Well Boise started at 3 and TCU started at 6 and haven't lost while Oregon started at 11 and Auburn at 22 are currently ahead. Why did two teams who started in the top 10 and haven't lost get jumped by two teams outside the top 10?
Hmm.... perhaps because they play in real conferences and have to go against legitimate teams every single week? I could give a shit about Boise playing VT week one and then Nevada week 10, the week to week grind of a major conference determines who has the goods and who doesn't.
That's great. You can insist one way and I can insist the other and we can go on all week. People going with the schedule argument perhaps have not noticed that Oregon's schedule is not particularly strong either.
I've made the same argument a thousand times against Boise and TCU. You just made a simple, unsupported statement. I responded in kind. As for Oregon's sched, is it devastating? No, but it's significantly better than Boise State's. Oregon running the table in a major conference beating USC, Stanford, Cal, and (if they win) Arizona blows away Boise.
I'm a huge WAC/mid-major supporter and even I understand that Oregon's conference schedule is far more difficult than any mid-major's. Yisman, I don't understand how you think a TCU vs. Boise title game makes any kind of sense. Is it because they're undefeated? That doesn't mean they're the two best teams in the country. I could see one of the making it if Auburn or Oregon loses, but not both.
One of TCU or Boise should go to the championship game if they go undefeated just so this debate doesn't happen every year.
Yeah, I posted an opinion without justification and you did the same. We can go back and forth with "yes it is" "no it isn't" all week. Oregon's schedule is weak. So far, they've beaten one team in the BCS top 25. Boise State? Same thing. here's a strength of schedule statistical rating Boise State has a weaker in conference schedule of course, but they at least are willing to schedule strong games out of conference, as opposed to Oregon scheduling Portland State and New Mexico. Oregon's schedule is not dramatically stronger if you actually break it down, as opposed to just saying "they're in a real conference and Boise State isn't." Has LSU played a significantly stronger schedule than Boise State? Of course. Oregon? No.
I said in my opinion they should be ranked 1-2. Then Hurricane said it wouldn't make sense even if Auburn and Oregon both lost, which I disagree with. If both lose and Boise State and TCU win out, I think there's a good chance that Boise State and TCU would make it, and deservedly so.
Post full o' questions: Are you kidding me? Have you not seen what Auburn has done this year? Have you not seen what Oregon has done this year? The first sentence is completely wrong. ...and no, it's not the same thing at all. Boise State plays conference games against New Mexico State, San Jose State, Utah State, and Idaho. Oregon plays conferences games against USC, Stanford, and Arizona. These teams that I've listed are on completely different levels when it comes to talent.
We'll see what happens if they both lose. Auburn has yet to play the toughest game on their schedule. Oregon losing is less likely, but could happen.
What does that have to do with my post? I don't see how that doesn't make this the toughest game on their schedule. I think everyone would agree playing at Alabama is far tougher than hosting South Carolina.
You don't see how ridiculous that logic is? Apply that kind of "this team beat that team who beat this team" logic to any sport and see how far that gets you. Teams match up differently and upsets do happen, especially when the favorite is on the road in certain situations. Saying a home game against South Carolina is tougher than a road game against Alabama is pretty out there. Using your logic, Kentucky is better than Alabama and South Carolina. After all, they beat South Carolina. Ole Miss must be better than all of them, because they beat Kentucky.
Oh, the irony. College football is the only sport where that actually matters. A god damn computer makes all the decisions. It's not out there and I'm not even being biased. It's just the damn truth. South Carolina beat Alabama by two scores. The toughest opponent in the SEC wouldn't lose by two scores and they most definitely wouldn't have two losses. * I see you edited some stupid bullshit into your post (as usual). That obviously isn't what I was trying to say. It's become clear to me that you know far less than I thought about college football. Alabama isn't Auburn's toughest game. LSU and South Carolina are better teams THIS year (especially LSU).
All your posts are stupid bullshit, so I guess we're on even footing here. "Blah blah blah, I'm smarter than you. I'm knowledgable and you're stupid." Go ahead and start a poll and ask whether a home game against South Carolina is tougher than a game at Alabama or not. I'd be interested in seeing the results, especially since you claim that my disagreeing with that means I know far less than whatever your worthless opinion was beforehand. I really don't care how much you think I know about anything whatsoever.
