|
|
Post by coachaaron on Jan 4, 2009 9:30:48 GMT -6
Is Utah the national champion? No one has beat them and they are now the only D1 team that is undefeated. Plus they beat an Alabama team that was ranked #1 for 5 weeks this year and comes from what many consider the best conference (SEC).
|
|
|
|
Post by coachorr on Jan 4, 2009 9:40:35 GMT -6
They should be, but the Mountain West is conference with no respect. So, to answer your question, the communist anti-American front who run the BCS will not allow Utah to be #1.
|
|
|
|
Post by Yash on Jan 4, 2009 9:44:55 GMT -6
can't be BCS champs, could be AP or coaches poll champs but very very unlikely that they'd get enough votes. I bet they get a few though. by rule coaches are supposed to vote for whoever wins the BCS title game but its just a rule, so it can be broken.
|
|
|
|
Post by highball007 on Jan 4, 2009 10:43:26 GMT -6
I think they should be the National Champs! The sad stat is that USC will get more votes for National Champs then the Utes! I would like to see Utah, USC, Florida, Oklahoma play in a playoff to see who is the national champs. I really think Utah or USC would end up on top after all was said and done.
|
|
|
|
Post by airraider on Jan 4, 2009 11:45:52 GMT -6
Right now I do not see anyone beating Florida.. Ole Miss beat them, but Ole Miss is a pretty good team on certain days..
but today.. I dont think they could stay with in 21 points of Florida..
Now, if Oklahoma beats the Gators, then all of this goes out of the window.
|
|
|
|
Post by Yash on Jan 4, 2009 12:04:42 GMT -6
after many years of picking games and saying who I like, I have realized that I am vegas's best friend because I can't pick a winner if it slaps me in the face. I sure would like to see USC and florida play though. That speed on defense vs that physical of an offense, I'd love to see Tebow and Maulaluga go head to head.
|
|
|
|
Post by airraider on Jan 4, 2009 12:39:45 GMT -6
after many years of picking games and saying who I like, I have realized that I am vegas's best friend because I can't pick a winner if it slaps me in the face. I sure would like to see USC and florida play though. That speed on defense vs that physical of an offense, I'd love to see Tebow and Maulaluga go head to head. The thing with Florida is.. sure they have a power running game.. but they have some of the fastest players in the country.. even without Harvin in the game.. But Harvin has been practicing.. so he may play. |
|
|
|
Post by jangalang on Jan 4, 2009 13:03:05 GMT -6
They should be, but the Mountain West is conference with no respect. So, to answer your question, the communist anti-American front who run the BCS will not allow Utah to be #1. Let's put the SEC and Big XII vs. MW in the order they are ranked within their conference up against one another and guess who would win: #1 Florida/Oklahoma vs. Utah - toss up, toss up #2 Alabama/Texas vs. TCU - slight edge to Bama, definitely Texas #3 Georgia/Texas Tech vs. BYU - Georgia, slight edge to BYU #4 Ole Miss/Oklahoma St. vs. Air Force - Ole Miss, OSU #5 LSU/Missouri vs. Colorado St. - slight edge to LSU, Mizzou #6 Vanderbilt/Nebraska vs. UNLV - Vandy, definitely Nebraska #7 S. Carolina/Kansas vs. New Mexico - slight edge to USC, definitely Kansas #8 Tennessee/Colorado vs. Wyoming - Wyoming did beat UT!, toss up #9 Arkansas/Kansas St. vs. SDSU - Arkansas by a bunch, toss up I know the picks are just guesses by myself, but it's pretty clear which conferences are superior. My point is not to prove the MWC is not better than the Big 10 or Pac 10, but to show why a 1 loss Florida or Oklahoma team deserves the MNC (Mythical National Championship) over an undefeated Utah any year....they don't play the same grueling schedule week in and week out as OU, Florida, Bama, Texas, etc. |
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Jan 4, 2009 13:29:51 GMT -6
It depends on what you think is a bigger accomplishment: having an undefeated season in non-BCS conference and knocking off a very good Alabama team or losing one game in an extremely competitive BCS league, winning a conference title game, and then knocking off another team with the same resume.
|
|
|
|
Post by spos21ram on Jan 4, 2009 14:15:51 GMT -6
I don't knwo why the Big East is a BCS Conference right now, once Miami, VTech, and BC left they are no better than the WAC
|
|
|
|
Post by jhanawa on Jan 4, 2009 15:11:30 GMT -6
Utah has a legitimate claim but so do USC, Florida, Oklahoma and Texas. They have to to eliminate the power and influence of the conference commisioners and have a playoff or a mini playoff after the bowls...It's amazing to me that the BCS exists at all, how in the world can the NCAA exclude its own members from its championship process?
