Why is 12-0 Utah not being taken seriously?

[TommyTrojan]

I can understand Boise State and certainly Ball State, but the Utes have wins over Oregon State, TCU, and BYU. 2 10-win teams, and a team that may win 9 and go to the Rose Bowl.

Their 3 best wins are as good as unbeaten Alabama's 3 best wins in my opinion (Georgia, Ole Miss, LSU)

Having the worst TV contract ever, plus playing in the forgotten Moutain Time Zone sure doesn't help, but what more could they have done. I feel the reason they aren't taken seriously is because of their location. It seems like the national media largely ignores everything west of Texas with the exception of USC. Their is very little value in beating the Oregon State's, TCU's, and BYU's of the world because they don't sound good.

[Jim]

I can understand Boise State and certainly Ball State, but the Utes have wins over Oregon State, TCU, and BYU. 2 10-win teams, and a team that may win 9 and go to the Rose Bowl.

Their 3 best wins are as good as unbeaten Alabama's 3 best wins in my opinion (Georgia, Ole Miss, LSU)

Having the worst TV contract ever, plus playing in the forgotten Moutain Time Zone sure doesn't help, but what more could they have done. I feel the reason they aren't taken seriously is because of their location. It seems like the national media largely ignores everything west of Texas with the exception of USC. Their is very little value in beating the Oregon State's, TCU's, and BYU's of the world because they don't sound good.

That the Mountain West doesn't pack 85-105,000 people into a stadium. They have a following to be sure but clearly, based demographics and straight popualtion count, the following is just a fraction of what the BCS'rs can muster. And those BCS guys get a double serving of the ever faithful. We all agree it is about money. Non-BCS is now 2-1 in BCS bowls (a.k.a. rivals the SEC percentage wise - Hen or James will now counter this comment). And USC vs. Utah projection by CFN isn't too shabby for a Fiesta Bowl.

[aufan59]

Their best win is over TCU, one they were dominated 55 minutes of the game and won because of two missed TCU field goals at very short range.

Their best win is over TCU, who lost to Oklahoma 35-10.

Lets get some entertainment in the bowl games, not pity invites who only win if their opponent doesn't take them seriously.

[Bucs90]

Nah, their best win is over Oregon State, who are gonna be Pac10 champions. Too bad. Utah probably would've won the Pac10 this year. But, they aren't a BCS school, so they don't deserve a chance to win the National Championship.

[aufan59]

Nah, their best win is over Oregon State, who are gonna be Pac10 champions. Too bad. Utah probably would've won the Pac10 this year. But, they aren't a BCS school, so they don't deserve a chance to win the National Championship.

Agreed. I watch CFB for entertainment. The less watered down it is, the better.

[CJHawkeyes]

Agreed. I watch CFB for entertainment. The less watered down it is, the better.


So, the less competitive college football is, the more entertaining it is?

[aufan59]

So, the less competitive college football is, the more entertaining it is?

The more concentrated the talent is, the better.

[ZOOMBAG]

The talent is less concentrated than ever today. And will move afoot to limit scholarships even further it will get even more diluted. And that is GOOD for college football. Guess you'd better go watch football on Sundays....

[aufan59]

The talent is less concentrated than ever today. And will move afoot to limit scholarships even further it will get even more diluted. And that is GOOD for college football. Guess you'd better go watch football on Sundays....

I'll enjoy the SEC competing with the worst non-BCS conference for recruits (the sun belt) snatching up BCS Title after BCS Title while the other BCS conferences get their talent diluted at a much quicker rate.

[ZOOMBAG]

Well SEC is down to third in the conference power ratings now.

[CJHawkeyes]

The more concentrated the talent is, the better.

So, you are more entertained by a system that only really allows 20 of 120 teams to consistently compete for the national title all the while those 20 teams avoid each other as much as possible?

[EvilVodka]

I can understand Boise State and certainly Ball State, but the Utes have wins over Oregon State, TCU, and BYU. 2 10-win teams, and a team that may win 9 and go to the Rose Bowl.

Their 3 best wins are as good as unbeaten Alabama's 3 best wins in my opinion (Georgia, Ole Miss, LSU)

Having the worst TV contract ever, plus playing in the forgotten Moutain Time Zone sure doesn't help, but what more could they have done. I feel the reason they aren't taken seriously is because of their location. It seems like the national media largely ignores everything west of Texas with the exception of USC. Their is very little value in beating the Oregon State's, TCU's, and BYU's of the world because they don't sound good.

