
RE: Washington and Bob Hunt.
The Husky hype here is getting unbearable. Feel like I'm in South
Bend. After all, I thought only Notre Dame had hype. Anyway,
Washington has played one tough opponent in my book, Colorado, and
they got beat. Colorado shot themselve early by getting the early
tie, and as others forget, barely beating Stanford the next week.
Colorado shot themselves early.
That California was still in the running for the Roses is testament
to how weak the Pac10 is. Probably the weakest in the country,
other than the SWC.
Talking about the SWC, is there a more overrated team in the nation
than Houston? Second straight year of no competition and inflated
stats.
JD
|
388.119 | :-) | SHALOT::MEDVID | Dump Jesse Helms | Mon Oct 29 1990 15:07 | 4 |
| �Who has Pitt beaten?
Ohio University. EwwwAhhh.
|
388.120 | | NAC::G_WAUGAMAN | | Mon Oct 29 1990 15:17 | 19 |
|
> Talking about the SWC, is there a more overrated team in the nation
> than Houston? Second straight year of no competition and inflated
> stats.
Like I said in .93, JD, there is not a more overrated team. Houston has
played in some tight games, and when they get up late, they're not happy
with just the two-touchdown victory. They just keep pouring it on with
that run-and-shoot. Very impressive statistically and all that, but
you'd think the pollsters would see through it.
An interesting game for Houston (besides Texas) is Arizona St. on Dec 1.
If the SWC is as generally weak as I think it is, the lowly Sun Devils
(2-5) will probably still give Houston all they can handle. One of the
games Arizona St. *did* win was a thrashing of the very SWC-respectable
Baylor Bears.
glenn
|
388.121 | ND didn't jump--Auburn slipped... | CURIE::CHUANG | What's so Funny 'Bout Peace, Love & U | Mon Oct 29 1990 15:18 | 10 |
|
re. 113
I think the reason ND jumped over Auburn is obvious. Auburn
need a blocked conversion attempt to beat a mediocre Mississippi
St. team 17-16.
I am not a Notre Dame fan.
Peace/ed
|
388.122 | another poll | RIPPLE::DEVLIN_JO | My lasted week as a bachelor | Mon Oct 29 1990 16:48 | 10 |
| USA?TODAY POLL:
1. Virginia
2. Nebraska
3. Notre Dame
4. Houstonj
5. Auburn
Washington (Tie for 5th)
JD
|
388.123 | Once more with feeling | SHALOT::HUNT | No. 1 Ranked Virginia Cavaliers | Mon Oct 29 1990 16:48 | 54 |
| � If Washington was undefeated with their schedule, they'd undoubtedly
� be #1.
But they aren't and so they ain't. If and buts, beer and nuts,
n'est-ce pas ???
� C'mon, Bob, don't misrepresent us all. There has been some very
� rational discussion around this issue.
*Rational* discussion ??? In *here* ??? On this issue ??? Maybe
from a handful of people, yourself included, but that's about it. I
started out by saying that Virginia had a soft schedule way back in
August, fer cripesakes, before the season even started. All I've
gotten is truckloads of grief for what has transpired. If it's not
the schedule, it's the East Coast mentality, if not the East Coast,
it's the Big Ten refs, if not the refs, it's the other teams losing, if
not the losses, it's the lack of a playoff system, if not the system,
then it's the worst thing since BYU and on and on and on ...
Very few people in here have even *dared* to believe that the Cavaliers
actually might have a kickass team. Very few.
� Washington's schedule and performance to date arguably have shown
� them to be as good "on the field and in the dirt" as Virginia or any
� other team.
Apples and oranges. They don't mix.
� If you don't agree based on record completely regardless of
� schedule, then you at least need to respond to the issue of the
� Nebraskas, Houstons, and Wyomings. Virginia has not beaten any of
� these undefeated teams on grass, turf, or any other surface.
And Nebraska, Houston, and Wyoming didn't play Clemson and won't play
Georgia Tech, either. Both of these teams were/are undefeated going
into their games with Virginia. So what ??? Past reputation doesn't
score points. This year's players score the points. *If* Virginia
gets to play any of these teams in a bowl, I hope it's a great game.
Period. End of story.
I will say it again. It is past time that the big boys of college
football acknowledge that their long-time stranglehold on the game is
fast disappearing. Miami was the first team to stake this claim with
their 1983 national title over Nebraska. Other schools like West
Virginia, Colorado, and now Virginia are hammering the point home. The
polls have served their purpose. Back in the days when only about a
dozen or so schools could have hoped for a title. Now the polls and
those schools themselves are out-of-date with the modern realities.
The old football "factories" will be the new "Rust Belt" of college
athletics in the 1990s.
About time some folks in here saw the light, too.
Bob Hunt
|
388.124 | If they could only find the switch!!!!! | 33864::M_PHILLIPS | Flirting With Disaster | Mon Oct 29 1990 23:07 | 1 |
|
|
388.125 | | CBOPC3::ROSS | You've fallen and can't get up! | Tue Oct 30 1990 07:32 | 5 |
| If Virginia loses to Georgia Tech on Saturday, how low do you think
they will drop in the polls? 5th? 10th? It would be hard to
place Virginia in the top 10 in my view if they lose at home to Tech.
I think Tech has a shot...
|
388.126 | Separating parity from schedule | NAC::G_WAUGAMAN | | Tue Oct 30 1990 07:54 | 26 |
|
Okay, ND did *not* get leapfrogged in either poll after last week.
Marty had the order right but the polls reversed. Nebraska is still #2
in the UPI; ND is #2 in the AP.
Bob, I'm on your side on this "new order" thing. Yes, the change has
been coming since the late 70's when the rules were changed. However,
I consider it to be a completely separate issue from the scheduling
one. If parity is now the watchword, more than ever schedule
disparities must be resolved. I shudder to think what will happen in
the 90's if Miami continues to maintain a strong program (and given the
talent in Florida I have no reason to believe that they won't) in their
Big East set-up. If the system is moving towards one of superconferences
where the emphasis is placed solely on winning one's conference, and yet
a poll remains in place, there is little to determine the differences
between conferences outside of a few big end-of-season bowl games.
There are now too many good teams for the bowls to serve this purpose.
Even given our differing opinions on Virginia's overall strength *this
year* (in 1987 it was Syracuse, 1988 West Virginia, next year someone
else), I think you would agree that this could become a problem, and
one that wasn't there fifteen years ago when each year there might be
only a half-dozen legitimate contenders.
glenn
|
388.127 | More ... | SHALOT::HUNT | No. 1 Ranked Virginia Cavaliers | Tue Oct 30 1990 09:32 | 32 |
| � If parity is now the watchword, more than ever schedule disparities
� must be resolved.
I agree. But it doesn't happen overnight since the two issues are not
mutually intertwined. Football schedules are set too far in advance
for this to happen "naturally". Basketball schedules, for example,
are much easier to adjust to talent levels on a year-by-year basis.
Virginia has upgraded its talent beyond its schedule. Nebraska has
downgraded its schedule below its talent. There is a balance
somewhere between these two "extremes".
� I shudder to think what will happen in the 90's if Miami continues to
� maintain a strong program (and given the talent in Florida I have no
� reason to believe that they won't) in their Big East set-up.
There is no Big East football. The Big East now has four independents
(Pitt, Miami, Syracuse, and BC) who will gradually move towards playing
each other. Each of these teams will still have 7 other
non-conference games to line up.
� There are now too many good teams for the bowls to serve this purpose.
Parity. Plain and simple. And Virginia is as good or better than
anyone else *this* year. Not year in and year out. *This* year.
� I think you would agree that this could become a problem
I'm not sure what exactly you mean by a "problem" but I know I'm
enjoying this year's "problem" immensely.
Bob Hunt
|
388.128 | That's unless these schools decide to become football factories | NAC::G_WAUGAMAN | | Tue Oct 30 1990 10:11 | 18 |
|
> There is no Big East football. The Big East now has four independents
> (Pitt, Miami, Syracuse, and BC) who will gradually move towards playing
> each other. Each of these teams will still have 7 other
> non-conference games to line up.
I understand this. But there is talk of adding others, including West
Virginia and the likes of Virginia Tech, Temple, Rutgers, etc., and/or
aligning with the SWC or ACC. Given the great football I've gotten
used to seeing Miami play in the 1980's (ND, Penn State, Oklahoma,
Michigan, Florida St., Florida, etc.), neither prospect excites me.
You would think that the NCAA might have the foresight to start
thinking about what all these superconference deals will do to the
overall product and react appropriately (right now it's every man for
himself), but then again this is the NCAA we're talking about.
glenn
|
388.129 | confused and incoherent | WSE028::JOLMAMA | Hulk-a-Mania is dead. | Tue Oct 30 1990 15:58 | 18 |
| regarding note .115
To state that Washington's (PAC10) "conference brethern are weak", is
babble, pure unadulterated babble.
note .118
To state that California is in the running, shows how weak the PAC10 is.
More true, clear and clean babble, of the highest order.
Please do not compare USC, California, Standford, Oregon, ASU,
Arizona State- even WSU and UCLA with Virginia's conference foes.
Want parity- it exists at the highest level in the PAC10.
The NY Times poll, based on records and opponents records has
U ov VA ranked 1, and the Huskies #2.
|
388.130 | Going for the sympathy vote | HOTSHT::SCHNEIDER | Voted for whatsisname... | Wed Oct 31 1990 11:24 | 4 |
| JD's hero, Lou Holtz says that Notre Dame shouldn't even be in the top
10.
Dan
|
388.131 | | WMOIS::RIEU_D | Read his lips...Know new taxes! | Wed Oct 31 1990 11:33 | 2 |
| Right Dan, then he'll whine if he isn't.
Denny
|
388.132 | | BSS::JCOTANCH | Stanford 36, Notre Dame 31!!! | Wed Oct 31 1990 11:39 | 9 |
| > Right Dan, then he'll whine if he isn't.
Exactly. If ND's #1 Holtz cries that they're undeserving. When
they're not #1 (i.e. after last year's Orange Bowl) he cries that ND
should be #1.
Joe
|
388.133 | | BSS::M_HENDERSON | Bart Simpson - My Hero, Man !!! | Wed Oct 31 1990 12:01 | 11 |
| I fail to see hard logic behind the hate for Notre Dame. As you know
I am an AVID Nebraska fan so I have my bias. But I fail to see why
people hate ND so much. Man, ND can do NOTHING right according to some
of you guys.
I'd even like to see Nebraska vs ND in the Orange Bowl. What a matchup
and what tradition.
What Gives?
Nebraska Marty GO BIG RED !!!
|
388.134 | if buzzards had bugles for a...... | WSE037::JOLMAMA | Hulk-a-Mania is dead. | Wed Oct 31 1990 12:08 | 12 |
|
WHAT IF:
Illinois had not played Arizona, the Illini would be ranked #1.
Notre Dame had not played Stanford, the Irish would be ranked #1.
BYU had not played Oregon, the Cougars would be ranked #1.
U of VA played any of the above, or Wahsington, USC, ASU,
the Cavaliers would not be ranked #1.
|
388.135 | The Pac-10: conference of upsets and little else | NAC::G_WAUGAMAN | | Wed Oct 31 1990 12:23 | 27 |
|
> Illinois had not played Arizona, the Illini would be ranked #1.
> Notre Dame had not played Stanford, the Irish would be ranked #1.
> BYU had not played Oregon, the Cougars would be ranked #1.
But let's not forget the most important one:
If Washington had not played Colorado, the Huskies would be ranked #1.
While the Pac-10 may be well-balanced, seven of its ten teams have lost
out of conference. The other three are Arizona, with only two games
outside of the Pac-10, one against New Mexico; Oregon, with two WAC,
one Big Sky, and one Big West opponent; and USC, which has a game
remaining with Notre Dame. All that and only Washington appears to
have established any superiority within the conference.
The Pac-10 is 9-8 overall against the Big-10, Big-8, SWC, and 1-A
Independents (no games against the SEC or ACC). They are, however, a
stellar 9-5 against the always-tough WAC, Big Sky, and Big West.
Obviously an underrated conference, this Pac-10.
Clearly, Brent Musberger doesn't know what he's talking about, again.
glenn
|
388.136 | | FSOA::JHENDRY | John Hendry, DTN 292-2170 | Wed Oct 31 1990 12:51 | 32 |
| Marty,
Irrational hate for Notre Dame? Nope, not me. I admire the way they
took an advantage and parlayed it into what they are today. By virtue
of their being the premier football-playing Catholic university, they
captured a natural market and the press in our urban locales. They
became one of the first truly national universities along with Army and
Navy, who also had a natural constituency. They continue to exploit
that advantage today and there's nothing wrong with it, it's just good
business sense.
What I object to about Notre Dame is the perceived overrating at times
of some of their players and of the program. I don't blame Notre Dame
for that, I blame the people who do the rating, but it doesn't make me
like Notre Dame any better. What I really object to is the sanctimony
coming from the school in general, and the whining and complaining from
Lou Holtz in particular. If the place is going to set itself up as
something special and far above the rest of the rabble then it has to
expect to not be liked by a lot of people and to hear a lot of
rejoicing when they fall.
It's kind of like what used to happen with UMass in football when we
played Harvard. Being called "barbarians", being looked down upon
because we were a state university and hearing chants like "you may be
winning but you'll all be working for us someday" coming from a bunch
of tweed clad, nerdy looking four eyed dweebs who wouldn't know if a
football is blown up or stuffed really got under my skin. Same thing
with Notre Dame. They think they're better than everyone else. In
some ways they are, but it doesn't mean I have to like hearing about it
all the time.
John
|
388.137 | Long distance pat on the back | SHALOT::MEDVID | Dump Jesse Helms | Wed Oct 31 1990 13:06 | 8 |
| Thank you, John Hendry, for another note that is the definitive reply
to all previous notes in a topic. Maybe this one should be marked for
mandatory reading also.
John, you really don't belong in this conference. You make too much
sense.
--dan'l
|
388.138 | | PARITY::LEFEBVRE | Let's go places and eat things | Wed Oct 31 1990 13:09 | 3 |
| Sheesh...you guys aren't gonna swap spit or anything, are you?
Mark.
|
388.139 | | SASE::SZABO | The Beer Hunter | Wed Oct 31 1990 13:19 | 5 |
| John, go to the head of the class! :-)
Mark, go to the principal's office again! :-)
Hawk
|
388.140 | beavers | WSE028::JOLMAMA | Hulk-a-Mania is dead. | Wed Oct 31 1990 13:45 | 6 |
| regarding .135
Ya, but three of the loses were by Oregon State, the Wake Forest,
Kansas, (but not William and Mary) of the PAC10.
|
388.141 | | FSOA::JHENDRY | John Hendry, DTN 292-2170 | Wed Oct 31 1990 13:50 | 5 |
| Thanks, Dan'l.
No thanks, Mark, he's not my type.
John
|
388.142 | Just following the rules: good with the bad | NAC::G_WAUGAMAN | | Wed Oct 31 1990 13:54 | 12 |
|
> Ya, but three of the loses were by Oregon State, the Wake Forest,
> Kansas, (but not William and Mary) of the PAC10.
Whenever I've made an argument against the Pac-10 being that great,
it's mainly been based on their weakness at the top over the past
decade, to which the response has been "yeah, but what about top to
bottom...". Unfortunately, Oregon State happens to be at the very
bottom. Even Kansas crushed 'em.
glenn
|
388.143 | You can't be serious!!!!!!!!!!!!! | RAVEN1::M_PHILLIPS | Flirting With Disaster | Wed Oct 31 1990 23:48 | 4 |
| rep .134 You need to get into comedy!!!!!! :-)
M.J.
|
388.144 | Lou, come on down | RAVEN1::RJONES | | Sun Nov 04 1990 08:40 | 7 |
| Notre Dame #1...
For a week only till we kick their a$$ Saturday..
UT by a bunch... GO BIG ORANGE
Rich
|
388.145 | Washington stting pretty | CADSYS::CAVE | | Sun Nov 04 1990 19:45 | 10 |
| Many teams were eliminated from National championship contention over
the week-end (Virginia, Auburn, Nebraska, Illinois).
I think it looks real good for Washington right now. I feel ND will
either slip this coming Saturday against Tenn or at USC but still
win their bowl game. Washington only has a home game against UCLA
and away at Washington ST with a potential ROSE bowl match with IOWA.
Alan
|
388.146 | USA Today Top 10 | HBAHBA::HAAS | Big Smile at the Drivethrough | Mon Nov 05 1990 06:54 | 14 |
| CNN/USA Top 10
1. Notre Dame
2. Washington
3. Houston
4. Colorado
5. Miami-FL
6. Georgia Tech
7. Iowa
8. BYU
9. Virginia
10. Tennessee
TTom
|
388.147 | Champions play defense, too... | NAC::G_WAUGAMAN | | Mon Nov 05 1990 08:43 | 13 |
|
It's starting to look like a Washington-Iowa matchup in the Rose Bowl
will be as close as we get to a national championship game (if ND loses
against one of three tough remaining opponents). It's as interesting a
matchup as any, too.
