official BCS rankings out

[dthomas=ddixon]

If Boise St goes undefeated and doesn't get in to the championship game, maybe that will give them the incentive to schedule a tough non conference road game every season.(Although they did win at Oregon last season) Otherwise, I don't see teams from weak conferences every getting into the title game.

See, its not that BSU doesnt want to schedule a tough out of conference schedule, its that teams dont want to play them. For example, why would Florida want to play BSU? If they win they get nothing out of it because they were suppossed to win. If they lose (see what happened to us this year) there chances at a national title are screw.

Well obviously they're not gonna get Florida to play them but they sure as hell could do better than Miami of Ohio, UC Davis, Bowling Green & Tulsa. That is so ridulously weak. They aren't even trying with a schedule like that.

[uo2010]

Are you really saying it would be unfair for us to pass BSU ?
After seeing the 2nd half of our game yesterday, I'm pretty sure the offense c/h sliced BSU up yesterday like they did the dawgs..
We scored 8 points in the BSU game and the team has averaged 38+ points after that.
I don't think a repeat game w/b the same at all.

Yes that is what I am saying. We should not be ranked higher than BSU

[uodux1212]

Damn BSU is dropping fast.

cincy too

Cincy at least has a chance to improve by playing ranked teams WV and Pitt. BSU, on the other hand, has no where to go but down. If we beat USC (and Utah and Cal win) we will probably pass them in the polls, which would be really unfair.

Further, only one non BCS school can get an automatic birth. So if TCU goes undefeated and Boise State drops out of the top 10 (which looks likely), a one loss Penn State or a two loss USC could get a BCS birth over Boise because of TV and game revenues.

Why would that be unfair? Yeah they beat us and they're a good football team, but their schedule/conference is a joke. Would they go through a BCS conference undefeated? Probably not...

[duckgrad99]

This brings up an interesting question: How much should head to head wins be weighed vs overall schedule? Boise St did beat Oregon which should count for a lot, but they don't have to play Cal, USC, etc.

[uo2010]

If Boise St goes undefeated and doesn't get in to the championship game, maybe that will give them the incentive to schedule a tough non conference road game every season.(Although they did win at Oregon last season) Otherwise, I don't see teams from weak conferences every getting into the title game.

See, its not that BSU doesnt want to schedule a tough out of conference schedule, its that teams dont want to play them. For example, why would Florida want to play BSU? If they win they get nothing out of it because they were suppossed to win. If they lose (see what happened to us this year) there chances at a national title are screw.

Well obviously they're not gonna get Florida to play them but they sure as hell could do better than Miami of Ohio, UC Davis, Bowling Green & Tulsa. That is so ridulously weak. They aren't even trying with a schedule like that.

Well even if they played multiple teams as good as Oregon, unless they play a top 5 elite team it will be impossible for them to get to the national championship.

[duck55]

This brings up an interesting question: How much should head to head wins be weighed vs overall schedule? Boise St did beat Oregon which should count for a lot, but they don't have to play Cal, USC, etc.

Texas beat the Okies last year and lost their spot in the NC game to them.

The claim that one loss does not define your season should also hold that one win does not define a season.
If Boise were to schedule a good team in late Oct or Nov , a win would ring out loud that they can compete late in the season.
I would match Boises schedule against Floridas up to this point but alas, they are not in the SEC.

[uo2010]

This brings up an interesting question: How much should head to head wins be weighed vs overall schedule? Boise St did beat Oregon which should count for a lot, but they don't have to play Cal, USC, etc.

Making comparisons is impossible. The only thing that we know is the BSU beat us, and beat us bad. BSU should stay ranked ahead of us as long as they keep winning.

[addictedtoquack]

I simply can't believe where they have USC ranked, especially cause of how far they are ahead of Oregon. We just stomped Washington who we all know is who USC lost too, and our one loss to Boise is ranked 7th. Seems unfair. But I guess overall that is good having them so flufffed up in the rankings cause if we beat them this weekend it will look that much better.

[UOducksTK1]

#10 is very accurate IMO for Oregon.

