Was this not the best weekend of CFB so far this season?

MiketheangrydrunkenCUfan · Sun Oct 18, 2009 4:59 am

Okay, so I'm a little biased. Anytime CU wins and NU and ND lose, it's a damn fine weekend if I do say so my damn self.

But overall, starting with Thursday night's USF/Cincy game, this week has offered as much intrigue, suspense and excitement as anyone could hope for in the last week before the BCS standings come out. To wit:

Cincy beats USF to take the driver's seat in the Big East
Texas narrowly beats a Bradford-less Oklahoma
OSU loses to Purdue. Purdue!?!?
Florida squeaks by Arkansas
Va. Tech loses to GT (RACK the Flexbone)
ND gets 3 shots inside the 10 and blow them all. That makes 8 in a row. So long, Front Butt.
Nebraska and Kansas get exposed
Iowa might be for real
On the undefeated non_AQ front, TCU wins impressively, while Boise continues to scabdick
Alabama has a great D, but are they a great team? Hard to say. Methinks they'll be #2 in the BCS, though, and all things considered, they should probably be #1.

.m2 · Post by **.m2** » Sun Oct 18, 2009 5:06 am

Cal blows up one of the best defenses in College Football...

Furd loses.

Yeah, its been a "Good day"

Van · Post by **Van** » Sun Oct 18, 2009 5:09 am

Front Butt ain't necessarily gone just yet. In fact, that loss may have just earned him another contract extension.

Seriously, ND could still go 10-2 and go to a BCS bowl game. Lotta football left to be played. ND will need to lose at least two more before any serious consideration is given to blowing him out.

Van · Post by **Van** » Sun Oct 18, 2009 5:27 am

True, but there's nobody scary left on their schedule. They could still lose to B.C. or Pitt, but they shouldn't.

Terry in Crapchester · Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:33 am

Van wrote:Seriously, ND could still go 10-2 and go to a BCS bowl game.

Ordinarily, I'd agree with you. This year, however, could very easily be a different story. ND was #25 in the AP poll this past week, and if I had to venture a guess, will be somewhere around #30 or so when the first BCS rankings come out tomorrow. Too much ground to make up, even if they run the table. Looks like we're Gator Bowl bound this year, as long as the wheels don't fall completely off.

Lotta football left to be played. ND will need to lose at least two more before any serious consideration is given to blowing him out.

Weis could be gone with one more loss. Only way he'll survive another regular season loss is if it's a narrow loss to one of the better remaining teams on the schedule. No way in hell does he survive two more losses this year.

King Crimson · Post by **King Crimson** » Sun Oct 18, 2009 2:48 pm

minus OU losing (given Bradford out), i had a heckuva day in front of the TV. RRS, USC-ND, Arkie,-UF, CU-KU...all great games running mostly continuous. went out for a beer so missed ASU-UW.

however, BTPCF games all pushing (or straight-up being) 4 hours is a slog. 4 hours of the kind of emotional wringer that is the RRS is rough. it would be nice to see the networks reel this in a bit. though, we are probably closer to seeing games turned into 12 minute quarters or some measure where the clock keeps running than a decrease in the advertising hole....(only kidding a little bit). did you know that Lipitor may not be for everyone?

MuchoBulls · Post by **MuchoBulls** » Sun Oct 18, 2009 5:43 pm

Van wrote:True, but there's nobody scary left on their schedule. They could still lose to B.C. or Pitt, but they shouldn't.

Dion Lewis could run wild on that D. I'd be surprised if Pitt doesn't win that game.

Van · Post by **Van** » Sun Oct 18, 2009 5:57 pm

I'd be surprised if Pitt could match scores with ND this season.

MuchoBulls · Post by **MuchoBulls** » Sun Oct 18, 2009 6:57 pm

Pitt should be able to control the clock with their running game. Lewis is a beast and they have a very underrated FB who is good running and catching passes out of the backfield.

They should have blown Rutgers out on Friday. Up 14 and using the run to go right down the field they subsequently try to pass on 1st down and Stull fumbles. Rutgers then cuts it to 7 points and had a chance to tie late.