Well, I'm glad we will at least get to see Utah play someone in the BCS...before the BCS, you're looking at Utah heading to the Las Vegas bowl

[TommyTrojan]

Agreed. I watch CFB for entertainment. The less watered down it is, the better.

Well then lets keep Alabama out of the national title then too...seeing as how they aren't as exciting as OU, Texas, or Texas Tech. :rolleyes:

[aufan59]

So, you are more entertained by a system that only really allows 20 of 120 teams to consistently compete for the national title all the while those 20 teams avoid each other as much as possible?

Maybe you are entertained by a so-called top 10 matchup between TCU and Utah that is decided by two missed field goal inside the 20.

I'd rather watch games with more concentrated talent instead of seeing a great QB go to a small school and watch it dominate a weak conference.

Conference play is what it is about in college football. The less talent in conference, the less exciting the football is to watch.

[aufan59]

Well then lets keep Alabama out of the national title then too...seeing as how they aren't as exciting as OU, Texas, or Texas Tech. :rolleyes:

I'm entertained by defensive football. Just because Big 12 coaches call plays like I did playing Madden '95 where the hail mary works 100% of the time doesn't mean its entertaining. Poor defense is only entertaining to the shallow college football fan.

[CJHawkeyes]

Maybe you are entertained by a so-called top 10 matchup between TCU and Utah that is decided by two missed field goal inside the 20.

I'd rather watch games with more concentrated talent instead of seeing a great QB go to a small school and watch it dominate a weak conference.

Conference play is what it is about in college football. The less talent in conference, the less exciting the football is to watch.

BCS leagues never have similar games? Unlike last year, nearly every big game in the SEC this year has been lospided. Does all that concentrated talent make a blowout entertaining?

[aufan59]

BCS leagues never have similar games? Unlike last year, nearly every big game in the SEC this year has been lospided. Does all that concentrated talent make a blowout entertaining?

Well we have seen that a Big 12 coach(Les Miles) can ruin concentrated talent. He was the reason for two blow outs in two of the SEC's predicted big games.

Those blow outs are similar to Big 12 games, where defense is only played because you must put 11 men on the field in every play.

[Hail to the Victors Valiant]

Utah is not being taken seriously because they almost lost to Michigan.

[billy]

I'm entertained by defensive football. Just because Big 12 coaches call plays like I did playing Madden '95 where the hail mary works 100% of the time doesn't mean its entertaining. Poor defense is only entertaining to the shallow college football fan.



Defense is entertaining. If you don't have an offense to go along with your good defense you don't get anywhere.


Yeah, the SEC has some good defenses. Auburn gave up 20 pts to UT Martin (Yeah I know, 1 was a defensive TD). Not to mention giving up over 300 yards of total offense to them.

Meanwhile the vaunted South Florida Defense (huge sarcasm) gave up 7 points to them and only 97 total yards.


I'm effin sick and tired of all this "we play defense in the SEC" crap.

Yeah you guys have some low scoring defenses. But again, you also have some of the lowest scoring offenses and some of the absolute worst quarterbacks.

Casey Dick sucks. Jarrett Lee and Hatch both suck. Smelley sucks. Kodi Burns sucks. Tyson Lee sucks. Adams and Nixon at Vandy both suck. Stephens and Crompton at Tennessee both suck. Hartline sucks.



And all of these guys aren't just sucking against the SEC. They sucked against virtually everybody.


So quit giving me this SEC defense crap. It doesn't hold any water dude.

[aufan59]

I guess you don't really watch college football much. SEC defenses hit much harder. Watch a goal line stand in the SEC then in the Pac-10.

It is why the injury rate of QBs in the SEC is much higher than that of other conferences. Look it up.

[HellYeahHokie]

Give it up Billy.

It's guys like Aufan that are the reason that BlueHen crusades against SEC mythology.

He could rationalize an 0-12 SEC team as Top 10 worthy.

You are right of course about the SEC this year, but you'll never convince him otherwise.

[EvilVodka]

Utah is not being taken seriously because they almost lost to Michigan.

eh...I'd say its because of the Mountain West's crappy television deal

who here has actually watched the Mountain West play football this year?

I saw the Utah-Michigan game, San Diego State-NotreDame, and BYU-Washington....

no one has gotten a chance to see some of the conference's premier games, unfortunately

[aufan59]

no one has gotten a chance to see some of the conference's premier games, unfortunately

Utah wouldn't be ranked so high if people watched their game against TCU.

[GatorGrad]

Why do you guys take aufan so seriously? It's pretty clear to me that he's having fun getting you all wound up and needling you about the SEC. I guess it's working.

