VeeshanVault

Which 1-loss team will be playing in the Sugar Bowl for the National Championship.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/abcsports/BCSRankings

I like the way ESPN spells out the components of the rankings. The AP/ESPN polls are still the most important part of the overall equation. For instance Miami has like 10 points, 6.5 of which come from the average of those two polls (more points is bad in the BCS). For instance, a loss costs you one point. Compare that with what the rankings cost you in points and you get a picture of still what kind of grip the polls have on college football.

all rankings are from yesterday's BCS standings.

Well, I hate to be a party pooper, but OSU isn't going to be a 1-loss team in just 3 short weeks. In fact, I'm pretty sure at least 4 of those 6 teams you listed are going to lose, and it'll be Michigan who gets the honor of losing the Sugar Bowl to Oklahoma. I really can't see the Sooners losing to anyone, they look about as tough as any team I've seen in a long time.

As far as my Michigan prediction goes... a boy can dream, can't he?

yeah i thought about putting Michigan on their just for you Sylv

fnord and all, etc.

but i think you are dead on, OSU has the least chance of getting there.

USC. And honestly, the only two teams I see atm that can even give the Sooners a fight are USC and Michigan. Shame Michigan shot themself in the foot.. again.

Michigan will probably kill OSU this year..

I honestly don't expect a 2 loss team to make it, but we are the highest ranked team with a top 10 BCS team left in our schedule!

If OSU were to win out, I think they should definitely move up to #2 and play in that game. I really don't see that happening though. Shit, there's stil a decent chance that they could end up with 4 losses this year.

Barring OSU running the table, smart money is on USC.

USC has the inside track, and 3 easy teams to play.

so yeah the smart money is on USC.

Michigan is going down. That is all.

OU won't be in the Sugar Bowl. They will lose to some other Big 12 team in the Big 12 Championship game. I still claim OU is the most overrated team this year. They have only played 2 ranked teams this year, and only played two good teams from the Big 12.

well OU losing certainly would help my cause

but the BCS has their strenthg of schedule at #5.

hahahahaha that is such bullshit that their SOS is that high

The Big 10 has a lot of strong teams this season. That SOS is not out of line IMO.

Florida State still has to play NC State, who owns that Seminole ass and Florida who has made huge leaps this season.

Miami losing to VT killed their title shot, and VT doesn't play enough teams worth a shit to deserve one.

USC has a cakewalk for a schedule, and an offense that makes me cry. Leinart has a 62% completion rate, both their top RBs go for 5 yards/carry, and the top 2 receivers grab 14+ yards/catch.

Miami has been overrated all season imho. They have played pretty shitty and Berlin is mediocre.

OU will destroy the rest of the Big 12. OU has dominated every game this year with the exception of the Colorado game, and that was only close in the 3rd quarter.

Most likely they will face Nebraska in the Big 12 Championship and Texas pasted Nebraska 31-7. What the fuck do you think OU does to Nebraska?

My money is on OU and USC in the Sugar, not like I'm really going out on a limb there though.

I think its Bullshit that LSU is still 7 in the BCS.

Zamtuk wrote:OU won't be in the Sugar Bowl. They will lose to some other Big 12 team in the Big 12 Championship game. I still claim OU is the most overrated team this year. They have only played 2 ranked teams this year, and only played two good teams from the Big 12.

And the combined score of the 2 ranked teams OU played is

117-22


get a fuckin clue dude.

btw, I hope we play Ohio St. they are by far the weakest team on that list.

OU isn't overrated, but their QB is. Imho he is a product of a damn good team, not the way around. If he wins the Heisman it just proves how blind and stupid voters are.

i think OSU loses 3 more games

btw, I hope we play Ohio St. they are by far the weakest team on that list.

Yeah, plan the victory parties, it's in the bag... hmm. Sounds familiar.

Yea they beat Texas who is also over rated, and some other OK team that hasnt beat shit this or the past 10 years.


Give me a break. First time OK plays a solid team, then I will say they are good. Till then, they will choke just like the past 4 years.