|
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jan 4, 2009 15:24:19 GMT -6
...It's amazing to me that the BCS exists at all, how in the world can the NCAA exclude its own members from its championship process? That is where you (and the vast majority of fans..so its ok) go wrong. The NCAA does NOT RECOGNIZE A BCS division team as a national champion. Never have. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 4, 2009 15:51:18 GMT -6
split the national championship between utah, sc, texas (if it wins), and the winner of the BCS game
MWC may not be as strong as the big XII or the SEC, but this year they were at least as good as the pac-10 (in a sort of down year for the pac). the top 3 teams (utah, tcu, byu) would hold their own against the top couple pac-10 teams (sc, oregon, cal, oregon st) and could probably beat the mid-level teams most of the time (stanford, arizona, asu, ucla). after that there is a little drop-off though to air force, colorado state, new mexico, etc. but if washington st and washington pooled their top players together they still probably couldnt beat SDSU.
there was one weekend where the MWC was like 3-0 vs the pac-10, when BYU blew out UCLA, UNLV upset (then) ranked ASU, and someone else lost to a MWC team.
|
|
|
|
Post by k on Jan 4, 2009 16:47:50 GMT -6
OK. I'll be the first.
Playoff....
|
|
|
|
Post by jhanawa on Jan 4, 2009 16:58:50 GMT -6
That is where you (and the vast majority of fans..so its ok) go wrong. The NCAA does NOT RECOGNIZE A BCS division team as a national champion. Never have.
Perhaps so, obviously the NCAA doesn't care who the champion is as long as the money continues to flow in from the Bowls and the BCS Bowls....
|
|
|
|
Post by carookie on Jan 4, 2009 17:54:57 GMT -6
I just don't buy the strength of schedule argument. Lets say you put the '94 Huskers (or whoever you think is the best team ever) in Utah's shoes this year; do they then become less of a title worthy team because their SOS is weak?
All SOS does is allow the big conferences to maintain control of the $$$ and give them and the talking heads a viable excuse when deserving teams: USC, Utah, etc. don't get a title shot (which happens EVERY year).
What does it matter how good the 9th best SEC team is compared to the 9th best PAC-10 team, when the question at hand is who is the best team? Just because you won the best conference that doesn't make you the best team, winning on the field does.
Sadly too much $$ involved for that
|
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Jan 4, 2009 19:26:22 GMT -6
I just don't buy the strength of schedule argument. Lets say you put the '94 Huskers (or whoever you think is the best team ever) in Utah's shoes this year; do they then become less of a title worthy team because their SOS is weak? All SOS does is allow the big conferences to maintain control of the $$$ and give them and the talking heads a viable excuse when deserving teams: USC, Utah, etc. don't get a title shot (which happens EVERY year). What does it matter how good the 9th best SEC team is compared to the 9th best PAC-10 team, when the question at hand is who is the best team? Just because you won the best conference that doesn't make you the best team, winning on the field does. Sadly too much $$ involved for that Yes, the '94 Husker team would be in the exact same boat. Without a playoff system, this is what you have. If you take the strength of schedule out of the current BCS system, you have an even bigger headache. Now, the teams rankings are almost completely dependent on the polls; a very scary idea. I'm more of a Utah fan than of Florida or Oklahoma, and although their record is impressive, I don't think they are the best team in the country. IMO, if you put them in one of BCS conferences, they would still walk out with a winning record, but they would not be undefeated. |
|
|
|
Post by coachinghopeful on Jan 4, 2009 20:00:54 GMT -6
Is Utah the national champion? No one has beat them and they are now the only D1 team that is undefeated. Plus they beat an Alabama team that was ranked #1 for 5 weeks this year and comes from what many consider the best conference (SEC). They should, but BCS politics and economics won't allow it. Utah will have to be lucky with finishing #2 or #3. Just more proof why Div 1A needs a playoff like all the other levels. |
|
|
|
Post by baldingmullett on Jan 4, 2009 22:27:42 GMT -6
No way, Utah couldn't play with Florida or Oklahoma.
