BleacherCoaches.com

Thats a fact

LSU has not exactly been playing inspired football this season. I think Penn State can beat them, and Joe usually has them prepared in bowls. I dont think LSU as big a matchup problem as other teams, that's for sure. Should have a lot of hype around it, and I'm very happy we are playing another team w/ a lot of history.

Someone asked Navorro Bowman what he thought about LSU. He replied, "Never tried it. Usually stick to marijuana".

ham55 wrote:

Dirt Winston wrote:How does the Big 10 get two BCS teams and the PAC 10 one? What a crock. Does anyone watch the games?

Because outside of Oregon, there wasn't a team eligible for BCS contention. Where the hell have you been throughout all these conversations? Only the top 14 are eligible. This year they took the top 10. Oregon State was the next closest at 18 and then Stanford at 21. A 3 and 4 loss team aren't gonna make the BCS. Not this year anyhow.

Yeah I know the rules of the BCS, thank you. The BCS sucks. The PAC 10 was probably the toughest conference this year. USC was 4th or 5th place, and they go to Big 10 champ OSU and beat them with a freshman QB playing his second game. The system stinks when the best conference is penalized for having too many good teams. Three Big 10 teams in the top 12 or whatever is a joke.

You obviously do not know the rules, or you wouldn't be arguing with what he said.

You can't lose more than 3 games. You must be within the final 14 of the BCS standings. USC was 6th in the Pac-10.

The Ancient Enemy wrote:You obviously do not know the rules, or you wouldn't be arguing with what he said.

You can't lose more than 3 games. You must be within the final 14 of the BCS standings. USC was 6th in the Pac-10.

I'm not arguing with him oh great Master of the Board. I originally said it sucks that 2 Big 10 teams are in the BCS and only 1 PAC 10 team, even though the PAC 10 is clearly the better conference. The system sucks, the people voting for PSU and Iowa because they only have 2 losses over PAC 10 teams with three aren't watching the games.

Who you think should have gotten in, small peon of the board?

Oregon State? 8-4 Arizona? 8-4 Stanford? 8-4 USC? 8-4 California? 8-4.

Which one of those teams belongs in the BCS this year. A year when there were 5 undefeated teams. They took 2 Big 10 teams because they only lost 2 games. Ohio State is a team that has improved over the year; USC was on a huge decline after that win over Ohio State. Iowa could have very easily been undefeated had Stanzi not gone down with an injury. You're trying to tell us that all those teams listed up there belong in before either of those?

You see a good conference that beat each other up. I see a middle of the road conference where nobody really wanted to assert dominance over any of the other and someone had to end up winning the conference.

ham55 wrote:Oregon State? 8-4 Arizona? 8-4 Stanford? 8-4 USC? 8-4 California? 8-4.

Has there been a team with 8 wins make the BCS...oh wait.

the 1998 Syracuse team was 8-3 heading to the Orange Bowl(11 game regular season)
1999 Stanford 8-3 (11 game season)
2002 Purdue 8-3 (11 game season)
2004 Pitt 8-3 (11 game season)
2005 Florida State 8-4 (11 game season, but they won their conference)


The difference between these schools that I mentioned in my previous post? They all won their conferences.