Don't worry about Houston, either. They haven't played their toughest
games yet (Texas and Arizona St). It remains to be seen what will
happen when they run up against a defense. And how can a national
championship team give up NCAA-record passing yardage against TCU?
glenn
|
388.148 | ND gets my respect! | EARRTH::WORRALL | | Mon Nov 05 1990 09:31 | 9 |
| Well as noted earlier Virginia is not all that they where cracked up to be.
Hey love them or hate them, Notre Dame plays a incrediable schedule and
comes to play every week. Tom Osborn proved again how much of a stiff
he truly is. Real tough schedule Tom. Once again it reaffirms the
need for a college playoff. Looking forward to ND-Tenn, for you Boston
fans thats channel 7 at 2pm this Saturday!!!!
Greg
|
388.149 | We need a playoff system for sure now | SHALOT::MEDVID | Dump Jesse Helms | Mon Nov 05 1990 09:48 | 9 |
| It seems, however, that Georgia Tech is not being given the credit for
a great win. Come on, folks, Virginia was "what it was cracked up to
be." Georgia Tech beat them. GT is 7-0-1. For this team not to be in
the top five is a crime.
Can someone post the remaining schedules for the top five teams? The
whole bowl picture is a mess.
--dan'l
|
388.150 | | ROCK::GRONOWSKI | the dream is always the same... | Mon Nov 05 1990 09:52 | 11 |
|
<<< OURGNG::SYS$SYSDEVICE:[NOTES$LIBRARY]SPORTS.NOTE;2 >>>
-< OURGNG::SPORTS - Digital's daily tabloid >-
================================================================================
Note 388.6 College Football- Who's #1? 6 of 149
ROCK::GRONOWSKI "the dream is always the same..." 3 lines 16-OCT-1990 14:32
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UVa will lost to GaTech... so there's no need to worry about them.
|
388.151 | Virginia top 5 material if they hadn't choked. | RHETT::KNORR | Carolina Blue | Mon Nov 05 1990 10:05 | 12 |
| > Georgia Tech beat them. GT is 7-0-1. For this team not to be in
> the top five is a crime.
All true dan'l but that "1" hanging on the end of their record was
against a North Carolina team that had won exactly 2 games the last 2
years! (Both the wins were of the 1AA kind too.)
We've improved, granted, but not enough to beat a legitimate Top 5
team. Virginia should've won but (IMHO) they choked in a big game ...
- ACC Chris
|
388.152 | | BSS::JCOTANCH | CU: Back-to-Back Big 8 Champs | Mon Nov 05 1990 10:13 | 12 |
| > We will try to help you all move higher after we kick NDs a$$ this
> Saturday in Knoxville.
> Go Vols
You know it!!
Which brings me directly to my point. With all this talk from the Lee
Corso and the newspapers about CU and ND meeting in the Orange Bowl, you
would think that ND had cancelled their game with Tennessee!
Joe
|
388.153 | | 29575::ROLLINS_R | | Mon Nov 05 1990 10:36 | 4 |
| Tennessee plays a big game against Notre Dame this weekend in
Knoxville, and then travels to Memphis to play Mississippi. That
game may even be a more important game, as the UT-Ole Miss winner
will probably be the Sugar Bowl host team.
|
388.154 | remaining schedules for Top 10 | HBAHBA::HAAS | Big Smile at the Drivethrough | Mon Nov 05 1990 11:44 | 14 |
| CNN/USA Top 10 remaining schedules:
1. Notre Dame at Tennessee, Penn St, at Southern Cal.
2. Washington UCLA, at Washington St.
3. Houston at Texas, East Washington, Arizona St (Tokyo).
4. Colorado Oklahoma St, Kansas St.
5. Miami-FL Boston College, Syracuse, at San Diego St.
6. Ga Tech Va Tech, at Wake Forest, at Georgia.
7. Iowa Ohio St, Purdue, at Minnesota.
8. BYU at Wyoming, at Utah, Utah St, at Hawaii.
9. Virginia at No Carolina, Maryland, at Va Tech.
10. Tennessee Notre Dame, Mississippi (Memphis), Kentucky, at Vanderbilt.
TTom
|
388.155 | Washington Huskies: best team in the country? | HOTSHT::SCHNEIDER | Voted for whatsisname... | Mon Nov 05 1990 11:50 | 8 |
| Washington should be #1. They play a reasonably tough schedule, and
the only loss they have had is to an obviously tough Colorado team. As
I pointed out week's ago, the voter's leniency with Notre Dame after
they lost to Stanford was a clear example of the things that go on off
the field that annually keep Notre Dame closer to the top then they
often deserve.
Dan
|
388.156 | don't cry for the PAC 10 | HBAHBA::HAAS | Big Smile at the Drivethrough | Mon Nov 05 1990 12:09 | 14 |
| I like Washington a lot but I don't have a lot of sympathy for PAC10 or
Big10 schools about being no 1. If they weren't tie to the almighty
dollar of the Rose Bowl, they could go to other bowls and win a national
champhioship.
Also, until the conferences abandon their tie-ins with the bowls, there
won't be a national playoff. The SEC has also suffered from this being
locked into the Sugar Bowl.
Notre Dame has all of the marketing necessary to keep them high in the
rankings. However, they can't win the national championship without
winning on New Year's Day. They also have a talent at doing this.
TTom
|
388.157 | CU should be in top 3 | BSS::MENDEZ | | Mon Nov 05 1990 12:17 | 9 |
| How in the world can CU be ranked behind a team that they beat?
CU has played one of if not the toughest schedule in the country.
Tennessee, Washington, Texas, Illinois, Oklahoma, Nebraska and the
team that beat ND at home.
Frank Mendez
|
388.158 | They have TWO losses | SHALOT::MEDVID | Dump Jesse Helms | Mon Nov 05 1990 12:22 | 6 |
| And should have lost to Missouri but were given 5 downs to beat them.
The pollsters won't forget this. And if CU should play for the
national championship, they'll never get the respect of any of the
media because you'll see the 5th down on TV over and over and over...
--dan'l
|
388.159 | ND: it ain't pretty, but they win | NAC::G_WAUGAMAN | | Mon Nov 05 1990 12:23 | 23 |
|
I can't decide between Notre Dame and Washington and if it comes down
to both having the one loss after the bowls it'll be a crying shame,
but I'd have to go with ND on the basis of schedule. Washington has
been laying it on teams lately, but other than the one major shocker ND
has done nothing but win. If that were to continue against Tennessee,
Penn State, USC, and say Colorado in the Orange I don't think you could
question the selection. Additionally, they convincingly beat what I
still consider to be one of the three best teams in the country, Miami.
Pretty solid credentials. Dan?
Is it worse to beat all your worthy opponents in the big games but
suffer a letdown against an obviously inferior team like Stanford or to
beat all but one of your tough opponents like Washington has done? I
lean towards the former. In the latter case, Colorado can make a
strong claim to being better than Washington, especially since their
tie came in an extra pre-season game against one of the toughest teams
in the country (Tennessee), a gamble that raises additional revenue
for the program but can only hurt your ranking. Obviously, Stanford can
not make a similar claim against Notre Dame. Thus far, no one can.
glenn
|
388.160 | CU may still have a chance | BSS::MENDEZ | | Mon Nov 05 1990 12:42 | 5 |
| I have this feeling that the teams who need to lose for CU to end
up number 1 will indeed lose. I just hope that CU does not go
flat against OSU and K State.
Frank Mendez.
|
388.161 | THe Huskies are a good team but should prove it on the field against top quality opposition. | DECWET::METZGER | Quoth the raven,"Eat my shorts" | Mon Nov 05 1990 12:52 | 25 |
|
I would love to see a rematch of the CU - Washington game. IMHO these are the
2 best teams in the country right now. If ND makes it through the rest of their
schedule undefeated and plays CU in the Orange bowl then I think that that
game should be for the national championship.
Everybody has Husky fever around here but the papers say that all they want to
do is go to the Rose Bowl. They aren't playing for a national championship.
Unfortunately they are tied into the Rose Bowl and will never get the
opportunity to play for one. I agree with the previous noter that said the
PAC-10 and the Big 10 have sold out National Championship aspirations for the
$$$$.
Washington has been killing their opponents and I think that they are a great
team but the only top level competition they have played this year is CU and
they lost to them. I would love to see the Huskies win the Nat championship
but I would rather see them play the best ranked team at the time for it
instead of previously selected conference champion that might not even be ranked
in the top 5 come bowl time.
If Washington wins the mythical championship by beating an unworthy foe in the
Rose Bowl and watching a team like CU beat ND in the Orange Bowl than I will
consider it as weak a championship as BYU's was.
Metz
|
388.162 | You've been affected by the hype | HOTSHT::SCHNEIDER | Voted for whatsisname... | Mon Nov 05 1990 13:00 | 29 |
| >If that were to continue against Tennessee,
>Penn State, USC, and say Colorado in the Orange I don't think you could
>question the selection. Additionally, they convincingly beat what I
>still consider to be one of the three best teams in the country, Miami.
>Pretty solid credentials. Dan?
If they go on winning against that crew of teams, AND Washington goes
on winning, a lot of credit has to be given to ND's strength of
schedule. But will they face a Colorado team that is a much better
team than last year, or will they search for the overmatched opponent
come bowl time as they have the last two years?
I don't see, Glenn, how you say it's better to lose to a patsy on the
schedule than one of the tough teams, as is the case you seem to be
making for ND over Washington. You say ND suffered a letdown, which
sounds more like excuse-making marketing hype, yet don't apply the same
hype to Washington's loss against a far superior team. I think what
you might mean is that ND can force this sort of sleight-of-hand down
the voter's throats than they could a loss to Miami. Should good
marketing decide the National Championship.
As was shown with other teams that lost to much better teams than
Stanford, a non-ND team which suffered than "letdown" would have been
dropped to about 15 or worse, and would still be fighting their way
back up with the other 1-loss teams. With proper consideration to the
schedule, and the quality of the team they lost to, we might be talking
more of a 6-team fight now, with Washington having a clear edge.
Dan
|
388.163 | The Rose Bowl is not just about greed | NAC::G_WAUGAMAN | | Mon Nov 05 1990 13:09 | 26 |
|
> If Washington wins the mythical championship by beating an unworthy foe in the
> Rose Bowl and watching a team like CU beat ND in the Orange Bowl than I will
> consider it as weak a championship as BYU's was.
Not even close. The Rose Bowl looks like it's going to be for real
this year for the first time in years. Iowa (if they can finish off
strong with three wins against Big-10 opponents) is a worthy opponent.
Beating Michigan and crushing Illinois on foreign turf is no mean feat.
Only Miami has beat Iowa, in Miami, as I think the Hurricanes would do
to Washington if they had to play there. Iowa's Matt Rodgers can throw
the football, folks. I think Washington-Iowa is a tough matchup.
The Rose Bowl affiliation does hurt, but I wouldn't be so cynical with
the teams for supposedly "selling out", guys. The Rose Bowl and its
tradition with the Pac-10 and Big-10 goes back to the end of the
WWII, long before the big money poured in. I have a much harder time
with the veritable plethora of bowl games that have sprung out of
nowhere for little more reason than filling TV time from Thanksgiving
to New Year's. If a great team from either of the very lucrative
Big-10 or Pac-10 conferences wanted to break rank and play in a
TV-sponsored national championship bowl, they'd easy bring in as
much money as the Rose Bowl offers.
glenn
|
388.164 | | CNTROL::CHILDS | Never, hear surf music again... | Mon Nov 05 1990 13:29 | 12 |
|
Also Glenn, Washington lost to CU in Boulder in a close tough game. ND
lost at home to a weak opponent. I think based on this Washington deserves
higher marks.....
If ND looses again do you think they would consider a rematch with Miami in the
Fiesta? What if all the other teams except Miami loose again as well will they
go for the rematch?
Somehow I doubt it but as a fan I'd sure like to see it....
mike
|
388.165 | Granddaddy of them all... | HOTSHT::SCHNEIDER | Voted for whatsisname... | Mon Nov 05 1990 13:29 | 18 |
| >Unfortunately they are tied into the Rose Bowl and will never get the
>opportunity to play for one. I agree with the previous noter that said the
>PAC-10 and the Big 10 have sold out National Championship aspirations for the
>$$$$.
You can accuse the conferences of stubbornly sticking to tradition, but
I think selling out is a reach. I think the Big 10 and Pac 10 think
they keep the Rose Bowl important, which is likely a mistaken notion.
The Rose would likely be the most promiment bowl in terms of luring the
national championship teams in, if they were given the choice. Sure
the money is the best for the Rose, but it's been that way for a long
time. The term, "selling out" would better be applied had those teams
recently been tied in to the Rose after a long period of being an open
bowl, or perhaps to a team that feels it needs to be on television
every week at exactly the same time on the same channel so it's poor
fans across the country don't have their weekend schedules upset.
Dan
|
388.166 | | PEAKS::WOESTEHOFF | Save Waldo Canyon | Mon Nov 05 1990 13:33 | 17 |
| It looks like the Rose bowl and the Orange bowl will be the 2 most
important bowl games in deciding the national champion. Washinton and
Iowa will both be ranked in the top 5. The same goes for CU vs ND (if ND
continues to win). I've heard that if ND loses before the end of the season,
Miami may go to the Orange Bowl. But what if Tennesse beats ND. Will they
have a shot at the Orange Bowl or will they be locked into some other
game ? The CU vs Tennesse season opener was a terrific game. A rematch
would be nice.
There is a possible interesting scenario. Washington is ranked above CU but
CU beat Washinton. What if Washington and CU both win their bowl games.
Will Washinton still be ranked above CU ?
BTW, I see that Houston is ranked in the top 5. What tough teams have they
beaten other than SMU ?
Keith
|
388.167 | Let's have a commitment now to avoid excuses later, Dan | NAC::G_WAUGAMAN | | Mon Nov 05 1990 13:37 | 52 |
|
> -< You've been affected by the hype >-
Save it for JD, Dan. I'm not rooting for ND under any circumstances,
believe me (Go Vols, Go!). Hype has nothing to do with my opinion here.
> If they go on winning against that crew of teams, AND Washington goes
> on winning, a lot of credit has to be given to ND's strength of
> schedule. But will they face a Colorado team that is a much better
> team than last year, or will they search for the overmatched opponent
> come bowl time as they have the last two years?
A lot of credit? Is this a concession to ND's championship claim if
they *do* go to and win the Orange Bowl versus, say, the Citrus? I think
that's the way they'll go. The Citrus will no longer be able to raise
the money to compete. In fact, if Georgia Tech holds on they may walk
and give Virginia the Citrus. We might as well get you on record on this
now as opposed to, say, after the USC game.
> I don't see, Glenn, how you say it's better to lose to a patsy on the
> schedule than one of the tough teams, as is the case you seem to be
> making for ND over Washington.
It's only a very slight difference at best. The crux of my argument is
the competition claim, which you've also conceded to. Anything else is
admittedly splitting hairs.
> As was shown with other teams that lost to much better teams than
> Stanford, a non-ND team which suffered than "letdown" would have been
> dropped to about 15 or worse, and would still be fighting their way
> back up with the other 1-loss teams. With proper consideration to the
> schedule, and the quality of the team they lost to, we might be talking
> more of a 6-team fight now, with Washington having a clear edge.
How so? Notre Dame and Washington both lost their fourth game of the
season, and remember that it was Michigan, already beaten by Notre Dame,
that was the first one-loss team to bounce back to the top. What about
the quality of teams beaten, not lost to, as part of the equation? Did
these other teams beat Miami? Maybe ND didn't fall far enough, but
they've done more since to make up for it than the others, and have the
potential to do much, much more than anyone else (Tennessee, Penn
St., USC, etc.).
In any case, let's not worry too much about the weekly machinations of
the polls, only the end results. Does a four-game win streak including
the Orange Bowl merit the championship? Let's have a definitive
answer. I think it does, but I must admit that I don't think this ND
team is capable of it, either. That's a very tough row to hoe, but if
it's accomplished it should be recognized, though.
glenn
|
388.168 | Strength of Sched. vs. strength of loss | 32071::SCHNEIDER | Voted for whatsisname... | Mon Nov 05 1990 15:04 | 39 |
| >Is this a concession to ND's championship claim if
>they *do* go to and win the Orange Bowl versus, say, the Citrus? I think
>that's the way they'll go.
Is Citrus the one with the ACC commitment? I keep track of teams
better than Bowl contracts... Anyway, if ND continues with their one
defeat and plays a worthy NYD opponent, like CU, then I've got to give
their schedule a strong consideration. I'm bad with commitments...