I agree with Xyun. OU is an incredible team. I will be shocked if they don't make it to the Sugar Bowl, and pretty damn surprised if they don't win it.

I also agree with Kelshara. Jason White is good, but he's not even the best player on his team, or the second best, or the third.... so how the fuck is he the frontrunner for the Heisman trophy?

You have a wide receiver who's on pace for over 1,800 yards and 26 touchdowns, a man who is clearly the best player in the game, and he's not a frontrunner.

You have Eli Manning and Brad Smith, who have gutted their teams to the positions they're in now.

You have the multitude of defensive standouts on the other top-tier teams. You're telling me that Jason White is a better player than Tommie Harris or Sean Taylor?

The only reason that Jason White may win the Heisman is because he's the quarterback of the best team.

well Jason White is better than Tommie Harris.... oh ye of shitting football helmets on SI cover fame.

Hey Mr. Penn State, is there a team better than OU and if so who?

No one knows because they have a pussy schedule. Sorry xyun, your mecha of a team has only played *two* ranked teams all year. It takes more than killing two overrated teams to impress me. I will give that they are a good team, but they are overrated as hell.

OSU's next three games are harder than OU's entire schedule.

I'd like to see OU's offense go up against OSU's defense or Michigan in general. I do believe their schedule is fairly weak though..

OSU's offense just plain sucks this year heh, but their defense is damn tough.

If White wins the Heisman I will.. erh.. dunno what but I will do something! Because that would be ridiculous.

I guess in your book, it's better to barely beat unranked teams with losing records than it is to blow out ranked teams.

This bullshit about "easy schedules" gets brought up all the time, and it's ridiculous.

First off, unless there's a very large difference in strength of schedule, it's really not that important. It's not like there's a huge difference between playing one middle-of-the-pack team or another.

Second, and more important, no team plays a difficult schedule. Ohio State has beaten a grand total of one good opponent (Iowa). Those wins over NC State and Washington don't look nearly so impressive anymore. Florida State hasn't beaten anyone, unless you're really pumped up about beating Georgia Tech and Maryland.

Seriously, scroll through the list of one-loss teams out there and ask yourself how many real hard games they've had to play. None have a schedule that is a whole lot tougher than Oklahoma's.

Personally I think the whole BCS system is a joke. It needs to be thrown out imho.

I didnt say my team was good did I.



But my team sure in the hell plays harder teams year in and out than OK.


#16 Nebraska, #18 Minn. , #6 Ohio, #14 Prudue , #10 Iowa , and soon #15 MSU. Not to mention with the shitty play in all but Ohio game, they only lost by a avg, of 7 points per game.So although they are having a crappy year, they still were in every single one of their games and could have won.


Compared to


#11 texas, and # 22 OK state. Fuck who the hell has OK state played to be ranked 22? Shit they lost to Nebraska also, by more points than Penn State. So Penn State > OK State? I guess beatting SMU SSU la Lafayett is a sure thing when you dont play 1A teams FFS.


Dont bring weak shit to this table.

You totally ignored my question. Who is better than OU?

O I didnt see that.


Of course its Penn State



Seriously right now, I think USC, or even Mich.

It's not like USC's played a harder schedule. They won some games that looked more impressive at the time than they do now, and the only good team they've beaten is Washington State.

I mean, sure, they could be better than OU; we don't know because they haven't played each other. But the schedules provide no evidence of such.

Xyun wrote:You totally ignored my question. Who is better than OU?

Totally stupid fucking question. If you compare them to the shit teams they have played this season then no one. And the answer of that question sure as hell will not be best answered with the BCS. But if you really believe that the talent of the teams OU has played measures up to the rest of the NCAA (including 22 other ranked teams) then you need to go cheer for pop warner teams.

I guess in your book, it's better to barely beat unranked teams with losing records than it is to blow out ranked teams.

If that is the case, then in your book it's cool to wave your dick around high in the air everytime OU beats the piss out of one of their high school caliber opponents. Only now do I wish VT would have lost to UM so they could assrape you in the championship.

Going to chime in here. Being a biased junior at OU, I will say OU will run the table and beat USC to win it all. Yeah we really haven't played anyone but it is rather pointless to argue about what ifs. I say OU will win it all and will put my grand total of 2 VVs on it.

