dwccrew wrote: UC is rated were they should be, but they are the most overhyped and have taken advantage of a very weak schedule (the weakest out of the top 19 teams in the polls).

weakest of top 19? where do you come up with this stuff?

enigmaax wrote: I'm sure I've used the phrase "haven't beaten anyone" before, but it does get kind of silly.

Who has beaten anyone? The "anyone" list must include like four teams and unless they play each other, they're all the same - beating nobody. Since that means they are no good, then what does that then make the nobodies.

dlazz - What is a quality win by your definition?

I'd consider a quality win one that is ranked when the season comes to a close, or a near-close. (like now).

Right now Cinci has two, over #23 West Virginia (whom they beat by 3), and over #16 Oregon State by 10. As far as I'm concerned, these are "okay" wins, but do not justify their current #5 ranking.

TCU is in similar fashion...a victory over #14 BYU and #25 Utah.

Boise has one over #8 Oregon.


I think teams are starting to take advantage over the fact that pre-season rankings are super biased and you don't necessarily need to play quality opponents in order to go bowling. You can schedule some bad non-conference opponents (Bama, Florida, Texas)

You really don't make any sense. If Texas, Bama, and Florida haven't played anyone either, and Cincy has beaten more "okay" teams than Boise, shouldn't Cincy be #1? Or should that be TCU?

By the way, TCU also beat AP#25 Clemson (on the road). Alabama has beaten (BCS) #12 Virginia Tech and #13 LSU.

Who is your top five?

DBLAZZ UR SO WRONG CINCI DA BOMB

enigmaax wrote: You really don't make any sense. If Texas, Bama, and Florida haven't played anyone either, and Cincy has beaten more "okay" teams than Boise, shouldn't Cincy be #1? Or should that be TCU?

By the way, TCU also beat AP#25 Clemson (on the road). Alabama has beaten (BCS) #12 Virginia Tech and #13 LSU.

Who is your top five?

The SEC and the Big 12 are better than the Big East...

My Top 5 would be for the most part the same teams, just flipped around here and there:

1. Alabama
2. Florida
3. Texas
4. TCU
5. Boise
(6. Cinci)

Strength of schedule is overrated as a distinguishing factor between how good teams are. If you put the New England Patriots in the crappiest D6 conference in Ohio, they'd tear up all the HS kids. Yet people on here would say, "Well, of course they're not good as St. X. Just look at how bad their schedule is!"

SoS is a way for a team to prove that it's a good team. But playing a weak schedule doesn't mean that a team isn't good. Additionally, a lot of that is out of the hands of school--most contracts are signed years in advance. How are they supposed to know that the team they scheduled in 2004 for this season wasn't going to be any good?

Most top college teams will not give Boise or TCU a home and home contract to play. That is why if you see them play a "good team" most of the time it will be on the road. Hats off to Oregon for playing Boise on the Blue turf. Your Florida's, Ohio States, Texas, are not going to play this type of nothing to gain and everything to lose game and the way the BCS is set up who can blame them.

All of them are undefeated because they're in the championship "discussion" (I don't see any of them getting in because I think Texas will beat Nebraska, although I'd like them to lose so we can see what happens) and none of them will even compete with Florida, Alabama or Texas. If one of them make it, it'll be a joke of a title game IMO--of course I could be wrong, but that's how I see it. And if that happens, that hurts the chance for a school like this to ever make it back to the title game.

UC

0311sdp wrote: Most top college teams will not give Boise or TCU a home and home contract to play. That is why if you see them play a "good team" most of the time it will be on the road. Hats off to Oregon for playing Boise on the Blue turf. Your Florida's, Ohio States, Texas, are not going to play this type of nothing to gain and everything to lose game and the way the BCS is set up who can blame them.

Yep, there is a big problem right there. That is a big reason most of them won't play a team like Boise, they have nothing to gain and everything to lose. But that's BULLSHIT, because if Boise is going to be in the title talk every year after playing a schedule that is trash then if a team like OSU schedules and beats them they should get quality opponent credit for it. But if that happened everyone would say "it's Boise State". Well, when it comes to them being undefeated and in the title game discussion, why can't we say "it's Boise State"?

Not only do the individual BCS institutions stand to lose but the conferences they represent stand to lose their kung fu grip on a good thing they have going. Why lend any credibility to non-BCS schools, when the BCS committee has already discounted them as not being worthy?

I'm sure there would be game on the smurf turf from a BCS conference member school who may be at the bottom of their league more often were it not for the BCS conferences discouraging it, not openly of course but behind the scenes.

Why arent Florida and Alabama in this too?