But I don't think examining whom a team lost to is splitting hairs. I
find it significant that UW lost to a high-quality team like CU, at CU,
while ND lost to a low-quality team like Stanford, at South Bend. This
argument is part and parcel of a strength of schedule argument.
>What about
>the quality of teams beaten, not lost to, as part of the equation?
Of course! I've never said anything but that. But it doesn't wash
away losing at home to a patsy. Had ND lost, to say Michigan, and
matched that up with Washington's loss at the hands of CU, there's no
doubt that strength of schedule would be the only determining factor
without a game to decide differences. But this isn't the case, and so
the quality of the loss must be factored into whatever equation will
determine the myth. RIght from the get-go, this factor was ignored by
the voters, unfortunately and typically.
>Does a four-game win streak including
>the Orange Bowl merit the championship?
If Washington and ND both continue without another loss? I don't
know. It's my opinion (and I've only seen them play once) that UW is
tops now, as I said earlier. Would it be fair to knock them off the
top rung if they continue undefeated? If their was no Notre Dame
factor, I'd have a hard time answering that. But I'll join you in
predicting that if ND continues unbeaten, they'll win it all, and they
don't need the Orange Bowl for that. They could play Houston, or
Wesleyan, and still win that vote.
Dan
|
388.169 | thanks for on more U.V. #1 babble | 10550::JOLMAMA | Hulk-a-Mania is dead. | Mon Nov 05 1990 15:55 | 19 |
| regarding note .161
metz- You have gotto be one miserable Jose, living in Seattle and
disliking the Dawgs as much as you do. All the Rose Bowl and Number
One hype must make your day a long one and difficult one.
Regarding your assertion that the Huskies have had only one 'top
flight' opponent, I disagree. What was USC ranked, at the time they
played the Huskies- it was in the top 10. Oregon was and is a Top 25
team as was Arizona. California, the Rodney Dangerfield of the
conference, is no weakling either. Colorado was lucky to beat
Stanford- who beat you know who. Why is it that the Dawgs schedule
is rated by USA and other polls to be one of the toughest?
|
388.170 | Don't worry, Dan, I knew I wouldn't get a commitment | 4156::G_WAUGAMAN | | Mon Nov 05 1990 15:55 | 38 |
|
This "strength of loss" is a new one on me. I'm still more impressed
by a team that takes on all comers and beats all other scheduled
contenders to the title but loses to one patsy, than a team that loses
its *toughest* game and hasn't played a real tough one since. I didn't
hear the "strength of loss" argument last year when Florida State
dropped not one game, but *two*, to patsies and then made a claim to
the title based on its victories over eventual #1 Miami and thrashing
of Nebraska. They had a pretty good argument, too (but not good
enough).
Under the same logic, how do you rate Washington over Colorado? And
how does Washington, with victories over Arizona St., Oregon, Stanford,
California, and Arizona since the loss to Colorado in their toughest
game have any greater claim than ND to the current top spot? With USC
again showing their relative weakness with Saturday's tie to Cal, I
don't think Washington's claim is as strong as you think. Washington's
non-conference performance has been lackluster at best, too (Wash 20,
San Jose St. 17; Wash 20, Purdue 14; Colorado 20, Wash 14).
> If Washington and ND both continue without another loss? I don't
> know. It's my opinion (and I've only seen them play once) that UW is
> tops now, as I said earlier. Would it be fair to knock them off the
> top rung if they continue undefeated?
You're succumbing to the system at its worst. Like I said, I may have
a hard time deciding between Notre Dame and Washington at this time, and
the matter will likely decide itself anyway. But if ND beats Tennessee,
Penn St., USC, and Colorado I'm convinced, regardless of Washington's
current ranking. Why wouldn't it be fair to knock Washington off?
You've been critical of the polls, and now appear to be wedded to
the idea that rankings shouldn't change unless losses are incurred.
Isn't this what you were criticizing ND for just last week (who would
have been leapfrogged had Nebraska won, by the way, whether you believe
it or not)?
glenn
|
388.171 | | BSS::JCOTANCH | CU: Back-to-Back Big 8 Champs | Mon Nov 05 1990 16:09 | 23 |
| Would be an interesting scenario if CU and Washington were to win the
rest of their games. Washington's only tough game left is the Rose
Bowl against (probably) Iowa. If CU plays and beats an Irish team
ranked #1 in the Orange Bowl, it is going to one heck of a close vote
and could even be split polls.
The other factor involved is Houston. The Cougars play Texas this
week in Austin. It'll be interesting to see where Houston is ranked in
the AP Poll tomorrow. If they're ranked second, I don't see anybody
jumping over them if they keep winning, even after the bowls. Then again,
the pollsters may slight them because they are on probation.
Now, let's look at what should happen. ND loses to
Tennessee and Houston loses to Texas. Then if Washington wins the Rose
Bowl convincingly, they win the national championship. But if UW
barely wins the Rose Bowl or loses, the winner of the Miami-CU Orange
Bowl will be national champ.
Bottom line is this weekend could clear things up even more. But as
much as I hate to say it, if ND upsets Tennesee this week, I don't see
the Irish losing to Penn State or USC.
Joe
|
388.172 | You assume too much with NU | 32071::SCHNEIDER | Voted for whatsisname... | Mon Nov 05 1990 16:44 | 46 |
| >I didn't
>hear the "strength of loss" argument last year when Florida State
>dropped not one game, but *two*
Sure you did. From Miami, remember, who only lost to Fla St. Are they
supposed to be embarrassed by a loss to Florida State? Not if you ask
me. Was ND supposed to be embarrassed by a loss to Miami? Uh-uh.
(OK, they should be embarrassed for begging for the National Title
anyway, but that's ND for you...)
It's always been important who you lose to. The worse the team you
lose to, the worse it should be for you, when comparing to teams with
only one loss, all other things being equal (esp. schedule strength).
>With USC
>again showing their relative weakness with Saturday's tie to Cal, I
>don't think Washington's claim is as strong as you think.
'SC was playing much better ball then. THey've really fallen on hard
times since. THey've had two key injuries to the defense since then, a
defense that was missing 2 of the top 5 in the NFL draft from the year
before. It's really thin now.
>how do you rate Washington over Colorado?
Well, I'd say that Colorado is playing the best ball of anyone now.
How can they be denied after impressive back-to-back wins against Okie
and Nebraska? But there is a matter of the loss and the tie, and the
other loss to Missouri. In my head now, I think they'd win the
imaginary playoff, and I could forgive them the tie for that. But that
Missouri game...no slack.
>Why wouldn't it be fair to knock Washington off?
My statement has nothing to do with the system you've accused me of
succombing to. Rather I've succombed to logic. If Washington is the
best now, and they don't lose the rest of the way, including a
non-patsy Rose Bowl, what evidence would I have of them getting
relatively worse? I can't assume ND will choose to play Colorado, I've
given up hope for 'SC beating them, Penn St. isn't that impressive this
year. We could be talking one tough game the rest of the year for ND
instead of the 4 in your presentation. What's Washington's remaining
schedule? Is it so much poorer than ND's that it offsets the Stanford
loss and my current personal ranking?
Dan
|
388.173 | USC not Tennessee | 10550::JOLMAMA | Hulk-a-Mania is dead. | Mon Nov 05 1990 17:06 | 7 |
| ND will lose to USC not Tennessee. Don't underestimate the Trojans.
California is a tough team, the tie should not be viewed as showing
that USC is weak but that Cal is a strong team.
.
|
388.174 | this is why I want a CU - Husky rematch | 10529::METZGER | Quoth the raven,"Eat my shorts" | Mon Nov 05 1990 17:16 | 28 |
|
I never stated that I disliked the Huskies. In fact I think it's great that they
are doing as well as they are. I'm a happy camper that they have had such a
successful season. I might even go to the game next week. I think that they
have an excellent team, but I don't think that they have proven that they
are the best team in the country and I'd rather see them play the highest
ranked team they can on Jan 1 rather than being locked into the Rose Bowl.
Iowa is a decent team but I think CU or Miami or Nd would be a better test of
Washington than Iowa.
I actually expect Washington to go into the Rose Bowl ranked #1. I think ND will
lose 1 of its last 3 games. I also think that Houston will lose 1 also.
I like to see the #1 and #2 teams in the country go head to head on Jan 1 and
the whole thing gets settled on the field (relatively) instead of relying on
a whole bunch of "reporters" and "coaches" to decide matters. With Washington
playing in the Rose Bowl we're not going to see this.
As far as their strength of schedule goes....The Pac 10 as a whole is pretty
weak this year. A lot of the PAC 10 teams get voting points based on past
history rather then present performance (USC especially). I think the Huskies
may have the best team in the country...the quotes from other coaches make it
seem like they do...I'd just like to see them prove by playing the best
competition on Jan 1....
Metz
|
388.175 | UT vs Tech in the Sugar bowl | 33864::RJONES | | Mon Nov 05 1990 23:08 | 10 |
| Tennessee WILL beat ND Saturday.... Knoxville has been waiting for
this game all year. That's all everybody is talking about. We will be
ready, and we will kick ass. Watch and see.
Colorado may be the best team in the nation. Right now... You don't
never know what that month off from December 1 to Janurary 1 will do to
a team. A coach makes his money that month of the season.
Vols by a bunch...
Rich
|
388.176 | VOLS 4 nd | 33945::HAAS | Big Smile at the Drivethrough | Tue Nov 06 1990 08:39 | 6 |
| Tennessee has moved to -4 over Notre Dame. It should be a very pivotal
game for both teams. If Tennessee wins, they're in the #1 picture, big
time. If ND wins, it will make them the de facto champ - assuming they
win the rest - going into the bowls.
TTom
|
388.177 | Logic? You rejected the premise (ND-Colo) I gave you... | 4156::G_WAUGAMAN | | Tue Nov 06 1990 08:40 | 68 |
|
> What's Washington's remaining
> schedule? Is it so much poorer than ND's that it offsets the Stanford
> loss and my current personal ranking?
Absolutely, if, and I stress *if*, ND plays Colorado (I included this
condition in my challenge to you; you've apparently ignored it). I'll
give you USC, although I wouldn't give up all hope in that game yet
(maybe Marinovich can get his head screwed on in time), but Penn State
is still fairly strong. You'll recall the game they gave to USC when
USC was still all together, and they've gotten tougher defensively if
anything. Tennessee at Knoxville is as tough a game as anyone can play.
With the Colorado game, I see two very tough games, one moderate, and
one fairly weak game.
By comparison, Washington has UCLA (at home), Washington St., and
probably Iowa. That totals one tough game (maybe; Iowa's got a way to
go) and two very weak ones.
You are obviously weighing the strength of teams lost to much more
heavily than the strength of teams played overall, and I'm not sure
why (either that or you mistakenly believe that Washington's road is
as tough as Notre Dame's). While you appear to like this specific
criteria *this year*, it has never been considered the most important
one. Oklahoma won it all in 1975 when their only loss came to Kansas,
late in the season no less. USC took a piece of the title in 1978 in
large part because their only loss was to weak, first-year Pac-10
member Arizona St. Penn State did the same with unranked Alabama in
1982. In an otherwise tough schedule, dropping a supposedly easy one
has not historically been grounds for elimination, nor should it be.
If I see two teams with one loss that don't have the opportunity to
play each other, I'll go with the tougher schedule, regardless of who
the loss came to. You disagree?
> In my head now, I think they'd win the
> imaginary playoff, and I could forgive them the tie for that. But that
> Missouri game...no slack.
Firstly, not only *should* the tie be forgiven, it should be credited.
When you add a pre-season game with Tennessee to your already tough
schedule, and you don't come away with a loss (the Vols played for
the tie, too), that's in your favor. This is opposed to Washington
opening with San Jose St. and coming close to losing, 20-17.
Secondly, the Missouri thing has become a false rallying cry for
do-gooders nationwide. The game was played *at* Missouri, with a
Missouri down-keeper, Missouri scoreboard operators, and Missouri
statisticians in the press box. Then, when the Big-8 officials screw
up, I read in here how it was *Colorado* that sneakily let the game go
on with knowledge of the number of downs, all while the clock is running
and they're trying to run a hurry-up offense. To honest observers, if
anyone outside of the officials is at fault for inaction during those
final seconds, it's the Missouri coaching staff, who have the right
*under the rules* to ask for an officials' time-out and a conference to
straigten things out.
Unfortunately (and I *do* have a major problem with this), the entire
situation was exacerbated by a post-game performance of unabashed
whining by Bill McCartney. Otherwise, especially since Colorado wasted
a down anyway under the officials' mistake, I don't feel they have
anything to be sorry for, and have been unfairly penalized because of it,
in part due to the ungraciousness of their coach. The sentiment of a
bad taste left in the mouth by a pompous coach should not enter into the
polls, though. Otherwise, we could count out Notre Dame before the
the first down is played. ;-)
glenn
|
388.178 | bad timing for Houston | 33945::HAAS | Big Smile at the Drivethrough | Tue Nov 06 1990 10:31 | 7 |
| Those who are touting Houston for the National champs don't get any help
from the Cougars schedule. Hosting East Washington on Nov 17 might
further Klingers stats but it won't help him in the Heisman and won't
help the team in the polls. Playing a weak team at a critical time ain't
gonna get it done.
TTom
|
388.179 | | 32071::SCHNEIDER | Voted for whatsisname... | Tue Nov 06 1990 11:24 | 45 |
| I don't know, Glenn. I still have a hard time reconciling giving more
credit to a team for losing to a bad team than a good one. You've
given evidence that teams have lost to bad teams and gone on to the
title, but what was the competition they faced? Was it a team with the
same record? With a reasonably difficult schedule? Whose only loss
was away to a very good team? Those are a lot of mitigating
circumstances which, to me, amount to more than the splitting of hairs.
If we assume (a stretch, based on past choices) that ND deigns to play
CU in the bowls, has the strength of ND's schedule off set the HUGE
difference in the quality of each team's only loss? All I can say is
that it's possible, but not definite. At that time, I'd put some stock
into how each team looked on New Year's Day in their (assumed) wins.
>You are obviously weighing the strength of teams lost to much more
>heavily than the strength of teams played overall, and I'm not sure
>why
No, I'm weighing them nearly equal. They have the same record, ND
plays the tougher schedule, but it's no landslide. Washington's loss
came to a much, much tougher team. If I were weighing the loss in the
way you state, there would be no dilemma. But I also look at what's
been happening recently. ND beat Pitt, but it wasn't a very convinging
win, the same Pitt that was just destroyed by Miami. ND squeaked by
Michigan and should have lost to Michigan St. But Washington, since
some early season jitters has been positively been destroying
opponents! By the end of the season, who are the common opponents for
the two teams? I know USC...Did Washington play Stanford? Will ND
play CU?
The more you've made me think about this, the further I'm engrossed in
the conclusion that it's not as cut and dried as you seem to believe.
But again, if all the assumptions take place I know that what you say
will come to pass. And it won't even be close. Such is the sway on
the voters.
>Secondly, the Missouri thing has become a false rallying cry for
>do-gooders nationwide.
I've said what I had to say on this subject in the Big 8 topic. The
officials made a mistake; CU directly benefited from it. I'm not going
to blame Missouri, nor give CU credit for a legitimate win. It was
tainted, and would have been a likely loss otherwise.
Dan
|
388.180 | | 10529::METZGER | Quoth the raven,"Eat my shorts" | Tue Nov 06 1990 11:27 | 7 |
|
FYI
Washington crushed Stanford...
Metz
|
388.181 | Might as well give Miami the Mythical right now! | 15558::SZABO | The Beer Hunter | Tue Nov 06 1990 11:47 | 14 |
| I have a hard time seeing Virginia at #11 only because they lost a
close game to a very tough team while Miami is considered to have a
great shot at winning the Mythical. Everyone seems to be debating over
the difficulty of the 1 loss that many top teams have experienced,
meanwhile, Miami will wind up with a sneak job while having been blown
out twice by 2 weaker teams!
I agree that Miami is one heckuva great team, but let's face it, they
lost twice. IMO, they should not be allowed in the Top 10, and they
should not be invited to a bowl that has possible Mythical written all
over it. Also, Virginia shouldn't have dropped any lower than #5-6.
I'd say they're at least #4..........
Hawk
|
388.182 | | 10881::DEVLIN_JO | I DID WHAT! | Tue Nov 06 1990 11:51 | 13 |
| re .130
Dan, Lou Holtz ain't my hero - if he is, then Wade Boggs is yours.
re .132
JOe, yep, just like Jimmy JOhnson cried the year before.
Tata
Without reading through, I feel ND isn't #1, nor is Washington.
