October 19, 2007
It's midnight, USF
Cinderella's run through the BCS appears to be over, as "surprising" USF lost to unranked Rutgers last night on the road, 30-27.
A few lessons from the USF-Rutgers game:
- If you're the #3 ranked team on the country, don't schedule a game at Rutgers on a Thursday night. The Scarlet Knights knocked of Louisville last year by three points at home, as well.
- Special teams matter. A lot. Much was made of the kick USF blocked and attemtped to advance for a touchdown. Those points came off the board because the Bulls were a little too obvious with their bumbling-stumbling-fumbling routine. Meanwhile it was the Scarlet Knights who did a better job on special teams - executing a fake punt, a fake field goal for a TD, and blocking a USF field goal attempt.
With a glut of one-loss teams, it would appear that USF is going to take a dive in the rankings.
It should - but doesn't - matter that USC only dropped a few spots when getting Stanford-ed, but... well, the Trojans had a special place in the heart of pollsters and they weren't inclined to give up on Southern Cal just yet.
While it might not seem fair to punish the Bulls severely for the three point road loss, the truth is that many pollsters didn't believe that USF deserved its spot at the top. In their eyes, USF reconfirmed it last night.
For those that have been clamoring (even more) loudly for a playoff system, I would say that USF lost in their "bracket" last night. We'll see how the rest of the season shakes out, but USF has essentially been eliminated from the National Championship race.
Comments:
GatorGreg said:
posted on October 19, 2007 9:03 AM — 66.89.151.21 — link — abuse?
First off, Rutgers absolutely handed that game to USF and they crumbled. Levitt looked like a bumbling idiot that as never been on TV(He also needs to whiten his teeth). Discipline was nowhere to be found and USF thought that their brown doesn’t stink and they would walk through Rutgers with ease. WRONG! Because of this, I see USF dropping to 13-16 depending on what happens this weekend.
Id also like to touch on something say that commentators were talking about. This is in reference to Grothe's excitement about his planned hunting trip he is leaving on this Sunday.
I find it ABSOLUTELY REDICULOUS, that a program that wants to be taken serious, allows their star starting QB to worry more about planning some hunting trip in the Midwest, rather than keeping focused on school work and more importantly, your primetime game against Rutgers. Not to mention that UCONN next weekend is no push over this year.
A little advice would be to plan your 8 point buck trip sometime in late January and show a little dedication to your fans/school and more importantly your team. A real program needs discipline and focus, neither of which I saw last night.
jonsey said:
posted on October 19, 2007 9:08 AM — 167.197.127.130 — link — abuse?
Can anyone say, "New system"? The past 4 years has proven the BCS system a bust. it all started in 2004 with Auburn left out of the NC. And last year Florida almost got left out of the NC, and the fans would have been stuck watching a repeat game between Ohio state and Michigan. It has progressed into this- nobody has any idea who the better team is. When are the commissioners going to learn that ANY team can be beat on any giving night? A Playoff is the only "system" that is ever going to stop all the controversy.
OU-Ron
posted on October 19, 2007 9:40 AM — 72.198.24.199 — link — abuse?
said:
@2 GG, I agree, Levitt running wind sprints before the game and acting like a mad man who was beyond getting any help in anger management. The man has to be a good coach but Discipline starts with the Coach. Too intense...
Don V said:
posted on October 19, 2007 10:48 AM — 97.100.9.74 — link — abuse?
Jonsey:
If, as you say (and I agree), "ANY team can be beat on any giving (sic) night", why is a playoff good? If any team can beat any other, it then sounds like you should want to reward a season's worth of accomplishments over a team that gets hot at the end.
Gator Boys said:
posted on October 19, 2007 11:27 AM — 66.231.138.222 — link — abuse?
That was a bad call on the USF blocked kick return for TD that was called back. I think both of those fumbles were accidents. The first guy tried to scoop it up and it came out of his hands (you could see him grasp for the ball as it slipped out, not something you do when you throw the ball forward on purpose) and the second guy obviously fumbled then knocked the ball forward in his running arm-swing motion. Check it out on youtube sometime
jonsey said:
posted on October 19, 2007 11:32 AM — 167.197.127.130 — link — abuse?
Don V:
Exactly!!! We should reward the team that is strong at the finish. If a team has a couple off games at the beginning of the season, then fills all the gaps in midseason, and are the best team they can be, and win a playoff series, then yes- I would reward them. It would be better than having a match-up like last year- Ohio State getting chomped by Florida (and Notre Dame getting slashed by LSU). The only problem I can see with a playoff is that it might become a SEC championship rematch.
TampaGator said:
posted on October 19, 2007 3:55 PM — 64.12.116.136 — link — abuse?
