Quick Hits: BlogPoll Ballot and Football Parlay Picks

Posted: November 2, 2012 in Big Ten, Chicago Bears, College Football, Illinois Fighting Illini, NFL Football, Sports
Tags: ,

It’s been a crazy week in the Frank the Tank household, so I just have time for my BlogPoll Ballot and parlay picks for this post.  Some more in-depth posts about conference realignment, the college football playoff picture and TV contracts are forthcoming.

(1) BlogPoll Ballot

This is the first time in history where an undefeated Notre Dame team is actually underrated.  The Irish resume is deserving of a #2 ranking.

(2) College Football Parlay Picks (odds from Yahoo! and home teams in CAPS)

Illinois (+27.5) over OHIO STATE – As evidenced by last week’s post, I’m waaaaaay down on the state of the Illinois football program, but for whatever reason, the Illini generally outperform expectations whenever they play Ohio State (if only because this matchup typically comes with trap game timing for the Buckeyes).

USC (+8.5) over Oregon – I’m feeling upset #1…

LSU (+8.5) over Alabama – … and upset #2.  Identical lines for two uber-talented home teams in the biggest games of the weekend.  Get ready for that Notre Dame vs. Kansas State national championship game.

(4) NFL Parlay Picks (odds from Yahoo! and home teams in CAPS)

Bears (-3.5) over TITANS - I’m going to chalk up last week’s sub par performance by Smokin’ Jay Cutler and the Bears to a short week coming off of a Monday Night Football appearance.

FALCONS (-3.5) over Cowboys – Atlanta should honestly be getting more love from the oddsmakers here.

Ravens (-3.5) over BROWNS – This Browns team was challenging to be the among the worst Cleveland teams ever (which is saying something) before it pulled out that cringe-inducing victory over San Diego last week.  I think they’ll revert to true form against the Team Formerly Known as the Cleveland Browns.

Enjoy the weekend, stay safe if you’re on the East Coast and, no matter what your political persuasion might be, please vote on Tuesday!

(Follow Frank the Tank’s Slant on Twitter @frankthetank111 and Facebook)

 

About these ads
Comments
  1. frug says:

    This is the first time in history where an undefeated Notre Dame team is actually underrated. The Irish resume is deserving of a #2 ranking.

    Is it really underrating if they are only one spot lower in the BCS than they are in your own ballot?

    • @frug – The human voters have ND at #4 while the computers have them neck-and-neck with Kansas State at #1, so in that sense, they actually are underranked by the humans (although you’re right that they’re not necessarily underrated).

      • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

        Sorry Frank but the computers aren’t the baseline, not agreeing with their results doesn’t mean you are ‘under’ ranking a team.

  2. bamatab says:

    RTR!

    And here’s to hope you’re wrong on at least one if your picks.

  3. bullet says:

    Where’s Kent? You realize you have as many MAC teams in your poll as ACC teams.

  4. greg says:

    Go Hawks.

  5. bullet says:

    What is your reasoning behind ranking Nebraska 18 and leaving UCLA (who won head-to-head) unranked?

  6. “What is your reasoning behind ranking Nebraska 18 and leaving UCLA (who won head-to-head) unranked?”

    Interesting question. Both UCLA and Nebraska are 6-2 as well.

    At quick glance, I see you also have four Pac-12 teams in the top 25 but I see only one other Big 10 team (Ohio State).

    Of course, the better analysis would be that UCLA has played #19 Nebraska (W), #13 Oregon State (L), and will play #16 USC and #12 Stanford. UCLA doesn’t have Oregon on their schedule.

    On the other hand Nebraska has only played #3 Ohio State (L) of all the teams ranked in your top 25.

    I am not sure I would have caught this (if I was voting), but it does seem odd to rank Nebraska and not UCLA.

    • ccrider55 says:

      I’d think Az might be considered. Yes, 3 losses, but all to ranked teams: UO (6 trips into red zone with no points turns a somewhat competitive game into blowout), OrSU close (gave up long late drive), and Stanford in OT (surrendering 14 pt mid 4th qtr lead). Plus wins over formerly ranked OkSU and currently ranked Toledo and USC.

  7. bullet says:

    I was looking at the offensive stats and there is no one dominant conference when you look at yards per game. But points per game is loaded with Big 12 schools. Interesting that this year 56! of the 124 schools are averaging over 30 points a game.

    Ranking in Points/game (yards/game)
    5. KSU (43)
    6. Okie St. (1)
    7. Baylor (3)
    8. Texas (38)
    9. WV (13)
    12. Texas Tech (11)
    13. OU (20)
    rest of B12
    42. TCU (48)
    84 ISU (88)
    121 Kansas (101)

    Looks like KSU, Texas and to a lesser extent, OU are relatively opportunistic.

    • bullet says:

      And for Duffman, for some reason ESPN does offensive team stats, but does not do team defensive stats. You can find them at the NCAA website, but not at ESPN.

      • Brian says:

        bullet,

        You can also find them at cfbstats.com, and they also offer situational stats.

        B12 in ppg (vs AQs only):
        13. KSU (14)
        15. OU (20)
        26. ISU (29)
        37. TCU (44)
        43. OkSU (47)
        57. TT (82)
        84. KU (77)
        100. TX (107)
        118. WV (109)
        122. Baylor (117)

        The AQ-only ranks are just to show duffman that the numbers aren’t impacted much by OOC schedules except for TT.

    • ” Interesting that this year 56! of the 124 schools are averaging over 30 points a game.”

      Wow, that is a pretty wild stat. I mean, I dont know how many schools normally score that much, but I a guessing its not as many…!? Would be interesting to see scoring trends like this over past 50 years or so.

  8. Brian says:

    http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/8584617/former-psu-president-graham-spanier-indictment-shows-lengths-administrators-went-cover-sandusky-allegations

    More detail of the cover up at PSU has come out with Spanier’s indictment. Not everything in the article is new, but some of it is.

  9. Brian says:

    http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/8584690/ncaa-putting-restriction-athletes-want-play-immediately-transferring

    In order to be more consistent, the NCAA tweaked their guidelines for when a player can get a waiver to avoid sitting out a year. Now you have to transfer to a school within 100 miles of the ailing/injured family member to be eligible for a waiver.

    • Brian says:

      There was no mention of stopping schools from blocking a player’s transfer to certain schools, though. A coach could easily use this rule to block all I-As within 100 miles.

  10. Denogginizer says:

    Add

  11. Brian says:

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/pac12/2012/11/02/southern-california-lane-kiffin-ncaa-sanctions/1674875/

    Some of the scholarship math for USC will apply to PSU, too. This details how USC did it.

    2010
    1. 19 recruits
    2. Start 2 year bowl ban
    3. Appeal ‘chip reductions to delay them a year
    4. 7 players transferred out after sanctions, leaving USC with 67 on scholarship

    2011
    1. Recruit 31 kids (6 back counted to 2010)
    2. Last year without a bowl

    2012
    1. Recruit 12 kids
    2. Down to 75 players on ‘ship, but that includes walk-ons given one this year
    3. With injuries, they are below 70
    4. Travel roster versus Stanford was 56 true ‘ship players and 14 former or current walk-ons

    2013
    1. Recruit up to 18 kids (3 can back count to 2012 if they enroll early)
    2. Lose 19 seniors plus who knows how many others (call it 25 total) from 2012
    3. Start off at 75 players again but with a bunch of former walk-ons among the 75

    2014
    1. Recruit 25+ (they can back count if they don’t fill up 2013)
    2. Lose 15-20 players.
    3. Back to 85 total, but still counting several former walk-ons

    2015
    1. Recruit 25
    2. Lose 15-20 players
    3. Back to full strength (or at least close)

    USC will need 2 years to recover after the sanctions, and they only have to drop to 75. They also couldn’t maintain 75 during just 2 years of penalties. PSU will need more recovery time and won’t be able to really maintain 65.

    Penalties:
    2012-2015 – no bowls
    2013-2016 – 15 recruits
    2014-2017 – 65 total scholarships (if below 65, they can give the difference to walk-ons)

    Rough numbers:
    2012 – 75 players
    2013 – 21 recruits (back count 6 to 2012), 70 players (attrition = 26)
    2014 – 15 recruits, 65 players (attrition = 21)
    2015 – 15 recruits, 61 players (attrition = 19)
    2016 – 15 recruits, 58 players (attrition = 18)
    2017 – 25 recruits, 65 players (attrition = 18)
    2018 – 25 recruits, 73 players (attrition = 17)
    2019 – 25 recruits, 80 players (attrition = 18)
    2020 – 25 recruits, 85 players (attrition = 20)

    Attrition equals losses to graduation, NFL, injuries, academics, legal issues, transfers, etc. From 2002-2010 PSU averaged 20.3 recruits per year, so I take that as a decent measure of typical attrition for them. It’s higher in 2013-4 because they have to get down to 65 and because of the sanctions. I reduced it for 2015-2019 to reflect the smaller team size, but kept it slightly elevated to reflect the larger classes from 2010-2013 and slightly higher rates of injuries (fewer backups means more plays and thus more injuries) and transfers (frustration with losing and/or not playing enough). I’m also only tracking the true scholarship players. Clearly PSU will award walk-ons scholarships to use all 65 every year.

    I think PSU will be below full strength in 2012-2019 for “4 years” of penalties. On top of that, there’s the question of whether the quality of recruits suffers as well. On the bright side, I think JoePa often underrecruited towards the end so the average quality may not drop too much.

    2012 hasn’t been too bad, and 2019 shouldn’t be either assuming PSU doesn’t lose too much recruiting cache during the bad years. Even 2013 and 2018 should be OK years depending on their luck with injuries. 2014-2017 will be their darkest years. The key for PSU will be developing a strong walk-on program to provide some quality depth during those years.

  12. zeek says:

    http://saintleolions.com/sports/mbkb/2012-13/releases/20121102y1aglh

    Taylor McGillis ‏@Taylor1McGillis
    @franfraschilla DII Saint Leo goes on the road and stuns Miami 69-67.

  13. Alan from Baton Rouge says:

    Frank – I like the way you’re thinking.

    GEAUX LSU Fightin’ Tigers!

    • bamatab says:

      Alan – It should a great game tonight. Unfortunately I was able to make it to Baton Rouge. I’ve got to make it over there one of these years while both schools are at there peak. I would say good luck, but I want Bama to win :). But I do hope you have a great time at the game. It’ll be a good one.

      • Alan from Baton Rouge says:

        bamatab – I’m sorry you couldn’t make it. The atmosphere will be incredible.

        • bamatab says:

          Alan – Dispite the loss, you guys play on heck of a game. I can’t remember a team being able to run the ball on us, and complete passes on us like you guys did Saturday (when did your QB decide to finally live up to the preseason hype?). Honestly I can’t take very many more games like that in a season. Gut wrenching isn’t the word for it.

          I know it was probably a tough one to lose, but you guys played a heck of a game.

          • Alan from Baton Rouge says:

            bamatab – it was a great game. Just like last November, the home team outplayed the visitor but let them stick around. With the exception of the BCS game, the Miles v. Saban games have all been great. The series is now 4-3 Alabama. LSU wins in 07 (41-34), 10 (24-21) and 11 (9-6 OT). Bama wins in 08 (27-21 OT), 09 (24-15) and 12 (21-17). Since the Bear’s last year in 1982, Alabama has 16 wins, LSU with 15 wins and one tie.

  14. bullet says:

    Looking at the paper, there are 26 games on in the Atlanta area today and that doesn’t count BTN or P12 Network or the 3 games TH (Miami-VT, Ohio-EMU, WKU-MTSU) and 1 last night (UW-Cal). That’s just cable channels without requiring a sports tier.

    SEC has 8 games-on ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU, CSS, Fox Sports South, 2 on CBS and a Syndicated game. Big 12 has 5 games-SPSO, ESPN2, Fox and 2 on ABC. Big 10 has 2-ABC and ESPN. Pac 12 has 3-ESPN2, Fox, FX. CUSA has 2-CSS and SPSO. ACC has 3-ESPN2, FSSO and syndication. Sun Belt has a CSS game. Notre Dame is on NBC. And a Colonial game is on the NBC Sports Network.

    They are really filling the air waves.

  15. ccrider55 says:

    ND needs to drop. They were barely able to prevail over a team that looked to be doing their best to lose…and it took three OT’s!

  16. ccrider55 says:

    LSU borrowed notes on how to finish games from Pitt.

    • bullet says:

      Les Miles lost another one trying to be too cute.

      • mushroomgod says:

        Les is Saban’s bitch. Saban is awfully good anyway….he doesn’t need the help.

        I don’t like the SEC or Saban particularly, but found myself rooting for Alabama. He’s the only coach and they’re the only team I can count on smashing the fraudulent Irish should USC fall down on the job.

        • Alan from Baton Rouge says:

          mushroomgod – Miles has beaten Saban more than anyone else since Saban has been at Bama. Head to head: Saban 4 wins, Miles 3 wins.

