Which bowl games are good conference litmus tests?

Zamtuk · Post by **Zamtuk** » January 3, 2008, 4:15 pm

You nailed it. I merely pointed out that, for such an awful conference as the Big Ten, we somehow managed 8 bowl eligible teams. Yet such a powerhouse conference as the Pac Ten only managed to get 6.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » January 3, 2008, 4:29 pm

Zamtuk wrote:You nailed it. I merely pointed out that, for such an awful conference as the Big Ten, we somehow managed 8 bowl eligible teams. Yet such a powerhouse conference as the Pac Ten only managed to get 6.

This chatter about strength of conferences will never go anywhere. My original goal was to point out that the Big Ten is not a better conference than the Pac 10. The issue here was the inflated perception of the Big Ten.

ASU's next game against a Big Ten school is 2010 @ Wisconsin unless they match up against a Big Ten (11) team in a bowl game. Hopefully Wisconsin will still have an inflated ranking the third week into the season before the Sundevils roll over them on their way to a National Title.

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » January 3, 2008, 5:08 pm

Aardor wrote:
Winnow wrote:
Zamtuk wrote:Not to mention the fact that, as proven by facts and stats, the Big Ten has a winning record against the Pac Ten (and every other D1 conference, mind you), winnow's statement is, as usual, completely wrong.
How about we limit it to the second half of the 20th century and 21st century? The glory days of the leather helmets is kinda out of date. I'll concede those years to the Big Ten (11).
Statistically speaking, are there any reason to eliminate those years from this comparison? Seems odd that you would want to delete data (unless it is to support your opinion, like zamtuk said)!

From what I saw when I was pulling the stats for ASU that I listed above, they didn't play Big10 teams before the dates he was looking for anyhow.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » January 3, 2008, 5:31 pm

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/arti ... 9/1118/RSS

SEC, Pac-10 the best conferences of 2007; Big Ten the worst

December 24, 2007

By Randall Mell

South Florida Sun-Sentinel

What’s the best football conference in the land?

It’s more than a lively water-cooler debate this season.

It probably should have been the most important question asked in determining who deserves to play for the national championship.

In a year in which individual national title contenders couldn’t clearly separate themselves, conference power ratings ought to mean more. In an era when so few meaningful nonconference showdowns are played, the overall strength of a conference ought to be scrutinized more rigorously in measuring the worthiness of its conference champs.

In short, with no independents in the title hunt, maybe the winners of the two best conferences in the land should get to play for the national title in a year like this.

And if you accept that premise, did we get it right?

Did No. 1 Ohio State and No. 2 LSU reign over the best conferences in the land?

Actually, no. If conference strength is the criteria, we got it only half right.

If we’re rewarding conferences, it ought to be No. 1 LSU vs. No. 2 Southern California, according to this man’s conference ranking system.

The SEC is the nation’s top conference by a significant margin, based on my formula, with the Pac-10 the second best. The Big Ten? It’s tied with the Big 12 as the weakest of the six traditional conferences.

Here’s how my system ranked them: No. 1 SEC, No. 2 Pac-10, No. 3 ACC, No. 4 Big East, No. 5 (tie) Big 12 and Big Ten.

I know, I know. The ACC and Big East seem too high and the Big 12 too low.

The problem here is that the six major conferences don’t play each other enough to get a confident feel of how they really compare. You might not like my formula, but at least it offers some measurable, objective basis for deciding. Conferences were assessed in three categories: 1) Number of teams it placed in the Top 25 of final BCS standings; 2) Winning percentage in nonconference games among the six major conferences; 3) Aggregate conference ranking by the official BCS computers.

A conference was rewarded one point for leading a category, two for second, three for third, etc. The conferences with the lowest total scores ranked the highest.

Here’s the lowdown:

SEC (5 points): The SEC didn’t just rank No. 1 in the aggregate total of the six BCS computer rankings of conferences. The SEC was No. 1 in each of the six. The Big Ten was last in four of the six. The SEC also ranked first with more teams (5) among the final BCS Top 25 than any other conference. If you’re thinking there’s inherent bias in rankings, know that the 60 coaches and 114 Harris Interactive voters are spread evenly across the nation. The bottom line is LSU had to beat more good league brethren to win this conference than any other conference champ.