This might have been mentioned in this thread before, but I'm in love with the fact that Utah and Cal are both ranked pretty high. Utah is #16 and Cal is #24. If they keep winning, the computers will only love us more.

Just makes the USC-Oregon game that much bigger.

[Bigducker]

LSU IMO is very overrated. They should have lost a couple of other games. They were pretty much dominated by Washington, out gained by a 157 yds, the only team Wash has out gained. Les Miles was quoted as "that was a pretty good football team."
Ducks should be ahead of them, but of course that's the big bad SEC.

[RanDux]

Damn BSU is dropping fast.

cincy too

Cincy at least has a chance to improve by playing ranked teams WV and Pitt. BSU, on the other hand, has no where to go but down. If we beat USC (and Utah and Cal win) we will probably pass them in the polls, which would be really unfair.

Further, only one non BCS school can get an automatic birth. So if TCU goes undefeated and Boise State drops out of the top 10 (which looks likely), a one loss Penn State or a two loss USC could get a BCS birth over Boise because of TV and game revenues.

Unfair? Whatever system is used has to allow for teams to improve or get worse throughout the year. If we pass them it simply means that the pollsters believe that we are better than BSU now, which we probably are. I don't have a problem with that.

[RanDux]

Translation: There needs to be a playoff. What happens if 3 or 4 teams finish undefeated?

If Iowa finishes undefeated I hope we get to (or even USC) see them in the Rose Bowl to kick their overrated ass.

My thoughts exactly. Let them keep winning. Make a victory, if we get to the Rose Bowl, that much easier. We would completely dominate & embarrass them.

Got to admit it would be fun to kick Ohio State and Terrell Prior's arses, too, though.

[ducksrock]

W

Damn BSU is dropping fast.

cincy too

Cincy at least has a chance to improve by playing ranked teams WV and Pitt. BSU, on the other hand, has no where to go but down. If we beat USC (and Utah and Cal win) we will probably pass them in the polls, which would be really unfair.

Further, only one non BCS school can get an automatic birth. So if TCU goes undefeated and Boise State drops out of the top 10 (which looks likely), a one loss Penn State or a two loss USC could get a BCS birth over Boise because of TV and game revenues.

[/quote]

BSU can schedule a tougher schedule, just not a home and home arrangement..There is no incentive to go play in a 32,000 seat stadium. Furthermore, its not the rest of the worlds problem that they are in a podunk league....Do something about that BSU.....
But noooo........Why do that? It would end the perfect season prospects year after year...Why? I will tell you why? You want a shot at a NC game? Well, ya gotta earn it...Its not handed out....Thats not the way it works....

[monster]

Has the BCS ever taken 2 mid-majors before? Or is this a race between TCU and BSU? Go Frogs!

[3duxmebroma]

Your logic of 'keep team A ranked higher because they beat team B and they haven't lost' breaks
down at some point. Because of conflicts that arise, it doesn't make sense to freeze 2 teams like
that: it's ultimately necessary to look at wins and losses relative to strength of schedule.
For example, currently there are 7 BCS teams, including BSU, that haven't lost. If you don't consider
strength of schedule, how do you order them in the rankings ? They haven't played each other, and
they won't all play each other or have a playoff. The logical way to order them is to look at strength
of schedule and strength of conference. That's why, in the BCS rankings that BSU is behind 5 of
those other unbeaten teams.
When you start looking at strength of schedules, I don't think anyone with a full deck would
consider the WAC, BSU's conference, as strong as the PAC-10.
If UO and BSU both run the table from here, that would mean that UO beat 4 currently
BCS-ranked teams and BSU w/h beaten one, in the first game of the season, and played a lot of weak
teams in their conference.
Sorry, I can't agree that BSU s/b ranked higher, if that happens.

This brings up an interesting question: How much should head to head wins be weighed vs overall schedule? Boise St did beat Oregon which should count for a lot, but they don't have to play Cal, USC, etc.

Making comparisons is impossible. The only thing that we know is the BSU beat us, and beat us bad. BSU should stay ranked ahead of us as long as they keep winning.