Lennie:
That call seemed fine; I thought the 4th and 22 pass interference call was dubious. Understandable in home field, and probably of little consequence--but the contact from my view, didn't appear to amount to interference.
My $.02.
GO GATORS!!
gatorstud said:
posted on October 19, 2007 4:13 PM — 69.95.111.248 — link — abuse?
t-gator...i used to be one of those people who didn't like the no-touch policy on pass plays....but, the rule states that no contact is allowed, no matter how little the contact is........
i have had to hear about this rule when my steelers beat the seahawks a couple of years ago in the superbowl.....
....offensive player "BARELY" touches the defender to get clearance in endzone ....touchdown is taken away and everyone that has a seahawks jersey is bitchin and points to that play that ruined the superbowl.....
but later on in the game...4th quarter i think, hasselback tries to run and fumbles the ball.....the refs decided to review the play..and as it turns out, the play was overturned and deemed not a fumble...why????
because a steeler defender BARELY TOUCHED HASSELBACK ON HIS WAY DOWN....."BARELY"......matt h. was not tackled by anyone, he went down on his own and farrior barely touched him but the seahawks fans had no problem with that call though.....the rules are there for a reason...and they have to be enforced....
it is jmho...but i though it was the right call......
go gators...and hokies
Regan said:
posted on October 19, 2007 4:17 PM — 64.12.116.136 — link — abuse?
jonsey (#3):
I really need to just write the essay, save it, and copy-and-paste; it really seems that the debate always starts the same way, the same things are said on both sides, and it always ends up with both sides claiming victory.
Seriously. There is just no reason to type the same thing over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over over and over and over and over again.
But...Idiot over here haven't gotten around to it yet. So I'll just do the summing up, and will debate it at your convenience:
IMHO, A PLAYOFF IS NOT THE ANSWER...
1) It would ruin the intensity of the regular season. Proof: NCAA Basketball in January and February.2) It is contrary to what CFB is: CFB is about a season's worth of perfection (or as close as it can be); not about getting 'hot' at the right time. The day a 2-loss National Champ is crowned over a major 1-loss team is the day CFB is as pointless as the No Fun League.
3) It Is Not Needed: If a BCS conference team wins out, they get to play for the NC. If they lose a game, they throw it to the winds of fate. For '04 Auburn's sake though, a fix could be made easily:
For the years of a 3-Team controversy, I say throw in a "Plus-One System Contingent Yearly Upon Basis Of Need". Everyone's happy...
Sorry for the venting; not trying to go off on you...I just react rather quickly whenever I see the subject brought up. :-)
Zac said:
posted on October 19, 2007 5:42 PM — 209.36.193.14 — link — abuse?
DonV (Post 6) & Jonsey (Post 9), are you guys advocating that MI should go to the NC game, should they win out? Look at what you’re saying and their remaining schedule. I think the entire season’s resume’ should be considered. A team may begin well. Suddenly, an injury here, an injury there, some bounces or officiating doesn’t go their way… You’re going to punish them for that, if they have the same record as a team that lost one of their 1st 4 games to NOBODY, but wins out.
A play-off takes that all into account. Every team with decent, qualifying records (The “experts” still have to figure that one out.) selected to a play-off get the same amount of time for rest & preparation as the others chosen to go. In effect, a team may start out hot, loose one of it’s last 4 games, rest up, and win the 1st round of a play-off, or not. By the same token, a team might loose one of its 1st 4 games, get hot & win-out, rest up, and loose in the 1st round, or not. The point is, those in the play-offs earned (for the most part) their way there; but now it’s an even playing field.
Regan (lucky #13), back atcha, my friend, with more debate to follow...
“IMHO, A PLAYOFF IS NOT THE ANSWER...”
Your opinion is noted and sincerely respected.“1) It would ruin the intensity of the regular season. Proof: NCAA Basketball in January and February.”
I disagree. Have you been watching any Big East basketball during January & February? Trust me; there’s been no lack of intensity that I’ve seen between any of the teams trying to make the Big East tournament.
“2) It is contrary to what CFB is: CFB is about a season's worth of perfection (or as close as it can be); not about getting 'hot' at the right time.”
I define CFB differently than you, but I agree (Don’t faint, now.); it’s not about who peaks when. It does have everything to do with a team’s resume’ (season results) as to whether or not they qualify.
“The day a 2-loss National Champ is crowned over a major 1-loss team is the day CFB is as pointless as the No Fun League.”
If it’s done right, this shouldn’t (Yes, I’m crossing my fingers.) happen.
“3) It Is Not Needed:”
That’s arguable either way.
“If a BCS conference team wins out, they get to play for the NC. If they lose a game, they throw it to the winds of fate.”
This too depends on many factors, but I don’t see it necessarily as an argument for or against.