No matter what Matt says, the Pac10 is woefully weak.
jD
|
388.183 | is the Honeymoon over??? | 6984::CHILDS | Never, hear surf music again... | Tue Nov 06 1990 12:00 | 11 |
|
jD
^
^
Well guys he definately married. Notice how he's dropped the
capital J cause he don't wear the pants no more?
;^) congrats, welcome back and how about them GIANTS!!!!!!
mike
|
388.184 | As of now Notre Dame doesn't deserve its ranking | 4159::NAZZARO | Cannibals aren't picky eaters! | Tue Nov 06 1990 12:12 | 43 |
| Here we go again - strength of schedule. Interesting to note that
the power ratings in USA Today have Washington #1 and Notre Dame #17.
Will you all allow me the privilege of debunking the myth of the
tough Notre Dame schedule once again? Thank you.
Here are the schedules of Notre Dame, Washington, and Colorado - for
now the top three teams in the running for #1. Let's compare each
school's opponents won-loss record:
NOTRE DAME 7-1 WASHINGTON 8-1 COLORADO 8-1-1
Michigan 5-3 San Jose St 6-2-1 Tennessee 5-1-2
Mich State 4-3-1 Purdue 1-7 Stanford 3-6
Purdue 1-7 Southern Cal 6-2-1 Illinois 6-2
Stanford 3-6 Colorado 8-1-1 Texas 6-1
Air Force 4-5 Ariz State 3-5 Washington 8-1
Miami 6-2 Oregon 7-2 Missouri 3-6
Pitt 3-5-1 Stanford 3-6 Iowa State 3-5-1
Navy 3-5 California 5-3-1 Kansas 3-5-1
Arizona 6-3 Oklahoma 6-3
Nebraska 8-1
TOTALS: 29-36-1 45-31-3 51-31-4
From these totals, and looking at the teams played, it is quite
clear that Colorado has played the toughest of the three schedules,
Washington's is a close second, and Notre Dame's lags far behind.
Let's examine the one common opponent of all three teams, Stanford,
and see how each team has done against the Cardinal.
Colorado defeated Stanford 21-17.
Notre Dame lost at home to Stanford 36-31.
Washington destroyed Stanford 52-16.
On any basis you want to compare, Notre Dame should rank third
when compared to Washington and Colorado. I would give Washington
a slight edge over CU as the top team in the country. However,
if Notre Dame defeats Tennessee, Penn State, and USC, I would
consider them to be on a par with the other two teams.
NAZZ
|
388.185 | I like the Buffs right now | 4156::G_WAUGAMAN | | Tue Nov 06 1990 12:35 | 29 |
|
Clearly, San Jose St. at 6-2-1 is better than 5-3 Michigan. A very
faulty way of measuring strength of schedule.
The Sagarin power ratings are better, but nowhere close to perfect. For
instance, they rank Michigan at #7 and Notre Dame #17. Because Sagarin
does not publish his algorithm, I can only guess that he assigns a
disproportionate amount of credit to offensive and defensive statistics
(weighted against the competition) rather than the old-fashioned W's and
L's, which are most important but provide very little data. Don't
forget, Sagarin is a handicapper and he uses these power ratings to
set point spreads. The system is not necessarily well-designed for
national rankings, where head-to-head wins and losses are more
important. Notre Dame apparently loses out because they've won ugly,
even against weak competition, but at least they've won.
In any case, I haven't said that Notre Dame is #1, nor that their
schedule has been the toughest *to date*. I was only trying to
lay the groundwork for an end-of-season consensus with Dan in the
unlikely event that ND does finish off the season with wins over their
very tough remaining opponents, in order to prevent unnecessary and
unwarranted complaining about the polls and ND's bowl selection
process come January 2. He didn't bite, so it's up for grabs, I guess.
The more *I* think about it, the more I think Colorado should be #1
right now.
glenn
|
388.186 | Nazz shows us the light | 32071::SCHNEIDER | Voted for whatsisname... | Tue Nov 06 1990 12:47 | 19 |
| >Clearly, San Jose St. at 6-2-1 is better than 5-3 Michigan. A very
>faulty way of measuring strength of schedule.
I'll be the first to admit that W-L % isn't everything in rating a
team, but Glenn you've been beating me about the head and shoulders
with Notre Dame's schedule strength. Now that we take a look at it, I
see that 5 of ND's 8 opponents have sub-.500 records. No matter how
you slice that, it's none too impressive.
The only title-worthy game ND's played this year is the impressive win
over Miami. The squeaker over Michigan and the luck job over an
unimpressive Michigan St. round out their over-.500 competition.
Shades of 1973, when ND lied about their competition to swindle a
national championship from Alabama. After NYD all you heard was
schedule strength, and the voters were moved. it turned out that year
that ND had a sub-.500 schedule as well.
Dan
|
388.187 | Voters were moved, and so was anyone else who watched | 4156::G_WAUGAMAN | | Tue Nov 06 1990 13:23 | 22 |
|
> I'll be the first to admit that W-L % isn't everything in rating a
> team, but Glenn you've been beating me about the head and shoulders
> with Notre Dame's schedule strength.
End of season, Dan, at the end of the season, I said. Don't distort me.
I said after Tennessee, Penn State, USC, *and* Colorado *if* they play
them (and barring losses by either I see no reason they won't, as
Colorado represents the highest-ranked available opponent in the
biggest-money game). These games differentiate the schedules. There
are no more Air Forces, Navys, or San Diego States left.
> Shades of 1973, when ND lied about their competition to swindle a
> national championship from Alabama. After NYD all you heard was
> schedule strength, and the voters were moved. it turned out that year
> that ND had a sub-.500 schedule as well.
Good one, Dan! A big underdog ND beat Alabama in the national
championship Sugar Bowl that year. Some swindle!
glenn
|
388.188 | You still haven't explained away the loss | 32071::SCHNEIDER | Voted for whatsisname... | Tue Nov 06 1990 13:43 | 13 |
| >End of season, Dan, at the end of the season, I said. Don't distort me.
Okay, okay. But then right now, who would you rate higher, Washington
or ND, and why? Do you factor the relative strength of the loss in?
That's how I can't understand how you give ND preference for losing to
a patsy.
My point with 1973 was that we've heard the strength of schedule
argument used before describing a sub-.500 record. And I'm sure we'll
hear it again next season when Miami is substitiuted for by one of the
Big 10 weak sisters.
Dan
|
388.189 | CU, ND, WU | 4156::G_WAUGAMAN | | Tue Nov 06 1990 14:04 | 30 |
|
> Okay, okay. But then right now, who would you rate higher, Washington
> or ND, and why? Do you factor the relative strength of the loss in?
Right now, I go with Colorado, Notre Dame, Washington. My main reason
for ranking ND ahead of Washington is that I feel they've beaten (not
crushed, not destroyed, just beaten) two teams, Miami and Michigan,
better than anyone Washington has beaten. I give bonus points for the
win against Miami, who I honestly felt was the best team in the country
at the time. The combination, for me, outweighs the relative strength
of the loss to Stanford versus Washington's loss to the *only* superior
team they've played. Washington has played more middling teams to ND's
mediocre-to-poor ones, but I'm less concerned with games that either
would win than with the real big ones. ND is 2-0 in the big ones;
Washington 0-1.
Can I explain the loss to Stanford? Honestly, no. Can I explain
Washington's to Colorado? I think Colorado is better.
> My point with 1973 was that we've heard the strength of schedule
> argument used before describing a sub-.500 record.
This is the first I've heard of this argument being used in 1973. Why
would it be? An undefeated Notre Dame beat an undefeated Alabama in a
game that was set up as the national championship. You're not making
this up, are you? (I would have believed you if you'd said 1977, but
since you're the one making the claim...)
glenn
|
388.190 | CU seems the best now. Ranked #1? No... | 32071::SCHNEIDER | Voted for whatsisname... | Tue Nov 06 1990 14:29 | 14 |
| I follow your rankings of CU, ND, UW. I don't necessarily agree, but I
follow. I'd just like to point out that earlier you seemed content
with the record, and strength of schedule, and awarded ND relative
bonus points for getting beat at home by a patsy. Now your defining
ND's ranking by its wins over the superior teams on the schedule,
Michigan and Miami. I'm not criticizing that, but illuminating it as a
factor that previously wasn't cited.
I may, in fact, mean 1977. I don't remember the records of college
football as well as you do. I recently read an article which mentioned
ND's bragging about strength of schedule before in trying to appeal to
the voters, when in fact their schedule was sub-.500.
Dan
|
388.191 | The only solution... | 10881::DEVLIN_JO | How many more weeks.. | Tue Nov 06 1990 14:39 | 19 |
| I'm thinking of starting a petition - the petition will be to close
Notre Dame down as a college, or if that can't be achieved, to ban
them from playing college ball. And it goes further, all records
will be washed forever from the books. ALl National Championships
rescinded. All Heisman's returned.
The school sucks. No one who ever went there, played there, or
is stupid enough to root from them should be allowed into society.
The beating should commence now. Shock therapy. Sterilization
to clean the gene pool.
That will make lots of people happy. There will be no more overrated
college players or teams. World peace will happen. Crime will
drop. There will never be another arguement over who's #1.
Everything will be black and white. The voter's will not be swayed
by the media or other intangibles. Dan and Joe and Nazz will be
happy.
JD
|
388.192 | | 39292::DHAMEL | Lights are on, but nobody's home | Tue Nov 06 1990 14:58 | 3 |
|
Ya gotta have mighty big lats to yank a chain that big, JD!
|
388.193 | | 15447::LEFEBVRE | You are a fluke of the universe | Tue Nov 06 1990 15:08 | 3 |
| Who's chain yanking? Where do I sign?
Mark.
|
388.194 | huskies | 10559::JOLMAMA | Hulk-a-Mania is dead. | Tue Nov 06 1990 15:09 | 18 |
| Don't equate the win/loss records of the PAC10 teams as measures of
strength. The PAC10 a balanced, powerhouse balanced. Thus teams like
Oregon, Arizona, California, and USC have blemished records. Look how
Stanford, Oregon, Arizona have faired against top 5 teams. Get out of
your SCC, Big 10, Big 8 mind-sets.
A sports writer for a Houston newspaper said it best:
"All you have to do is look at the scores to see how good the
Huskies are". And Don James is no Tom Osborne or Barry Switzer in
the run-up-the-score department.
I will stick with my consistent message: The Huskies will prevail.
Too bad there isn't a playoff!
|
388.195 | Mark, I thought you were a Miami DOLPHINS fan (?)...... | 15558::SZABO | The Beer Hunter | Tue Nov 06 1990 15:26 | 4 |
| JD, I'll sign only on 1 condition, that UMiami be nuked also. Then,
there won't be anymore of that ridiculous dancing after every play.
Hawk
|
388.196 | | 34223::MEDVID | Dump Jesse Helms | Tue Nov 06 1990 15:26 | 6 |
| I'll tell ya what. Regardless of who's really number 1, isn't this
conference an lot more fun than it was during baseball season?
Thank God for Mom, Apple Pie, Harvey Gantt, and SPORTS!
--dan'l
|
388.197 | The ND stuff is an added bonus... | 4156::G_WAUGAMAN | | Tue Nov 06 1990 15:29 | 9 |
|
> I'll tell ya what. Regardless of who's really number 1, isn't this
> conference an lot more fun than it was during baseball season?
That's why I sign off come January and re-enlist when the college
gridiron season kicks off...
glenn
|
388.198 | | 39062::JHENDRY | John Hendry, DTN 292-2170 | Tue Nov 06 1990 18:58 | 2 |
| And, the Apostrophe Police have had lots of opportunities to jump in
but have kept their mouth shut ....
|
388.199 | | CSC32::SALZER | | Tue Nov 06 1990 22:34 | 13 |
| When ND bit the bullet against Stanford 2(?) weeks ago, Holtz stated
that they couldn't possibly be ranked #1 again this season.
More smoke or honest insight? Of course that's another topic but
after last saturday's tumbling from the top ranked teams, 2-3 more
weeks of these surprises could cloud the picture even more.
In any event, it's good to see the Rose Bowl mean more than a parade
and a 'filler' game between the meatier contests. Hmmmmmmm......
Then consider an Iowa upset there. It all has me throughly confused.
(Wyoming would have been in great shape if they wouldn't have lost
saturday too.)
BoB
|
388.200 | New #1 after Saturday | 33864::D_SMITH | | Wed Nov 07 1990 06:25 | 10 |
|
All the talk about Notre Dame being #1 will end Saturday with their
second loss of the season. They are going against the best defense
they have faced all year and the quickest receivers they have faced
all year, which adds up to a big loss for ND. Volunteers by 10!!!!
Dave
|
388.201 | can't stand either | 6984::CHILDS | Never, hear surf music again... | Wed Nov 07 1990 07:46 | 6 |
|
I'll sign too. Heck. I'll evne make a contribution, carry the petition
door to door. Anything to get rid of Lou Holtz and Digger Phelps....
mike
|
388.202 | Get rid of 'em all! | 4159::NAZZARO | Cannibals aren't picky eaters! | Wed Nov 07 1990 09:57 | 11 |
| Give me that pen - I'm with ya. In fact, I'll propose that only
state-run schools can field interscholastic programs. Bye-bye, BC!
See you later Georgetown! Sayonara, BYU!
Or, have all private schools compete in a non-scholarship,
no-recruiting league - Division B.
NAZZ
PS - As for this weekend, ND will run for over 300 yards against
Tennessee and win 34-21.
|
388.203 | CU SUPER?? | 36058::LEARYM | | Wed Nov 07 1990 14:02 | 16 |
| YOU GUYS AMAZE ME!
All of a sudden Colorado is a SUPER team after having played just ONE
fantastic quarter against Nebraska. From what I have seen I'd put
Washington ontop and pick the next four out of a deck of cards to
round out the top 5. Could be CU,ND, Miami, Ga. Tech, UVA,Houston!
Any of the six teams mentioned could end up being #1. Depends on who is
playing consistently at the end. Hey, CU is good and could be in the
driver's seat if ND makes the Orange Bowl at #1.
Prediction; Irish 21,Vols 17 as Irish rise to the level of their comp
once again.
|
388.204 | Comparing schedules?! | 36058::LEARYM | | Wed Nov 07 1990 14:24 | 17 |
| Re. .184
OK, Nazz, now that you have compared CU,WU, and ND, opponents records.
How about adding the current records of each team's future opponents.
Does the fact that ND closes with Tennessee,Penn St and USC make
their opponents records comparable to Washington's( UCLA and Wash St.)
and CU's ( OK ST and K St.) overall? I think so
Let's draw the whole picture, not one that suits your purpose
ML
|
388.205 | Be consistent | 34223::MEDVID | try me on, I'm very you | Wed Nov 07 1990 14:44 | 7 |
| Has everyone forgotten that it took CU five downs to defeat Missouri?
For weeks that was the biggest note topic in this conference. Now
a lot of you are saying they are #1. If that wasn't a legit win four
weeks ago, why is it one now?
--dan'l (who has nothing against CU, just against your
forgetfulness)
|
388.206 | | 10881::DEVLIN_JO | How many more weeks.. | Wed Nov 07 1990 15:03 | 8 |
| Dan'l,
Can you imagine the uproar in here, especially from one Buff rooter,
anti-ND rooter, if the 5 down fiasco had happened to hand Notre
Dame a victory? We'd never, ever hear the end of it. But, that's
hypocrisy for ya...
JD
|
388.207 | | CSC32::GL_JOHNSON | I CAN'T drive 55! | Wed Nov 07 1990 15:13 | 13 |
|
1) Colorado
2) Washington
3) Notre Dame
4) Tennessee
5) Miami
6) Georgia Tech
7) Virginia
8) Iowa
9) Florida
10) Nebraska
glen j.
|
388.208 | I'm not anti-ND, just a CU alum... | 21568::CHUANG | What's so Funny 'Bout Peace, Love & U | Wed Nov 07 1990 15:13 | 8 |
|
If the 5th down fiasco happened to ND, Lou Holtz would have made
Bill McCartney (CU's coach) look like the epitome of class...
And ND would have probably gained in the rankings, instead of
CU who dropped in the rankings 3 weeks in a row despite winning
every week...
Peace/ed
|
388.209 | cu #1? | 10550::JOLMAMA | Hulk-a-Mania is dead. | Wed Nov 07 1990 15:22 | 8 |
| Also peculiar, are the references to the CU 'preseason' tie with
Tennessee. Of course being 'preseason' game, this should count less
(or not at all) in the consideration of CU as the top team in the
nation. Was the Miami loss to BYU, a preseason game also?
|
388.210 | just in case | 33945::HAAS | Big Smile at the Drivethrough | Wed Nov 07 1990 15:27 | 7 |
| I don't know if any of this is addressed at me - I put CU at the top -
but I'm not disputing anything about their record, including ties -
preseason or otherwise - or 5 down TDs. All I'm saying is that right now,
they're playing the best and I'd favor them against any other team, with
the possible exception of having to play at Washington.