Pac-10 (9 points): The Pac-10 had the fewest teams (2) ranked among the final BCS Top 25 but had the best winning percentage (5-3) in nonconference games that were played among the six big conferences. The Pac-10 ranked second among the BCS computers.

ACC (11 points): No other conference won more nonconference games (9) played among the six major conferences, but none lost more (10). Hey, at least they were out there playing other big conferences.

Big East (12 points): The league didn’t play many meaningful nonconference games, and the league didn’t fare well when it did with a 5-8 mark against the other major conferences.

Big 12 (13 points): Though no conference had more teams (Oklahoma, Missouri and Kansas) among the final BCS top 8, the Big 12 didn’t fare well among computers. Strength of schedule isn’t an official BCS category, but it’s factored into the computers.

Big Ten (13 points): Every conference has its embarrassing losses, but Michigan losing to Appalachian State, Minnesota to North Dakota State, Iowa to Western Michigan and Northwestern to Duke pretty much sums up the Big Ten’s sagging reputation.

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » January 3, 2008, 5:47 pm

You know...I just noticed something peculiar with the Big 10 and bowl games this year. Did anyone else notice how many games they played that were home games for the opponent?

Purdue vs Central Michigan in....Detroit, Michigan

Penn St vs Texas A&M in....San Antonio, Texas

Michigan vs Florida in.....Orlando, Florida

Illinois vs USC in....Pasadena, California

Ohio St vs LSU in....New Orleans, Louisiana

So far the Big 10 is 3-1 against those teams that have home field.

Zamtuk · Post by **Zamtuk** » January 3, 2008, 7:15 pm

I did notice it, but didn't know for sure how many of them were that close.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » January 3, 2008, 7:32 pm

So, Big Ten schools actually thrive in games where they play near their opponent's home yet they STILL can't manage a respectable record in the Rose Bowl.

Bowl games and snow don't mix. That's just the truth of it. If people are going to travel to a game, they most likely are going to want a nice place to go to which eliminates anywhere a Big Ten school is located.

Sueven · Post by **Sueven** » January 3, 2008, 10:16 pm

The necessity for good weather for postseason games in college football is strikingly different than the NFL, where playoff games in cold, snowy, windy conditions are a rite of passage. Obviously, this favors the southern conferences, especially the SEC and the Pac Ten, and disfavors the northern conferences, especially the Big Ten.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » January 3, 2008, 10:49 pm

Sueven wrote:The necessity for good weather for postseason games in college football is strikingly different than the NFL, where playoff games in cold, snowy, windy conditions are a rite of passage. Obviously, this favors the southern conferences, especially the SEC and the Pac Ten, and disfavors the northern conferences, especially the Big Ten.

How many Super Bowls do you see in cold weather climates? They held it in Detroit and everyone complained even though it was in a dome. So, even the Super Bowl favors the warm weather teams? People want to go to NICE places when given the option. Like Arizona for example! Super Bowl will be here next month!

The cold weather advantage is overrated. Look at what Jacksonville did to the Steelers in December with snowy weather. It's the same with Arizona's 100 degree heat they used to have during early season games when they used Sun Devil Stadium...both teams sweat and overheat...there's no conditioning for it.

Using that as an excuse is pretty weak. What kind of advantage is Michigan's stadium anyway when the genius engineers designed it so 100K screaming fans sound like 10 on the field? Ah hell, I gave you another excuse to throw out there now.

Sueven · Post by **Sueven** » January 3, 2008, 11:25 pm

The Super Bowl is never played in cold weather.

The games leading up to the Super Bowl are often played in cold weather.

It's not an 'excuse,' but it is an advantage.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » January 4, 2008, 12:12 am

Sueven wrote: It's not an 'excuse,' but it is an advantage.

It's not an advantage unless you actually feel that some people, just because they were drafted by a team with a hometown located in the cold, actually perform better in the cold. As I said, I think that's complete bullshit, the same as the Cardinals not having an advantage because their games were played in 100+ degree weather.

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » January 4, 2008, 1:14 am

Winnow wrote:
Sueven wrote: It's not an 'excuse,' but it is an advantage.
It's not an advantage unless you actually feel that some people, just because they were drafted by a team with a hometown located in the cold, actually perform better in the cold. As I said, I think that's complete bullshit, the same as the Cardinals not having an advantage because their games were played in 100+ degree weather.