Van · Post by **Van** » Sun Oct 18, 2009 7:48 pm

It's only Pitt. They're just not very good.

Nolesy · Post by **Nolesy** » Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:32 pm

I suppose the only thing that could improve the weekend is Plowed Under getting a huge record deal.

MiketheangrydrunkenCUfan · Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:58 pm

Nolesy wrote:I suppose the only thing that could improve the weekend is Plowed Under getting a huge record deal.

Heh. Plowed Under is sooo 2006. It's all about A Horse Apiece these days.

Van · Post by **Van** » Sun Oct 18, 2009 9:13 pm

MiketheangrydrunkenCUfan wrote:
Nolesy wrote:I suppose the only thing that could improve the weekend is Plowed Under getting a huge record deal.
Heh. Plowed Under is sooo 2006. It's all about A Horse Apiece these days.

What the fuck are you two talking about?? Who is Plowed Under/A Horse Apiece?

MgoBlue-LightSpecial · Sun Oct 18, 2009 9:15 pm

Neither is ND. It should be a hell of a game.

Agreed. ND is in a dogfight every week, and this one will probably be no different mostly because their D blows.

Van · Post by **Van** » Sun Oct 18, 2009 9:28 pm

So, Mgo, ND doesn't have a D? Really? You're finally coming to understand that, and that having no D means they're not going to beat USC in a big game? Finally figured that one out, didja?

Van · Post by **Van** » Sun Oct 18, 2009 10:02 pm

'Spray, read it again. That was my point: ND's D was no good.

Mgo and I had been going back and forth about this game, and he was telling me that USC's O wasn't going to be able to score enough to win it. I kept telling him two things: 1-ND's D is that bad. 2-USC's O is building. Slowly they're opening it up more, and ND's D will give them the perfect opponent to really begin to open it up.

Van · Post by **Van** » Sun Oct 18, 2009 11:44 pm

You should be. Katy missed you last night. Bitch was lying in wait for you, playing the Kentucky fight song all night.

Swear to god, like I told her, Kentucky's fight song sounds like the music one might expect to hear in the bathroom of a Yugoslavian ornothology museum. It's about as rousing as a Wolfman take.

Carson · Post by **Carson** » Mon Oct 19, 2009 1:31 am

Van wrote:You should be. Katy missed you last night. Bitch was lying in wait for you, playing the Kentucky fight song all night.

Swear to god, like I told her, Kentucky's fight song sounds like the music one might expect to hear in the bathroom of a Yugoslavian ornothology museum. It's about as rousing as a Wolfman take.

The first time I heard it I thought I was watching an old "Medfield College" Disney movie. Flubber, anyone?

MgoBlue-LightSpecial · Mon Oct 19, 2009 1:35 am

Van wrote:So, Mgo, ND doesn't have a D? Really? You're finally coming to understand that, and that having no D means they're not going to beat USC in a big game? Finally figured that one out, didja?

The only thing I learned is I should stop making risky picks...publically.

Katy · Post by **Katy** » Mon Oct 19, 2009 1:38 am

Carson wrote:
Van wrote:You should be. Katy missed you last night. Bitch was lying in wait for you, playing the Kentucky fight song all night.

Swear to god, like I told her, Kentucky's fight song sounds like the music one might expect to hear in the bathroom of a Yugoslavian ornothology museum. It's about as rousing as a Wolfman take.
The first time I heard it I thought I was watching an old "Medfield College" Disney movie. Flubber, anyone?

Don't be a couple of ASSES.

:P

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Oct 19, 2009 1:39 am

Mgo, you just keep going ahead then and betting against USC in nationally televised OOC games. Betting against streaks like that, it'll always serve you well.

:D

.m2 · Post by **.m2** » Mon Oct 19, 2009 1:40 am

My grandpa on my mom's side graduated from Kentucky with an Engineering degree.... and I still don't give a shit about KU.

My grandpa was a dick of the highest order.

Terry in Crapchester · Mon Oct 19, 2009 2:02 pm

Van wrote:Mgo, you just keep going ahead then and betting against USC in nationally televised OOC games.

If he was betting against the spread, looks like he made a good bet.