      • Alan from Baton Rouge says:

        bullet – Les Miles has won a lot more games than he’s lost by taking chances. Does he wish he had that fake FG back? Hell yes. Me too.

        Les has lost so few games while at LSU (20 in 8 years), but I can’t really think of “another one” that he lost by “trying to be too cute.”

        • bullet says:

          He’s had a lot of bad clock management as I recall.

          • Alan from Baton Rouge says:

            bullet – now you are changing the subject. Does “cute” mean trick plays or poor clock management? If you mean trick plays, LSU has pulled off many more trick plays than the ones that haven’t worked. If you mean poor clock management, LSU has only lost one game due to poor clock management. The only reason LSU was in a position to lose that Ole Miss game with poor clock management, was due to THE greatest onside kick I’ve ever witnessed.

          • bullet says:

            IMO he does a lot of dumb things in games. And being too cute can result in poor clock management although I don’t remember the particulars. That doesn’t mean he’s not a good coach. But he could be better.

        • bullet says:

          Its one thing to be cute against UK. Another to try to have a kicker run against Alabama. He’s just done a lot of, “what is he thinking?!” over the years. He’s certainly been very successful, but I think its in spite of those sorts of things, not because of them.

          • Alan from Baton Rouge says:

            bullet – you keep discussing things you don’t really have a clue about. If your reference to Kentucky is the “Bluegrass Miracle”, Nick Saban was the coach and it was a Hail Mary at the end of the game. Miles “cute” plays come against top 10 teams like South Carolina, Florida, and Alabama, and they usually work.

        • bamatab says:

          While his trick plays didn’t work, they did keep his team loose. A lot of the times, teams take on some of the characteristics of their coach. One of those characteristics for LSU is that they usually play loose. Unlike Bama, which can play tight at times, especially against LSU. I think that has somewhat to do with Saban’s “uneasiness” with Les’ “unconventional” coaching style.

    • bullet says:

      Could have been massive shakeup in the BCS standings. Florida was in some trouble. But it will all be pretty minor, with only LSU losing among the top 14 (Oregon St. is still playing as I write this). Actually WVU is the only team who lost to a team outside the BCS top 25 today, but Arizona should join them.

  17. duffman says:

    Week 10 :

    ACC : AQ = 5-5 : NAQ = DNP : FCS = DNP : OFF = TWO :: U = NONE
    ACC (5-5) : B1G (DNP) : BE (DNP) : B12 (DNP) : PAC (DNP) : SEC (DNP) : IND (DNP)
    CUSA (DNP) : MAC (DNP) : MWC (DNP) : SB (DNP) : WAC (DNP) : FCS (DNP)

    B 12 : AQ = 5-5 : NAQ = DNP : FCS = DNP : OFF = NONE :: U = Kansas State
    ACC (DNP) : B1G (DNP) : BE (DNP) : B12 (5-5) : PAC (DNP) : SEC (DNP) : IND (DNP)
    CUSA (DNP) : MAC (DNP) : MWC (DNP) : SB (DNP) : WAC (DNP) : FCS (DNP)

    BE : AQ = 3-4 : NAQ = DNP : FCS = DNP : OFF = ONE :: U = Louisville
    ACC (DNP) : B1G (DNP) : BE (3-3) : B12 (DNP) : PAC (DNP) : SEC (DNP) : IND (0-1)
    CUSA (DNP) : MAC (DNP) : MWC (DNP) : SB (DNP) : WAC (DNP) : FCS (DNP)

    B1G : AQ = 5-5 : NAQ = DNP : FCS = DNP : OFF = TWO :: U = Ohio State
    ACC (DNP) : B1G (5-5) : BE (DNP) : B12 (DNP) : PAC (DNP) : SEC (DNP) : IND (DNP)
    CUSA (DNP) : MAC (DNP) : MWC (DNP) : SB (DNP) : WAC (DNP) : FCS (DNP)

    IND : AQ = 1-0 : NAQ = 2-0 : FCS = DNP : OFF = ONE :: U = Notre Dame
    ACC (DNP) : B1G (DNP) : BE (1-0) : B12 (DNP) : PAC (DNP) : SEC (DNP) : IND (DNP)
    CUSA (DNP) : MAC (DNP) : MWC (1-0) : SB (1-0) : WAC (DNP) : FCS (DNP)

    PAC : AQ = 6-6 : NAQ = DNP : FCS = DNP : OFF = NONE :: U = Oregon
    ACC (DNP) : B1G (DNP) : BE (DNP) : B12 (DNP) : PAC (6-6) : SEC (DNP) : IND (DNP)
    CUSA (DNP) : MAC (DNP) : MWC (DNP) : SB (DNP) : WAC (DNP) : FCS (DNP)

    SEC : AQ = 5-5 : NAQ = 3-0 : FCS = DNP : OFF = ONE :: U = Alabama
    ACC (DNP) : B1G (DNP) : BE (DNP) : B12 (DNP) : PAC (DNP) : SEC (5-5) : IND (DNP)
    CUSA (1-0) : MAC (DNP) : MWC (DNP) : SB (1-0) : WAC (1-0) : FCS (DNP)

    .

    Best scheduler = everybody played about equal but the B1G had 2 teams OFF
    Worst scheduler = SEC with 3 non AQ’s and 1 team OFF

    .

    Observations :
    Ohio State is first to play 10 and still undefeated – the good
    Michigan State has played 10 games and sits at .500 – the bad
    Illinois and Purdue still looking for a conference win – the ugly

    .

    My weekly B 12 is over rated observations :

    Sagarin still ranks the B 12 as the toughest conference as updated 11.04.2012 @ 2 am

    http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/fbc12.htm

    I included the ELO numbers this week for Brian (70% of conference has Top 30 ELO)
    **** Bowl eligible OOC schools in BOLD ****
    2 Kansas State (9-0) : #33 SoS : #2 ELO :::: W 5-4 ACC, W 3-6 SB, W 3-7 FCS
    6 Oklahoma (6-2) : #10 SoS : #8 ELO :::: L 9-0 IND, W 2-7 CUSA, W 3-6 FCS
    14 Texas Tech (6-3) : #21 SoS : #16 ELO :::: W 4-6 MWC, W 3-5 WAC, W 4-5 FCS
    17 Oklahoma State (5-3) : #24 SoS : #22 ELO :::: L 5-4 PAC, W 5-3 SB, W 1-8 FCS
    19 Texas (7-2) : #18 SoS : #14 ELO :::: W 5-4 SEC, W 4-6 MWC, W 2-7 MWC
    26 Iowa State (5-4) : #7 SoS : #25 ELO :::: W 4-5 B1G, L 7-2 CUSA, W 3-6 FCS
    27 TCU (6-3) : #37 SoS : #34 ELO :::: W 3-6 ACC, W 4-5 CUSA, W 1-8 FCS
    37 Baylor (4-4) : #27 SoS : #50 ELO :::: W 4-5 CUSA, W 6-3 SB, W 7-2 FCS
    48 West Virginia (5-3) : #29 SoS : #26 ELO :::: W 4-5 ACC, W 4-5 CUSA, W 7-2 FCS
    88 Kansas (1-8) : #4 SoS : #105 ELO :::: L 4-6 CUSA, L 9-1 MAC, W 7-2 FCS

    The B12 is 1-3 against bowl eligible teams with the sole win against a Sun Belt team!

    .

    Again, B12 is skewed with only 1 school with an ELO over 50!
    2 Kansas State – still think they should be Top 5 till they lose
    6 Oklahoma – still a Top 25 team but should be no higher than #16
    14 Texas Tech – 3 loss team that should not be in the Top 25
    17 Oklahoma State – 3 loss team that should not be in the Top 25
    19 Texas – not Top 25 for near loss to KANSAS and no quality wins
    26 Iowa State – 4 losses and no quality wins
    27 TCU – 3 losses and no quality wins
    37 Baylor – 4 losses and no quality wins
    48 West Virginia – 3 losses and no quality wins
    88 Kansas – 8 losses and no quality wins

    According to Sagarin this is the 4th toughest schedule in the USA so far!
    (they played 2 Top 25, several Top 50, and the rest is junk)
    Game # 1 = 7-2 FCS school
    Game # 2 = 9-1 MAC school who lost to Iowa in neutral site game (N Illinois)
    Game # 3 = 4-6 CUSA school (Rice)
    Game # 4 = 4-4, 1-4 conference team with no big wins
    Game # 5 = 6-3, 3-3 conference team with no big wins
    Game # 6 = 5-3, 3-2 conference team with no big wins
    Game # 7 = 7-2, 4-2 conference team with no big wins
    Game # 8 = 6-2, 4-1 conference team with no big wins
    Game # 9 = 9-0, 6-0 conference team

    .

    .

    Sagarin states his numbers are connected yet the following schools are below 80% of the B12 schools (4-4 Baylor is number 8 at #37) NOTE, teams with winning records in BOLD :

    ACC (9) or 75.0% : #55 Miami 5-4, #59 Virginia Tech 4-5, #69 Georgia Tech 4-5, #74 North Carolina State 5-4, #80 Duke 6-4, #92 Virginia 3-6, #111 Maryland 4-5, #112 Wake Forest 5-4, #113 Boston College 2-7

    Big East (8) or 100% : #44 Louisville 9-0, #47 Rutgers 7-1, #49 Cincinnati 6-2, #60 Syracuse 4-5, #63 Pittsburgh 4-5, #76 South Florida 3-6, #103 Temple 3-5, #115 Connecticut 3-6

    B1G (6) or 50.0% : #40 Michigan State 5-5, #57 Indiana 4-5, #62 Iowa 4-5, #71 Purdue 3-6, #72 Minnesota 5-4, #118 Illinois 2-7

    B 12 (2) or 20.0% : #48 West Virginia 5-3, #88 Kansas 1-8

    IND (2) or 50.0% : #79 Navy 6-3, #149 Army 2-7

    PAC (4) or 33.3% : #46 Washington 5-4, #61 California 3-7, #95 Washington State 2-7, #159 Colorado 1-8

    SEC (6) or 42.9% : #42 Missouri 4-5, #43 Vanderbilt 5-4, #51 Tennessee 4-5, #58 Arkansas 4-5, #75 Auburn 2-7, #105 Kentucky 1-9

    A conference with 80% Top 37 schools should be playing in the MNC every season! Look at all the teams above in BOLD that fall below Baylor who has a non winning record! This week I think only 2 B12 schools are worthy of the Top 25 and most should not be getting a single vote in any poll or ranking! Texas Tech has 3 losses and Texas has 2 losses but not a single good win.

    Top 25 (2) = 9-0 Kansas State and 6-2 Oklahoma

    .

    .

    The teams with the better defense went 3-2

    #44 Oklahoma State @ #13 Kansas State : won as projected
    #16 Oklahoma @ #26 Iowa State : won as projected
    #97 Texas @ #57 Texas Tech : lost in a close game
    #37 Texas Christian @ #115 West Virginia : won as projected
    #83 Kansas @ #118 Baylor : was close game until protracted rain delay

    B12 games this week with better defense in BOLD :

    #17 Oklahoma vs #114 Baylor
    #21 Kansas State @ #47 Texas Christian
    #29 Iowa State @ #90 Texas
    #56 Oklahoma State vs #116 West Virginia
    #59 Texas Tech vs #88 Kansas

    • bullet says:

      Its just an odd year. You could probably take #15-#40 and draw them out of a hat and do as well as the pollsters. I’ll throw out my top 25:
      1 Oregon
      2 Kansas St.
      3 Alabama
      4 Notre Dame
      5 Ohio St. (noone’s beaten them yet)
      6 Georgia
      7 Florida
      8 LSU
      9 South Carolina
      10 FSU
      11 Oregon St.
      12 Louisville (probably too high-but zero losses)
      13 Clemson
      14 OU

      Then its a big drop

      15 Stanford (may end up 7-5-OR, OR St., UCLA ahead-just not sure about them since AZ and USC (both wins) are so hard to judge)
      16 Texas (bad loss vs. OU)
      17 Texas A&M (good losses at home, but we’ll learn more about them vs. AL Saturday and whether they should be higher)
      18 UCLA (bad loss vs. Cal)
      19 Nebraska (squeaking out wins, UCLA loss doesn’t look so bad now)
      20 Louisiana Tech (good loss, but A&M is only team with winning record they have played)
      21 USC (talented, but they lose to the good teams-UW only win over a team with a winning record)
      22 Texas Tech (lose to teams with more talent-OU,KSU,UT-schemes work vs. equals)
      23 Oklahoma St. (lost to Jekyll-AZ, close vs. KSU and UT)
      24 MS St. (crushed by 2 decent teams they’ve faced)
      25 Northwestern (struggles vs. weak teams, but only 2 losses so far)

      Right behind you have Michigan, Arizona, TCU, N. Illinois, Washington or alternatively any of UNC, WVU, Iowa St., Rutgers, Penn St., Wisconsin, Toledo, Ohio, Boise, Arizona St. Arizona is Jekyll and Hyde. They lost 49-0 to Oregon and 66-10 to UCLA and beat Toledo, Oklahoma St., USC and UW. Their other losses were by 3 to Oregon St. and 6 in OT at Stanford.

      • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

        I just can’t in good conscience rank Oregon #1 until they show they can beat a defense with a pulse. Right now I see Oregon vs Alabama ending similarly to vs Auburn in the BCSNCG or vs Ohio State in the Rose.

        • ccrider55 says:

          USC vs ND should shed some light.

          • duffman says:

            Southern Cal has shown they can score on Oregon. I think you are correct about using the game with Notre Dame as a better comparison. If the Irish hold the Trojans to 14 – 21 points @ Southern Cal then the Oregon defense becomes very suspect. The wrinkle now in the mix is the possibility of the Ducks meeting UCLA in the CCG! Not sure many projected that when the season started.

          • ccrider55 says:

            No reason to limit it to USC. Comparing results against Stanford can come a week earlier. Low bar, all the quacks have to do is win in regulation, and without bizzare officiating giving deciding aid.

        • Michael in Raleigh says:

          Alabama very well could shut down UO’s offense, but Oregon vs. Auburn is a bad example of why that would happen. That game was a nailbiter. Auburn won on a FG as time expired, and only after that fluke play where the Auburn RB advanced the ball an extra 30 yards or so because the Oregon defender didn’t… quite… finish the tackle, and started walking back to the huddle. The game could have gone either way.

          • duffman says:

            I think the Auburn vs Oregon was offense vs offense where Alabama has a much more potent looking defense. Watching Alabama and LSU play it is amazing how fast the defense closes from the outside. My guess is this years Alabama, LSU, and Florida team could beat either Oregon or Auburn from that year. South Carolina (with Lattimore) and Georgia seem more equal to those the 2 teams in the MNC that year.

        • Brian says:

          Scarlet_Lutefisk,

          “I just can’t in good conscience rank Oregon #1 until they show they can beat a defense with a pulse.”

          As opposed to all the great offenses AL has faced? TN is the best they’ve faced. TAMU will be the biggest challenge all year on O. Meanwhile, OR has Stanford and OrSU coming up which are both top 25 defenses.

          • duffman says:

            My doubts on Mississippi State have proved well founded but TAMU still has me sitting on the fence. While the game with Florida was close it was because Florida adjusted at halftime and won the second half. Both TAMU losses were close at home and I have to think playing at Alabama will be quite hostile indeed. Where the folks at TAMU are getting the love is beating Arkansas and Auburn but as we have seen they are far from where they were supposed to be.

            If TAMU is unable to score 3 – 4 TD’s in the first half then I think Oregon will be a bad fit for the MNC game. The better game may be Alabama vs Kansas State but the money and media will have Notre Dame against the Tide.

          • Richard says:

            “As opposed to all the great offenses AL has faced? TN is the best they’ve faced.”

            . . . and they limited Tenn. to 13 points (while scoring 44 on the Vols).

            I’ve seen no indication that Oregon’s offense would do much better.

            BTW, Football Outsider’s S&P+ ranking has the Vol’s offense as the best in the country (by actually a decent margin) & Oregon’s as 2nd best:
            http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ncaaoff

            The main difference is that Oregon’s defense is good while Tennessee’s isn’t.

            I believe you’ll find that the old adage that a great defense beats a great offense is borne out by results.

          • Brian says:

            Richard,

            “. . . and they limited Tenn. to 13 points (while scoring 44 on the Vols).

            I’ve seen no indication that Oregon’s offense would do much better.”

            The only indication you’d accept is them actually doing better against AL, and that can’t happen until January.

            “BTW, Football Outsider’s S&P+ ranking has the Vol’s offense as the best in the country (by actually a decent margin) & Oregon’s as 2nd best:”

            1. That assumes that I care about “advanced” statistics.
            2. They aren’t nearly as high in the raw data (about #30 while OR is #1), so it further assumes I trust their adjustments based on opponents.
            3. It only uses about half of OR’s plays.
            4. They are very different types of offenses, and being able to stop one doesn’t mean you can stop the other.

            “I believe you’ll find that the old adage that a great defense beats a great offense is borne out by results.”

            That’s why they play the games. Great offenses have won some games, too. And people seem to ignore that OR also has a solid defense (Football Outsiders say it’s #2) while AL’s offense is less successful than OR’s.

          • bullet says:

            Auburn’s defense 2 years ago was very suspect. They gave up a lot of points.

            Alabama this year hasn’t convinced me they have the offense to stay with Oregon (they’ve scored, but haven’t played much of a schedule until this week-that’s why they are so low in the computer polls). Oregon’s rbs have amazing acceleration and speed. When you see them, it looks like most teams have running backs going in slow motion. Alabama has also managed to slow the game down so their defense hasn’t worked much. That wouldn’t happen with Oregon.

          • bullet says:

            And Oregon’s D has shut down some pretty good offenses. Except for USC, most of their points have been given up after the game was decided-in the 2nd quarter!

  18. Brian says:

    Notes from the weekend:

    Well, it looks like no BCS Buster after all. Boise lost again and the computers hate their schedule, so it’s doubtful they can make the top 16 now.

    SEC voting bias is still alive and well with MSU still in the polls despite back to back blow outs. I could forgive the AL loss, but TAMU blows them out too. This is a team with a best win of TN or Auburn, both home games. Their best road win is @Troy. Hopefully LSU crushing them next week will be enough to drive them out of the top 25.

    BCS top 25 losses:
    expected – #5 to #1, #24 to #2, #17 to #4
    upsets – #15 to #16 (blow out), #18 to #23
    to unranked – #19, #21, #22

    Conference races:
    ACC – looks like FSU vs Miami in the CCG finally, Clemson is possibly BCS at large
    BE – could come down to UL vs RU in the last week with UC in the mix, no at large team
    B10 – NE vs WI for now but next week is huge (NE/PSU, WI/IN), no at large team probably
    B12 – KSU would have to lose 2 of 3 to not win the league, maybe OU or UT for BCS at large
    P12 – OR vs USC probably, no at large team unless OR gets upset by OrSU or Stanford
    SEC – AL vs GA, someone will be an at large team

    BCS:
    6 champs, ND, 3 AQ at larges

    • ccrider55 says:

      UT for possible at large? Not ahead of the winner of the RRRout, who I think is the only possible B12 at large. P12 might get at large into Rose Bowl if UO is in NCG.

      • bullet says:

        Texas at 10-2 gets into the BCS if OU loses a game. Outside shot they get picked anyway depending on the bowl picking as at 10-2 they would have had to beat KSU on the road.

        Don’t think LT gets high enough. If A&M beats Alabama, maybe. At large are Notre Dame and likely SEC, B12 and P12 teams with ACC if B12 or P12 beat up on each other.

        We may have a 9 win team get into the BCS this year. There are only 22 AQ bowl eligible teams with 2 losses or less and that includes 3 BE teams. Many will meet each other in the next few weeks.

        We have 6 unbeaten teams. At this point last year we had 5 and ended with none. There are 11 once beaten teams with 1 BE, 1 WAC, 4 MAC, along with UGA, UF, OR St., FSU and Clemson. There were 9 at this time last year.

      • Brian says:

        ccrider55,

        “UT for possible at large? Not ahead of the winner of the RRRout, who I think is the only possible B12 at large.”

        If UT wins out to be 10-2 and have beaten 11-1 KSU, yes they would be an at large possibility. Other than OU and UT, nobody else in the B12 seems to be close enough to the top 14.

        “P12 might get at large into Rose Bowl if UO is in NCG.”

        No. If OR wins out, they’ll beat Stanford (9-3 max), OrSU (10-2 max) and USC again probably. In addition, Stanford and OrSU still have to play. With OrSU at #12 and Stanford at #15 (USA Today), it’s unlikely they can withstand 1 loss let alone 2 and still be in the top 14.

        What could happen is that the BCS has to use it’s rules to reach outside the top 14. That may let in some teams I excluded above.

        USA Today top 14:
        SEC – 6
        ACC, B12, P12 – 2
        BE, Indy – 1

        15-20 (most likely replacements for top 14):
        P12 – 2
        BE, B10, B12, WAC – 1

        21-25 (unlikely to get BCS eligible):
        B10, P12, SEC, MAC, MWC – 1

        Due to the 6 SEC teams ranked so high, the BCS may have to extend their reach to the top 18 (it grows by 4 every time). If so, that changes things. If LT becomes a BCS Buster, that also changes things.

        • ccrider55 says:

          Brian:

          This is the thing I agree with duffman about. Outside of possibly beating KSU what makes UT’s case? The same circular reasoning that supports most in the SEC playing weak OOC? I’d suggest that Texas beating KSU (very unlikely) would seriously damage the rep of the B12, not boost a second team.

          • Brian says:

            ccrider55,

            “Outside of possibly beating KSU what makes UT’s case?”

            Nothing. But they still have a chance to do that, and I think a 10-2 UT that beat 11-1 KSU would get an at large. Thus I listed them as a possibility.

            I was being pragmatic. The teams have to be in or near the top 14 already, can’t be the 4th or lower from their conference, and need sufficient SOS for the computers to let them be eligible. UT fits that description IF they win out.

            “I’d suggest that Texas beating KSU (very unlikely) would seriously damage the rep of the B12, not boost a second team.”

            Suggest away. That doesn’t change how the polls or computers work. Beating an 11-1 team would help UT. UT is #17 in the USA Today poll today. Last week they were #22 in USA Today and #23 in the BCS at 6-2. It’s reasonable to think they’ll be around #18 this week at 7-2. 3 more wins, including over a top 5 team and they would definitely be top 14. You don’t have to agree with it, I’m just talking about what would happen.

          • bullet says:

            Outside of Arizona, who has lost 4 games, noone outside the top 14 has much of a case. UT has a weak case, but so do Nebraska, A&M, UCLA, USC…. Maybe Stanford has a case, but it depends on USC and Arizona being for real. And Stanford has 3 very tough games ahead.

            As for UT, other than the “circular reasoning”-Texas Tech and Oklahoma St. on the road, they destroyed an Ole Miss team that gave Alabama and A&M fits and Georgia for the 1st half.

          • ccrider55 says:

            Bullet:

            And that gift Kansas gave them?

          • bullet says:

            That gift Pitt gave Notre Dame? Missed 33 yd FG is a lot bigger gift.

          • ccrider55 says:

            Yes, and a brutal interference call.
            I’d have ND in top 10, but the weakness of their victories demands them not automatically be placed above a number of teams that have taken loss(s).

    • duffman says:

      I was typing in my argument for a MAC school while you were putting this up. Just going with schools with 0, 1, or 2 losses by conference :

      SEC = (7) teams
      PAC = (4) teams
      MAC = (4) teams
      B1G = (3) teams but Ohio State ineligible
      B 12 = (3) teams
      BigE = (3) teams
      WAC = (3) teams
      ACC = (2) teams
      CUSA = (2) teams
      I ND = (1) team
      MWC = (1) team

    • bullet says:

      Pac 12 South is wide open. A 4 way tie at 5-4 isn’t totally unrealistic.
      USC loses to ASU, beats UCLA
      UCLA beats WSU, loses to USC & Stanford
      Arizona beats CU, UU and ASU
      ASU beats USC & WSU, loses to Arizona

    • Michael in Raleigh says:

      BCS Bowl Predictions:

      NCG: Alabama (13-0) vs. Oregon (13-0)
      Rose: Nebraska (11-2) vs. Notre Dame* (11-1)
      Fiesta: Kansas State (12-0) vs. Clemson (11-1)
      Sugar: LSU (10-2) vs. Oklahoma (10-2)
      Orange: Florida State (12-1) vs. Louisville (12-0)

      *USC, Arizona, and UCLA already have three losses each, and counting. I’m predicting at least a third loss for Stanford and a second for Oregon State (both to Oregon). Stanford or Oregon State are also assured of an additional one loss between each other, as they have yet to play each other. With each Pac-12 team having 3+ losses (or at least 2+ losses in Oregon State’s case), no one besides Oregon is likely to finish in the Top 14, the minimum ranking for at-large BCS eligibility.

      Notre Dame’s loss would be to USC. Clemson would win out, including the South Carolina game.

      • bullet says:

        BCS title game Notre Dame 12-0 vs. Oregon 13-0
        Rose Nebraska 10-3 vs. OR St. 10-2
        Fiesta KSU 11-1 vs. Alabama 12-1
        Sugar Georgia 12-1 vs. OU 10-2
        Orange FSU 11-2 vs. Louisville 11-1

        I don’t think USC is going to take out Notre Dame. Oregon has lots of challenges, but they are very good. KSU falls to someone. In this scenario I have Alabama losing to UGA in ccg-I think Alabama loses to someone, whether its A&M, Auburn or UGA. UL has been living on the edge and drops one to somebody. Clemson gets in if OU and UT both lose a game (and they don’t lose too badly to S. Carolina), which is distinctly possible.