Quit proving just how clueless you are. A team that gets to practice and condition in that 100+ degree weather will be better than a team coming from a colder climate. Just like teams going into the mountains (Denver/Boulder etc) would have to deal with the thin air, or a team going from Arizona into Buffalo in the Winter will have to learn how to keep their players from freezing on the sidelines when they don't own snow-gear.

Zamtuk · Post by **Zamtuk** » January 4, 2008, 1:17 am

If winnow was right then wouldn't Tampa Bay not be 0-48 or something in temps below 20.

or whatever that stat is.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » January 4, 2008, 1:21 am

Tampa Bay sucks. Bad example.

Morgrym · Post by **Morgrym** » January 4, 2008, 10:01 am

Winnow wrote:Tampa Bay sucks. Bad example.

Wierd, I don't see the Cards on this list anywhere, too bad Tampa sucks and they are in the playoffs again...

Super Bowl Standings

Team W L Pct. Pts. Opp.
San Francisco 49ers 5 0 1.000 188 89
Baltimore Ravens 1 0 1.000 34 7
Chicago Bears 1 0 1.000 46 10
New York Jets 1 0 1.000 16 7
Tampa Bay Buccaneers 1 0 1.000 48 21
Pittsburgh Steelers 5 1 .833 141 110
Green Bay Packers 3 1 .750 127 76
New York Giants 2 1 .667 66 73
Dallas Cowboys 5 3 .625 221 132
New England Patriots 3 2 .600 107 148
Oakland/L.A. Raiders 3 2 .600 132 114
Washington Redskins 3 2 .600 122 103
Baltimore Colts 1 1 .500 23 29
Kansas City Chiefs 1 1 .500 33 42
Miami Dolphins 2 3 .400 74 103
Denver Broncos 2 4 .333 115 206
St. Louis/L.A. Rams 1 2 .333 59 67
Atlanta Falcons 0 1 .000 19 34
Carolina Panthers 0 1 .000 29 32
Tennessee Titans 0 1 .000 16 23
Seattle Seahawks 0 1 .000 10 21
San Diego Chargers 0 1 .000 26 49
Cincinnati Bengals 0 2 .000 37 46
Philadelphia Eagles 0 2 .000 31 51
Buffalo Bills 0 4 .000 73 139
Minnesota Vikings 0 4 .000 34 95

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » January 4, 2008, 10:21 am

The Cardinals suck too although I'm an optimist when it comes to them!

Take the Miami Dolphins who had the highest winning percentage in sports during Don Shula's years and tell me again about this cold weather advantage. Somehow they managed to win in cold weather climates...might be because they were good teams! After you're done with that, give the pre 90's Raiders a look.,,maybe the 49'ers although it's a little chilly in S.F! Might have to wear a sweater!

Making weather excuses is pathetic.

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » January 4, 2008, 11:28 am

Tell that to the Bengals and Chargers players that played in the Freezer Bowl in Cincinnati back in the 80's. The Chargers came up here wearing arctic looking shit and the Bengals came out in short sleeves....and then stomped the Chargers. I don;t think we saw any temps of -37' during the bowl season though.

Morgrym · Post by **Morgrym** » January 4, 2008, 12:19 pm

It's a pretty big factor for those people not used to the colder weather. I used to live in Maine and it got pretty brutal cold up there, I now live in Virginia and today it is in the 20's. However, people are freaking out like it's the end of the world and wearing shit that would make survivor man smile.

The body does get used to a climate and functions better in that climate. It's like high altitude training for runners, perhaps there is a sekret freezer chamber for southern ball players on good teams.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » January 4, 2008, 12:31 pm

Looks like people are going to choose to ignore that the warm weather teams I mentioned above had no problems posting high winning percentages season after season no matter where they played.

I guess the cold weather teams freak out when conditions are good. The Steelers are a prime example. They played the Cardinals in a dome and collapsed under the pressure of perfect conditions.

Morgrym · Post by **Morgrym** » January 4, 2008, 12:39 pm

Any given Sunday....

There are all kinds of excuses and taboo's around the enigma. Hell, Tampa was supposed to be "cursed" but that curse was broken a couple of years ago and they have yet to have that problem again. Playing in the cold weather sucks no matter who you are, that shit hurts!