TTom
|
388.211 | Not this week... | 33864::RJONES | | Thu Nov 08 1990 00:13 | 12 |
| REP: .202
Nazz - How much money you got to bet ??? NO WAY does ND run for 300
yards. That's bull and you know it. Come on down Saturday and I'll GIVE
you a ticket to watch the big orange "D" shut down Rocket and Co...
Once again Tennessee by at least 14 or worse...
I also agree with TTom. CU may be playing the best ball in the nation.
Right now.
Go Vols,
Rich
|
388.212 | Should be a good game and close!!! | 33864::M_PHILLIPS | Flirting With Disaster | Thu Nov 08 1990 00:17 | 6 |
| This should be a good game. 300yds is alittle steep,but could happen.
Not saying it will, just that it could happen. I say............
UT 31
ND 23
M.J.
|
388.213 | GO VOLS!!!!! | BSS::JCOTANCH | CU: Back-to-Back Big 8 Champs | Thu Nov 08 1990 08:53 | 5 |
| Rich, I sure hope you're right about UT kicking a$$ on Saturday. The
Vols have a bunch of people pulling for 'em this week. We expect to
see a lot of Tennessee celebrations taking place on those checkerboards!!
Joe
|
388.214 | | 26340::ROBICHAUD | Dockers...Pants for |CENSORED|s | Thu Nov 08 1990 09:01 | 9 |
| If Bill McCartney had any class he wouldn't have stated his team
*would've* forfieted the game had Missouri not cheated by somehow tampering
with the field. He would've stood up and said it was to bad, but a win's
a win. But instead he hinted that his team would've forfieted (something
they couldn't do under present NCAA rules) if ol' Mizzou wasn't such a
bunch of cheaters, making it *appear* he was such a moral guy. His false
piety was enough to make anybody puke.
/Don
|
388.215 | I repeat: for me, the tie is *not* a blemish | 4156::G_WAUGAMAN | | Thu Nov 08 1990 09:17 | 16 |
|
> Also peculiar, are the references to the CU 'preseason' tie with
> Tennessee. Of course being 'preseason' game, this should count less
> (or not at all) in the consideration of CU as the top team in the
> nation. Was the Miami loss to BYU, a preseason game also?
I didn't refer to the game as a "pre-season" game in the sense that it
shouldn't count because it was early and they weren't ready. I
explicitly stated that it was an extra game that they didn't have to
play, and that a tie in such a game against a team as tough as
Tennessee works to Colorado's favor, not to their detriment. I opposed
this with Washington's non-conference schedule of San Diego State,
Purdue, and Colorado (loss).
glenn
|
388.216 | Make that San Jose State (slight improvement) | 4156::G_WAUGAMAN | | Thu Nov 08 1990 09:19 | 1 |
|
|
388.217 | a zit is a blemish | 10559::JOLMAMA | Hulk-a-Mania is dead. | Thu Nov 08 1990 12:01 | 5 |
| regarding .215
Lombardy is rolling over in the grave. A tie isn't a blemish?
"A tie is like kissing your grandma." Lombardy.
|
388.218 | Since you want to talk about hypocrisy | 32071::SCHNEIDER | Voted for whatsisname... | Thu Nov 08 1990 12:07 | 18 |
| >Can you imagine the uproar in here, especially from one Buff rooter,
>anti-ND rooter, if the 5 down fiasco had happened to hand Notre
>Dame a victory? We'd never, ever hear the end of it. But, that's
>hypocrisy for ya...
As one who spoke out strongly against Colorado, I know you don't mean
me with the accusation of hypocrisy, but let's not forget that a
similar situation did happen in favor of Notre Dame two years ago, this
one at home, this one which also led directly to a Notre Dame victory
over arch-rival Miami.
On the play in question, the official ended up awarding Notre Dame the
ball on their own one yard line on downs, despite the fact that Miami
only had three downs. This particular call, and Notre Dame's later
refusal to rematch Miami in the bowls (the game everyone wanted to see)
enabled ND to win the Mythical.
Dan
|
388.219 | wishful thinking | 36058::LEARYM | | Thu Nov 08 1990 12:17 | 12 |
| Don't remember that one Dan. Are you sure that you are not just
wishing so hard that ND would cheat that it has become reality
for you?
By the way, in '87 I remember Miami refusing a rematch with FSU under
similar circumstances. Miami already had beaten FSU,was ahead of them
in the polls and played Penn St. I believe who also was rated ahead
of FSU. I'd have done the same if I was Miami in '87 or ND in '88.
ML
|
388.220 | | BSS::JCOTANCH | CU: Back-to-Back Big 8 Champs | Thu Nov 08 1990 12:55 | 14 |
|
> Can you imagine the uproar in here, especially from one Buff rooter,
> anti-ND rooter, if the 5 down fiasco had happened to hand Notre
> Dame a victory?
> I'm just *tired* of *seeing* anti-ND *stuff* in *every* **freakin'**
> note by *a* _particular_ noter who *doesn't* have a *life* after
> *ND-hatred* *.*
These guys couldn't be talking about me, you think?......Naaaahhhhhhh.
Joe
|
388.221 | It's all history now | 8852::BROWN | Whiskey River's don't run Dry | Thu Nov 08 1990 14:16 | 10 |
|
When are you guy's going to quit whinning about this damn fifth
down BS. They played what the damn down marker said. The QB would never
have downed the ball to stop the clock if he had known it was Fourth and
two. The game is History. I doubt there'a a coach in this country that
would turn around a give up a win because the Ref's made a mistake.
It was a very hard fought game for both teams, but CU came out ahead,
end of story.
Cadzilla
|
388.222 | | BSS::JCOTANCH | CU: Back-to-Back Big 8 Champs | Thu Nov 08 1990 14:39 | 5 |
| RE -1
Thank You.
Joe
|
388.223 | How could you forget, ML? | 32071::SCHNEIDER | Voted for whatsisname... | Thu Nov 08 1990 14:44 | 26 |
| >Don't remember that one Dan. Are you sure that you are not just
>wishing so hard that ND would cheat that it has become reality
>for you?
You really don't remember that decisive play of the Miami-ND game of 2
autumns ago? The back, was it Highsmith?, took his body to the one
yard line, and reached over with his hand and the ball into the end
zone. The ball striking the turn caused him to fumble it and ND
recovered in the end zone. It was a 3rd down play. Here's what could
have been called.
- Highsmith was down on the 1. 4th down, Miami.
- TD Miami as the ball crossed the plane of the endzone in possession.
- ND ball touchback. Bad call, since it means the ball crossed the
plane (TD) and the ground caused the fumble (no-no).
To the best of my recollection, the refs resolved this by giving ND the
ball on the one. They claimed no fumble but Miami lost it on downs
when pressed for information after the game. When pointed out it was
only third down, the ref in question admitted making a mistake. He was
subsequently told from above that he didn't make a mistake and not to
comment on the issue anymore.
Dan
|
388.224 | | 6984::CHILDS | Never, hear surf music again... | Thu Nov 08 1990 15:19 | 13 |
|
> To the best of my recollection, the refs resolved this by giving ND the
> ball on the one. They claimed no fumble but Miami lost it on downs
> when pressed for information after the game. When pointed out it was
> only third down, the ref in question admitted making a mistake. He was
> subsequently told from above that he didn't make a mistake and not to
> comment on the issue anymore.
I think Dan if my memory serves me correctly that it was a 4th down play
but that by spotting the ball at the one they ignored the fact that it
should have been 1st and goal for Miami....
mike
|
388.225 | It's not as wild a prediction as you may think | 4159::NAZZARO | Cannibals aren't picky eaters! | Thu Nov 08 1990 15:27 | 8 |
| There are two reasons I think ND will gain lots of yardage on
the ground vs. Tennessee:
1) They won't be able to pass effectively against the Vols.
2) ND will get on top of Tennessee early and play ball control.
NAZZ
|
388.226 | | 8750::JOHNSTON | LegitimateSportingPurpose?E.S.A.D.! | Thu Nov 08 1990 15:36 | 7 |
|
I think Dan, if my memory serves me correctly, that it was a 4th down
play, but that by spotting the ball at the one, the refs ignored the
fact that it should have been Notre Dame's ball at the 20. (recovery of
an opponent's fumble in the end zone).
Mike JN
|
388.227 | But was it Highsmith? | 32071::SCHNEIDER | Voted for whatsisname... | Thu Nov 08 1990 16:19 | 12 |
| >I think Dan if my memory serves me correctly that it was a 4th down play
>but that by spotting the ball at the one they ignored the fact that it
>should have been 1st and goal for Miami....
I think you're right, Mike. They ignored that Miami got the first on
the advance of the ball. Of course, they only came to whatever
conclusions they did after the game was over.
MikeJN. The refs couldn't give the ball to Miami. If they call it a
fumble, they have to admit their was a touchdown first.
Dan
|
388.228 | Vols to beat #1 | 33864::T_OSBORNE | | Fri Nov 09 1990 03:19 | 6 |
| Re:225
IF ND gets on top of Vols early, that would give the Vols the
opportunity to open the game up. The ND secondary can't keep up with
the Vol recievers. This should give the Vols the edge. Secondly, the
Irish will not be able to control the ball all day. Vols defense is the
best that ND has faced all year. Vols will win by 7 or more.
|
388.229 | not selective memory | 36058::LEARYM | | Fri Nov 09 1990 07:21 | 10 |
| Dan,
I had forgotten the mini controversy. After the smoke cleared
was the first or second ND offensive play of the subsequent series
an interception by Miami? I remembered the fumble(which by the way I
had mentioned earlier in Note 59 that I thought it was a bad call
against Miami) but didn't recall the down controversy.
ML
|
388.230 | | 7412::SANTOS | | Fri Nov 09 1990 07:47 | 10 |
|
The running back was Cleveland Gary not Alonso Highsmith. It should
have been ruled a TD. Jimmy Johnson had the cubes to go for the 2
point conversion and for the win, late in the game, but the attempt
failed. He should have gone for the tie and won back-to-back national
titles (87 & 88). Miami under coach Erickson won last year. Miami is
one call from winning the National title 3 years in a row.
Chuck
|
388.231 | 1988 | 36058::LEARYM | | Fri Nov 09 1990 08:22 | 17 |
| Chuck,
Do you mean the call to go for two at the end of the game or the
non-call on the fumble.
Had Miami gone for the tie, I believe it would have hurt them in the
polls. As far as the fumble goes,Yea, Miami should have been awarded
the TD. But, remember, ND threw an interception, right after the
"fumble" and Miami scored in two plays anyway,so six or half-dozen
Miami got the TD they deserved. And still lost, which is the
bottom line.
ML
|
388.232 | This officiating nonsense is beneath you, Dan | 4156::G_WAUGAMAN | | Fri Nov 09 1990 08:38 | 35 |
|
The running back *was* Cleveland Gary. I thought the fumble call was
inconclusive myself (both from the standpoint of Gary being down and/or
being in the end zone), and Jimmy Johnson's claim that one referee said
they had turned the ball over on downs only served to confuse things
later (the NCAA and their officials said nothing, per policy). I
honesly don't believe the officials did turn the ball over on downs,
even if one official did mistakenly say that. Additionally, there were
at least two other controversial fumble calls in that game that went
Miami's way, too, if you really want to turn a classic game into an
officiating pissing contest.
What Dan really doesn't want to acknowledge is that even if it were a
bad call occurring during the course of an intense back-and-forth game,
the game didn't hinge on the call. As mentioned, Miami got the ball
back right away, maintaining field position, and eventually did score
the touchdown they needed with less than a minute to play, making the
two-point conversion the almost-forgotten key to the game. At *worst*
the call only knocked a couple of minutes off the clock. The whole
affair ranks right up there with Irving Fryar supposedly "blowing" the
national championship by dropping a TD pass in the 1984 Orange Bowl,
when in reality Nebraska drove and scored anyway and lost on the failed
conversion. In the final analysis, the fumble call did not cost Miami
the game.
Maintain your dignity, Dan. Don't cast your lot with whiners like
Johnson *or* Holtz. It was a great game that was only tainted by the
crying that came from Jimmy Johnson, which I believe only occurred in
the first place because he was politicking for a rematch he wasn't
going to get. I have fairly strong feelings that the Irish wheedled
their way into national championships in 1966 and 1977, but not 1988.
glenn
|
388.233 | College football playoff = ND vs MIAMI | 7412::SANTOS | | Fri Nov 09 1990 08:50 | 17 |
| ML,
I Mean JJ should have gone for the 1pt conversion not the 2pt conversion.
Before the attempted conversion I was glad he was going for the 2 pts.
Isn't hind sight wonderful.
Miami was #1 going into that game a tie wouldn't have dropped them
below ND, because the game was in South Bend. Maybe West Virginia
would have jumped to #1, but Miami would have gotten a shot at them
in the bowl game not ND. Besides the way the polls favor Miami and ND
we might of had a rematch between Miami and ND on New Years Day that
year.
Fumble/non-fumbles/bad calls are all part of the game, I don't bother
to dicuss them.
Chuck
|
388.234 | Win one for the gipper | 8068::GILBERT | R.I.P. The Wild Colonial Boy | Fri Nov 09 1990 14:05 | 3 |
|
Notre Dame will win it for Tommy Clancy. The Wild Colonial Boy always
loved ND.
|
388.235 | 1988: as mythical as it gets | 32071::SCHNEIDER | Been there. Did that. | Fri Nov 09 1990 17:17 | 31 |
| > -< This officiating nonsense is beneath you, Dan >-
Oh, c'mon. Let me make that decision. It clearly cost Miami the
single most important game of the year, and then was covered up in
bixzarre fashion.
>What Dan really doesn't want to acknowledge is that even if it were a
>bad call occurring during the course of an intense back-and-forth game,
>the game didn't hinge on the call. As mentioned, Miami got the ball
>back right away, maintaining field position, and eventually did score
>the touchdown they needed with less than a minute to play, making the
>two-point conversion the almost-forgotten key to the game.
This is illogical. A turnover shortly followed, we can agree on that,
and a TD followed the turnover. Had Miami scored the touchdown,
instead of the refs handing the ball (and the game) over to Notre Dame,
the possibility of the same ND turnover and TD is still there, isn't
it? You're saying Miami should be content, because they scored again
anyway. What you should be saying is that they may have scored twice
with any call, but the absolute absurd one offered, and won the game.
>I have fairly strong feelings that the Irish wheedled
>their way into national championships in 1966 and 1977, but not 1988.
I hope youdon't feel that it's undignified, but I think that Miami
would have pounded Notre Dame on any field other than South Bend in
1988, and Holtz knew it too, which is exactly why ND ducked a chance at
the rematch and went against an over-matched and overrated West
Virginia.
Dan
|
388.236 | It never stops. ND's shamelessness; my criticism. | 32071::SCHNEIDER | Been there. Did that. | Fri Nov 09 1990 17:27 | 8 |
| By the way, Glenn, did you see ESPN's Campus Report with Chris Fowler
the other day? He said the Notre Dame bowl committed is seriously
looking at two other bowls besides the Orange, the SUgar and Cotton and
prospective opponents Mississippi and Texas. The question he thinks
they're considering is can they market this so the public will accept
them "ducking" (his word) Colorado.
Dan
|
388.237 | A few scores.... | CSC32::GL_JOHNSON | Time's Up! | Sat Nov 10 1990 19:10 | 8 |
| ND 34, Tennessee 29 - ND keeps top spot(in AP/UPI polls at least)
UCLA 25, Washington 22 - Huskies can say goodbye to the mythical
CU 41, Okla. St. 22 - Buffs gear for possible showdown with ND
Ohio St. 27, Iowa 26 - Rose Bowl trip on hold for Hawkeyes
Georgia Tech 6, Virginia Tech 3 - Ramblin Wreck survives
glen j.
|
388.238 | | 6308::CAVE | | Sat Nov 10 1990 20:23 | 15 |
| Is this Dan guy for real!!
The past two years ND has played the highest possible rated team.
Both teams were undefeated. In ND didn't play WV in 88 and both
teams went undefeated, you would say ND ducked VW.
As far as this year is concerned, why shouldn't ND check out all
possiblities. There was (is) a good change they might lose before
the bowls and they might want alternatives to the ORANGE (MIAMI was
to replace ND is ND lost to Tennessee).