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Oct 19, 2009 3:27 pm

Terry in Crapchester wrote:
Van wrote:Mgo, you just keep going ahead then and betting against USC in nationally televised OOC games.
If he was betting against the spread, looks like he made a good bet.

He wasn't. He went out of his way to publicly proclaim that ND would win straight up, because USC wouldn't be able to do anything on offense, and ND would score their usual 30+. Try to keep up.

"The streak has to end sometime," is never a good bet. Betting for streaks to continue will always be the huge play, especially when the supposed streak ender has no D and they're playing a team which basically never loses big games to anyone; not just to ND.

Betting for USC to lose straight up a nationally televised game they have to win? Betting for ND to win a big game under Charlie Weis - against Pete Carroll - when Charlie is still yet to obtain a single "signature win" in five years at ND?

That doesn't strike you as a bit insane? That was clearly a case of the heart doing the thinking instead of the head.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial · Mon Oct 19, 2009 3:39 pm

Van wrote:
Terry in Crapchester wrote:
Van wrote:Mgo, you just keep going ahead then and betting against USC in nationally televised OOC games.
If he was betting against the spread, looks like he made a good bet.
He wasn't. He went out of his way to publicly proclaim that ND would win straight up, because USC wouldn't be able to do anything on offense, and ND would score their usual 30+. Try to keep up.

"The streak has to end sometime," is never a good bet. Betting for streaks to continue will always be the huge play, especially when the supposed streak ender has no D and they're playing a team which basically never loses big games to anyone; not just to ND.

Betting for USC to lose straight up a nationally televised game they have to win? Betting for ND to win a big game under Charlie Weis - against Pete Carroll - when Charlie is still yet to obtain a single "signature win" in five years at ND?

That doesn't strike you as a bit insane? That was clearly a case of the heart doing the thinking instead of the head.

Yeah, but like you said before, who cares? I had nothing riding on the outcome...and I did get a Pick'Em point out of the deal. I'd say +1 for me there.

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Oct 19, 2009 3:42 pm

Jsc810 wrote:
Van wrote:a team which basically never loses big games to anyone
The University of Texas would like a word with you.

S'why I conspicuously included "basically" instead of an unqualified "never."

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Oct 19, 2009 3:45 pm

Mgo wrote:Yeah, but like you said before, who cares? I had nothing riding on the outcome...and I did get a Pick'Em point out of the deal. I'd say +1 for me there.

Agreed. You gotta admit though, when USC's D was just shit hammering the ND O and until USC just completely took their foot off the gas you were chalking that one up as an "L" in your Pick' Em too.

You lucky bastard. That was like your ridiculous wtf? crazy Washington win the week before; the one which pushed you over the top in your winning week in Pick 'Em.

Then again wins don't come any luckier than my ASU win over Washington this past week.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial · Mon Oct 19, 2009 3:50 pm

Oh, absolutely. I left this Mexican restaurant when SC was up by two scores, and assumed I was done. I didn't get to see ND's comeback, although I got to a sports bar in time for their final drive.

Terry in Crapchester · Mon Oct 19, 2009 3:56 pm

Van wrote:
Terry in Crapchester wrote:
Van wrote:Mgo, you just keep going ahead then and betting against USC in nationally televised OOC games.
If he was betting against the spread, looks like he made a good bet.
He wasn't. He went out of his way to publicly proclaim that ND would win straight up, because USC wouldn't be able to do anything on offense, and ND would score their usual 30+. Try to keep up.

I didn't see the original comment. Sorry.

"The streak has to end sometime," is never a good bet. Betting for streaks to continue will always be the huge play, especially when the supposed streak ender has no D and they're playing a team which basically never loses big games to anyone; not just to ND.

Betting for USC to lose straight up a nationally televised game they have to win? Betting for ND to win a big game under Charlie Weis - against Pete Carroll - when Charlie is still yet to obtain a single "signature win" in five years at ND?

That doesn't strike you as a bit insane? That was clearly a case of the heart doing the thinking instead of the head.

I've never heard Mgo profess any particular love for ND, so unless he really, REALLY hates USC, a statement that he let "the heart do[] the thinking" is just a tad over the top.