As far as Jason White goes, he in no way deserves a Heisman. It's just that nobody that's having a great season is getting enough coverage. With OU being undefeated and the past drama with White blowing out both his knees, the whole comeback story just appeals to the Heisman voting body. He doesn't deserve it at all. More to come because I'm sure this post doesn't die until after the championship.

My top 5 Heisman runners:

1. Larry Fitzgerald: Best player in NCAA football now. So dominant it isn't even funny. You can't cover him one on one, can't cover him two on one.. and hell, put three on him and he will STILL make the important catches. He is the best receiver in college football, and it's about damn time the Heisman goes to the best player, not the QB on the best team.

2. Eli Manning. Where would the team be without him? Nowhere. And that is my definition of a deserving Heisman winner. He is turning out a better college career than his brother, and that says quite a bit. And he is doing it without all the weapons Peyton had.

3. Phillip Rivers. Quite possibly the best QB in college football. Unfortunately, he is suffering bigtime from his team being mediocre. He is a damn good player though, and should definitely be considered.

4. Matt Leinart. He is playing better than Palmer did last year at this time. Do I really need to say anything else?

5. I will put up a tie here between John Navarre and Chris Perry. Navarre has been criticized a lot, but he has been a bigtime player this season, even in the 2 losses. Perry suffers from a few mediocre games, but after the job he did against Michigan State he has to be mentioned again.

Yes! Larry Fitzgerald!

I've been yelling about Larry Fitzgerald for Heisman since the beginning of the year. The fact that he's not a near lock for the heisman already is just completely mind boggling to me.

Ask any scout or GM or coach or whatever: Who is the best player in College Football?

I'll bet you that 75% or more will tell you Larry Fitzgerald. It's not like this isn't common knowledge.

The Heisman is supposed to go to the best player in College Football. Larry Fitzgerald is the best player in College Football. So why the fuck would you give Jason White the award?

Kelshara wrote:2. Eli Manning. Where would the team be without him? Nowhere. And that is my definition of a deserving Heisman winner. He is turning out a better college career than his brother, and that says quite a bit. And he is doing it without all the weapons Peyton had.

Anyone else see them announce this weekend that Eli had moved the Manning brothers ahead of the Detmer brothers as the most potent brother tandem in NCAA history. Talk about meaningless stats!

5. I will put up a tie here between John Navarre and Chris Perry. Navarre has been criticized a lot, but he has been a bigtime player this season, even in the 2 losses. Perry suffers from a few mediocre games, but after the job he did against Michigan State he has to be mentioned again.

Being about the biggest Michigan fan in the world, it pains me to say that Navarre is by no means a Heisman contender. He's a decent QB, but there are a lot of better QB's out there. Shit, I'd take Battleship Lorenzen over Navarre. Perry on the other hand deserves talk of a Heisman. I don't think he's got a real good shot of winning it, though a dominating performance over OSU would really help him out.

I disagree on Navarre actually, and I did quite a bit of thinking about wether he, Josh Harris or Roethlisberger should get that spot. I chose Navarre due to what I think is great leadership skills, cool demeanor and has shown he can carry the load when needed to.

- He has 3 games under 200 yards passing, all of them blowout wins where he didn't need to shine.

- In both losses he had well over 300 yards (360 and 389)

- In the Minnesota game, he basicly won the game with some hell of a good stats. 70.2% completion rate in what was basicly a pure throwing game? That is insane.

Anyway, there are other good QBs out there but I think Navarre is getting a lot of undeserved criticizm after his one really bad season (was it his Sophomore? Can't remember).

Lorenzen rules. That man is a tank.

Perry won't win it. It's like Larry Johnson last year: Good running back on good-but-not-top-tier team, great stats, lots of good games.

But he didn't show up in the biggest games of the season (the ones his team lost). And he's certainly not going to run for 2,000 yards.

If LJ couldn't do it with more going for him, how will Perry? I could see him getting nominated, but his team better at the very least win the big ten to have any shot.