[CJHawkeyes]

Utah wouldn't be ranked so high if people watched their game against TCU.

If I watched, would the result have been different?

[Blue Hen]

The SEC tough defense fairytale is SEC myth # 35

[Blue Hen]

Would Alabama be ranked so high if people watched its game vs 2-9, 149th ranked Tulane ? You need help, AUFAN

[Blue Hen]

I value AuFan. His idiocy is more typical of SEC blowhards. If the only SEC guys around here were astute, realistic CF fans like yourself, NCT, Evil and maybe some others , SEC mythology wouldn't be as much fun.

I remember a classic post from ol' Aufan about how hard hitting Mississippi State would likely hit its way to the championship of most other conferences...if it could figure out a way to out hit Maine.

[GatorGrad]

But when aufan says things like the BCS Title Game should be an Alabama-Florida rematch, do you really think he's being serious? The way you guys respond to him is probably exactly what he's looking for and thus encourages him to keep up the needling.

[Blue Hen]

I do think he's serious. He's got a very tunneled vision view of CF and has nothing but contempt for the facts about the SEC. He was dead serious about the 'hard hitting' MSU claim...dead serious about Auburn clobbering WVU etc,etc. Back when Billy ran his 4 or 5 week ATS contest, AUfan picked SEC teams in all the games and was in dead last place with an 0-16 record or something like that. GG, there are 10x more AUfan types out 'there' than GG type SEC fans.....maybe 20x more, by my estimate. Nothing personnel. I'm sure AuFan is a good fellow and would be interesting to meet... he's just caught up in the great myth and percption.

[GatorGrad]

aufan - Do you really think that Alabama and Florida should rematch in the BCS Championship Game no matter what happens in Atlanta? I don't buy it. I believe he's definitely an SEC homer, but there's no way that I believe everything he writes was meant to be taken seriously 100% of the time. Sort of like Biffy who needles everyone and gets just enough of a rise out of the crowd to keep doing it.

[aufan59]

Michigan fans were crying over the fact that they didn't get a rematch against Ohio State, but even me mentioning an Alabama/Florida rematch makes me crazy? Assuming Alabama loses to Florida, why exactly is Alabama less deserving than any other 1 loss team?

[billy]

AUfan is being completely realistic most of the time. I know a big LSU fan and he talks about how dominant and tough the SEC is all the time.
I've seen plenty of guys like AUfan, they actually believe what they say.

They actually believe that a team like Mississippi State would dominate in the Big 12.

[EvilVodka]

Michigan fans were crying over the fact that they didn't get a rematch against Ohio State, but even me mentioning an Alabama/Florida rematch makes me crazy? Assuming Alabama loses to Florida, why exactly is Alabama less deserving than any other 1 loss team?

so you're already assuming an Auburn loss in the Iron Bowl? hmmm...

[aufan59]

so you're already assuming an Auburn loss in the Iron Bowl? hmmm...

Alabama should go even as a two loss team. Look at LSU last year.

[GatorGrad]

Alabama should go even as a two loss team. Look at LSU last year.

So a two-loss Alabama team, who did not win the SEC, should go over say a Big 12 Champ one-loss Oklahoma or Texas?

[Blue Hen]

Uh huh...looking at LSU last year. What exactly did LSU prove other than the SEC champ was better than the B10 and ACC champs ? That's the fundemental flaw of the BCS mythical system.....it doesn't require the top teams to prove themselves vs each other, other than one goofy game. All guesswork. Nothing more than that.

[Blue Hen]

I think all 10 slots in these BCS exhibitions should be automatically filled by SEC teams and the other 2 SEC teams should get their choice of playing in any of the other PSEGs.

[EvilVodka]

Uh huh...looking at LSU last year. What exactly did LSU prove other than the SEC champ was better than the B10 and ACC champs ? That's the fundemental flaw of the BCS mythical system.....it doesn't require the top teams to prove themselves vs each other, other than one goofy game. All guesswork. Nothing more than that.

I doubt we'd ever see a champion of a 16 team tourney who's beaten all other 11 conference champs

Hen, you don't think winning the SEC and beating the champs of two other conferences isn't proving yourself? you're headed off into la la land, and away from any sort of common sense

[Blue Hen]

No Evil, I don't see how LSU proved it was better than the BE champ, the P10 champ and lots of other champs. Certainly, even a playoff wouldn't let everybody play everybody else but as teams won and moved through the brackets teams would be required to prove a hell of a lot more than this BCS system requires them to prove..
Also Evil consider this. In a 16 team championship the winner will have been required to win 4 consecutive, tough , games with only a week to prepare for each. In this BCS system the champ is required to win only one post season game with 6 weeks to prepare.....no comparrison, whatsoever, in degree of difficulty or burden of 'proof'.