        Michael is right, there’s a good possibility noone from the P12 other than Oregon qualifies. But I think one of them will do enough.

      • ccrider55 says:

        You don’t think a 10-2 OrSU (requiring they defeat a ranked Stanford along with two others, losing to #2 UO) that is currently BCS #10 or so wouldn’t stay in the elligible pool? Perhaps even a 3 loss Stanford, gaining from a quality win and not hurt badly by losing to Oregon?

        If ND gets in the Rose Bowl I’d hope the B1G and PAC re-evaluate their decisions regarding the BCS 2.1 fake playoff!

      • frug says:

        A 10-2 Oregon St. would definitely stay in the top 14, particularly if they can play Oregon close. The computers like them and that should be enough to offset any potential bias by voters.

      • Brian says:

        Michael in Raleigh,

        “NCG: Alabama (13-0) vs. Oregon (13-0)
        Rose: Nebraska (11-2) vs. Notre Dame* (11-1)
        Fiesta: Kansas State (12-0) vs. Clemson (11-1)
        Sugar: LSU (10-2) vs. Oklahoma (10-2)
        Orange: Florida State (12-1) vs. Louisville (12-0)”

        Using your assumed game outcomes, I’d predict this result:

        NCG – AL vs OR
        Rose – NE vs OrSU
        Fiesta – KSU vs ND
        Sugar – LSU vs Clemson
        Orange – FSU vs UL

        But let’s say you’re right and OrSU or Stanford isn’t eligible:

        NCG – AL vs OR
        Rose – NE vs OU
        Fiesta – KSU vs ND
        Sugar – LSU vs Clemson
        Orange – FSU vs UL

        I think the Rose might go for the traditional Big 8 matchup rather than NE vs ND, but it would be a tough choice. ND is great for business, but NE/OU has so much history and might be a better game.

      • bullet says:

        In your scenario, BCS ends up something more or less like
        1 AL, 2 OR, 3 KSU, 4 FSU, 5 ND, 6 LSU, 7 UGA, 8 FL, 9 UL, 10 Clemson, 11 OU, 12 Nebraska, 13 S. Carolina, 14 ? Its hard to see Stanford and Oregon St. both falling below 14. If A&M plays Alabama close maybe they get a little more love in the polls and can take that 14 slot.

    • Brian says:

      BCS predictions:

      NCG – AL vs OR
      Rose – NE vs OrSU
      Fiesta – KSU vs ND
      Sugar – LSU vs Clemson
      Orange – FSU vs UL

      What if OrSU was ineligible?

      NCG – AL vs OR
      Rose – NE vs OU
      Fiesta – KSU vs ND
      Sugar – LSU vs Clemson
      Orange – FSU vs UL

      What if OSU was eligible and OrSU wasn’t?

      NCG – AL vs OR
      Rose – OSU vs ND
      Fiesta – KSU vs Clemson
      Sugar – LSU vs OU
      Orange – FSU vs UL

  19. Brian says:

    Bowl eligibility

    Eligible – 48
    Need 1 win – 17 (65)

    Ineligible – 29
    Need 1 loss – 9 (38)

    2 games away from either (usually mean 4-5) – 21

  20. duffman says:

    Teams with 0, 1, 2, or 3 losses – Will the MAC be rewarded at the end?
    AQ conferences with no placeholder listed as (0)

    Zero loss
    ACC = (0)
    B 12 = (1) Kansas State
    BigE = (1) Louisville
    B1G = (1) Ohio State
    I ND = (1) Notre Dame
    PAC = (1) Oregon
    SEC = (1) Alabama

    One loss
    ACC = (2) Florida State and Clemson
    B 12 = (0)
    BigE = (1) Rutgers
    B1G = (0)
    I ND = (0)

    MAC = (4) Kent State, Ohio, Northern Illinois, and Toledo
    PAC = (1) Oregon State
    SEC = (2) Florida and Georgia
    WAC = (1) La Tech

    Two loss
    ACC = (0)
    B 12 = (2) Oklahoma and Texas
    BigE = (1) Cincinnati
    B1G = (2) Nebraska and Northwestern
    CUSA = (2) Central Florida and Tulsa
    I ND = (0)
    MWC = (1) Boise State
    PAC = (2) Stanford, UCLA
    SEC = (4) South Carolina, Texas A&M, Louisiana State, and Mississippi State
    WAC = (2) Utah State and San Jose State

    Three loss
    ACC = (1) North Carolina
    B 12 = (4) Texas Tech, TCU, Oklahoma State, and West Virginia
    BigE = (0)
    B1G = (3) Michigan, Penn State, and Wisconsin
    I ND = (1) Navy
    MAC = (2) Bowling Green and Ball State
    MWC = (3) Fresno State, San Diego State, and Nevada
    PAC = (1) Southern Cal
    SunB = (5) Middle Tennessee, Arkansas St, LA – Monroe, W Kentucky, and LA – Lafayette

    • bullet says:

      UNC is also bowl ineligible like Ohio St. and Penn St.

    • Brian says:

      No, the MAC won’t be rewarded. They’d have to get their champ into the top 16 and be above an AQ champ to make the BCS most likely. If they don’t make the BCS, they just get their usual bowls plus trying to fill spots other conferences (B10 this year) can’t.

  21. bullet says:

    Northern Iowa is a warning about over-scheduling. At 1-4 they were ranked in the FCS poll as they had lost by 5 at Wisconsin, 11 @ Iowa, 7 @ Youngstown (who was top 5 at the time) and 12 at home vs. ND St. (#1 FCS). They are now 3-6 and in 8th place in the Missouri Valley.

  22. duffman says:

    The ranks of the undefeated after week 10 :

    AQ schools 6 of 72 = 8.33% of population : 6 of 124 = 4.8% of total

    IND (1) of 4 => 25.0% : 9 – 0 = Notre Dame
    Big East (1) of 8 => 12.5% : 9 – 0 = Louisville
    Big 12 (1) of 10 => 10.0% : 9 – 0 = Kansas State
    B1G (1) of 12 => 8.3% : 10 – 0 = Ohio State
    PAC (1) of 12 => 8.3% : 9 – 0 = Oregon
    SEC (1) of 14 => 7.1% : 9 – 0 = Alabama

    ACC (0) of 12 => 0.0%

    .

    Non AQ schools 0 of 52 = 0.0% of population : 0 of 124 = 0.0% of total

    MAC (0) of 13 => 0%
    CUSA (0) of 12 => 0%
    MWC (0) of 10 => 0%
    Sun Belt (0) of 10 => 0%
    WAC (0) of 7 => 0%

    .

    Undefeated teams OFF for week #11
    10-0 Ohio State : 2 games – @ Wisconsin and vs Michigan

    Undefeated games for week #11

    9-0 Louisville @ 4-5 Syracuse : 12:00 pm ABC : 3 games – @ SU, vs Uconn, @ RU
    7-2 Texas A&M @ 9-0 Alabama : 3:30 pm CBS : vs TAMU, vs WCU, vs AU + CCG?
    9-0 Kansas State @ 6-3 TCU : 7:00 pm FOX : 3 games – @ TCU, @ BU, vs Texas
    9-0 Notre Dame @ 2-7 Boston College : 8:00 pm ABC : 3 games – @BC, vs WF, @ USC
    9-0 Oregon @ 3-7 Cal : 10:30 pm ESPN : @ Cal, vs Stanford, @ OSU + CCG?

    .
    ….
    .

    AP Top 25

    SEC (7) = #1 Alabama, #5 UGA, #7 UF, #9 LSU, #12 USC, #15 TAMU, #22 MSU
    PAC (5) = #2 Oregon, #13 Oregon St, #16 Stanford, #17 UCLA, #21 Southern Cal
    B 12 (4) = #3 Kansas State, #14 Oklahoma, #19 Texas, #25 Texas Tech
    B1G (2) = #5 Ohio State, #18 Nebraska
    ACC (2) = #8 Florida State, #10 Clemson
    BigE (2) = #11 Louisville, #24 Rutgers
    I ND (1) = #4 Notre Dame
    WAC (1) = #19 La Tech
    MWC (1) = #23 Toledo

    Dropped : Boise State / West Virginia / Arizona

    .

    USA Top 25

    SEC (7) = #1 Alabama, #5 UGA, #7 UF, #9 LSU, #11 USC, #14 TAMU, #23 MSU
    PAC (5) = #2 Oregon, #12 Oregon State, #15 Stanford, #19 UCLA, #22 Southern Cal
    B 12 (3) = #3 Kansas State, #13 Oklahoma, #17 Texas
    ACC (2) = #6 Florida State, #8 Clemson
    BigE (2) = #10 Louisville, #20 Rutgers
    B1G (2) = #16 Nebraska, #21 Northwestern
    I ND (1) = #4 Notre Dame
    WAC (1) = #18 La Tech
    MWC (1) = #24 Boise State
    MAC (1) = #25 Toledo

    Dropped : West Virginia / Texas Tech / Oklahoma State

    .

    Harris Interactive Top 25

    SEC (7) = #1 Alabama, #5 UGA, #7 UF, #8 LSU, #11 USC, #15 TAMU, #20 MSU
    PAC (5) = #2 Oregon, #12 Oregon State, #14 Stanford, #18 Southern Cal, #21 UCLA
    B12 (4) = #3 Kansas State, #13 Oklahoma, #17 Texas, #25 Texas Tech
    ACC (2) = #6 Florida State, #9 Clemson
    BigE (2) = #10 Louisville, #22 Rutgers
    B1G (2) = #16 Nebraska, #24 Northwestern
    I ND (1) = #4 Notre Dame
    WAC (1) = #19 La Tech
    MWC (1) = #23 Boise State

    Dropped : West Virginia / Oklahoma State

    .

    .

    The B12 rankings
    – Kansas State beat 3-2 Oklahoma State @ home : #3 / #3 / #3 – unchanged
    – Oklahoma won @ 2-4 Iowa State : #14 / #13 / #13 – mostly unchanged
    – Texas won @ 3-3 Texas Tech : #19 / #22 / #22 – bumped up 5-10 spots!
    – Texas Tech lost to 4-2 Texas @ home : #25 / #27 / #25 – only dropped 5-7 spots.
    – TCU beat 2-3 WVU @ WVU : #29 / #31 / #27 – bumped up 8 spots!
    – Oklahoma State lost to 9-0 Kansas State @ KSU : #31 / #29 / #33 – only dropped 3-5!
    – West Virginia lost to 3-3 TCU @ home and still got votes! : #NR / #37 / #32
    – Iowa State (5-4, 2-4) lost to Oklahoma
    – Baylor (4-4, 1-4) beat Kansas
    – Kansas (1-8, 0-6) lost to Baylor

    70% of a conference who played such a padded getting votes is terrible. The AP (4 B12 teams) held with 4 teams in. The USA (3 B12 teams) poll cut the B12 in half but left 4 just out of the Top 25. The Harris (4 B12 teams) culled the herd by 2. This seems to mean more doubt about the invincibility of the B12 is sinking in. The B1G is not as bad as advertised and at least 2 teams made the Top 25 in all 3 polls. Northwestern is finally getting some love in the Top 25. Texas is still ranked higher than the quality of their wins indicate and seems destined to remain ranked as they and Oklahoma must sell the tickets and viewers for the conference. Overall the other AQ conferences are getting more representation and balance in the polls. Here are the 2 and 3 loss teams in the Top 25 for this week :

    B 12 (3) = 7-2 Texas : 6-2 Oklahoma : 6-3 Texas Tech
    B1G (2) = 7-2 Nebraska and Northwestern
    PAC (3) = 7-2 Stanford and UCLA : 6-3 Southern Cal
    SEC (4) = 7-2 LSU, South Carolina, Texas A&M, and Mississippi State

    .

    .

    Here is the fourth BCS

    SEC (7) = #1 Alabama, #5 UGA, #6 UF, #7 LSU, #8 USC, #15 TAMU, #21 MSU
    PAC (5) = #3 Oregon, #11 Oregon State, #14 Stanford, #18 UCLA, #19 Southern Cal
    B 12 (4) = #2 Kansas St, #12 Oklahoma, #17 Texas, #12 Texas Tech
    BigE (2) = #9 Louisville, #23 Rutgers
    ACC (2) = #10 Florida State, #13 Clemson
    B1G (2) = #16 Nebraska, #24 Northwestern
    I ND (1) = #4 Notre Dame
    WAC (1) = #20 La Tech
    MAC (1) = #25 Toledo
    MWC (0) = NONE
    MAC (0) NONE
    CUSA (0) NONE
    SunB (0) NONE

    7 SEC teams = 50% of conference
    5 PAC teams = 42% of conference
    4 B 12 teams = 40% of conference

    It looks like the B12 is losing spots and the other AQ’s are taking their place meaning a more balanced AQ representation. This is a good sign and should chill me out a bit as the polls are beginning to look how I thought they should have all along.