|
|
|
|
Post by Yash on Jan 4, 2009 22:34:58 GMT -6
I'm not saying they can play with florida or OU, but no one gave them a chance against bama and they stood up to that challenge. I'd like to see it all played out.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jan 5, 2009 1:10:04 GMT -6
No way, Utah couldn't play with Florida or Oklahoma. Right...so they can't play with a team who Alabama was beating for 3 quarters. Care to provide any insight on how you came to your conclusion? |
|
|
|
Post by windigo on Jan 5, 2009 11:31:25 GMT -6
That is where you (and the vast majority of fans..so its ok) go wrong. The NCAA does NOT RECOGNIZE A BCS division team as a national champion. Never have. Perhaps so, obviously the NCAA doesn't care who the champion is as long as the money continues to flow in from the Bowls and the BCS Bowls.... The NCAA was forced out of college football in all aspects except regulatory by the conference in an anti trust suit by the major conferences. That is what freed up the BCS conferences to create the BCS. And oddly enough that collusion to exclude the other conferences violates antitrust laws. Congress has already threatened them that is why we now have the midmajor rule. |
|
|
|
Post by Coach JR on Jan 5, 2009 13:01:01 GMT -6
It depends on what you think is a bigger accomplishment: having an undefeated season in non-BCS conference and knocking off a very good Alabama team or losing one game in an extremely competitive BCS league, winning a conference title game, and then knocking off another team with the same resume. I don't know it to be true or not, but I've heard Utah strength of schedule is better than Bama's. I hope maybe the AP will throw them a bone, but honestly I don't see it...OU or Florida will claim all the polls. Kinda sucks, but that's the way it is. |
|
|
|
Post by coachtut on Jan 5, 2009 13:07:09 GMT -6
after many years of picking games and saying who I like, I have realized that I am vegas's best friend because I can't pick a winner if it slaps me in the face. Great quote. lol |
|
coachbigelow
Junior Member
Coach at Southern Virginia University
Posts: 261
|
Post by coachbigelow on Jan 5, 2009 13:07:26 GMT -6
I coach in Utah right now, so this is the biggest talk of the state right now. But this article sums up what happened. rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=dw-utah010509&prov=yhoo&type=lgnsMany fans out here are angry about this Mtn network that they have cause it really does hamper team exposure. For awhile there were actually markets within the conference that couldn't even see their teams games. Question how many of you have seen all of the Utes games this season? Problem is this whole decision making process is media driven. BTW three teams from the WEAK MWC in the top 16 of the BCS at the end of the regular season. |
|
|
|
Post by baldingmullett on Jan 5, 2009 18:03:37 GMT -6
No way, Utah couldn't play with Florida or Oklahoma. Right...so they can't play with a team who Alabama was beating for 3 quarters. Care to provide any insight on how you came to your conclusion? So you would also think, since the eagles and the bengals tied that the bengals would be a playoff team in the nfc, right. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jan 5, 2009 20:15:28 GMT -6
Right...so they can't play with a team who Alabama was beating for 3 quarters. Care to provide any insight on how you came to your conclusion? So you would also think, since the eagles and the bengals tied that the bengals would be a playoff team in the nfc, right. Completely different. To be a playoff team, one needs to establish a pattern of success over the season. Cincy clearly did not do that. Cincy did demonstrate that in the NFL everyone can play with everyone. So, I ask again, do you care to provide some insight on how you came to your conclusion that Utah could not play with a FLA, a team who Alabama was beating for 3 quarters. |
|
|
|
Post by Yash on Jan 5, 2009 20:23:28 GMT -6
The point is, we never will know. Until they seed them out, and play a playoff we won't know. If I had money on the line, I take florida over utah, but Utah, Boise and Stanford beating USC have proven that anything can happen. To say that they could never beat florida, the same florida that was beaten by an 8-5 Ole Miss team, is close minded. The point of all of this is, anything can happen. Its easy to make a bold assertive statement about a game that will never be played.
|
|
|
|
Post by Coach Huey on Jan 5, 2009 21:11:28 GMT -6
fan perspective: " team a will win. they are awesome"
coach perspective: "team a should win assuming they can establish blah, blah... but, team b may have a chance if they can contain yada, yada"
fan - team will win all based on perception as absolutes. since it is perception, then little attempt made to justify the opinion nor open minded enough to see how variables could affect outcome
coach - states how team should win but can justify how the other team could possibly compete. or, if won't justify completely, can at least acknowledge that certain scenarios must go one way or another for a team to win
once threads turn to "fan" ... what's the point of them being here? where is the "learning value" in that?
|
|
|
|
Post by lionhart on Jan 6, 2009 21:53:40 GMT -6
strength of schedule national rank..... Florida #9 - Oklahoma #7 - Utah #86
Also have to look at OUT of conference games..... Utah beat a horrendous michigan team by a couple of points, they beat D-1AA Weber st, and did have an impressive victory vs. oregon st. Is that comoparable to the schedules of Florida (hawaii, florida st, miami, the citadel), or Oklahoma (chatanooga, big east champ cinncinatti, TCU)? that needs to be factored in as well.
|
|