[Jim]

Alabama should go even as a two loss team. Look at LSU last year.

Southern Cal would probably have trounced OSU. I'll even go so far as to say Texas or Oklahoma would have beaten them. All that picking LSU showed is that the coaches poll counts. All you're getting with a BCS title game is a hodge-podge selection of two teams where the result is based on who happens to play a better game for approx. 3+ hours. We have no way of knowing just how good LSU was in 2007. We dop know they beat Ohio State and nothing more. Look, Kentucky might have been able to do it again as Illinois might have as well.

Calling the winner the "national champion" is hollow since it doesn't prove who was consistently the best team (there is no way to actually determine this - even with a playoff). It is all based on bias, who will draw the crowd, how badly another coach hates/dislikes you and who wrote the friggin' code. Who the hell appointed Harris as some kind of clairvoyant authority? My suggestions are better as how to regard the outcome from one game to the next. Weight it and do some simple addition and multiplication. Talley the points up and you get the "best" based on "performance" in addition to those simple W/L records. Playoffs are based on who got lucky or who decided to show up more at the friggin' "tournament". Was Kansas the best team last year in BB?

Maybe after all of these revenue-generator bowls are over with you could get the top two and that would be a step in the right direction - I guess?

[GatorGrad]

There's that term again..."best team." Who cares whether or not Kansas was the "best team" in hoops last year? They won the NCAA Championship. Whether or not people think they were the best team is irrelevant.

[Jim]

There's that term again..."best team." Who cares whether or not Kansas was the "best team" in hoops last year? They won the NCAA Championship. Whether or not people think they were the best team is irrelevant.

But will you agree with me there must be a better, more equitable and no-biased way to rank those teams who would make it to the "playoffs"?

I mentioned that winning or losing will be at the top of the any criteria for obvious reasons. Next how the respective teams performed based on offensive and defensive statitics generated leading up to that game. Third, where it was played. W/L and performance. The tougher the schedule you play the more tempered your numbers will probably be but it is a relative comparison. Youmight not be the leading offense in the nation but then again you didn't play Florida International, The Citadel, UT-Chatanooga and Maine either.

I think we'd have a fairer and more accurate compilation of data to determine just how good a team is. And I did state, in another thread I do believe, that you wouldn't have to play USC, Alabama, Wake Forest and Texas Tech to have an impressive OOC. Just two of your four or three of your five OOC games against BCS (that would include MWC and WAC teams) by requirement to participate at the top-tier level.

[CJHawkeyes]

But will you agree with me there must be a better, more equitable and no-biased way to rank those teams who would make it to the "playoffs"?

I mentioned that winning or losing will be at the top of the any criteria for obvious reasons. Next how the respective teams performed based on offensive and defensive statitics generated leading up to that game. Third, where it was played. W/L and performance. The tougher the schedule you play the more tempered your numbers will probably be but it is a relative comparison. Youmight not be the leading offense in the nation but then again you didn't play Florida International, The Citadel, UT-Chatanooga and Maine either.

I think we'd have a fairer and more accurate compilation of data to determine just how good a team is. And I did state, in another thread I do believe, that you wouldn't have to play USC, Alabama, Wake Forest and Texas Tech to have an impressive OOC. Just two of your four or three of your five OOC games against BCS (that would include MWC and WAC teams) by requirement to participate at the top-tier level.

Did you all of my posts for the past few years?:D

[GatorGrad]

Yes, give me CJ's objective ranking system...I think I'll write an email to Stewy Mandel's mailbag!

[TigerStripe]

I think Utah is a very good team.

[Jim]

Did you all of my posts for the past few years?:D

I read some of them but have had this idea for some time now. Posted on it as far back as three years ago. So how do we differ or what is similar?

[Jim]

I think Utah is a very good team.


GO Carolina GO !!!

[CJHawkeyes]

I read some of them but have had this idea for some time now. Posted on it as far back as three years ago. So how do we differ or what is similar?

Oops! The word "miss" is missing from my previous post. That said, I was teasing you because you appeared to be advocating the idea of an objective ranking system for college football and the 50% of my posts that aren't about a playoff are about my own idea for an objective ranking system.