Morgrym · Post by **Morgrym** » January 4, 2008, 12:49 pm

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/18/sport ... score.html

In every team sport, more games are won by the home team, and the National Football League is no different. But the effect of home-field advantage is strengthened when teams that are used to playing their home games in warmer climates or indoors have to play in cold weather later in the season.

Since 1998 and through Week 14, there have been 262 games in which a team that plays in a warmer climate or indoors has gone on the road to play a cold-weather team outdoors after Oct. 31.

In those games, including the playoffs, the cold-weather home teams won 67 percent of the time (174-87-1). That is significantly better than the standard N.F.L. home-field advantage, in which home teams win about 58 percent of the time. (Cold-weather teams here are defined as Kansas City and points north, except on the West Coast.)

Why the advantage? "Living in the cold weather day to day helps get you acclimated to what it will be like on Sundays," said the former Packers running back Edgar Bennett, now a Green Bay coach. "At least once a week, we would practice outside and get adjusted to the conditions: the slick ball, the footing."

In the years Bennett played with the Packers, from 1992 to 1996, the team lost only one home game after Halloween.

"Initially, adrenaline gets going, guys are into it and want to do well," Bennett said. "But if we could establish ourselves early, you would see the other team start to realize how cold it was."

This issue is even more severe for the six teams that play their home games indoors: Indianapolis, Detroit, Minnesota, St. Louis, New Orleans and Atlanta. (A seventh team, Houston, plays in a stadium with a retractable roof, but it is open for most games.)

Since 2000, dome teams are 15-41 when the temperature at the start of the game is 50 degrees or lower, and 2-13 when the temperature is freezing or below. No team that plays its home games in a dome has ever made it to the Super Bowl without playing all its playoff games indoors.

It seems odd that teams that play indoors have such a hard time playing outdoors, especially when those teams play in Northern cities. Players in Minnesota and Indianapolis have to go outside in the cold before and after practice. But these teams exemplify the problems that indoor teams have in dealing with the elements.

The Minnesota Vikings won at least 10 games for seven out of eight years from 1969 to 1976, and made three appearances in the Super Bowl. But since the Metrodome's unveiling in 1982, the Vikings have acquired a reputation for fading late in the season. Last season, the Vikings started 5-1, then lost 7 of their final 10 regular-season games, including games in Chicago and Washington.

Those two teams were a combined 11-21 last year, but both games were played in temperatures below 50 degrees. When the Vikings upset the rival Packers in Green Bay during the playoffs, it was the team's first victory in cold weather since 1999. A few weeks ago, the Vikings beat the Packers again, thanks to a last-second field goal, raising their cold-weather record since 2000 to an underwhelming 2-14.

Indianapolis's problems in cold weather have been less all-encompassing, but more notable. The Colts have made the postseason each of the last three seasons, only to be embarrassed by a cold-weather opponent.

For the last two seasons, that team has been the New England Patriots, who humbled the powerful Colts offense with victories of 20-3 in the 2004 season and 24-14 in the 2003 season. The season before, the Colts were obliterated in the playoffs, 41-0, when they had to play in 35-degree weather against the Jets.

This history is what makes Indianapolis's 13-0 record so important. From the beginning of the season, the Colts' goal was never to equal the perfect season of the 1972 Miami Dolphins. Their goal was to get home-field advantage throughout the playoffs and to avoid having to win on a cold night in Foxborough, Mass. - or Pittsburgh, or Denver - to make it to the Super Bowl.

The Falcons do not have that luxury; tonight they brave the Chicago cold to try to help their playoff hopes. The odds are against them, but there is always a chance. The Falcons know this as much as any team. Three years ago, with many of the same players, Atlanta became the first team to beat Green Bay in a playoff game at Lambeau Field. Perhaps the cold weather at Soldier Field will not seem so daunting after all.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » January 4, 2008, 1:07 pm

Edgar Bennett is nuts.

The Colts won the Super Bowl last year so cold weather didn't affect them.

Dolphins 70's-80's
Raiders 80's
49ers 80's-90's

Good teams are unaffected by cold in their march to glory.