Fwiw, I had ND in the Pick'Em, although I'm pretty sure I did that objectively. I saw the 10 1/2 point spread, was conscious of ND's run as this year's version of the Cardiac Kids, and figured that the outcome would be closer than that, even though I expected USC to win. Fwiw, two weeks earlier I picked Washington over ND with the benefit of a 13 1/2 point spot, for pretty much the same reason.

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Oct 19, 2009 4:23 pm

Jsc, correct, playing a presumable snooze fest game against Washington or Stanford does not constitute a "big game" for USC. See, for it to be a big game for USC it needs to be treated as such by both teams, and the entire nation.

Those games only became big games after the game, when the result fucked USC.

A big game for USC is a "circle this one on your calendar" game. Those are always nationally televised games. They're either OOC games like Ohio St or Auburn, or they occur late in the conference season, when the Rose Bowl is on the line for both teams. Most importantly, they're games in which USC has a reasonable fear of losing.

When the spread is USC-20 or more, no, those arent "big games" for USC. They may still lose such a game, but those aren't the kind of games I'm talking about.

This year USC had three definite big games circled on their calender: @OSU, @ Cal, @ND. UCLA is a rivalry game, so that one always counts as a big game - or at least it's supposed to. USC lost that one in '06 as a 900 point favorite, which ended up keeping them out of the national title game. So, as it turned out, it was a big game - they just didn't know it at the time, or treat it like one at the time, the assholes.

With the way things have panned out this season, if USC beats Oregon St - goddammit, why Oregon St, the week before the Oregon game? Grrrrr - at home next week then the roadie to Autzen on Halloween becomes another big game. Now that's the big game I would fear. If I were to ever bet on USC losing a big regular season game, that's the type of game I would choose. USC has lost three straight in the state of Oregon, and Oregon's bizarre offense can cause anyone fits when they're running it smoothly and not seeing their QB lying in an ICU somewhere.

If Oregon can avoid the obvious trap game loss in Seattle this week against a thoroughly pissed off Washington team then that Oregon-USC game will pretty much be for all the marbles. Whichever team wins that game shouldn't lose the rest of the year. They'll be in the definite driver's seat for the Rose Bowl, and possibly even the title game too should everything shake out just right.

USC is coming off the ND win, with Oregon in Autzen next week. Oregon has their Super Bowl with USC next week. Let's see if both USC and Oregon can avoid stepping on their dicks this week.

If they can both win this week, there ya' go: If ever you want to bet against USC in a big game, next week's game in Autzen would be the one. I'm not telling you it's a strong play or anything, but if your heart just wants to bet against USC and you also want your head to at least give your heart permission to go have some fun, that's the game. USC could definitely lose that one, even knowing it's a big game.

Hopefully both teams win this week, and hopefully both teams come into next week fully healthy. Should both things happen I'd have to pick USC to win it, just because of their D and their history in games like that, but that one will scare me more than any "big game" since the Texas game. I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to see Oregon win that one.

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Oct 19, 2009 4:30 pm

Terry, Mgo may not hold any love for ND but as he and I argue in Chat about USC you can rest assured that he'd love to see USC go down to a team which lucked out in beating his own team.

C'mon, who are you kidding? Except for die hard Domer Haters you know everyone wants to see USC go down there. Everyone is sick of USC. They root for USC to go down every week, just like most of the nation is now pulling for Christ to lose in Gainesville. I think there are a lot of people in the nation who would consider this season to be a relative success - or at least a salvaged season - just as long as neither Florida nor USC wins the national title.

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Oct 19, 2009 4:46 pm

Dude, it ain't likely, but USC could lose this week to Oregon St. If USC comes out flat because of the ND game and looking ahead to Autzen, yeah, that little fucker Jacquizz Rodgers could hurt 'em again.

USC just better remember they have an important game to play this week, or else next week's game loses all meaning.

They certainly could lose in psycho Autzen, on Halloween night, in what will debatably be Oregon's biggest game in the history of their program. That place is going to be an absolute madhouse, and Oregon is a real bitch when they're playing well.