[Jim]

Oops! The word "miss" is missing from my previous post. That said, I was teasing you because you appeared to be advocating the idea of an objective ranking system for college football and the 50% of my posts that aren't about a playoff are about my own idea for an objective ranking system.

This is the place for us to prepare our dissertations on this subject is it not? If you feel yours is fair and balanced then go ahead and advocate it. You are the one that seems to have wild alterations to the current "real" rankings are you not? If not then I apologize for charging you with that. Yes, I do post weekly with my rankings, comments as to why I rank as I do and ATS picks. I would have really enjoyed you're having done the same. Usually people will view them but offer to challenge or criticism. I miss that as it would help me assess my process and tweak it with some overlooked insight offered by others.

[Blue Hen]

Well, I occasionally question your ATS skill.......which ain't too good, Jim. :-)

[Jim]

Well, I occasionally question your ATS skill.......which ain't too good, Jim. :-)

While my percentile might not make me strongly consider changing my vocation, you'll will notice that a fair number of my "losses" are tight where the point spread I chose is just a few points off. But I have missed some badly and I might add so have those who feed their families or support their habits doing the same thing. I have more plus-days than I do minus but when I miss the mark I do so in a most "impressive" way. I have 9-6's , 7-5's , 7-4's and most recently an 8-7. But also have a 2-10, 4-8 and I believe even a 3-9. So when I win I do so narrowly and when I lose I do so badly.

I sure wish you'd take the plunge since you are a serious one who does this for money.

[Blue Hen]

I do my plunging for real but I can't be picking 10 - 15 games a week because there are almost never that many good plays on the board. I'll share this week's plays with you ...a 4 team parlay :

Oregon State - 3.5
Virginia + 8.5
Ga Tech + 8.5 (not really my pick - a friend/co-investor's pick)
Florida State + 16.5

the lines will probably have moved a little by the time I place the wager in a few minutes.

[Blue Hen]

Jim, it's alot easier to "get Lucky" , as you put it, when a team only has to win one single post season game with 6 weeks to prepare. A team that can win 4 consecutive playoff games, with only 6 days to prepare for each, is far more than "lucky"...it's GOOD...arguably the BEST.

Competition is so much better than beauty contest 'elections' !

[CJHawkeyes]

This is the place for us to prepare our dissertations on this subject is it not? If you feel yours is fair and balanced then go ahead and advocate it. You are the one that seems to have wild alterations to the current "real" rankings are you not? If not then I apologize for charging you with that. Yes, I do post weekly with my rankings, comments as to why I rank as I do and ATS picks. I would have really enjoyed you're having done the same. Usually people will view them but offer to challenge or criticism. I miss that as it would help me assess my process and tweak it with some overlooked insight offered by others.

I'm not sure what you are getting at here. If you have an idea you like, go ahead and promote it. As with any other idea, I might offer an opinion on it. My only purpose here was to simply tease you for appearing to advocate an idea that is my number one issue. That said, no need to apologize for any opinion you might have about my ideas. I suppose my idea can be accused of wild alterations, especially at earlier points in the season, but being objective, it disregards what I consider subjective nonsense.

[TommyTrojan]

Thought this deserved a bump given whats going on

[aufan59]

To answer the question:

Alabama gives them 21 point lead, and they'll blow it.

[Hail to the Victors Valiant]

Sec dominance is on display in tonight's Sugar Bowl. In response to you Q, I throw out MWC's poor bowl success this year and that Utah beat Michigan by only 2 points this year when even Toledo trumped Michigan and Toledo's coach was fired.

[ZOOMBAG]

SEC Dominance, indeed. 3rd and 1 on the 20, a false start and 15 yard loss on a sack.....dominant SEC team here....

[TommyTrojan]

Sec dominance is on display in tonight's Sugar Bowl. In response to you Q, I throw out MWC's poor bowl success this year and that Utah beat Michigan by only 2 points this year when even Toledo trumped Michigan and Toledo's coach was fired.

What you do is infinitely more important than how you do it.

Utah has beaten, Oregon State, BYU, and TCU this year. If they keep this up vs. Bama, I’d say their resume is NC worthy.

[EvilVodka]

What you do is infinitely more important than how you do it.

Utah has beaten, Oregon State, BYU, and TCU this year. If they keep this up vs. Bama, I’d say their resume is NC worthy.

Going into the bowl season, you had USC, Utah, and Boise State with a combined 35-1 record...no one responded to this, and not a single journalistic brainiac had stumbled upon this stat

In essence, the entire west was left out of the National Championship picture this year

Worst year for the BCS yet IMO...