18 is not bad considering its a first year coach. Do u see houston up there lol
no, YOU'RE off topic
18 is not bad considering its a first year coach. Do u see houston up there lol
Where does Houston have to get to to get a BCS game, #8?
they'll likely get in unless Boise passes them.
Top 12 is automatic, top 16 is also automatic since they'd be ranked higher than the Big East champion. However, they have to be ranked higher than Boise, so that's more important.
Actually they don't. The non-BCS conference team has to be a conference champion and in the top 12 (or 16). Right now TCU is in the driver's seat in the MWC
Michigan State is the best two loss team in the country?
Dumb. I think UGA would kill them.
will drub them in the rematch.
Badgers whoop them in the championship game and then the Dawgs whoop them in a Bowl Game.
These rankings always feel a little too indebted to head-to-head matchups and rank ordering as opposed to logic. UGA lost its first two games and has been on a roll since; MSU needed a miracle to beat Wiscy in regulation, and Wiscy has been drubbing teams as long as they don't throw 40+ yard passes with under a 30 seconds to go. Of that group, MSU looks like the biggest fraud.
But MSU also have quality wins against Wisc, @OSU, Mich while losing to 2 ranked teams in ND and Nebraska. You can spin the logic either way. Do I think they are that good? Maybe not. But I don't think there is a bad argument for them either.
I mean they did beat Wisc head-to-head regardless of luck, Georgia's losses are understandable, but they don't have as many quality wins, South Carolina hasn't looked that good. And so on and so forth. I know giving Sparty credit is a favorite thing to do around here, but I don't see this as that outrageous.
is better than MSU, IMOI
us being ranked this high, considering we did beat the now bowl eligible Eastern Michigan Eagles !
Our most impressive win is against now #25 Notre Dame.
Eastern is not bowl eligible. They beat two FCS schools. Only one can count towards bowl eligibilty. They need another win.
how about , the " winning record eastern michigan eagles"
This is true, they need AT LEAST another win because the MAC only gets three guaranteed bowl spots, so even seven wins is no guarantee. I hope they pull it off, though, that would be really exciting for a formerly stagnant program.
I was at the meijer on carpenter road on Friday and the greeter had a huge stack of EMU football tickets she was handing out for free. It would be cool for EMU to go to a bowl, but I'd hate to think how much it would cost them, because nobody would go to it.
You never know. Maybe all those Meijer Eagles would show up and give Spartan fans something else to bitch about.
But what he has done at EMU is damn near a miracle. If you look at EMU's facilities, fanbase, ability to recruit (for a variety of reasons), history, and everything else, English has done a great job. EMU is a 44 yard FG with time expiring away from being 5-1 in the MAC. They got smoked by the B1G, but look at where they came from. Them being 4-2 with a chance to beat a beatable Kent State and beat NIU would leave them with the second best record in the MAC. If they would have beaten Ball State without the long FG, they would have a good shot at the MAC championship game. Pretty impressive for where they came from.
For some reason i see a michigan vs georgia capital one bowl
I'm thinking the loser of the B1G Champ Game goes to Cap One, just don't see two B1G teams getting BCS invites. We have no B1G teams ranked in the top 10 currently and still a lot of beating up to do in the conference. If we win at least one of the last two then Outback in Tampa is my prediction. But the loser in Indy next month should be going to Orlando.
10-2 Michigan team probably looks better than a three loss loser of the BTCG. That is the curse of the championship game I think it has been proven numerous times in the Big 12 and other conferences that the loser of the championship game does not get brownie points.
As they shouldn't. We should never assume that the best team will always come from one division and the second best from the other. That would just be coincidence.
Or, that the winner of a division won't get exposed in the most important game of the season.
The loser of the CG isn't guaranteed the #2 spot. If the winner of Mich-Neb wins the final week of the season, I can't see them getting passed up for a 3 loss MSU or Wisc. And a BCS game is still in play for the winner this Saturday. Again, assuming they win the last week of the season, its likely a choice between a 10-2 Mich/Neb, a two loss ACC runner-up or Stanford for the last at-large spot. The Big Ten team will almost certainly be the biggest draw.
Especially because it's Michigan and Nebraska. There are about a dozen teams that will leapfrog others in a BCS bowl's mind, and Michigan and Nebraska are both in that club.
Nebraska is new to the Big Ten, divisional opponents, 1997, the QBs and their styles and weaknesses. We're playing for media momentum heading in to the 26th.
Michigan/Nebraska is going to be huge in the coming years. I would say that "stable state" Big Ten has either us or them averaging a division championship minimum 3/5 years, probably much closer to 3.5ish. With it being a November game, it's going to come down to the winner of this game more than ever, and it's going to be big most years.
Well considering they are 10th currently and they stay undefeated, they automatically get a BCS bowl bid...