Don't you watch college football? Road favorites lose those types of "storm the field afterwards" conference roadies all the time, and USC has lost three straight in that state. Winning there this year will be no cake walk.

indyfrisco · Post by **indyfrisco** » Mon Oct 19, 2009 6:04 pm

Van wrote:USC just better remember they have an important game to play this week, or else next week's game loses all meaning.

Next week's game has already lost all meaning after the Washington game, on a national scale. Unless you are just talking about the Pac 10 championship and a Rose Bowl...

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Oct 19, 2009 6:18 pm

Yeah, pretty much I'm just talking about the Pac 10 championship and the Rose Bowl.

Still, it's not inconceivable that an 11-1 USC or Oregon could land themselves in the national title game. If Bama or Florida either lose two games or just plain look bad in the SEC CCG that along with a loss by Texas could vault USC in particular into the title game.

Let Cincy and Iowa also find a loss somewhere and an 11-1 USC could very definitely get into the title game.

indyfrisco · Post by **indyfrisco** » Mon Oct 19, 2009 6:26 pm

Well, there's a lotta ifs there, but no, it's not inconceivable. I just don't see FLorida or Bama both losing a game. If just 1 loses a game and beats the other in the SEC CCG, I can see both of them getting the invite to the BCS no matter what every else team not named t.u. does. In other words, t.u. has to go undefeated to get in. Iowa, Cincy, Boise, TCU all are out unless Texas has more than 1 loss along with USC, Oregon, Bama and Florida.

indyfrisco · Post by **indyfrisco** » Mon Oct 19, 2009 7:10 pm

I still think 1 loss t.u, USC, Alabama, and Florida get in over an undefeated Iowa. I don't think it is right, but I think it would happen.

Anyhow, I hate discussing this shit midseason. I know we are on a message board, but if you take this same discussion week after week adjusting for that week's games it is just a mess. I'd rather play all the games and discuss the outcome.

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Oct 19, 2009 7:32 pm

Indy wrote:If just 1 - Bama or Florida - loses a game and beats the other in the SEC CCG, I can see both of them getting the invite to the BCS no matter what every else team not named t.u. does. In other words, t.u. has to go undefeated to get in.

Agree completely, provided the SEC CCG is a good, close game. If however it's an ugly game, or it's a blow out, then no, the loser of that game doesn't get in over a one loss USC or an undefeated Iowa.

Who cares if this stuff is fruitless and pointless to talk about now? Like we have anything better CF related to talk about. This is what we do. It's a CF message board.

Would we rather sit here and dissect Florida's bullshit win over Arky, or Cal's glorious defeat of UCLA?

We talk about potential games. That's what we do, lacking a playoffs.

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Oct 19, 2009 7:51 pm

Mace, nobody's saying a one loss SEC team gets in over an undefeated Texas. We all agree Texas is a lock if they run the table.

Iowa? That's a different story. Right or wrong, they may not get in even if they run the table, not if the SEC CCG features a good, close game between two undefeateds.

I'm not saying it's a lock that Iowa wouldn't get in under that scenario, but it is at least a possibility. With Texas there is no such possibility. They're in if they win out.

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Oct 19, 2009 8:13 pm

Mace, that just isn't necessarily how the BCS points system works. If both Bama and Florida have a huge points lead over Iowa and the #1 team in particular loses the game in a squeeker they simply may not lose enough points to fall all the way below an idle Iowa, who will not've played since before Thanksgiving. Iowa is going to completely disappear from everybody's radar for awhile, and all the focus will be on Bama-Florida. If they play a great game it'll likely only confirm the media's perception that they're both a cut above everybody else...and the BCS points are the BCS points. If the loser only falls enough to end up one point ahead of #3 they're still in.

The media wants Tebow and the Gators in that title game. They sure as hell do not want Iowa in that game. If Florida is #1 and they look good in an SEC CCG loss, well, I'm just saying don't be surprised if the media and the BCS points system refuse to let them fall out of the title game. Under that scenario it'd take a real "helmet" team to go undefeated to definitely prevent the rematch, and Iowa isn't a helmet team.

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Oct 19, 2009 9:18 pm

I think in that instance USC would get the nod, simply because the media wants USC vs the SEC more than they'd want an SC CCG rematch. USC is probably the only remaining one loss team which could prevent the rematch under that scenario.