If Miami has gotten "the fumble" call ND wouldn't have been on the 1
yard line and wouldn't have been so trapped in.
|
388.239 | How they did | 33945::HAAS | Big Smile at the Drivethrough | Sun Nov 11 1990 08:10 | 22 |
| How the top ten - plus or minus - faired (all scores in SCOREBOARD):
1. Washington - lost to UCLA, played poorly at home.
2. Colorado - beat Oklahoma St, but did not cover, for what's that worth.
3. Notre Dame - beat Tennessee at Tennessee.
4. Miami - bye
5. Iowa - lost to Ohio St at home, folded down the stretch, big time.
6. Florida - beat Georgia real bad in Jacksonville.
7. Tennessee - failed to comeback all the way at home against ND.
8. Georgia Tech - squeezed by Va Tech, no TDs.
9. Houston - got beat up in Austin by Texas.
10. Virginia - politely did away with No Carolina, did not cover.
Others:
Florida St - scored 70 against happless Cincinnati
BYU - won big at Wyoming (first WAS loss at home).
Nebraska - drubbed Kansas on the road.
Michigan - held on to beat Illinois in Ann Arbor.
Texas - very impressive against a_overhyped Houston.
Auburn - lost in last minute to Southern Miss.
TTom
|
388.240 | | 33864::RJONES | | Sun Nov 11 1990 22:10 | 14 |
| To Nazz - Boy did you know what you were talking about. ND's offensive
line played very well, and those big backs ran down our throats. We did
miss a bunch of tackles. It was a great game... We should have won the
football game.
Sorry to all the CU fans. Tried to help you all out. I was hoping we
would have made the two point conversion, that way after we recover the
kick we don't have far to get into field goal range and Johnny gets his
tie.
Crow is not bad with a lot of Jack to wash it down...
Let's go beat Ole Miss
Rich :-(
|
388.241 | Majors TOO conservative!! IMO | 33864::M_PHILLIPS | Flirting With Disaster | Mon Nov 12 1990 00:40 | 14 |
| A tough loss for UT, a good game though from what I saw,alot of action
and never got boring. Again, I think Majors got "TOO" conservative when
UT was up by 3pts and went away from his pass. At the end I thought
Kelly should have put that ball in front of his reciever(Pickens?), led
him deep in the end zone to where if Pickens couldn't get it then
nobody could. But, thats easy to say if your sitting on the couch and
watching the tube.
It made my weekend to see Houston and Washington get beat. Houston
shouldn't even be in the top 25.
And Hell, My GameCocks even managed to win one against S.Illni :-)
M.J.
|
388.242 | ND pulls another out. | 30670::DIGGINS | | Mon Nov 12 1990 06:47 | 10 |
|
Major's too conservative? They threw the ball 60 times!!
Good game, Kelly had a field day with the ND secondary but
it wasn't enough and the Irish prevailed. Notre Dame's running
game was the key to this win. And I don't care how over-rated
some of you think Ismail is the kid can just fly! Rickey Watters
had a big day as did Pickens, this Pickens looks like he'd be
a good pick. (no pun intended)
Steve
|
388.243 | I would hope even Dan could see it... | 4156::G_WAUGAMAN | | Mon Nov 12 1990 07:56 | 29 |
|
> By the way, Glenn, did you see ESPN's Campus Report with Chris Fowler
> the other day? He said the Notre Dame bowl committed is seriously
> looking at two other bowls besides the Orange, the SUgar and Cotton and
> prospective opponents Mississippi and Texas. The question he thinks
> they're considering is can they market this so the public will accept
> them "ducking" (his word) Colorado.
Looks like the gig is up for you, Dan. ND is going Orange, rumors or
no. They will make the right bowl decision for the third year in a
row. (And don't be giving me that re-match logic. Under the
system that rewards head-to-head performance the ND-Miami comparison
had already been decided, while an undefeated, untied West Virginia
would have left questions, and at least as much criticism as ND
received for "ducking" Miami. The fact that it was an even year,
meaning ND had home-field advantage is just too bad. More than any
other team of the 80's, Miami benefited from their home field, given
the Orange Bowl set-up. That's just the way it goes.)
If you didn't see the game, or even if you don't like ND, their effort
Saturday against Tennessee was heroic. Simply heroic. (See: Zorich
in the dictionary under "courage".) This is a very flawed team that
just keeps on winning, even under hostile conditions, while all these
supposedly superior teams like Washington come up against a little
adversity and roll over and die. If you can't appreciate what ND did
Saturday, you can't appreciate college football.
glenn
|
388.244 | Source? | 4156::G_WAUGAMAN | | Mon Nov 12 1990 08:03 | 13 |
|
> To the best of my recollection, the refs resolved this by giving ND the
> ball on the one. They claimed no fumble but Miami lost it on downs
> when pressed for information after the game. When pointed out it was
> only third down, the ref in question admitted making a mistake. He was
> subsequently told from above that he didn't make a mistake and not to
> comment on the issue anymore.
And, for the record, please substantiate this wholly re-created version
of events. After the first sentence, it's all news to me.
glenn
|
388.245 | 8^) | 30670::DIGGINS | | Mon Nov 12 1990 08:32 | 7 |
|
You guy's are worse than Clemson fans.
Steve
|
388.246 | | 15558::SZABO | The Beer Hunter | Mon Nov 12 1990 08:32 | 14 |
| Amazing interception to save the game for ND. I thought for sure that
Tennessee would pull it out. I also thought Washington would pull it
out, but UCLA hung tough.
Say what you want against Lou Holtz, but the man has filberts and is
not afraid to shuffle his players around to new positions in the middle
of the season.
Great call, Mike JN, on the Texas-Houston game. Houston finally got
the spanking they deserved.
Penn State wins it's 7th in a row. Next week- Notre Dame.
Hawk
|
388.247 | A heart stopper for ND fans! | 30670::DIGGINS | | Mon Nov 12 1990 08:49 | 8 |
|
Tennessee worked that on-sides kick to perfection! They had the right
man (pickens) on the end and the kicker hit he ball perfectly, nice
play.
Steve
|
388.248 | | DECWET::METZGER | It's just the beat of love... | Mon Nov 12 1990 11:50 | 37 |
|
I was at the Husky game this saturday. It was my first div 1 game and it is
quite an experience to be surrounded by 71,000 fans wearing purple..
to put it clean and simply the Huskies were outcoached this weekend. UCLA
came out with the shotgun and ran it almost the entire game. The defensive
coordinator for Washington should have his head examined for failing to make
any adjustments to stop UCLA. The Bruins must have ran the same play 20 times.
It's almost a variation of the R & S. 3 wide receivers and two backs. One of
the backs delays and blocks before going out and the other goes across the
middle. Two receivers either runs curls or deep routes...The TE goes down the
middle...and 1 guy was not covered almost everytime they ran the play.
As soon as the UCLA QB (maddix who looked very good) saw the WA was in zone
coverage he audibled and UCLA ran this play. The only time the huskies stopped
it was when they went to man coverage....
On offense The huskies were gaining around 6-7 yards a pop running right
up the gut of the UCLA defense..but did they stick with it ? Noooooo...
They tried several sweeps which were squashed and in the second half the average
offensive series went 1st down..attempt 30 yard bomb...2nd down attempt 20
yard bomb...3rd down try some way to pick up a 1st down...This was all done with
a QB that showed in the 1st half that he couldn't pass and receivers that showed
that they couldn't hang onto the ball....The wind was gusting 30 mph all over
the place and the field was wet. The only consistant drives they had all game
were ones in which they pounded the ball up the middle on the ground....
the players deserved better than the coaching they received this week....
and once again the Rose bowl means nothing....I said last week that the
quotes were the like of " we are happy going to the Rose bowl..we aren't
even thinking about a nat championship" it showed this saturday.....
Too bad.......
Metz
|
388.249 | | RIPPLE::DEVLIN_JO | How many more weeks.. | Mon Nov 12 1990 12:52 | 31 |
| GLenn,
My sentiments exactly. The ND - Tennesse game was what college
ball is all about. The second half was explosive. I was almost
pulling for Tennessee to pull it out, because it would have been
thebest comeback I'd seen in a long,long time. Both coaches went
for it. Holtz going on 4th down, Majors having Kelly air it out
all day long. Stonebreaker really hunkered downin the 4th, and
teh VOls goal line defense was one of the best I've seen. Simply
*HUGE*. And the Rocket did perform when needed. After the big
Fmble at the goal line, he returns the punt to about the 10,
guarenteeing ND a chance for a FG at least (which they got). Then
on the next punt, the Vol punter was so concerned about him, that
he shanks about an 11 yard punt, setting up the go ahead TD. And
then of course, the run that was the game-winner. ND had good
field position all day because of the Vols fear of kicking to him.
They kicked short on the kick offs, and ND consistently had good
position (in the second half this was plainly evident).
Classic matchup. Good game.
RE Steve D. and Denny - Pickens looked great. That onside kick
was amazing.
re Metz;
Boy did it get quient in Seattle after the game....
JD
|
388.250 | | BSS::JCOTANCH | CU: Back-to-Back Big 8 Champs | Mon Nov 12 1990 14:01 | 19 |
| Despite the fact that we will probably have #1 vs. #2 in the Orange
Bowl, I am still strongly in favor a playoff. One of the biggest
problems with the current system is that there are top teams that
deserve to be in a playoff but have no chance at winning the mythical,
such as Texas, Virginia, FSU, Nebraska, Michigan, Washington, etc. (Not
to mention Florida, which I assume wouldn't be allowed in a playoff
because of their probation.)
Right now the frontrunners are obviously ND and CU, but there is a slim
hope for Miami and maybe Ga Tech if ND were to lose one of their last 2
but beat CU in the Orange. Even then, ND would have the argument that
they beat the #1 team in a bowl, therefore rising them high in the
final polls. But right now I don't see ND losing to Penn St or USC
because after being down for the count, the Irish have come back the
last 4 weeks with big wins over Miami & Tennessee and seem to have the
momentum again. Of course maybe justice will prevail and ND will
finally lose one of those close ones.
Joe
|
388.251 | | CSOA1::BACH | Onward through the fog... | Mon Nov 12 1990 14:12 | 7 |
| College Football- who's number one?
Last I heard Eastern Kentucky University...
Chip_GSH_Bach (EKU Class of '86)
P.S. Does anyone have scores from the 2A division?
|
388.252 | | BSS::JCOTANCH | CU: Back-to-Back Big 8 Champs | Mon Nov 12 1990 14:18 | 24 |
| The Heisman appears to be headed down to the wire, although if you
listen to the media enough you will get the feeling that Ismail is the
favorite at this point.
Here's how the top 4 did this week:
Ismail-Pretty much held in check, but had the big game-winning TD
Bieniemy-Had a good but not great day against Okie St. Rushed for 148
yards and still leads the nation in rushing.
Shawn Moore-Had another good day and still leads the nation in passing
Detmer-Passed for over 400 yards again.
I still can't believe that Bieniemy isn't the favorite right now with
such impressive stats on the nation's 2nd ranked team, but then again
he really didn't start to become noticed until mid-season, and it was
CU's first 4 games which were on national TV. And of course he didn't
play against the Vols, and won't be on national TV this week in his
last game before the votes are counted. Therefore, I say he's out of
the running. Ismail definitely has the inside track, especially since
his next 2 games are on national TV and against top-20 teams.
Gee, I used the term 'national TV' quite a bit when discussing the
Heisman trophy. Must just be a coincidence.
Joe
|
388.253 | Prob'ly still #1 | NAC::G_WAUGAMAN | | Mon Nov 12 1990 14:23 | 7 |
|
> P.S. Does anyone have scores from the 2A division?
EKU just held on against #18 Marshall, 15-12.
glenn
|
388.254 | I'm slowly becoming a believer in ND | WORDY::NAZZARO | Cannibals aren't picky eaters! | Mon Nov 12 1990 14:33 | 16 |
| Time to go to the crow cafe, Rich Jones!
I hate to pat myself on the back (yeah, right!), but I did predict
Notre Dame would run through Tennessee for over 300 years, and they
did - 316 to be exact. And if Tennessee didn't score that last
minute touchdown, I would have predicted the score exactly right.
Notre Dame, amazingly enough, always seems to do just enough to win.
Tennessee had 100 yards more total offense, but one vital interception
and the Irish escape once again. I can't call it luck anymore - it
happens too often to be luck.
My prediction for this week: Penn State's offense does next to
nothing, and its defense collapses late. 20-7 Notre Dame.
NAZZ
|
388.255 | Rich is a man - already ate his crow! | WORDY::NAZZARO | Cannibals aren't picky eaters! | Mon Nov 12 1990 14:39 | 14 |
| Rich, I apologize for missing your earlier note. Saw that you
already chowed down with your favorite beverage!
One tip I had on the Tennessee rush defense was that I listened
to WFAN from New York a week ago Saturday, and they had on the
Temple play-by-play guy after the Tenn-Temple game. He said that
Temple was running at will on Tennessee until their QB went out
with an injury early in the 3rd quarter, then Tennessee took over
control of the game.
FWIW, I was pulling for Tennessee, but Notre Dame has some type
of karma in their corner this season.
NAZZ
|
388.256 | A little late for work on Monday ??? | SHALOT::HUNT | A Prom Nightmare On Helms Street | Mon Nov 12 1990 14:40 | 6 |
| � but I did predict Notre Dame would run through Tennessee for over 300
� years, and they did - 316 to be exact.
^^^^^
Gawd, I thought that game seemed to go on forever ...
Bob Hunt
|
388.257 | This is getting to be more of a farce every year... | DECWET::METZGER | It's just the beat of love... | Mon Nov 12 1990 15:23 | 9 |
|
Penn State has a pretty smart coach at the helm. if anybody can devise a game
plan to win a specific game it's Paterno. I predict that this one will go down
to the wire and the Lions will win by 2.
Just remember it's not who you lose to it's when you lose....
Metz
|
388.258 | In spite of the win streak, Penn State not that strong | NAC::G_WAUGAMAN | | Mon Nov 12 1990 15:30 | 13 |
|
Paterno had better come up with a better strategy to defense the run
than last year, or it'll be a long afternoon again. Penn State's
offense has yet to get completely untracked, with QB Tony Sacca showing
little or no improvement from one week to the next (I think his best
game was against USC early), so PSU can't give up more than maybe 20
points if they want to have any shot at all to win.
Penn State is my home team, and a win would go long way towards a
possible top 10 finish, but I just don't see it. ND 31, Penn State 17.
glenn
|
388.259 | Only two more days of crow... | RAVEN1::RJONES | | Thu Nov 15 1990 03:29 | 8 |
| Nazz, What do you see in our future Saturday in Memphis against Ole
Miss. Am I wasting a trip??? Will we cover the points ??? My wife has
TOLD me to check with you before placing any bets. Also, how many yards
will the Rebs rush for this weekend. Speak great swami if only a few
words of wisdom..
This Vol needs help...
Rich
|
388.260 | Memphis St. supporters natural enemies of UT? | NAC::G_WAUGAMAN | | Thu Nov 15 1990 07:35 | 8 |
|
Is it true what I hear that U of Tennessee isn't real well liked in
Memphis and that this game is actually more of a home game for Ole Miss
than the Vols? If so, could make a difference in the outcome (but I
doubt it)...
glenn
|
388.261 | | RAVEN1::D_SMITH | | Thu Nov 15 1990 08:32 | 22 |
|
.260� Is it true what I hear that U of Tennessee isn't real well liked in
When you go west in the state you will find less and less UT
supporters. Memphis State and Vanderbilt has a larger following west
of Nashvile. Mississippi will have fewer hours to travel than
Tennessee to get to Memphis, but I suspect the Volunteers will have
just as many fans there as Ole Miss. Knoxville to Memphis is about an
8 hour drive. I hope Tennessee can stop the Mississippi ground game or
the Vols could be in for a high scoring game. I'll still take the Vols
by 7.
Mississippi chose to play in memphis. The game was going to be played
at Mississippi, but the Rebels thought they could get a bigger crowd
in the Liberty Bowl.
Dave
|
388.262 | Should be a high-scoring game | WORDY::NAZZARO | Cannibals aren't picky eaters! | Thu Nov 15 1990 09:37 | 10 |
| Unfortunately Rich, I cain't help you out, since I don't know
diddley about Mississippi. Tennessee I suspect should overpower
them offensively, though. If I were a betting man, I'd take the
over!
Thanks for your confidence in my prognostications, but even a
blind squirrel finds an occasional acorn. My elimination in the
fifth week of the King of the Hill contest is more my speed.
NAZZ
|
388.263 | ESPN deserves it!!!But, not in this case!!! | RAVEN1::M_PHILLIPS | Flirting With Disaster | Thu Nov 15 1990 23:29 | 7 |
| It was told on Sports Center tonight that Mississippi was holding some
sort of Pep-Rally and they were gonna sell slugs at t.v.'s with a
hammer that had ESPN on it, something about ESPN said UT would win this
match up and Miss. didn't take it too kindly. Oh well!!! I say it
should be a good game with UT winning by atleast 11pts.