    • Brian says:

      duffman,

      “The B12 rankings
      – Kansas State beat 3-2 Oklahoma State @ home : #3 / #3 / #3 – unchanged”

      As it should be.

      “- Oklahoma won @ 2-4 Iowa State : #14 / #13 / #13 – mostly unchanged”

      As it should be.

      “- Texas won @ 3-3 Texas Tech : #19 / #22 / #22 – bumped up 5-10 spots!
      – Texas Tech lost to 4-2 Texas @ home : #25 / #27 / #25 – only dropped 5-7 spots.”

      About what is expected for any W/L. One moved up, one moved down, and they moved about equally.

      “- TCU beat 2-3 WVU @ WVU : #29 / #31 / #27 – bumped up 8 spots!”

      Imagine that. Winning a game over a top 20 team moves you up in the polls. Still, you’re whining about a team getting about 0.5 points per voter.

      “- Oklahoma State lost to 9-0 Kansas State @ KSU : #31 / #29 / #33 – only dropped 3-5!”

      How far were they supposed to drop for losing at #3?

      “- West Virginia lost to 3-3 TCU @ home and still got votes! : #NR / #37 / #32″

      You’re whining about a team getting about 0.12 points per voter and that dropped 18 spots for one loss this late in the season.

      “70% of a conference who played such a padded getting votes is terrible.”

      Really?

      Ranked teams:
      SEC – 7 (50%)
      B12 – 3 (30%)

      ARV:
      SEC – 0 (0%)
      B12 – 4 (40%)

      Why not bitch about half the SEC being in the top 25 (5 of top 11, 6 of top 14)? No, 4 B12 teams being in 26-44 is the big crime apparently. ARV is where teams 21-45 go because voters aren’t sure who should be in the top 25. Only you would care that WV has 7 points.

      “It looks like the B12 is losing spots and the other AQ’s are taking their place meaning a more balanced AQ representation. This is a good sign”

      Why? What is inherently better about spreading spots around if teams in one conference deserve it?

      “and should chill me out a bit as the polls are beginning to look how I thought they should have all along.”

      No, it won’t. You’re crazily obsessed with hating the B12 and will constantly find something to bitch about even if the B12 goes 8-0 in bowls.

      • ccrider55 says:

        I’ll bitch about the number of SEC teams, but ESPN et al doesn’t care. It makes for an easier story to report on and average fans to swallow. Same reason individuals players are highlighted in team sports. Promoting the cult of SEC personality.

        It is a shame the pseudo playoff doesn’t start this year. It might have actually functioned as properly (assuming the last few weeks don’t lob in a grenade or two).

        • bullet says:

          They were definitely promoting Alabama (again!) last night on ESPN.

          There’s plenty of time left for things to change.

          • ccrider55 says:

            Did you notice they didn’t seem to understand that UO has more potential computer strength coming, not the reverse? Finally one talking head seemed to have had something said in his ear and started to mention that.
            Again a reason I really wouldn’t mind returning to bowls only and vote the champion. At least the Rose would simply be the elligible on field conference champs meeting (i.e. meets the only requirement that should be involved in a playoff selection).

      • duffman says:

        Brian,

        a) If multiple B12 schools were winning multiple MNC’s then I would say getting so many teams in the top was valid. So far that has not happened so I pointed it out.

        b) The SEC may have 7 in the Top 25 but they also have 7 teams with 0, 1, or 2 losses. This will correct itself with probably TAMU and Mississippi State falling out with their 3rd loss. Even so the SEC has at least 4 teams past the Top 50 with Tennessee, Arkansas, Auburn, and Kentucky while the B12 has only Kansas. While that may not strike you as odd, it sure does me.

        c) If the B12 was playing a competitive OOC schedule and still winning I would also feel they deserved more consideration for so many teams in the Top 30. Again, with only the Oklahoma vs Notre Dame (which OU lost @ home) as a top matchup across the entire conference it makes it hard to take the padded wins seriously.

        My obsession with the B12 is not the conference itself but that they get way more love then they earned. You seem to think they deserve but I do not think this is the case based on the games I have watched. I just do not buy the “everybody but Kansas” is wonderful mantra that seems to be spoken about the B12. When the B12 either wins more in competitive games or acts more like the dynamics of an average conference I will have no problem letting go.

        I had no obsession when the B12 still had 12 teams and was not obsessed about them early on in this blog when the views of the B12 were more rational to their on field performance. The tangent started when the B12 started losing members but the mainstream was saying they were getting stronger. This has always seemed counterintuitive with no real basis in fact. When things return to normal I will go back to caring about the B12 much less as I once did.

        On a side note I find it interesting that 3 of the 4 undefeated teams with a shot at the national championship game have done it with defense. If the B12 was such a power conference top to bottom why are so few teams failing to put op stiff defense in games?

        • Brian says:

          duffman,

          “a) If multiple B12 schools were winning multiple MNC’s then I would say getting so many teams in the top was valid. So far that has not happened so I pointed it out.”

          This is an incredibly stupid point you continue to try to make and I’m sick of it. The rankings you are bitching about are for this year. Results from previous years mean NOTHING to this discussion. There is one MNC up for grabs in 2012 and nobody has won it yet.

          “b) The SEC may have 7 in the Top 25 but they also have 7 teams with 0, 1, or 2 losses.”

          But with the B12 you dissect all their schedules and complain about how they haven’t beaten anyone OOC.

          MSU – Jackson St, Troy, USA, MTSU
          LSU – N TX, Idaho, Towson, UW
          TAMU – LT, SMU, SCSU
          AL – WKU, FAU, MI
          GA – Buffalo, FAU
          FL – BGSU
          SC – ECU, UAB

          Wow, color me impressed. 2 AQ wins, over 5-4 UW and 6-3 MI.

          By virtue of playing a 9 game round robin, the B12 has more losses because all their top teams play each other. Many of the top SEC teams have missed each other this year.

          “Even so the SEC has at least 4 teams past the Top 50 with Tennessee, Arkansas, Auburn, and Kentucky while the B12 has only Kansas. While that may not strike you as odd, it sure does me.”

          The SEC as 4 more teams. They should have more everywhere.

          “c) If the B12 was playing a competitive OOC schedule and still winning I would also feel they deserved more consideration for so many teams in the Top 30.”

          See the SEC’s list above. You have cherry picked the B12 for your abuse with no basis except you irrational hatred of them.

          “Again, with only the Oklahoma vs Notre Dame (which OU lost @ home) as a top matchup across the entire conference it makes it hard to take the padded wins seriously.”

          But AL/MI and LSU/UW are enough to take all the SEC fluff wins seriously? Hypocritical much?

          “My obsession with the B12 is not the conference itself but that they get way more love then they earned. You seem to think they deserve but I do not think this is the case based on the games I have watched.”

          I’ve never said they do or don’t deserve it. I’ve just pointed out that you have never had any rational basis for your prejudice. Results from previous years are meaningless. Statistical distributions of teams are meaningless. You ignore other conferences in the same boat while trying to sell us on the B10 deserving better from the polls. I’ve watched the B10 play this year and they are weak. They had a weak OOC and looked bad doing it. They have looked bad in conference play, too.

          “I just do not buy the “everybody but Kansas” is wonderful mantra that seems to be spoken about the B12.”

          Nobody is saying that or ever has been saying that. It’s just your fevered mind twisting everything to fit your worldview. Being top 50 hardly counts as being wonderful. What they do have is 9 teams at 4-4 or better, just like the SEC. The difference is the B12 only has 10 teams while the SEC has 14.

          “When the B12 either wins more in competitive games or acts more like the dynamics of an average conference I will have no problem letting go.”

          If they acted “more like the dynamics of an average conference” then they wouldn’t have so many teams above .500.

          “The tangent started when the B12 started losing members but the mainstream was saying they were getting stronger.”

          Way to re-write history. Nobody said losing NE made them better, but most agreed CO wasn’t a big loss since they’d been so down. What people did say was that the losses of TAMU and MO may not be as bad as they looked for the short term since WV and TCU had been doing really well while TAMU hadn’t. Then you went crazy and started spouting historical facts as if they impacted the 2012 NC race and ranting against the B12 at every opportunity, deserved or not.

          “On a side note I find it interesting that 3 of the 4 undefeated teams with a shot at the national championship game have done it with defense.”

          Have they? The numbers say otherwise. Other than ND’s scoring and OR allowing garbage points, all 4 teams appear strong on both sides of the ball. You could just as easily say they’ve done it with offense, but that would offend your sensibilities because you see offense as somehow less than defense.

          Scoring offense rankings: OR #1, KSU #5, AL #17, ND #72
          Scoring defense rankings: AL #1, ND, #2, KSU #21, OR #40

          F/+ from Football Outsiders:
          Offense: ND #3, KSU #6, OR#11, AL #12
          Defense: AL #1, OR#3, ND #7, KSU #18

          “If the B12 was such a power conference top to bottom why are so few teams failing to put op stiff defense in games?”

          Because the goal is to win games, not necessarily to play the best defense? Because they have a lot of high quality spread offense talent and defenses struggle to stop it? Because they are better on offense than on defense?

          What they are doing is winning more games than other leagues, and you can’t handle that.

          • acaffrey says:

            Brian: You are a great contributor. But your obsessed with Duffman’s obsession. Just saying.

          • acaffrey says:

            Ugh, your = you’re.

            In the dunce corner for me…

          • Brian says:

            I’m obsessed with the inconsistency and lack of logic behind his obsession. I’m fine with him thinking many B12 teams are overrated. I think some/many of them are, too. But his reasoning applies equally to a whole lot of other teams, too, and the hypocrisy bugs me. And I know it’s illogical when he starts defending the 2012 B10.

        • bullet says:

          Obviously, you haven’t seen Tennessee, Auburn, Arkansas and Kentucky play this year.

    • bullet says:

      Southern Miss winless
      Arkansas St.
      Idaho ST. (only win over Div II school)
      Air Force
      UMass (winless)
      Syracuse (twice)
      Vandy
      Boston College
      South Dakota (only win over Colgate)
      UNLV in 3OT
      New Hampshire
      W. Michigan
      Miami Ohio
      Central Florida
      Cal
      UAB
      Navy
      Temple
      N. Iowa
      Utah St.
      UTEP

      These are the ooc wins of the 7 Big 10 teams above .500. Absolutely nothing to brag about. Actually the non AQ schools they have played are virtually all in the bottom of their conferences and their FCS teams are as well.

      Losses
      UCLA, Alabama, Notre Dame, Oregon St., Ohio U., Virginia
      Losing to good teams does not make you a good team. Kentucky has a resume with losses to Louisville, Florida, S. Carolina, Georgia and MS. St.

      As for the other 5’s wins:
      N. Illinois
      N. Iowa
      Boise St.
      Central Michigan
      E. Michigan (twice)
      Indiana St.
      UMass
      Navy
      E. Kentucky
      Marshall
      W. Michigan
      Charleston Southern

      Again, not much to brag about (Boise decent, maybe N. Illinois), although more to talk about than the teams you want ranked.

      Their losses
      Iowa St.
      C. Michigan
      Notre Dame (twice)
      Ball St.
      Arizona St.
      Louisiana Tech

      You fail to see the reality that what you say about the Big 12 applies every bit as much to the SEC, Big 10 and Big East. And the ACC plays a lot of FCS schools while they are 13-15 vs. other FBS schools. And with the Big 12 and SEC, they aren’t losing to the UVAs or Ball St.s or Central Michigans except maybe at the very bottom (KU, UK and Arkansas).

      • bullet says:

        To list the Big 12, who also don’t have a lot to brag about (at least they did have 3 ranked FCS teams instead of only the Savannah St.s of the bottom of FCS)
        S. Dakota St. (KU)
        SMU (twice-BU and TCU)
        Sam Houston St. (BU)
        LA-Monroe (BU)
        Tulsa (ISU)
        Iowa (ISU)
        W. Illinois (ISU)
        Grambling (TCU)
        Virginia (TCU)
        New Mexico (twice-UT & TT)
        Wyoming (UT)
        Ole Miss (UT)
        NW Louisiana (TT)
        Texas St. (TT)
        Savannah St. (OSU)
        LA-Lafayette (OSU)
        Marshall (WV)
        James Madison (WV)
        Maryland (WV)
        UTEP (OU)
        FL A&M (OU)
        Missouri St. (KSU)
        Miami FL (KSU)
        N. Texas (KSU)

        But of course, they also have an extra conference game, so to compare, you have to add 5 wins (and 5 losses) vs.:
        KSU, OU, UT, TX Tech, Baylor, TCU, IA St., Ok. St., WVU and Kansas

        And the losses were:
        OU to Notre Dame, Ok. St. to Arizona and Kansas to N. Illinois and Rice.