If Houston goes undefeated, I'm having a tough time seeing them being excluded. Either Boise would have to pass them, or they would have to finish outside the top 16, seeing that the Big East champion is almost certainly going to be ranked lower. Do you really expect them to drop about 7 spots while winning?
I believe the highest ranked team from a non-AQ, if in the top 16 of the bcs, is guaranteed a bcs spot.
I posted part of this link last night, but:
Look at 3-B. The highest ranked non-AQ team that is ranked within the top 12 of the BCS and wins their conference is guaranteed a spot. Top 16 if the winner of an AQ conference is ranked below them. So because the Big East sucks so much, if Houston wins the C-USA, they're in. If they don't and lose along the way, it will most likely be to Southern Miss in the C-USA champ game, and USM was ranked 22nd so will probably move up in the standings after last night. So if they beat a top 10 Houston team, they might sneak in the top 16 and make it. Even if they don't, TCU is ranked 19th in both polls that came out today, so if they win out, they could sneak into the top 16 and make it if a C-USA team doesn't. It's going to be very hard for Michigan to steal a non-AQ spot.
They go undefeated, they are contractually obligated to be given a spot. They'll probably get waxed in that game, but they'll play it.
Ranked 18th with two games to go is excellent considering we're in our second coaching/ scheme transition in four years. I'll take this going into the Nebraska game, as it is the last ranked team we'll face in the regular season. It's nice not to see OSU on this list, it feels like....justice.
I posted this in a different thread but HOW IS HOUSTON RANKED?
And I am not joking at all with this question. They have played exactly 1 teem with a winning record (Louisiana Tech at 6-4) Thier opponents are a combined 36-61.
UCLA (5-5) North Texas (4-6) Louisiana Tech (5-4) Georgia State (2-7 I-AA) UTEP (4-5) E. Carolina (4-5) Marshall (4-6) Rice (3-7) UAB (3-7) Tulane (2-9).
People bitch about Boise's schedule this is UNACCEPTABLE for a team to even be considered for a BCS Bowl.
Edit: Updated for last nights late games records.
I agree that it is dumb, but they have gone undefeated against the team on their schedule - and it's not like they duck competition - and that should count as something. Plus, they have been beating teams rather handily, which helps. I don't think they are as good as that Hawaii team from a couple of years ago, but if you want to have a system like the BCS (which I don't like), then this is kind of the trade-off.
Also, I'm not going to punish Houston for winning all their games - that is an accomplishment regardless of who you play.
They may not be ducking competition (how can we be sure of that btw?) but it's not like they've come close to a BCS-worthy schedule. Sagarin ranks it 123, far and away the worst of any team that can realisitically get a BCS at-large spot.
I have no problem with them being ranked. What would be unacceptable is if Houston was NOT ranked. Not only are they undefeated but they've been womping teams. They've won their past 5 games by a combined 230some points or something like that. They've also bludgeoned two teams which beat Big 10 teams (North Texas and Rice). I think they look better than Hawaii did in 07 when they went undefeated until getting it handed to them by Georgia in the bowl game. If Houston does make it to a BCS game, they'll almost certainly lose but I don't think it will be by 31 points like Hawaii. VATech had a tough time putting E Carolina and Marshall away.
Houston has NO defense. If they make it to a BCS game, they will get destroyed by 31 or more easily.
Not sure how much I can agree with this. Sagarin has them ranked #24 in his pure points calculation. All we know is that they can barely get by a mediocre-at-best UCLA and LA Tech
November 26, 2011.
To you for this comment!!
I don't find myself concerned one way or the other with rankings at this point. Lets see 2 more wins from this team and then we can worry about things like warm weather bowls on Jan 2nd.
I was a little surprised to see Kansas State leapfrog UM. They beat a mediocre TAMU team (now 5-5) in 4 OT's at home, while UM beat a mediocre Illinois team (now 6-4) by 17 on the road. What exactly did KSU do in that game to justify them moving ahead of UM?
EDIT: I also noticed that Missouri and TAMU (who are both 5-5) got 5 votes each in the "Others" category. Can you guess how many current Big 12 coaches are voting members of the Coaches' poll? Yeah, that would be...5 coaches. Seems like Big 12 coaches really like to vote for their own conference members.
They look like a top 15 team for 3 quarters (or 2.5 quarters sometimes) and then a bottom team in the 4th quarter. Of their losses they seriously should have beat OSU (up 17 at half), Arkansas (up 15 half way through the third), Mizzou (up 11 entering the 4th), and Kansas St (up 10 with 6:30 left). The only game they got outplayed in was Oklahoma. I'm not saying that justifies KSU passing Michigan, I'm just saying that TAMU is world beaters for 3 quarters and then craps the bed. I'm glad I'm not a TAMU fan.
KSU didn't jump us, they were already ranked ahead of us, 14th last week I think, and actually fell three spots
How is V-Tech ahead of Clemson after their game earlier this season? That makes no sense whatsoever.