M.J.
|
388.264 | | CSC32::GL_JOHNSON | Time's Up! | Sat Nov 17 1990 19:12 | 7 |
| CU 64, K. State 3 - reserves score 24 points in 2nd half, will be #1
Penn State 24, ND 21 - the Rocket blew a gasket, ND never recovered
USC 45, UCLA 42 - wild & wacky game from longtime Pac-10 rivals
Maryland 35, Virginia 30 - Moore injured, Cavs will still get New
Year's Day bowl appearance.
glen j.
|
388.265 | | STAR::YANKOWSKAS | Paul Yankowskas | Mon Nov 19 1990 09:08 | 5 |
| General question -- has any team with two losses ever won the national
championship?
py
|
388.266 | | RIPPLE::DEVLIN_JO | School dat rookie | Mon Nov 19 1990 09:59 | 21 |
| Paul,
NO.
Regarding today's poll (in USA Today) - how can Miami be #2? They
lost to BYU and Notre Dame, both of whom are ranked lower. Last
year, many noters used the arguement that Miami beat ND, therefore
ND could never be ranked higher. Seems that the pollsters are leaning
towards handing Miami the champeenship.
Didn't watch any games this weekend, but was glad for Paterno -
he's got the Lions playing good ball right now (8 straight wins)
and I think they shold be in the top ten. I see CU romped on some
hapless requirement, but Houston takes the cake for classless piling
on. They really needed to keep Klingler in the game throwing against
Eastern Washington - I'm not impressed by his 11 Td's...
I think CU should be #1, with Georgia Tech #2, BYU #3, Texas #4,
ND #5, Miami #6...
JD
|
388.267 | | PEACHS::MITCHAM | Andy in Alpharetta (near Atlanta) | Mon Nov 19 1990 11:02 | 8 |
| Re: .266 -- RIPPLE::DEVLIN_JO "School dat rookie"
> I think CU should be #1, with Georgia Tech #2, BYU #3, Texas #4,
> ND #5, Miami #6...
And if ND beats CU in their upcoming matchup?
-Andy (waiting to see who's gonna say GA Tech should be #1)
|
388.268 | | RIPPLE::DEVLIN_JO | School dat rookie | Mon Nov 19 1990 11:09 | 8 |
| Andy,
No way shojuld ND or Miami be #1. If ND beats CU, and Ga. Tech
wins, then Ga Tech shold be #1.
Simple as that.
JD
|
388.269 | No more ND to whine about. The fun's over, JD! :-) | SASE::SZABO | The Beer Hunter | Mon Nov 19 1990 11:27 | 8 |
| Nice, nice win for Penn St. and Joe Paterno. And, if I'm not mistaken,
ND had a 14-0 lead!
Although I'm very happy about PS's big win, I'm also kind of
disappointed that ND won't be pissing people off this year now.....
:-)
Hawk
|
388.270 | A huge mess is brewing... | ORC::G_WAUGAMAN | | Mon Nov 19 1990 12:32 | 26 |
|
Yes, in the absence of a playoff if forced to choose between the lesser
of evils, I'd take Georgia Tech if they polish off Georgia (not a given)
and Nebraska, assuming an ND victory over Colorado. Miami has done
little more than get their losses out of the way early and then coast
home against some light competition. They will beat Texas, but if ND
beats Colorado I don't see where Miami has any more claim to the national
title than do the Irish (which is to say not much claim at all).
The only teams I can see that deserve a shot at the title are (in
decreasing order of preference assuming they remain unbeaten the rest
of the way) Colorado, Texas, and Georgia Tech. But in reality if
Colorado doesn't come through the title probably goes to the Cotton Bowl
winner (Miami-Texas) or even BYU (Holiday joke with Texas A&M) if
Nebraska beats Tech, either of which would be a little hard to take.
This year's post-season is easily the biggest mess since 1984, when
only two teams came out of the bowls with less than two losses-- BYU
and Washington. (In 1960, Minnesota did win the title with two
losses, but only because the final polls were taken before the bowls in
those days.) A post-bowl, four-team playoff (which is the format I've
favored, as not to compromise the bowls entirely) looks like it would
be suitable, and very interesting, this year.
glenn
|
388.271 | Engineers rule! | MPO::GILBERT | Foreshock or Aftershock? | Mon Nov 19 1990 13:11 | 9 |
|
While CU probably deserves to be #1 due to strength of schedule,
The Ramblin' Wrecks definitely deserve consideration for their
undefeated status. If Tech remains undefeated they should be #1.
Even though they didn't play as tough a schedule as some others
it wasn't that easy either. A case could even be made that Tech's
schedule was tougher than Miami's.
|
388.272 | Will the Caines be able?? | LUNER::WORRALL | | Tue Nov 20 1990 06:53 | 11 |
| It looks like last year all over again. If Colo beats ND, they are #1.
However, if ND beats Colo and the Canes beat Texas, the Canes are #1
AGAIN. For once I would like the #1 team in the land to win and dont let
any other team slip through the back door. Unlike last year when the
Colo/ND and Ala/Mia where being played at the same time, the Cotton
Bowl will be final before the kickoff of the Orange Bowl. Looking
forward to a very interesting New Years day.
Greg
|
388.273 | AP Top 25 | SHALOT::MEDVID | If I could be God tonight... | Tue Nov 20 1990 08:25 | 30 |
| 1. Colorado (45) 10-1-1
2. Miami (3) 7-2-0
3. GA Tech (8) 9-0-1
4. BYU (2) 9-1-0
5. Florida (1) 9-1-0
6. Texas (1) 8-1-0
7. Notre Dame 8-2-0
8. FSU 8-2-0
9. Washington 9-2-0
10. Nebraska 9-1-0
11. Penn St. 8-2-0
12. Houston 9-1-0
13. Iowa 8-2-0
14. Tennessee 6-2-2
15. Michican 7-3-0
16. Clemson 9-2-0
17. Virginia 8-2-0
18. USC 8-2-1
19. Ohio St. 7-2-1
20. Louiville 9-1-1
21. Mississippi 8-2-0
22. Illinois 7-3-0
23. Auburn 7-2-1
24. Michigan St. 6-3-1
25. Southern Miss. 8-3-0
Others receiving votes: Texas A&M, Oklahoma, San Jose St., Oregon,
California, Colorado St., Alabama, Baylor, Wyoming , Arizona, Syracuse,
Central Michigan, Loiusiana Tech, Maryland, North Carolina
|
388.274 | Rip Offs Galore | SHALOT::MEDVID | If I could be God tonight... | Tue Nov 20 1990 08:34 | 16 |
| Just to sum up some of the frustration that we've been lamenting
about:
- Colorado has a loss, a tie, and a disputed victory and is #1
- Twice beaten Miami is #2, two spots ahead of BYU, which has only one
loss and which beat the Hurricanes early in the season
- Georgia Tech is #3 even though it is the only major unbeaten team
in the country
- Penn State, which just beat top-ranked Notre Dame and has the same
record as the Irish, is ranked four places below Lou Holtz's team
- Clemson is ranked ahead of Virginia but the Cavs beat them in the
first ACC matchup of the season
This settles it. It's time for a playoff system!
--dan'l
|
388.275 | Colorado is excellent! | AXIS::ROBICHAUD | DockerS...Pants for |CENSORED|s | Tue Nov 20 1990 08:53 | 8 |
| I have absolutely no problem with Colorado being ranked #1.
Their one loss was definitely a_excellent loss and their tie was
a_excellent tie. Matter of fact since both Tennessee and Colorado
didn't want to win the game, and the objective was a_excellent tie,
and since that objective was met this almost qualifies it as
a_thigh_shuddering_excellent tie!
/Don
|
388.276 | | CAM::WAY | HWRFC Clydesdale | Tue Nov 20 1990 09:07 | 5 |
| � a_thigh_shuddering_excellent tie!
Yes, but /Don, since a tie is like kissing your sister, aren't
we talking a little incestuously here?
|
388.277 | Let's not leave anything out! | SASE::SZABO | The Beer Hunter | Tue Nov 20 1990 09:42 | 8 |
| Also, dan'l, since I sense objectivity in your last reply, you must
also consider that Miami is ranked 6(?) places higher than ND, even
though ND beat them convincingly PLUS, they have 1 more in the win
column......
HTH.
Hawk
|
388.278 | | SA1794::GUSICJ | Referees whistle while they work.. | Tue Nov 20 1990 11:31 | 15 |
|
Actually, all this No. 1 stuff is great if you are for a playoff
system. One of the best things to happen was that ND lost to Penn
St. and now has everyone scratching their heads wondering how do
we figure out who is No. 1.
This year is a joke as far as the bowls and the rankings go.
Another year like this one (with many top teams having 2 or more
losses), and the NCAA will have to adopt some sort of playoff system
to determine a *real* national champ. That is if they (NCAA) want
to retain any kind of integrity.
bill..g.
|
388.279 | | SHALOT::MEDVID | If I could be God tonight... | Tue Nov 20 1990 11:42 | 4 |
| Hawk, good point. I copied most of my reply from an AP story. Even
they neglected to say ND beat Miami.
--dan'l
|
388.280 | My friday | HOTSHT::SCHNEIDER | $80,000 + a Chevy Blazer | Tue Nov 20 1990 11:46 | 10 |
| >Also, dan'l, since I sense objectivity in your last reply, you must
>also consider that Miami is ranked 6(?) places higher than ND, even
>though ND beat them convincingly PLUS, they have 1 more in the win
>column......
Hawk, you need deprogramming...
I think 72 shots of beer, one every minute ought to do it.
Dan
|
388.281 | Mickey Mouse Parade... | BSS::M_HENDERSON | Bart Simpson - My Hero, Man !!! | Tue Nov 20 1990 12:21 | 14 |
| The Orange Bowl totally screwed up by extending the invitation to
ND so early when ND still had to play Penn State & USC. Because of
their greed and impatientce there will be no "championship game" for
#1.
This stupid poll thing only works when there is an obvious single
dominant team in a given year such as Nebraska of '83, Miami some
years etc... If there is no such team in a given year then this thing
is a travesty !!! A total joke !!!
Nebraska Marty
P.S. Dont consider GT an automatic VS the Huskers. NU will show up
ready to play !!!
|
388.282 | | BSS::M_HENDERSON | Bart Simpson - My Hero, Man !!! | Tue Nov 20 1990 12:22 | 3 |
| re: my own -1
What I mean by "Championship game" is #1 vs #2 head to head.
|
388.283 | Just another waste of your MONEY | OURGNG::RIGGEN | Burley from biking | Tue Nov 20 1990 12:36 | 14 |
| >> The Orange Bowl totally screwed up by extending the invitation to
>> ND so early when ND still had to play Penn State & USC. Because of
>> their greed and impatientce there will be no "championship game" for
>> #1.
The Orange Greed is still very much intact. By scheduling the Home team
in the Orange bowl (Miami) the area loses big $$$. Miami residents and UM
students allready have a place to stay. Where as ND-CU matchup the students
and supporters come from South Bend and Colorado. This means Big Business for
the area Hotels, and travel industry.
ALL BOWLS are for the $$$$$$ vs the National Championship.
Jeff
|
388.284 | Money talks...bullkaka..you know the rest. | WATTS3::DIGGINS | | Tue Nov 20 1990 12:59 | 10 |
|
This game could determine the national champion. Colorado has
every chance of winning the mythical thised year. ND does not
however. Yep just think of all those Coloradians spending all
those hard earned nuggets in beautiful Miami! Not to mention
the "evil ones" who will also spend multitudes of cash! Should be
a good game!
Steve
|
388.285 | | MAXWEL::MACNEAL | Mac's Back in Mass. | Tue Nov 20 1990 13:43 | 1 |
| So what's the big deal with determining a national champion?
|
388.286 | | SASE::SZABO | The Beer Hunter | Tue Nov 20 1990 13:44 | 9 |
| > 72 shots of beer, one every minute.....
Dan, you must've seen that Happy Days episode where Richie goes to a
bachelor party with a bunch of Marine Corps dudes........
I don't think I can handle shots of beer. After the 2nd shot, I'd be
downing the rest of the can out of frustration!
Hawk
|
388.287 | | AXIS::ROBICHAUD | Docker...Pant for |CENSORED| | Tue Nov 20 1990 13:48 | 4 |
| Hey Dan, go quaff another six pack of that sissy yuppie beer,
then we'll talk "excellent losses".
/Don
|
388.288 | never saw it... | HOTSHT::SCHNEIDER | Been there. Done that. | Tue Nov 20 1990 13:49 | 6 |
| >Dan, you must've seen that Happy Days episode where Richie goes to a
>bachelor party with a bunch of Marine Corps dudes........
Yowza! Yowza! Yowza! Girls! Girls! Girls! Six! Count 'em. Six!
Dan
|
388.289 | thanks, /Don (nostril-doner) | HOTSHT::SCHNEIDER | Been there. Done that. | Tue Nov 20 1990 14:04 | 10 |
| > Hey Dan, go quaff another six pack of that sissy yuppie beer,
>then we'll talk "excellent losses".
Yes, you're right. The world *should* know that you finally paid off
that bet. I fully enjoyed that 6-pack of Dos Equis, and the best part
is that Jim came to visit me and got your six of Sammies. So there we
are watching football, drinking great beer, and knowing that you bought
it for us.
Dan
|
388.290 | | AXIS::ROBICHAUD | Docker...Pant for |CENSORED| | Tue Nov 20 1990 14:07 | 5 |
| You and old "pink tank top" eh. Boy there's a pair that could
beat three of a kind. AND, if you were watching that sorry S Jests
team, you certainly weren't watching what passes for football!
/Don
|
388.291 | But why then does Texas lag behind Miami and BYU? | NAC::G_WAUGAMAN | | Tue Nov 27 1990 08:34 | 16 |
|
The AP pollsters swapped Georgia Tech for Miami at #2 in this week's
poll, apparently giving Tech the inside track at the national
championship if they continue to win and Notre Dame beats Colorado.
Just like when they swapped Miami for Michigan last year when both
teams were inactive, I guess a lot the voters thought hard about
where they had placed Tech and moved them up (Georgia Tech had eight
first-place votes to Miami's three last week, but were ranked much
lower on a substantial number of ballots). The voters also swapped
Texas for Florida at #5, which made a lot of sense.
Anyone know if the UPI coaches' poll left Miami at #2 (it's listed in
USA Today)?
glenn
|
388.292 | Colorado, Texas, and Georgia Tech (in that order) | NAC::G_WAUGAMAN | | Mon Dec 03 1990 08:18 | 37 |
|
Add BYU to the list of the unwashed (again)... If that drubbing to
Hawaii, complete with a mediocre performance by Detmer, had happened
two weeks ago, Ismail would probably be holding the Heisman right now.
For those who saw the Miami-San Diego State game, do you agree that
this team has no business making even a long-shot claim to the national
championship? Once again, a very lackluster effort on the road. I
don't think Miami was even able to make a first down on their last 3-4
possessions, and their defense was not up to stopping SDS's run or
pass in the same stretch. On SDS's last four possesions, they drove
the ball deep all four times, resulting in three missed field goals
and finally a touchdown. For wont of a kicker or coach (attempting a
55-yard field goal on 4th and 6 while 10 points down with less than a
half-quarter left? C'mon, coach...)
As I expected, Florida State did a number on Florida in their grudge
match in Tallahassee. I'm convinced that for big in-state and
conference rivalry games the home field advantage counts for more than
the usual 3-point edge assumed by bettors.
Texas did a decent job in coming from 14 points down early to hold off
A&M in another in-state game, and Georgia Tech didn't have as much
trouble with Georgia as I expected. Both teams did nothing to damage
their title hopes. I would hope that Texas finally moves in front of
Miami this week, to where they rightfully belong. With their
reasonably tough schedule and only the one loss, I'm not sure why it
has taken this long for Texas to receive the respect they've earned.
With the season complete, I only see Colorado, Texas, and Georgia Tech
with legitimate claims to the throne. It's too bad that Tech isn't
matched up with one of the other two. If they all lose? Either Notre
Dame or the Penn State-Florida State winner, depending on how those
games shake out...
glenn
|
388.293 | Blockbuster winner = National Champ | SHALOT::MEDVID | November spawned a monster | Mon Dec 03 1990 08:47 | 16 |
| Miami will drop. I'd lay money on it. Texas will take over the number
two spot.
As far as I'm concerned, Miami is a disgrace to college football. I
can never remember another team being involved in so many fights.
Someone needs to straighten that program out.
What I want to know is who the hey is voting for Colorado? I've
watched four or five sports shows recently and everyone who addresses
the "Number 1" issue says they did not vote for CU because of their
disputed victory.
Penn State should at least be in the top 5. Maybe with BYU and Florida
losing, that will happen.
--dan'l
|
388.294 | Clarification... | NAC::G_WAUGAMAN | | Mon Dec 03 1990 08:50 | 8 |
|
> Miami will drop. I'd lay money on it. Texas will take over the number
> two spot.