        • ccrider55 says:

          The B12 shouldn’t get extra credit and schedule weak OOC as if everyone’s extra game is OU. Conference games are conference games, not selectable OOC (scheduled ISU/KSU can’t disappear as easily as Oregon/KSU did). I like their nine game deal, as I do others that play nine. It isn’t credit that those conferences should claim. Conferences only playing eight should bear more responsibility for scheduling stronger OOC games and be not allowed to count FCS wins. If they say they can’t schedule four FBS then perhaps they should be playing nine conference games to reduce that struggle.

          • Brian says:

            ccrider55,

            “The B12 shouldn’t get extra credit and schedule weak OOC as if everyone’s extra game is OU.”

            Depends what you mean by extra credit. They should get at least 12.5% more credit for their conference schedule over teams that play only 8 conference games. The reason I say at least is that they never miss any of the top teams in their league. In bigger leagues, the top teams often miss each other (even with 9 games).

            Even if you assume everyone’s extra game is a mid-pack B12 team, that still a solid AQ game in addition to their 3 OOC games. That’s more than many schools can claim. I think you should always look at the totality of a schedule before rating it. It doesn’t matter if the games are OOC or in conference.

            What aggravates me are people like duffman who ignore the 9th game while decrying their OOC schedule. You can’t have it both ways.

          • m (Ag) says:

            More games against conference opponents isn’t a bad thing, but it doesn’t show your conference is good or bad. The non-conference games are needed to compare the teams in different conferences.

          • ccrider55 says:

            Brian:

            That is what I apparently did a poor job of saying. A 9th game of mid FBS caliber opponent should be a given for all teams, regardless of conference numbers. Follow that by scheduling 1 tougher, 1 mid level, and 1 weaker in addition to the given 9. You can only credit the 9th game extra if you accept that the power teams playing 8 plus 4 marshmallows is enough to prove their superiority, and that is the accepted norm to be aimed for.

          • Brian says:

            m (Ag),

            We’ll never have enough data to really compare leagues accurately anyway. There just aren’t enough data points.

          • Brian says:

            ccrider55,

            “That is what I apparently did a poor job of saying. A 9th game of mid FBS caliber opponent should be a given for all teams, regardless of conference numbers.”

            OK, I can buy that. Just so long as it being in league or OOC doesn’t matter.

            “Follow that by scheduling 1 tougher, 1 mid level, and 1 weaker in addition to the given 9.”

            Here you get into the 2 schools of scheduling.

            1: Play the easiest slate you can because wins trump SOS every time.
            2. Play the hardest reasonable schedule you can to prepare for the postseason and attract fans/recruits/viewers.

            1 works for coaches, 2 for ADs and fans. Until they show that 10-2 with a high SOS can trump 11-1 or even 12-0 with a lot of cupcakes, it doesn’t make sense for any team with BCS aspirations to challenge themselves.

            I also think you need to change the schedule based on what your program is:
            King – king, top 25, top 50, cupcake
            Top 25 – king/top 25, top 50, top 50, cupcake
            top 50 – king/top 25, top 50, cupcake, cupcake
            cupcake – king, top 25, cupcake, cupcake

        • m (Ag) says:

          One problem with judging conferences this year is that the Big 12, SEC, and Pac-12 have all distinguished themselves from the other conferences*, and there isn’t any games to compare the top schools between those conferences. The Big 12 got a win vs. the SEC, but it was against Ole Miss. The SEC has 2 wins over the Pac 12, but those were against Washington and Arizona State. The Pac 12 has a win over Oklahoma State, but that’s the only match-up between them I recall.

          Just not much to go on.

          * I’ll include the disclaimer that the ACC gets 4 more shots at the SEC before the season is over.

        • bullet says:

          Even the Pac 12 doesn’t have that much to brag about (more than anyone else, but not that much more)-basically Wisconsin, Nebraska, Ok. ST and BYU:
          OR-Akansas St.
          Fresno St.
          TN Tech
          OR St.-Wisconsin
          BYU (Nicholls St. still to play)
          UW-San Diego St.
          Portland St.
          Loss to LSU
          WSU-E. Washington
          UNLV
          Loss to BYU
          Stanford-Duke,
          San Jose
          Loss to Notre Dame
          Cal-Southern Utah
          Losses to Nevada and Ohio ST.
          USC-Hawaii
          Syracuse (ND still to play)
          UCLA-Nebraska
          Rice
          Houston
          Arizona-Ok St.
          Toledo
          S. Carolina St.
          ASU-N. ARizona
          Illinois
          Loss to Missouri
          Colorado
          Losses to Colorado St., Sacremento ST., Fresno St.
          Utah-BYU
          N. Colorado
          Loss to Utah St.

          • ccrider55 says:

            Agreed. In Washington’s corner is now a win over SDSU who just beat Boise on the blue turf. No easy task.

  23. Brian says:

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/2012/11/04/michael-hiestand-television-college-football-ratings-dan-patrick-notre-dame-alabama-lsu/1681031/

    COmbined, all the CFB games on Saturday night pulled about the same audience as Sunday night football does for the NFL.

  24. OrderRestored83 says:

    Add

  25. ccrider55 says:

    I realize it’s not big in the overall context of sports broadcasting, but I noticed the Dan Patrick Show is with NBC now. Perhaps a move to have their cult followers help improve visibility of Versus’, TCTSH, or whatever it’s called :)

  26. Andy says:

    Mizzou outgained Georgia, Vanderbilt, and Florida by an average of 59.3 yards, and yet lost all three of those games by an average of 10.6 pts.

    What was the difference? Turnovers, specifically turnovers from the qarterback. Lots of them. It’s amazing how much injuries at the QB position can screw up a season. Considering Franklin (when he does play) is playing with an injured throwing shoulder and a strained MCL, you have to attribute some of his accuracy issues to that. He didn’t have nearly as many turnovers last year.

    Mizzou could easily be 7-2 right now and ranked in the top 15 if we didn’t throw so many interceptions. But I’m sure there are other teams that could blame some losses on injuries. It happens.

    • ccrider55 says:

      I doubt Maryland will give you any sympathy over losing A quarterback. Mizzu’s multiple line injuries are more of a problem for a good TEAM to overcome.

      • Andy says:

        It’s a combination of an injured honorable mention All-Big 12 QB and a lack of a decent backup. And yeah, 5 or 6 of our top 10 o-linemen have had serioius injuries this year. Several are still out. It’s been brutal. And yet we’ve still outgained 7 out of 9 of the teams we’ve played. But we’ve had tons of interceptions. I guess a lot of that is due to lack of pass protection. We’re having to play true freshmen on the o-line right now.

  27. Alan from Baton Rouge says:

    Looking ahead to next weekend, there are only three games between ranked teams.

    #1 Alabama v. #15 Texas A&M
    #7 LSU v. #21 Miss State
    #11 Oregon State at #14 Stanford

    There are four conference games of interest.

    #2 K-State at TCU (6-3)
    #16 Nebraska v. Penn State (6-3)
    #24 Northwestern at Michigan (6-3)
    #25 Toledo v. Ball State (6-3) Tuesday

    • Brian says:

      Alan,

      You should note that IN plays WI for the East slot in Indy, too.

      • Alan from Baton Rouge says:

        Brian – I just looked at games involving ranked teams, but I’m sure that the Indiana Wisconsin game means a lot to whatever division they are in.

        • Brian says:

          Alan,

          I knew why it didn’t make your list. I was just pointing out that it was actually an important game (something unheard of in Bloomington) and thus “of interest” in a different way.

  28. m (Ag) says:

    Big 12 & Pac 12 still unhappy over Orange Bowl.

    There’s discussion of playing the proposed ‘7th Bowl’ match-up within the proposed 6 bowl setup.

    That of course would take up all the spots in the 6 bowls (4 playoff teams + 8 guaranteed slots).

    http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/blog/dennis-dodd/20839017/big-12-pac-12-grind-against-sec-big-ten-in-non-bcs-playoff-access

    • bullet says:

      So its the Big 10, SEC, Notre Dame and ACC vs. everyone else.

      • m (Ag) says:

        They should just add a 7th bowl, but make it an ‘Access Bowl’ with no affiliations.

        That should satisfy the Big 12/Pac 12 that the SEC/B1G/ND isn’t really taking a spot away from them, and they’ll have a chance to make more money (since presumably the Access Bowl slots will pay more than a bowl attached to the minor conferences). The minor conferences would have 4 shots at playoff births and 4 shots at ‘access slots’, though nothing would be guaranteed. Of course the SEC, ACC, and B1G will also have extra chances if they still have highly ranked teams after the Orange Bowl picks.

        • Michael in Raleigh says:

          As it is, ten of the twelve spots in the six major bowl games are pre-determined for each year:
          1-4) The four playoff teams
          5) The B1G champion, or top non-playoff B1G team (most frequently at Rose Bowl, but assured spot at alternative bowl when RB hosts a playoff game)
          6) The Pac-12 champion, or top non-playoff Pac-12 team (same as B1G champion)
          7) The SEC champion, or top non-playoff SEC team (most frequently at Cotton/Sugar winner of “Champions Bowl” sweepstakes, but assured spot at alternative bowl when that game hosts playoff game)
          8) The Big 12 champion, or top non-playoff Big 12 team (same as SEC champion)
          9) The ACC champion, or top non-playoff ACC team ( usually at Orange Bowl, but assured major bowl spot when OB hosts playoff game)
          10) The top team among the B1G, SEC, and Notre Dame that’s not in the playoff, Rose, or Cotton (i.e., the ACC’s opponent in the OB)

          Only two other spots are “access” or truly “at-large” spots available to Big East, non-AQ’s, BYU, Army, or other highly rated teams from the Contract Bowl conferences.

          Basically, as I understand it, there is a debate whether those two spots should remain “at-large” with no seventh bowl added; whether a seventh bowl should be added while one bowl becomes Pac-12/Big 12 vs. “Best of the Rest”; or simply that the final two spots should become Big 12/Pac-12 vs. “Best of the Rest” with no seventh bowl added, thus resulting in no “at-large” spots in the new system.

          • bullet says:

            I don’t think its clear that the 5 conferences +SEC/B1G/ND are guaranteed a slot (or an extra slot) in the years their bowl is a semi-final. The fact that they are not enthused about having 4 out of 12 as a semi-final indicates that they may not be. Since they will apparently rotate the 3 “big” bowls as semi-finals, it may be that there are technically 4 open slots, not two.

          • Eric says:

            I agree Bullet. While I think the champions of the 5 contract conferences will always be, the committee will only guarantee a conference a access bowl spot if they are the actual conference champ and displaced from their bowl by the semi-finals.

          • Brian says:

            bullet,

            “I don’t think its clear that the 5 conferences +SEC/B1G/ND are guaranteed a slot (or an extra slot) in the years their bowl is a semi-final.”

            That’s because they aren’t. The 5 champs are guaranteed a spot no matter what, but only the Rose has the right to automatically take a 2nd B10 team. If the Rose is a semi and the B10 champ is in the semis, no replacement is promised a spot. The same applies to P12, B12 and SEC, and presumably to the Orange Bowl deal as well.

            “The fact that they are not enthused about having 4 out of 12 as a semi-final indicates that they may not be.”

            It’s also because they only get to keep all the money from the bowl when it isn’t a semi. So hosting 4 semis mean $40M only 8 times instead of 12.

    • Brian says:

      m (Ag),

      It would take all the other spots, but it would also guarantee the little 5 a spot while giving the B12 and P12 a chance at a 2nd non-semi spot. That game would pay a lot less than the Orange for several reasons, though:

      1. TV doesn’t want it
      2. There’s no one logical site that works for all the leagues so travel may be poor
      3. The top Little 5 team may not be ranked very high
      4. The top Little 5 team usually won’t draw a ton of viewers

      The game making less hurts everyone a little, but oh well.

  29. frug says:

    http://geek-news.mtv.com/2012/11/05/disney-buying-hasbro/

    Disney may be in discussion to acquire Hasbro. Not only would this give the House of Mouse (which is already the king of merchandising) control of the world’s largest toy company it would also give them ownership of Transformers, G.I. Joe, Dungeons and Dragons, Beyblade, Battleship, Nerf, and Magic: The Gathering among several dozen other game titles and IP. Hasbro also has the toy and table top game licenses to Star Wars which Disney just bought.

    This is only a rumor but it makes a lot of sense.

    • frug says:

      Also worth noting that when combined with Pirates of the Caribbean, Marvel and Star Wars (all which were created or acquired within the past decade), the new Hasbro properties would give Disney a massive share of the young male demographic that the company had been accused of completely ignoring outside of ESPN.

  30. Mike says:

    Nebraska Athletic Director Tom Osborne said on Monday that NU has agreed “in principle” to play Oklahoma in a home-and-home series. The contracts aren’t signed, but that’s expected to be a formality, as both sides want it to happen, Osborne said.

    Sources at NU say the first game likely will be played in Norman, Okla., in 2021 — the 50th anniversary of the 1971 “Game of the Century,” also played at Owen Field. Then it’s back to Lincoln in 2022.