Now, to the game. Yes, there were some close calls, and as usual, some questionable calls. How about the pass interference call there at the end, all that “pushing & shoving” that went on?
It’s fitting, however; the same S FL, which took WVU as the 1st to go from the unbeaten ranks at the beginning of week 5, is S FL who is the 1st team to fall from the unbeaten ranks in week 7.Thanks to Rutgers, the Big East Championship is WVU’s to loose. All they have to do is win out. Yep, that’s ALL they have to do. (Yes, I'm now shaking in my boots.)
Gator Boys said:
posted on October 19, 2007 5:50 PM — 66.231.138.222 — link — abuse?
No way Lennie. It sort of looked like a throw and it went really far forward, but I'm pretty sure he was trying to scoop it and it bounced off his hands. I thought he threw it at first too and then they zoomed in and it looked like he was just picking it up. I dont care though, I wanted USF to lose anyway
Lennie Collins
posted on October 19, 2007 6:18 PM — 70.251.186.200 — link — abuse? said:
Hey Gator Boys(Comment #15) if that call was wrong then you still alright by me but if you look at it in slow motion the player run three steps looking around and when he felt the contact he tossed it. You and I seen it different. That doesn't make either one one of us right or wrong!Even if it was the Oklahoma Sooners that did it I would say a forward pass. TampaGator that touchdown for Rytgers that was waived for the holding penality...it was questionable. South Florida did out play Rutgers but the FINAL SCORE is what counts. That team(South Florida) is going to make some noise in the Big East. I see ALL teams in the Top 10 with at least 1 loss.
Big Tide said:
posted on October 19, 2007 7:29 PM — 12.208.88.211 — link — abuse?
I think the Big East took another big step forward last night. That was a hard hitting, well matched football game. I do think Rutgers had the best coach of the two teams and that guy show a lot of class. Kudos to Rutgers.
U. of S. C. 1978 said:
posted on October 19, 2007 9:11 PM — 97.82.188.250 — link — abuse?
Can't seem to get anyone interested but I still say an in-season elimination battle is the way to go. I agreed weeks back when the USF fan said they could lay claim to being the best team in Florida, (based on win-loss records). But trust me on this one guys, I look at, vs. Vanderbilt, at Tennessee, at Arkansas vs. Florida, vs. Clemson.
I would trade that for Ohio State, South Florida, Boston College, Oklahoma, Rutgers.UMICH is better than your school said:
posted on October 19, 2007 9:18 PM — 76.88.124.164 — link — abuse?
You guys are all totally leaving out the most important consideration in postseason CFB: bowls. I would much rather have an illigit NC than miss out on a conventional bowl season. Playoffs are nowhere near as interesting or exciting as bowl games. Bowl games make schools money too. That's how Big schools keep getting ranked high over and over; they are ranked high, so they play in better bowls. It's great...sorry USF and other 3rd Tier schools.
On another note. How many typical CFB fans knew the definition of the word "parity" before sports announcers started bastardizing it this season? Kirk Herbstreit is smart.
U. of S. C. 1978 said:
posted on October 19, 2007 10:20 PM — 97.82.188.250 — link — abuse?
#19
I guess you would Umich, considering that your team is so often one of those over ranked, non deserving, big bowl game participants. That is exactly what the rest of us are sick to death of, sorry sister teams proclaiming to be NATIONAL CHAMPIONS!Lennie Collins
posted on October 20, 2007 3:28 AM — 70.251.186.200 — link — abuse? said:
Comment #19...That is what is wrong with College Football now! To many (edit) bowls! The National Championship Game is the only thing that matters. Just like in College Basketball...No one gives a (edit) who win the (edit) N.I.T. unless of course the team you cheer for cannot make it to the field of 65. All these "bowl" games can go to (edit). Geez, what kinda (edit) is that...win 6 games and you qualify to play in a sorry bowl. I guess if the team that you like is terrible that's all the motivation they need to feel good. Hey team we couldn't make it to the National Title game...well at least we made to the Alamo Bowl this year! Hey next year let aim high...let's try for the Gator Bowl! (Edit) all these bowl games...Let's get a play-off system! Did I say PLAY-OFFS! Play-offs? I just hope to see some more good games! Play-offs? Play-offs?
The following message has been(edit) edited to be read by (edit)juvenile readers, (edit)!
Big Tide said:
posted on October 20, 2007 8:10 AM — 69.34.227.69 — link — abuse?