Morgrym · Post by **Morgrym** » January 4, 2008, 1:46 pm

Aside from a game in Baltimore (which is not that cold compared to Indy) they had zero cold weather games in the playoffs. The bowl was held in Detroit, in a Dome.

Zamtuk · Post by **Zamtuk** » January 4, 2008, 2:03 pm

Winnow wrote:Edgar Bennett is nuts.

The Colts won the Super Bowl last year so cold weather didn't affect them.

Dolphins 70's-80's
Raiders 80's
49ers 80's-90's

Good teams are unaffected by cold in their march to glory.

You do realize that there is a lot of snow in Indianapolis, since it is in the midwest. Don't let that AFC South tag fool you. If weather meant fuckall, then why is Lambeau Field so legendary, same with Soldier Field. Saying weather means nothing is maybe one of your most heinous comments yet.

Sueven · Post by **Sueven** » January 4, 2008, 2:08 pm

Also, pointing out that there have been good warm weather teams is totally valueless here.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » January 4, 2008, 2:40 pm

Zamtuk wrote:
Winnow wrote:Edgar Bennett is nuts.

The Colts won the Super Bowl last year so cold weather didn't affect them.

Dolphins 70's-80's
Raiders 80's
49ers 80's-90's

Good teams are unaffected by cold in their march to glory.
You do realize that there is a lot of snow in Indianapolis, since it is in the midwest.

They play in a dome.

Xatrei · Post by **Xatrei** » January 4, 2008, 2:48 pm

It's good to see a nice, robust discussion about bowl games as they relate to college conference strength!

Morgrym · Post by **Morgrym** » January 4, 2008, 3:27 pm

Eh, it's football and no one has the authority to split the post, so welcome to the derail.

The point was that it is cold in Indy so the players are semi used to it, to say that they play in a dome is silly when they live in the cold. It's not like they walk around town in a heated bubble.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » January 4, 2008, 4:10 pm

So let me get this straight....

Dan Marino played for Pitt...that would be considered a cold weather location to most. You mean to tell me that as soon as Dan Marino was drafted by the Miami Dolphins, all of his cold weather skills, that served him so well in college simply vanished? *poof*

How about those two players on the Cardinals from Michigan? Did they all the suddenly forget what cold weather is like?

Come on people. Next thing I see, you'll be researching their childhoods to see what the climate was like where they grew up.

Morgrym · Post by **Morgrym** » January 4, 2008, 4:17 pm

I think you got lost in your own argument.

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » January 4, 2008, 4:18 pm

Morgrym wrote:I think you got lost in your own argument.

He got lost exiting the womb

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » January 8, 2008, 12:39 am

I think that Ohio State and Oklahoma should play each other by default since neither team has shown up to their bowl games for the last couple years. Yeah, it's still the third quarter of the LSU v OSU game, but wtf?

Tyek · Post by **Tyek** » January 8, 2008, 12:44 am

Hey OSU...HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Thanks for the easy 31 points in the College Pick em Bowl.

Tyek · Post by **Tyek** » January 8, 2008, 12:59 am

Come on people we need some smack talk for this game. I get home from the daughters practice and nothing posted!!

noel · Post by **noel** » January 8, 2008, 1:13 am

As you wish, Tyek...

noel wrote:I'm not even convinced the National championship is going to be a watchable [read: competitive] game. I really hope that it is, but I'm not sold on OSU this year.

Tyek · Post by **Tyek** » January 8, 2008, 1:17 am

Well Brother, at least you can watch American Gladiators Brother

Tyek · Post by **Tyek** » January 8, 2008, 1:22 am

I am curious to see if the Associated Press will follow the Coaches poll and award LSU the title. They probably were dominant enough to win it all. This is going to be the most fictional National Championship in a number of years though.

And Yes OSU, I know the game is still going on. If you come back and win then you probably deserve the title.

noel · Post by **noel** » January 8, 2008, 1:29 am

Tyek wrote:Well Brother, at least you can watch American Gladiators Brother

Watching it now... PiP is the BCS game. Hogan has been surprisingly tame so far. I have a bet with my cousin on how many times he'll say 'Brother' during the show. So far only four.