    Osborne, who steps down as A.D. on Jan. 1, 2013, said this was something he wanted to have done before he left. What a perfect capper to his stint as athletic director.

    http://www.omaha.com/article/20121105/SPORTS/711059856

    • Mike says:

      This should make anyone who loves College Football happy.

    • Michael in Raleigh says:

      That’s good news.

      Missouri-Kansas, A&M-Texas, and WVU-Pitt, take note.

      • bullet says:

        That was the easiest one. Nebraska didn’t bad mouth their conference and conference mates (other than Texas) on the way out the door and gave plenty of notice.

        • ccrider55 says:

          I understand it was more amicable (other than with UT), but wasn’t their move the most surprising, albeit understandable? Didn’t UNL pay an early exit fee and leave in approximately the same amount of time as the others?

          • m (Ag) says:

            It isn’t about the schools that left, it’s about the schools that stayed.

            OU never took the fact that other schools left the conferences personally; reports were last year they were interested in scheduling both Nebraska and A&M as non-conference foes (I know I was disappointed we didn’t schedule them). It’s unsurprising Nebraska scheduled them at the next opening in their schedule.

          • frug says:

            I don’t think it was surprising, certainly not like the Syracuse or Pitt. Nebraska had made clear for almost a year they would be willing to listen to offers from other conferences. And they didn’t pay an early exit fee, the Big XII simply had two exit fee systems in place at the time. If you gave one year’s notice you had to pay a larger amount than if you gave two years notice. UNL, Mizzou and A&M all gave one year’s notice and (as a result) payed about the same amount in exit fees. Cashed strapped CU gave two years notice, but the Big XII was ready to move on without them as a 10 team conference so they let them go after a year.

          • Mike says:

            Nebraska had made clear for almost a year they would be willing to listen to offers from other conferences.

            I don’t think that’s accurate. Nebraska was tipped off (by Texas about the PAC16?) in January that there was going to be movement and Nebraska needed to do something. Five months later they left.

          • bullet says:

            Actually it was apparently amicable with UT privately, but publically Nebraska bashed UT as a negotiating tactic to reduce the exit fee. Everyone knew CU wanted to go to the pac 12. Nebraska to the Big 10 was a surprise to us not in the inside circles, but everyone inside knew Nebraska was evaluating their alternatives as were the B12 South schools. Nebraska announced in May or June and joined the Big 10 13 months later. Colorado was going to do 2 years, but both sides agreed to let CU go in 1 since Nebraska was leaving in 1. So CU got a reduced exit fee relative to Nebraska. A&M announced at the end of August and Missouri (after their governor had bad mouthed the conference) dilly dallied around forever before finally announcing they wanted to leave within a year.

            There was a conference with the Big 12, SEC and Big East and all agreed it would be best if Missouri left after 2012-3, but Missouri wanted to leave immediately. It could have BCS implications as WVU had to pull out of a game (FSU) and FSU had to schedule Savannah St. and has 2 FCS games. And of course, there were lawsuits with the Big East and WVU and Big 12 as everyone was scrambling to meet their TV committments.

          • frug says:

            @Mike

            Tom Osbourne began putting out feelers to the Big 10 right after Mizzou started publicly lobbying for a Big 10 invite the previous fall.

            Serious talks didn’t start until after the PAC negotiations took off, but Nebraska had already let it be known they were willing to go elsewhere under the right circumstances.

          • duffman says:

            Nebraska has been trying to get in the B1G for a century. It should come as no big surprise that they actually did it. Beyond that point Nebraska was a conference mate of Oklahoma for a very long time. The Texas schools not named Texas had only the short shared history of the Big 12.

          • Mike says:

            @frug – I don’t think that all happened until after the Big Ten announced it was exploring expansion in December. It wasn’t until then that Mizzou had anything to lobby for.
            Here’s a time line:

            http://www.omaha.com/article/20120102/NEWS01/701029929

            Here’s a quote from an article that I will post a link to in the next post (don’t want to violate the FtT one link rule):


            When the Big Ten first launched its drive to expand late last year, Nebraska was not a likely partner. The Big Ten had bigger potential targets. And contrary to many perceptions, Nebraska was generally happy in a conference whose most important rules — those governing how money was distributed — tilted to Nebraska’s liking.

            Perlman first reached out to the Big Ten this January after a tipster warned him that even an elite football school like Nebraska could be left standing on the sidelines in a major conference shake-up that appeared to be brewing.

          • Mike says:

            @duffman – That is true. Nebraska under Devaney had put out feelers couple of times to gauge interest from the Big Ten. However, Devaney died thirteen years before Nebraska made @duffman – That is true. Nebraska had put out feelers couple of times to gauge interest from the Big Ten for the past century. The last one reported was under Bob Devaney, who died thirteen years before Nebraska made the switch.

          • duffman says:

            1900 – Nebraska petitions B1G first time
            1911 – Nebraska petitions B1G second time
            1912 – Ohio State petitions B1G and gets in
            ******** a century of history happens here ********
            2011 – Nebraska joins the B1G

            Talk about moving slow in the B1G ;)

          • ccrider55 says:

            Whow, slow down! I’m likely to get dizzy.

      • Andy says:

        re: “Missouri-Kansas, A&M-Texas, and WVU-Pitt, take note.”

        Mizzou would gladly play Kansas or Illinois next year or any year, as soon as either school will agree to it. Unforntunatley neither school seems interested in losing to Missouri anymore.

        Perhaps Missouri’s struggles this season will help change their minds.

        • duffman says:

          If KU will not play it would be nice to see Mizzou play a B1G school as their OOC game every year. Rotate between the schools in IN and IL as this year I would have like to see a Northwestern vs Missouri game.

  31. bullet says:

    http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/andy_staples/11/06/college-football-power-rankings-week-10/index.html?sct=hp_wr_a1&eref=sihp

    Interesting comments on the oddness of one of the computer polls moving Notre Dame up as well as some interesting comments on the Alabama/A&M matchup (in his power poll). I expected Missouri’s offense to give SEC defenses fits while A&M rebuilt this year, but its been the reverse. This weekend A&M can make a huge splash-but it might just be a belly flop.

    • greg says:

      Mandel is an idiot.

      “How exactly does a triple-overtime win against a team that lost to Youngstown State allow Notre Dame to jump over Kansas State, which won by two touchdowns against a pretty good team from the league Anderson and Hester consider the second-strongest in the nation?”

      Answer: the media and public cried and cried and cried that margin of victory shouldn’t be considered in the computer rankings because it would encourage teams to run up the score. So, the computer algorithm is feed data that says “Notre Dame beat Pitt” and “KSU beat OkSU”.

      Who is holding the mediots accountable?

      Also, human bias overreacts to things like close wins.

      • bullet says:

        The point is that Oklahoma St. is higher rated than Pitt, yet Notre Dame moved past KSU. I believe (but I’m not 100% sure) they can consider MOV up to 21 points.

    • Andy says:

      Missouri’s offense would have given some SEC teams fits if not for injuries to the QB and 5 or 6 of their top 10 O-linmen.

      • OrderRestored83 says:

        Is it possible that maybe, just maybe, some of those physical defenses you played had a role in the rash of injuries the Tigers had to deal with? Just a thought. I called before the season started that Missouri would struggle to be bowl eligible; looks like I was right. Their offense doesn’t bode well against physical defenses with speed, you can’t continually try to beat SEC defenses horizontally and expect to get anywhere. What you can expect is a banged up QB and multiple OL injuries.

  32. duffman says:

    @ Alan

    Shout out to your NOLA ties

    http://twitter.com/McMurphyESPN

    Looks like Sugar Bowl beat out the Cotton Bowl

    Says “Champions” was just a placeholder

    .

    .

    @ Brian

    With this news at least the B12 can no longer duck the SEC and we will see how good they really are. If they get smashed for a few years the B1G will not have the black eye in the media which will be better for the B1G. If the match ups (as I predicted on FtT back in 2010) make the Rose and the Sugar the “playoff” bowls long term it should bode well for having a B1G in the MNC game more often. Based on the past this (which you say does not matter) this should make Buckeye fans pretty happy about now.

    • bullet says:

      One thing this does, assuming Cotton and Peach are bowls 5&6, is knock out the #2 Big 12 and #2 ACC bowl as well as #3 and #5 SEC bowls. That could lead to some scrambling of the bowl alignments. Of course, the assumption is that the Big 12 and SEC champs will normally be in the playoff, but that still leaves some attractive teams available for a bowl.

      • m (Ag) says:

        I’m guessing the SEC will still want at least 1 bowl in Texas.

        I wouldn’t be surprised if Jerryworld hosted a 2nd bowl, maybe Big 12#2 vs. B1G#3, and then the Bowl game @ the Cotton Bowl became a low level Big 12 v. SEC match-up.

    • Alan from Baton Rouge says:

      duff – that’s good news and well deserved. The Sugar Bowl is easily more prestigious, has more history than the Cotton Bowl. Plus, New Orleans is a big event city that knows how to throw a party. Arlington Texas? Well, . . . .

      • Brian says:

        Alan from Baton Rouge,

        “that’s good news and well deserved.”

        Agreed. If they had to choose one, i think the Sugar was the better choice.

        “The Sugar Bowl is easily more prestigious,”

        Easily? To an SEC fan, sure. Pre-BCS they were equal to most of the country. Being supplanted by the Fiesta and staying in that beat up stadium for 14 years hurt the Cotton a little, but Jerryworld makes up for that quite a bit.

        “has more history than the Cotton Bowl.”

        The Sugar started in 1934, the Cotton in 1936. Both have tons of history.

        “Plus, New Orleans is a big event city that knows how to throw a party. Arlington Texas? Well, . . . .”

        Yep. I think this really came down to simple math:

        New Orleans > Arlington
        Jerryworld > Superdome
        City > Stadium

        • Alan from Baton Rouge says:

          Brian – if national champions mean anything to you, then the Sugar is easily more prestigious and has more history than the Cotton Bowl. From 1936 (1st AP NC awarded) to 1997 (last year pre-BCS), the Sugar Bowl hosted 16 AP or coaches poll NC teams. The Cotton Bowl hosted only 5.

          Here’s a breakdown by bowl of hosting either the AP or coaches (UPI, USAT) National Champions:

          16 – Sugar & Orange
          12 – Rose
          5 – Cotton
          3 – Fiesta
          1 – Holiday & Citrus

          The Cotton Bowl has basically been the Texas invitational with 22 appearances, 10 more than Arkansas or A&M. The Sugar Bowl has had much more variety for its host team (LSU 13, Bama 13, UGA 9, Florida 8, Ole Miss 8, Tennessee 7).

          Since 98, the Sugar has been part of the BCS and the Cotton hasn’t.

          • Brian says:

            Alan from Baton Rouge,

            “Brian – if national champions mean anything to you, then the Sugar is easily more prestigious and has more history than the Cotton Bowl.”

            They really don’t mean much to me in this equation. I’m not saying that’s the consensus opinion, just mine.

            “The Cotton Bowl has basically been the Texas invitational with 22 appearances, 10 more than Arkansas or A&M. The Sugar Bowl has had much more variety for its host team (LSU 13, Bama 13, UGA 9, Florida 8, Ole Miss 8, Tennessee 7).”

            Nobody tops the Rose for regular attendees:
            USC 32, MI 20, OSU and UW 14

            “Since 98, the Sugar has been part of the BCS and the Cotton hasn’t.”

            As I said in my comment, this is the only real history advantage I see.

          • m (Ag) says:

            Your comment got me wondering, for all the talk of the B12’s history with the Cotton Bowl, which conference has actually appeared more using the current lineups? I used wikipedia’s Cotton Bowl page to go year by year to come up with:

            B12: 41 appearances (avg. of 4.1 per team)
            37,39,43,44,45,45,46,51,52,53,56,57,59,60,62,63,64,69,70,71,72,73,74,75,78,81,82,84,91,95,97,99,00,01,02,03,04,06,09,10,12

            SEC: 56 appearances (avg. of 4 per team): 41,42,42,46,47,47,51,52,53,54,55,56,61,62,63,65,66,66,67,68,68,69,73,76,76,81,82,84,86,86,87,88,89,90,90,92,93,94,98,99,00,01,02,03,04,05,05,06,07,08,08,09,10,11,11,12

            The current SEC lineup has been to the bowl about 39% more often, although the conference has 40% more teams.

    • m (Ag) says:

      Story announcing it on the SEC website:

      http://www.secdigitalnetwork.com/NEWS/tabid/473/Article/238836/allstate-sugar-bowl-to-host-sec-big-12-champions.aspx

      12 year agreement, with a few quotes from the commissioners & Sugar Bowl people.

    • Brian says:

      duffman,

      “With this news at least the B12 can no longer duck the SEC and we will see how good they really are.”

      No, we’ll see how well 1 of their teams does against 1 SEC team in a postseason game. That doesn’t determine how good each conference is to me.

      “If they get smashed for a few years the B1G will not have the black eye in the media which will be better for the B1G.”