I gave up on a legitimate, on the field champion years ago. Just get over it. At least this flawed system gives everyone a chance to be a National Champion in some poll and we have something to bitch about. Back in '92, for those of you too young to remember, the "experts" gave Alabama NO CHANCE of beating Miami. There were columnist and sports writers coming out of the woodwork to deride Alabama. Some of it was downright mean spirited. Bill Madlock, the all star baseball player for the Pittsburgh Pirates said on his radio program that he would come to Tuscaloosa and crawl up to Gene Stallings office and beg forgiveness if the Tide won that game. Well, we all know what happened. To borrow from some of you hipper guys, there was a "beat down!" We didn't just win the game, it was embarrasing. Of course this same Alabama team manhandled a pretty good Florida team as well, but the writers, experts and media types were JUST IN LOVE WITH MIAMI. It was sick. Anyway, Madlock came to Tuscaloosa and crawled on his knees. It was the greatest example of eating crow I've ever seen. There are so many of these stories that it just goes on and on. The only way to decide a true National Champion is to have legitimate Conference Champions play one another -period. End of story. Sorry, but it's that simple.
Rusty Shackleford said:
posted on October 20, 2007 8:46 AM — 205.188.116.136 — link — abuse?
Wow, i agree with a Bama fan, Division 1AA has a playoff system, it's not that great. It won't solve anything. It would be fun for yall who go for the cinderella's of CFB but Im sorry to tell you, The playoff system would be an SEC playground. What if Auburn had to play Bama again in the playoffs for some reason? Never. NEVER. That would completely ruin everything. It's like runnin through a cemetery stompin on graves, it ain't right. I want to see Auburn vs. Bama once a year. That's it. I don't want to see some lucky Big East school jump in the playoffs by accident and luck up and win the Title over a team who would normally win that game 9 times out of 10. Sorry. WAR EAGLE, LSU SUCKS!
Lennie Collins
posted on October 20, 2007 9:49 AM — 70.251.186.200 — link — abuse? said:
Hey Rusty Shackleford(Comment #24) if that team was that good then they should beat that Big East team the first time! Correct? I do agree with you that there would be problems still with a play-off. Teams/fans would argue about seeding or a site they have to play at. They have this in the NCAA Basketball road to the Final Four. I personally thought that the BCS system would great you know putting #1 against #2 but as you can see that it created more problems than solved. Put strength of schedule back in the voting! As long as there is no "split" champions I am okay for now.
Tom Blogical
posted on October 20, 2007 10:55 AM — 24.95.77.153 — link — abuse? said:
Rusty Shackleford (#24):
Don't forget, we almost had a Michigan-tOSU rematch for the MNC last year using the B(C)S. Even worse, the games would've been back-to-back. Worst of all, everyone saying that tOSU and Michigan were not the two best teams in the nation last year were, without any doubts, proven to be correct. Let that thought marinate for a while.
At least with using the polls for seeding, a playoff system would avoid the back-to-back scenario. Conference championships would, too--but only after a lot of reconfiguration.
Zac said:
posted on October 21, 2007 3:29 PM — 64.12.116.136 — link — abuse?
I have mixed feelings with regards to the number of bowl games out there. Sadly, Lennie, not all of those games make money for the schools which participate. The bowl has to fill the stands for that to work. Some don't.
The reason some don't is a function of the quality of competition and strength of the fan base. Let's face it; if 2 6-6 teams are going to play each other, that's not going to attract a lot of the locals who may come just because they like college football. Even if both teams are 7-5, if it's a Wake Forest against a Wyoming (for example), again, you may not fill the stadium likely because of weak fan support. On the other hand, if a 6-6 Notre Dame was going up against a 7-5 Miami, I guarantee you would fill the stands. (That's not likely to happen this year, by the way.)
On the other hand, the kids themselves like the idea of being in the lime-light at least once in their careers. The extra bowl games give them a chance to play one more time, except this time it's in front of a national audience. That, sometimes, does assist in garnering revenue for the participants. Sometimes a team works hard, suffers from inconsistency, bad calls, bad bounces, etc., and doesn't have the most impressive record. Bowls give teams like that one more chance.
Play-Off: A 4, 8, or even 10 team play-off will not hurt the bowl system. With 32 bowls offered over each of the past 2 seasons, the most number of bowls taken up by even a Top 10 team play-off would be 9. If the preliminary round between teams 7-10 were done on the home field of the higher seeds, then only 7 bowl games would be taken up. That leaves 25 bowls for the rest of college football - 50 teams. What's wrong with that???
Zac said:
posted on October 30, 2007 8:18 PM — 64.12.116.136 — link — abuse?
Post #28: Ratings, my friend, ratings. Some bowls, the pay-out is low enough, that the teams do get their dough, but it's not enough to cover expenses for the team. Besides, how much of the country do you think will tune in for say Ball St & Wyoming? Besides filling the stadium, this is why the lesser bowls don't bring in enough to give the teams a better pay-out.
Please note that all comments are subject to the Fanblogs Comment Policy.
Ramblin' Gator said:
posted on October 19, 2007 8:57 AM — 74.185.133.40 — link — abuse?Bummer.