Georgia Tech was at #2 in the AP last week...
glenn
|
388.295 | BYU_Hawaii? | MILPND::VLASAK | I went to a fight and a Miami U game broke out! | Mon Dec 03 1990 10:00 | 5 |
|
What were the results of the BYU-Hawaii game?
Bob V.
|
388.296 | | CSC32::J_HENSON | It's just the same, only different | Mon Dec 03 1990 10:02 | 9 |
| >><<< Note 388.295 by MILPND::VLASAK "I went to a fight and a Miami U game broke out!" >>>
>> -< BYU_Hawaii? >-
>> What were the results of the BYU-Hawaii game?
Hawaii - 59
BYU - 28
|
388.297 | | RIPPLE::DEVLIN_JO | Lets get naked and smoke | Mon Dec 03 1990 11:27 | 17 |
| Glenn,
Agree with ya. Miami is not deserving. Hey if Tech goes 11-0-1
they deserve the champeenship (providing ND beats the Buffs). I
won't in the States for the bowl games, but I'll go on record as
saying that if ND beats the Buffs, they don't deserve the #1 (same
with Miami if they win...) - despite the whining Lou will do.
Dan'l
Remember, Miami is just misunderstood. Fighting and stuff like
that isn't bad - overhype is (like in ND). You should know that
by now ;-)
Also, agree Penn State should be higher...
JD
|
388.298 | More on Detmer.... | BSS::JCOTANCH | CU: Back-to-Back Big 8 Champs | Mon Dec 03 1990 11:47 | 7 |
| Detmer's stats against Hawaii were 3TD's and 4 int's. However, he did
set the all-time NCAA passing record for yards. On the
highlights, they showed a Hawaii player posing like the Heisman trophy
after he scored a TD. I thought that was pretty funny.
Joe
|
388.299 | The run-'em-up QB stats have gotten out of hand... | NAC::G_WAUGAMAN | | Mon Dec 03 1990 11:56 | 19 |
|
> Detmer's stats against Hawaii were 3TD's and 4 int's. However, he did
> set the all-time NCAA passing record for yards. On the
> highlights, they showed a Hawaii player posing like the Heisman trophy
> after he scored a TD. I thought that was pretty funny.
That was great! ESPN made it sound like another example of poor
sportsmanship that might have future repercussions, but compared to
your average end zone dance I thought the pose was rather clever.
David Klinger made a valiant try at the season passing yardage record
by throwing for a single-game record 720+ yards in Tokyo against
Arizona State (final: 62-45), but fell short as Detmer played in 12
games to Klingler's 11. Not surprisingly, the single-game record
setting pass by Klingler was a 95-yard TD with 1:30 to play and
Houston up, 55-45.
glenn
|
388.300 | | BSS::M_HENDERSON | Bart Simpson - My Hero, Man !!! | Tue Dec 04 1990 11:56 | 14 |
| I'm going on-line to say that Tech will most likely beat Nebraska.
Now, if BYU could get #1 after beating a 6-5 Michigan IN A NON-New
Years day bowl because they were the only undefeated team left, when
why would Tech not deserve #1 considering the records of the other
teams. Including Colorado who has 1 loss, 1 tie, and 1 asterics.
I'm not puting down CU or any other team. I'm just saying there is
precedent for an undefeated team with a weak schedule winning the
mythical national championship.
Go BIG RED
Nebraska Marty
|
388.301 | | AXIS::ROBICHAUD | Edward Scissorhands cut here | Tue Dec 04 1990 12:01 | 6 |
| It would be a real shame to see a sissy team (read Georgia Tech)
from a sissy conference (read ACC) beat a Patriot like patsy (read
Nebraska) and win the National Title. It would be enough to make
me stop watching college football. 8^(
/Don
|
388.302 | Go Big Red! | MILPND::VLASAK | I went to a fight and a Miami U game broke out! | Tue Dec 04 1990 12:03 | 11 |
| re .300
Marty,
Two wrong do not a right make!
BYU should not have gotten when they did and GT will have to win
big and have other pieces fall into place to make it.
Bob V.
|
388.303 | | BSS::M_HENDERSON | Bart Simpson - My Hero, Man !!! | Tue Dec 04 1990 12:18 | 7 |
| re: -1
Bob, I agree, I'm just saying that the precident is there. Actually,
if you look at the situation this year, no one has a solid argument
for number 1.
Nebraska Marty
|
388.304 | Some corrections made to published numbers | MILPND::VLASAK | I went to a fight and a Miami U game broke out! | Tue Dec 04 1990 22:18 | 25 |
|
In glancing at the paper tonight I noticed that some teams play more or
less equal number of home and away games, while others build up a good
record by staying home. Check out the teams home and away records.
Home and Away records as of 11/26: (From The National top 16)
Home Away
Colorado 5-0 5-1-1
BYU 6-0 4-1
Miami 7-0 1-2
Texas 4-1 5-0
Florida 7-0 2-1
GT 6-0 3-0-1
ND 4-2 5-0
Wash 5-1 4-1
P.St 5-1 4-1
Clemson 4-2 5-0
FSU 6-0 2-2
Tenn 5-2 1-0-2
Hou 6-0 3-1
Lvlle 6-0 3-1-1
Mich 4-2 4-1
OK 5-1 3-2
|
388.305 | | ROCK::GRONOWSKI | the dream is always the same... | Wed Dec 05 1990 09:49 | 5 |
|
Go Miami... what a team... with equal # of home and road games (6)
the Raindrops would have finished at 8-4 (based on home and road
winning pcts).
|
388.306 | | SHALOT::MEDVID | November spawned a monster | Wed Dec 05 1990 10:14 | 3 |
| What's Miami's home vs. away record of pre- and post-game fights?
--dan'l
|
388.307 | | RIPPLE::DEVLIN_JO | always initial your kiwi | Wed Dec 05 1990 10:29 | 4 |
| Miami was one of the first schools to go to the almost all home
game schedule. Theyreally are tough, ain't they.
JD
|
388.308 | | AXIS::ROBICHAUD | Edward Scissorhands cut here | Wed Dec 05 1990 10:33 | 4 |
| Plus if Miami had played all of their games at home none of
their losses could be considered "excellent losses".
/Don
|
388.309 | | SASE::SZABO | The Beer Hunter | Wed Dec 05 1990 10:45 | 5 |
| What's this about Miami fighting again, etc.? Did they resort to it in
their last couple games? I haven't seen or read anything about Miami
in the last few weeks, so I really don't know how they behaved.....
Hawk
|
388.310 | | STAR::YANKOWSKAS | Paul Yankowskas | Wed Dec 05 1990 11:48 | 8 |
| re Hawk:
A brawl broke out with about a minute left in last week's Miami-San
Diego State game. The fracas was triggered by a late hit on SD State QB
Dan McGwire (brother of Mark) during a two-point conversion.
py
|
388.311 | Hulk Hogan ain't got nothing on the Canes | SHALOT::MEDVID | November spawned a monster | Wed Dec 05 1990 12:05 | 7 |
| > The fracas was triggered by a late hit on SD State QB
> Dan McGwire (brother of Mark) during a two-point conversion.
More like a late body slam.
--dan'l
|
388.312 | | BSS::JCOTANCH | CU: Back-to-Back Big 8 Champs | Wed Dec 05 1990 12:09 | 8 |
| > Miami was one of the first schools to go to the almost all home
> game schedule. Theyreally are tough, ain't they.
You mean like how ND had 7 home games en route to their national
championship season 2 years ago?
Joe
|
388.313 | Celebrate! Celebrate! Dance to the late hit! | SASE::SZABO | The Beer Hunter | Wed Dec 05 1990 12:22 | 5 |
| Whaddya expect from the 'Canes anyway...... BTW, what was the score of
that game? Were they their usual classless selves like I saw during
the Syracuse massacre?
Hawk
|
388.314 | | RIPPLE::DEVLIN_JO | always initial your kiwi | Wed Dec 05 1990 12:23 | 24 |
| Joe,
Never claimed ND didn't, however ND followed the lead of other schools,
most notably Miami, in doing the home schedule thang. I wish I
could dig up the article I read a few yers back, which described
the changes that schools, led by Miami, have undertaken in the last
few years. The major ones were the heavy home schedule, the second
being the sacrificial lamb schedule, as schools like East Carolina
were willing ot prostitute themselves for big bucks, and the honor
to get humiliated by the Miami's of the world.
The article correctly predicted that other independents, (namely
ND and Penn State) would go the heavy home route and start to make
easier schedules.
The author said that it wasn't too far-fetched to think of a future
college football season that resembled the lions vs. the Christians
every week, with lots of undefeated vying for the mythical and HUGE
payoffs in the bowl structure....
Another tactic pointed out was the strategic use of the BYE before
big games, much like Miami last year prior to ND.
JD
|
388.315 | Sounds familiar | SHALOT::HUNT | Shoeless Joe Belongs In Cooperstown | Wed Dec 05 1990 12:34 | 10 |
| � The author said that it wasn't too far-fetched to think of a future
� college football season that resembled the lions vs. the Christians
� every week, with lots of undefeated vying for the mythical and HUGE
� payoffs in the bowl structure....
Sorta like this season when Virginia briefly made it to the top
whereupon all the traditional Big Few "lions" started resenting the
unholy intrusion.
Bob Hunt
|
388.316 | Miami 30 SD State 28 - close game! | FSOA::JHENDRY | John Hendry, DTN 292-2170 | Wed Dec 05 1990 12:40 | 1 |
|
|
388.317 | | AXIS::ROBICHAUD | Edward Scissorhands cut here | Wed Dec 05 1990 12:45 | 4 |
| I was waiting for Dan to blame the Miami/San Diego State fight
on Notre Dame and Lou Holtz.
/Don
|
388.318 | Give him a chance! | KEPNUT::DIGGINS | | Wed Dec 05 1990 13:23 | 9 |
|
re /'r
If anyone could come up with an hypothesis 'ol Dano could! 8^)
Steve
|
388.319 | | FSOA::JHENDRY | John Hendry, DTN 292-2170 | Wed Dec 05 1990 13:51 | 19 |
| Lets not be naive here. College football is first and foremost a
business. It has little educational value and its main purpose is to
make money for the university. With that being the case, a school
which doesn't do the most possible to maximize its profit is not just
being naive, it's being stupid. This includes such things as
scheduling as many weak teams as possible, scheduling as many home
games as possible, making the best possible deal it can get for a bowl
game, having open dates before its biggest game and so forth. There is
nothing wrong with this, and the schools with the most leverage call
most of the shots. (scheduling weak teams comes with the caveat that
if the schedule is too weak, it will work against you)
It's a hard, cold, cutthroat business where the bottom line is "just
win, baby" and no school should be bashed for doing all it can to
better its position. I do however agree that a school should not bend
its admission standards so far that they are ridiculous and a school
has a moral obligation to not treat its athletes like pieces of meat.
John
|
388.320 | All is not lost... | NAC::G_WAUGAMAN | | Wed Dec 05 1990 14:19 | 23 |
|
If anything, television has resulted in the scheduling of tougher
games, not easier ones. There's always the bowl game if a team wishes
to schedule nothing but cupcakes, but foregoing any regular-season
television income probably produces a net loss at most schools from
scheduling at least a couple of big games. Anyone noticed the drop-off
in undefeated teams per year from the late 60's and 70's? Television
and parity brought on by the rules changes have improved competition in
college football. Of course television generally doesn't care if the
games are played home or away, so that decision is still dependent on
gate receipts.
What JD has continually refused to acknowledge in the special case of
Miami is the number of teams that have dropped them from their
schedule like a hot potato in spite of Miami's wishes to continue the
series. Seeing that Notre Dame was one of them, you'd think there
would be some reluctance to throw stones. At least I'll give credit
to Steve Spurrier, who restored the Miami-Florida rivalry upon his
arrival in Gainesville after his predecessor Galen Hall dropped it
in a fit of cowardice.
glenn
|
388.321 | Lets start a real minor league football system instead of using the colleges... | DECWET::METZGER | It is happening again... | Wed Dec 05 1990 14:23 | 13 |
|
Unfortunately the NCAA still tries to propogate the myth that College football
is still being played by Student - Athletes. The college game can't have it both
ways. Either admit that it is a business and make the game a minor leagues for
the pros or bring it back to it's previous days of real students playing the
game to win one for the good old U of xxxx and make a real minor league
business enterprise for feeding into the NFL.
This fancy two step that the NCAA tries to do with the business of college
football and the old time ideals of students playing football for the
university can't go on forever.
Metz
|
388.322 | | RIPPLE::DEVLIN_JO | always initial your kiwi | Wed Dec 05 1990 15:49 | 21 |
| Glenn,
Miami has had more cupcakes on its schedule then most other teams.
Yep, ND and Miami no longer play. So, will Miami go with another
tough team, or is another San Diego State or Cincinnatti, or Div.
1-AA in their future??? The article, which must have been about
3 years ago, since I was living in Andover at the time, was in one
of the sport mags. It constantly named Miami as a school that started
the home loading and the strategic scheduling of cupcakes.
I also don't believe your comment about TV actually fomenting more
tough games - many of these games were *always* there - TV just
adds to the hype. Most of these great games are long standing
rivalries - Nebraska-Oklahoma, Ohio State-Michigan, USC-Notre Dame.
The fact that there are less undefeated teams can be attributed
to a better pool of players, more equally spread out then in past
years, increased pressures brought about by hype and I'd guess
increased travel, etc.
JD
|
388.323 | Fear not, JD; the doomsday didn't come to pass | NAC::G_WAUGAMAN | | Thu Dec 06 1990 09:12 | 37 |
|
> Miami has had more cupcakes on its schedule then most other teams.
> Yep, ND and Miami no longer play. So, will Miami go with another
> tough team, or is another San Diego State or Cincinnatti, or Div.
> 1-AA in their future??? The article, which must have been about
> 3 years ago, since I was living in Andover at the time, was in one
> of the sport mags. It constantly named Miami as a school that started
> the home loading and the strategic scheduling of cupcakes.
I believe the article you are referring to was in Sports Illustrated.
I read it. It was one of your irresponsible, the world-is-coming-to-end,
everything-in-intercollegiate-sports-reeks style story. Bottom line is
that the product on the field (in spite of what's going on behind the
scenes) is as good as it ever was as far as I'm concerned. The number
of great games I've seen on television this year has again verified that
to me, and a great number of those were inter-conference games.
Miami had home-and-home series in the 80's with Notre Dame, Michigan,
Florida, Penn State, Oklahoma, and others which generated tremendous
television and revenue interest for Miami. How many of these series
were discontinued by Miami's volition? (I do know that both Florida
and Penn State have restored Miami to their schedules in the 90's, to
their credit.)
The fact remains that Miami *especially* cannot economically rely on
loading up on patsies at home. Does it mean anything to you that
neither the SEC (who picked up So. Carolina and Arkansas) and the ACC
(who picked up Florida State) had no great interest in Miami? Miami
does not automatically sell out games in a 80,000-seat home stadium
like many of your major state universities. In spite of a three-year-
old article that did not foresee the emphasis now being placed on
conference alignment, Miami is joining up with the Big East schools
and *will* be playing balanced home-and-home schedules with its members.
The Big East games might not be incredibly competitive (a fear of mine
all along), but it wasn't for a lack of Miami trying.
glenn
|
388.324 | It's a long walk from the practice field to the stadium | NAC::G_WAUGAMAN | | Thu Dec 06 1990 09:17 | 13 |
|
> The fact that there are less undefeated teams can be attributed
> to a better pool of players, more equally spread out then in past
> years, increased pressures brought about by hype and I'd guess
> increased travel, etc.
Oh, and one more thing. How is increased travel partially responsible
for parity when you're accusing the teams of disproportionately loading
up on home games? Same with all that hype around games with nothing
but 30-point-underdog patsies...
glenn
|
388.325 | | RIPPLE::DEVLIN_JO | always initial your kiwi | Thu Dec 06 1990 15:37 | 6 |
| Glenn,
I said I guess about the traveling, but you're right. Hey, I guessed
wrong...
jD
|
388.326 | final stats for the big 6 | HPSRAD::SANTOS | | Fri Dec 07 1990 14:59 | 16 |
| Home and Away records todays USA today.
1-A opponents
Home Away Neutral Final winning %
Colorado 6-0 4-1 0-0-1 10-1-1 .550
Texas 4-1 5-0 1-0 10-1 .567
Miami 6-0 3-2 9-2 .570
ND 4-2 4-0 1-0 9-2 .582
GT 6-0 3-0 0-1 9-0-1 .495
P.St 5-1 4-1 9-2 .570
What's all this stuff about Miami playing an all home schedule?
They played 6 home games and 5 away just like everybody else.
Chuck
|