      The B10/SEC games moving down the ladder helps the B10 regardless. The B10 will still get slammed by the media if the SEC is always getting that Orange Bowl slot, though.

      Novel idea – perhaps the B10 should beat the SEC in some big postseason games for a change if they want to alter the media’s stance.

    • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

      “With this news at least the B12 can no longer duck the SEC and we will see how good they really are.”

      —Conversely the SEC managed to wrangle a perpetual de facto home game to help obfuscate how good they really are.

      • duffman says:

        I think that only works if LSU is the SEC team. If is a east team that would not be a home game and I am guessing some NOLA fans would be hostile to some SEC west teams like Arkansas or TAMU. I will defer to Alan or Bamatab on who hates who in such a situation.

  33. bullet says:

    Here’s a blind test for ranking the top 5. I couldn’t indentify the teams beforehand:
    http://csnbbs.com/showthread.php?tid=597491

    There’s a link in the article to where they did the same thing last year and Oklahoma St. won easily.

    • acaffrey says:

      I chose Notre Dame and KSU. Not surprised though.

      • Brian says:

        Most people did (58% when I looked). I chose KSU then ND, too. Of course, they give a limited set of stats to base the decision on. What people really did was vote for who had the best resumes, and that’s not the same as who the best teams are. Too often people confuse the two.

        CFB example:

        2001 Miami was a great team with a ton of elite talent, but they played in a weak Big East. Did that make them less good? Would they have been better if they played a tougher schedule?

      • bullet says:

        I also did 1. ND, 2. KSU

    • frug says:

      I went with E (K-State) and D (‘Bama), with C (ND) a close third.

      • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

        Ditto. D’s large margin of victory > C’s slightly tougher strength of schedule (well allegedly tougher, not being a fan of Sagarin).

        • frug says:

          While I don’t dispute that C has a faced a notably tougher schedule than D (and it’s not just Sagarin that says so), for C to be higher than D, C’s average opponent would need to be projected to beat D’s average opponent by more than 14 points and the difference just isn’t that large.

    • m (Ag) says:

      In his introduction to his own weekly computer rankings, one of the FO authors gives a simple critique of the exercise:

      http://www.footballoutsiders.com/fei-ratings/2012/fei-week-10

    • duffman says:

      I slid if far to the right so I could not even see the Sagarin numbers. Mostly I went with opponents winning percentage.

      #1 = C @ 65.3%
      #2 = D @ 62.5%
      #3 = E @ 59.0%
      #4 = A @ 56.9%
      #5 = B @ 39.1%

    • duffman says:

      Interesting that ESPN keeps pushing the Alabama vs Oregon MNC pairing and nobody on here picked Oregon!

      • bamatab says:

        As an Alabama fan, I’d much rather play ND or KSU as opposed to Oregon. As Brian stated above, just because a school has a better “resume” doesn’t mean they are a better team. And after watching all of those teams, Oregon worries me the most (followed by KSU and then ND).

    • As Fremeau pointed out, it’s a grossly simplistic exercise. Some other things ignored:

      RUTS (even a simplistic “1st half vs 2nd half margin” would be useful), which clearly favors an Oregon team that has frequently tossed in backups early;

      Overtime wins (since clearly an overtime win is less convincing/meaningful than the same score in regulation), which clearly hurts Notre Dame, since they have two of them;

      Those buckets of top 20 / top 40 / everyone else are VERY simplistic. The 19th best team is probably not massively better than the 22nd, ditto 39th vs 42nd etc. And, of course, there’s something to be said for breaking out the bottom end as well. Beating the 60th best team in the country still does mean something even for a top-end team, while beating the 110th really doesn’t.

  34. duffman says:

    Tommy Trojan cheats again. I am shocked I tell ya, shocked!

    http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/ncaaf-dr-saturday/usc-footballs-student-manager-fired-intentionally-deflating-game-150806164–ncaaf.html

    Seems like Southern Cal had softer balls for the game with the Ducks

  35. Craig Z says:

    ESPN offers close to $500 million per year for the playoffs.

    http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/blog/dennis-dodd/20890401/espn-puts-an-early-value-on-a-playoff-close-to-500-per-year

    Other info: Big 12 and Pac 12 want another slot because Big 10 and SEC have two. Sources say market won’t support a seventh bowl. I didn’t know ESPN has an exclusive 30 day window for negotiating.

    • Eric says:

      I predict that if the Big 12/PAC-12 end up with another bowl (either a 7th bowl or within the 6 bowl structure), they are going to have to add the ACC to the list. The Big Ten/SEC are going to be opposed as it will limit or dilute the access bowls. The ACC will be very opposed if it ends up the only contract conference with one bowl. If the ACC gets in too though, I suspect they’ll get it through in some fashion.

  36. Brian says:

    Huge comeback win for FSU. Clemson (and VT) fans have to be crushed right now. It had major BCS implications, too. If FSU had lost, the ACC would have no chance for an at large team.

  37. Brian says:

    http://tracking.si.com/2012/11/08/auburn-president-preparing-for-gene-chizik-firing/?sct=cf_t2_a5

    It’s looking like a lot of new coaches in the SEC next year – KY, AU, AR, TN are all likely to get new coaches. Who grabs Petrino? Does someone poach Strong from UL? Malzahn has to be in the mix somewhere.

  38. Eric says:

    It sounds like the 7th bowl isn’t going to happen. So with that we have a pretty clear idea of how everything is going to work. They’ll be 3 contract and 3 access bowls. One of each will be a semi-final each year. If a conferences loses its contract bowl, it’s champ would automatically be placed in an access bowl to make up for the bowl, but that will probably only apply to the champ and not a 2nd team.

    For this I’m using BCS ranking as the committee rankings with only a few exceptions (mostly moving #5 teams up to #4 teams if one was a conference champ and the other not). I know they’d probably be a little different, but I don’t feel like analyzing each of the seasons in a lot of detail. The semi-final pairings will be Rose/Peach, Orange/Cotton, Sugar/Fiesta.

    2006
    New Years Eve:
    Fiesta Bowl: #8 Boise State vs. #9 Auburn
    Peach Bowl: #14 Wake Forest (in as ACC champs who lost Orange Bowl spot to playoff) vs. #6 Louisville
    Cotton Bowl (semi-final): #1 Ohio State vs. #4 USC (moved USC above LSU because won conference, they were really #5)

    New Years Day:
    Orange Bowl (semi-final): #2 Florida vs. #3 Michigan
    Rose Bowl: #7 Wisconsin vs. #18 California
    Sugar Bowl: #5 LSU vs. #10 Oklahoma

    2007
    New Years Eve:
    Cotton Bowl: #9 West Virginia #10 Hawaii
    Fiesta Bowl: #7 USC vs. #8 Kansas
    Peach Bowl (semi-final): #2 LSU vs. #3 Virginia Tech

    New Years Day:
    Orange Bowl: #14 Boston College vs. #12 Florida
    Rose Bowl (semi-final): #1 Ohio State vs. #4 Oklahoma
    Sugar Bowl: #5 Georgia vs. #6 Missouri

    2008
    New Years Eve:
    Cotton Bowl: #9 Boise State vs. #10 Ohio State
    Fiesta Bowl: #6 Utah vs. #7 Texas Tech
    Peach Bowl (semi-final): #1 Oklahoma vs. #4 USC (I moved USC ahead of Alabama since USC was a conference champ)

    New Years Day:
    Orange Bowl: #14 Georgia Tech vs. #4 Alabama
    Rose Bowl: #8 Penn State vs. #17 Oregon
    Sugar Bowl (semi-final): #2 Florida vs. #3 Texas

    2009
    New Years Eve:
    Peach Bowl: #9 Georgia Tech vs. #10 Iowa
    Cotton Bowl: #6 Boise State vs. #11 Virgina Tech
    Fiesta Bowl (semi-final): #2 Texas vs. #3 Cincinnati

    New Years Day:
    Orange Bowl (semi-final): #1 Alabama vs. #4 TCU
    Rose Bowl: #7 Oregon vs. #8 Ohio State
    Sugar Bowl: #5 Florida vs. #19 Oklahoma State

    2010
    New Years Eve:
    Cotton Bowl: #8 Arkansas vs. #9 Michigan State
    Fiesta Bowl: #5 Stanford vs. #10 Boise State
    Peach Bowl (semi-final): #1 Auburn vs. #4 Wisconsin

    New Years Day:
    Orange Bowl: #13 Virginia Tech vs. #8 Ohio State
    Rose Bowl (semi-final): #2 Oregon vs. #3 TCU
    Sugar Bowl: #7 Oklahoma vs. #8 Arkansas

    2011
    New Years Eve:
    Peach Bowl: #9 South Carolina vs. #11 Virginia Tech
    Cotton Bowl: #7 Boise State vs. #8 Kansas State
    Fiesta Bowl (semi-final): #2 Alabama vs. #3 Oklahoma State

    New Years Day:
    Orange Bowl: #15 Clemson vs. #6 Arkansas
    Rose Bowl: #5 Stanford vs. #10 Wisconsin
    Sugar Bowl (semi-final): #1 LSU vs. #4 Oregon (moved Oregon past Stanford thanks to being conference champs)

    In these years, we do have a few lower place teams make it, but it should be noted the top 10 made it every year.

    • m (Ag) says:

      -In 2010 you have Arkansas playing in both the Cotton & the Sugar

      -In 2007 #12 Florida goes to the Orange while the #11 team gets left out of the playoff bowls. That’s the only time the SEC/B1G slot in the Orange went to a team that wouldn’t have gotten an Access bowl slot anyway.

    • Brian says:

      Eric,

      I agree with your pairings (Rose/Peach, Orange/Cotton, Sugar/Fiesta) and would like to see this happen:

      2014
      Semis – Orange, Cotton
      B10 vs P12 – Rose
      B12 vs SEC – Sugar
      ACC vs B10/SEC/ND – Peach
      Access – Fiesta

      2015
      Semis – Sugar, Fiesta
      B10 vs P12 – Rose
      B12 vs SEC – Cotton
      ACC vs B10/SEC/ND – Orange
      Access – Peach

      2016
      Semis – Rose, Peach
      B10 vs P12 – Fiesta
      B12 vs SEC – Sugar
      ACC vs B10/SEC/ND – Orange
      Access – Cotton

      Repeat

      End results:
      Rose, Sugar, Orange – 1 semi, 2 contract games
      Fiesta, Cotton, Peach – 1 semi, 1 contract, 1 access

      That maintains the contract match-ups and their general locations while getting more quality games into the 3 access bowls. Keeping the match-ups should be good for TV, too.

      • m (Ag) says:

        I think the first group of semi-finals will depend on the site chosen to host the championship. Some articles on the Sugar Bowl getting the ‘Champions’ tie-in mention that they expect Jerryworld to get the title game the first year (I suppose they’re implying the SEC and Big 12 will support it). If so, I wouldn’t expect the Cotton Bowl to host a semi-final the first year.

        • Brian says:

          I don’t really care which set starts first, that’s just the rotation I would use. Feel free to renumber them as 2016, 2014 and 2015 or 2015, 2016 and 2014 if you want.

          My thought was that they’d want to start off with the Rose and Sugar getting their contracted games. The Rose will have the last BCS NCG, and I think they’ll want to establish the new Sugar relationship. That left the Orange for a semi, and I think they should pair the Orange and Cotton as semi sites. Also, the semi is a nice consolation prize for the Cotton not getting the Champs. That leaves the NCG open to be anywhere. Perhaps they’ll choose Phoenix, which will have gone 3 years without the NCG and is the access site that year.

      • Eric says:

        Generally how I figured was most likely to. If they follow the pairings, I don’t know if they’d put the Rose or Sugar 2nd, but the Orange definitely makes sense as first with the Big 12/SEC wanting to establish their new tradition and the Rose Bowl having just hosted a national championship and wanting to get back to a few guaranteed Big Ten vs. PAC-12 (we aren’t guaranteed that this year or next even though we are likely to get them).

  39. Brian says:

    http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/8611394/six-bowl-limit-recommended-national-semifinals-rotation-sources-said

    It looks like the commissioners will recommend only 6 bowls being in the semis rotation to the presidents. The 7th bowl is dead, but expect the BE and P12 to bring it up to the presidents as a last ditch effort to get it anyway.

    “Six bowls is ‘cleaner,’ ” a source said. “Each bowl would host four semifinals over the 12-year contract. A seventh bowl would be an appendage. It devalues the entire system and would cause major headaches.”

    I think some other concession will be made to keep people happy instead of the 7th bowl.

    The commissioners will meet Monday to discuss several issues and make recommendations to the presidents afterwards.

  40. Brian says:

    As Alan pointed out earlier, it’s a light weekend for CFB games outside the B10 (3 important games). My viewing schedule (if I’m around):

    12 – WI @ IN, flipping to NW @ MI
    3:30 – PSU @ NE, flipping to OrSU @ Stanford
    7 – KSU @ TCU
    10:30 – OR @ Cal, flipping to UCLA @ WSU

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s