Kelshara wrote:- In both losses [Navarre] had well over 300 yards (360 and 389)

Sueven wrote:But [Perry] didn't show up in the biggest games of the season (the ones his team lost).

I blame the offensive coordinator for those. Check out the play selection in the two losses, we hardly ran the ball at all. So that led to low numbers for Perry, and inflated numbers for Navarre.

Check Perry's rushes and Navarre's completion percentage and TD/INT numbers. In the Oregon game we only attempted 19 rushes, and were 28-55 passing with 3 TD's and 2 INT's. The Iowa game we ran 33 times, and Navarre was 26-49 with 2 TDs and 1 INT. Granted, both of those games were lost with poor special teams play, but Navarre didn't win them for us.

Michigan will win the Big 10, and Perry has 2 games to show what he's got and move up to the top of Heisman voting. One of those games is always one of the biggest games in all of college football every year. It's *possible* that he could still do it, though not likely.

Kelshara wrote: 4. Matt Leinart. He is playing better than Palmer did last year at this time. Do I really need to say anything else?

On College Gameday, this past weekend they mentioned that White is outperforming Carson Palmer at this point through last year. If that is your reasoning for having this dude on your Top 5, then you must put him in a tie with Jason White.

Another thing to consider is that Heisman awards don't go to underclassmen, they go to Seniors or extremely gifted juniors.

Sueven wrote:This bullshit about "easy schedules" gets brought up all the time, and it's ridiculous.

First off, unless there's a very large difference in strength of schedule, it's really not that important. It's not like there's a huge difference between playing one middle-of-the-pack team or another.

Second, and more important, no team plays a difficult schedule. Ohio State has beaten a grand total of one good opponent (Iowa). Those wins over NC State and Washington don't look nearly so impressive anymore. Florida State hasn't beaten anyone, unless you're really pumped up about beating Georgia Tech and Maryland.

Seriously, scroll through the list of one-loss teams out there and ask yourself how many real hard games they've had to play. None have a schedule that is a whole lot tougher than Oklahoma's.

Ohio State also had a good opponent in Bowling Green. I would put cash down that say if you put OSU or OU either one in the MAC that they would not go undefeated. Miami U (the real Miami is in Ohio) may be one of the hottest football teams in IA right now. They have one loss this year at Iowa and have dismantled some good teams since then. Northwestern and Colorado State both took ass whippings at home to them and Bowling Green got destroyed at MU.

The real travesty is that bowl games are not about anything but cash.

yeah, the real Miami is in Oxford, Ohio.

not in .... Miami....

Another thing to consider is that Heisman awards don't go to underclassmen, they go to Seniors or extremely gifted juniors.

Which is even more BS by the stupid voters (who a lot of them has admitted they don't really pay attention and let assistants do most of the work and recommendations).

It should go to the best player. Final. Be it a Freshman or a Senior.

Well lets see.....Miami University of Ohio was founded almost 100 years before Miami was incorporated in Florida. 1809 was the year for Miami U....while Miami of Florida was founded 1925. The city of Miami was actually incorprated in 1896 in case you were wondering.

additionally, the first incorporated town of Miami disappeared. It was reformed in the early 1900s.

What Kelshara said. The Heisman goes to the best player in the game. Why is that such a difficult qualification? Best player in the game. Currently a sophomore is the best player in the game. Accordingly, he should be awarded the Heisman. If he is also the best player in the game next year, then he should be awarded the Heisman next year.

There isn't a semantic debate here like there is with MVP awards. There is no bonus for being on a good team or any of the other intangible bullshit that people argue about with the MVP.

Best player in the game.

Raistin wrote:Yea they beat Texas who is also over rated, and some other OK team that hasnt beat shit this or the past 10 years.

That "other" OK team was the one that beat OU the last two years. Gotta love the bashers who don't keep up. The fact that OSU beat them the last two years is basically WHY the game was so big last weekend. It was figured that if OU was going to stumble, it would be there.

No I knew they beat Ok the past 2 years. I was just pointing out how hard of teams they play, adding in OK.

Perhaps we should change this poll to "Which 2 loss team..." =)