Interesting Notre Dame Note.

The name says it all!
User avatar
The Ancient Enemy
Official BleacherCoach
Official BleacherCoach
Posts: 7549
Joined: October 30th, 2004, 2:47 pm

Re: Interesting Notre Dame Note.

Post by The Ancient Enemy »

Turk, we are talking technically. I think Michigan is probably the best 4 loss team we've seen in college football in a very long time. Michigan is a good team... but they have 4 losses. FOUR. And THAT is your "quality win"? Give me a break.

Might I remind you that Michigan State lost 6 games?

I'm not saying anything about Oregon. I think Oregon sucks. People are jumping on Oregon because it's the popular thing to do. People try desperately to convince the viewers that the Pac 10 isn't the worst conference in football, but it just doesn't work.
User avatar
The Ancient Enemy
Official BleacherCoach
Official BleacherCoach
Posts: 7549
Joined: October 30th, 2004, 2:47 pm

Re: Interesting Notre Dame Note.

Post by The Ancient Enemy »

Moldo,

If they replace Tech with Temple, at least we found a I-A team to play.

I dunno why yall hate on Temple. Temple is not your conference rival. They aren't even a rival, period, of Pitt OR Penn State. They are a Pennsylvania team, though. Don't you want Temple to win the MAC? They're no threat to you. Moldo, don't you and I and other FH'ers kinda wanna see Portage do well in the WestPAC? They're your brothers! Temple is getting a new coach, and a new direction, and a new conference. Wish them well, man.

Besides... what's so bad about paying for a cheap win? Those schools that agree to it know they are getting paid handsomely for it. UNT was LOVING the money they were getting from LSU and Texas. That money goes a long way for a program who is in the dark. You build up, Moldo, from the ground. You don't wake up one morning at San Jose State and win a national title. Babysteps, mang.
El-Moldo
Official BleacherCoach
Official BleacherCoach
Posts: 9012
Joined: May 15th, 2004, 11:58 pm

Re: Interesting Notre Dame Note.

Post by El-Moldo »

AE: Please be more alert. I did not mention Temple in any context here. Plus, Temple is ALREADY on PSU's schedule for November '06, which has nothing to do with replacing LA Tech. Hope for your sake they don't schedule a I-AA school when so many I-A's are available for that date.
User avatar
The Ancient Enemy
Official BleacherCoach
Official BleacherCoach
Posts: 7549
Joined: October 30th, 2004, 2:47 pm

Re: Interesting Notre Dame Note.

Post by The Ancient Enemy »

I was under the impression that Temple was replacing Louisiana Tech. Is that not true?
El-Moldo
Official BleacherCoach
Official BleacherCoach
Posts: 9012
Joined: May 15th, 2004, 11:58 pm

Re: Interesting Notre Dame Note.

Post by El-Moldo »

Like I said. Temple is already on the schedule 3 out of the next 4 years. Lousiana Tech was on the schedule too for next September but wants out of it's contract. Got to pay attention.
User avatar
The Ancient Enemy
Official BleacherCoach
Official BleacherCoach
Posts: 7549
Joined: October 30th, 2004, 2:47 pm

Re: Interesting Notre Dame Note.

Post by The Ancient Enemy »

I am paying attention. I was just always under the impression that Temple was approached as soon as Tech wanted out. By the way, what the was the reasoning behind the pullout? Anyone know? Surely they gave an excuse.
fleaflicker
Official BleacherCoach
Official BleacherCoach
Posts: 1947
Joined: March 13th, 2004, 12:32 am

Post by fleaflicker »

Of course Turk, and that's what we are saying, that it isn't necessarily fair that the BCS isn't looking for the best football teams of those eligible, but the best money makers of the teams eligible.
"To give anything less than the best is to sacrifice the gift." -Steve Prefontaine
Post Reply