Tyek · Post by **Tyek** » January 8, 2008, 1:58 am

On the plus side OSU with your returning talent, you have a great chance to get blown out in three straight title games. Even if you lose to USC, you can breeze through the Big 10, hope for some well timed losses again. I mean you have USC, then Ohio, Youngstown State and Troy. So you are looking at 12-0 or 11-1...

and then the inevitable blowout bowl loss.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » January 8, 2008, 2:05 am

Winnow wrote: Pending the outcome of OhioSU vs LSU, we can take a look at the conference bowl results and listen to the excuses. The Big Ten's #2 team got blown off the field. If OhioSU loses, #1 and #2 are losers. #1 and #2 Pac Ten teams have already won their bowl games.

Big Ten ends up 3-5

Best Team in Big Ten lost their bowl game
Second Best Team in Big Ten lost their bowl game

It's pathetic that the Big Ten played for the national championship. That conference might be the sixth best conference in the country. Big Ten schools must love that they get a free ride each year into a BCS bowl game. Smoke and mirrors!

LSU vs USC would have been a good title game!

masteen · Post by **masteen** » January 8, 2008, 2:10 am

Big 10: 3-5
ACC: 2-6

Suck it, you second-rate motherfuckers.

noel · Post by **noel** » January 8, 2008, 2:14 am

What would be awesome is if OSU played something other than a cream-puff schedule (sans Michigan) so we could see a real team in the BCS bowl next year.

I guess you can take solace in the fact that USC wasn't the team you were facing, because that would have been REALLY ugly.

Tyek · Post by **Tyek** » January 8, 2008, 2:18 am

But Noel, They play USC next year. And the powerhouse grouping of Ohio, Troy and Youngstown State!!!

USC Plays Virginia, Ohio State and a better Notre Dame team.

masteen · Post by **masteen** » January 8, 2008, 2:25 am

Tyek wrote:But Noel, They play USC next year. And the powerhouse grouping of Ohio, Troy and Youngstown State!!!

USC Plays Virginia, Ohio State and a better Notre Dame team.

Better than who? Army?

Tyek · Post by **Tyek** » January 8, 2008, 2:27 am

Possibly. Hopefully better then Navy!!

Maybe we can win 5 games next year

noel · Post by **noel** » January 8, 2008, 2:32 am

Tyek wrote:But Noel, They play USC next year. And the powerhouse grouping of Ohio, Troy and Youngstown State!!!

USC Plays Virginia, Ohio State and a better Notre Dame team.

The best part about that is that after the USC game next year, I'll have to hear a lot less bullshit for the rest of the season.

masteen · Post by **masteen** » January 8, 2008, 2:39 am

Did anyone else notice how Flynn smirked a little when asked about how they were able to hang 38 on OSU's AWESOME NUMBAR WUN RANKED DEFENS?

Amazing how they keep playing the worst schedule in the country and the lemming pollsters keep fucking voting for them.

Spang · Post by **Spang** » January 8, 2008, 6:14 am

Tyek wrote:I am curious to see if the Associated Press will follow the Coaches poll and award LSU the title. They probably were dominant enough to win it all. This is going to be the most fictional National Championship in a number of years though.

And Yes OSU, I know the game is still going on. If you come back and win then you probably deserve the title.

LSU lost a couple games, but they never got upset. LSU deserves every ounce of the championship.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » January 8, 2008, 6:19 am

Arizona State finished ranked 16th in the BCS. Not bad!

Arizona State was 16th with Cincinnati, Michigan, Hawaii and Illinois rounding out the top 20.

Ahhh, finished above the #2 and #3 Big Ten (11) teams. Gooo Devillllls!

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=3185967

USC should have been 2nd and I don't like seeing any team with a big "M" symbol in the top five.

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » January 8, 2008, 10:41 am

Too many critical mistakes from OSU. You simply cannot have that many stupid penalties and turnovers and beat a good team.What I don't understand is why Tressel turned Rex Grossman Junior loose throwing the ball all over when this kid was running like a damn beast. Is Tressel the anti-Schottenheimer?

And you stupid non-knowing shit dumbass motherfucking idiot of a sports "fan", you care to explain why the unstoppable juggernaut of LSU could not step Wells? I swear to Christ I am going to actually add you and your ignorant retardations to ignore to even be able to read the ONE fucking forum I can stand going to on here. If you even had a clue what you were talking about and said it ONCE then it might be bearable.....but no you are an insufferable dumbass of proportions scientists did not even know existed outside of space.