PDA

View Full Version : BCS Title Game Predictions



improbus
01-03-2009, 07:43 AM
I'm torn on this one. On one hand, I do think that the Big 12 is overrated. UC was their best out of conference win. But, the SEC was up and down this year too, see Ole Miss beating TTU and Alabama losing to Utah. My gut says that Florida is too good all around for Oklahoma to handle, but I wouldn't be too surprised if Oklahoma put up 50.

LoganBuck
01-03-2009, 07:58 AM
Florida 49 - Oklahoma 27

The Big 12 hasn't shown well in bowl games. They are allowing points at the same alarming clip, but aren't fairing as well offensively. Sure they have gotten some wins, but those games have been ugly.

MWM
01-03-2009, 10:39 AM
I still remained surprised at how people let conferences dominate how they think about individual teams. The conferences are not playing each other. The other teams in the conference have nothing to do with the two teams playing for the national championship. It's Florida against Oklahoma, not the Big 12 versus the SEC.

Caseyfan21
01-03-2009, 11:06 AM
I will use my tried and tested formula that accurately worked to predict last season's National Championship game, the World Series winner, and last season's Superbowl winner. I always pick the team I do not want to win. So this year the NCAA Football National Champion will be Florida.

benchrosemorgan
01-03-2009, 11:17 AM
fla-30
uo-20

tex-27
ohio st. 20

improbus
01-03-2009, 11:24 AM
I still remained surprised at how people let conferences dominate how they think about individual teams. The conferences are not playing each other. The other teams in the conference have nothing to do with the two teams playing for the national championship. It's Florida against Oklahoma, not the Big 12 versus the SEC.
I understand your frustration (I believe we've had this argument before), but conference play and performance gives us a context for each team. The fact that Texas Tech, a supposedly high level Big 12 team, lost to a mid-to-low level SEC team gives us a little context. I am not saying SEC > BIG 12, therefore, FLORIDA > OKLAHOMA. What I am saying is that I don't know what to think of Oklahoma. The SEC out of conference beat Clemson, FSU, ASU, TTU, Michigan State, Georgia Tech, and Boston College. The Big 12 beat WVU, Illinois, Northwestern, Clemson, Cincy, TCU, and possibly OSU. That provides some context. It does not provide a definitive answer (see Alabama - Utah). I see the SEC's OOC schedule as slightly stronger which helps Florida's argument.

MWM
01-03-2009, 11:43 AM
I understand your frustration (I believe we've had this argument before), but conference play and performance gives us a context for each team. The fact that Texas Tech, a supposedly high level Big 12 team, lost to a mid-to-low level SEC team gives us a little context. I am not saying SEC > BIG 12, therefore, FLORIDA > OKLAHOMA. What I am saying is that I don't know what to think of Oklahoma. The SEC out of conference beat Clemson, FSU, ASU, TTU, Michigan State, Georgia Tech, and Boston College. The Big 12 beat WVU, Illinois, Northwestern, Clemson, Cincy, TCU, and possibly OSU. That provides some context. It does not provide a definitive answer (see Alabama - Utah). I see the SEC's OOC schedule as slightly stronger which helps Florida's argument.

Well, the clear second best SEC team lost, and lost convincingly, to a Mountain West team. I just can't wrap my mind around how Ole Miss beating Texas Tech has anything to do with Florida versus Oklahoma. Texas Tech completely disappeared after the loss to OU. They were a completely different team.

Also, I think people put way too much stock in the sweeping implications of bowl games. For one, I think the fact that teams have 4 weeks to prepare for these games makes it difficult to draw the types of conclusions people want to draw. So much can change in that long of a timeframe preparing for a single game. Would the result of TTU again Miss have been different had they played in the middle of the season when TTU was playing at their best and Ole Miss was still trying to discover themselves? Maybe not, but I don't look at one game and draw absolutel conclusions. Ole Miss beat Texas Tech yesterday because they played better. I don't think it means anything other than that.

And I think there's some fear of calling out the SEC as weak, because afterall it's the SEC and you're likely to get railed on by the SEC contingent always in place to put all the other inferior conferenes in their rightful place. But I try to be as objective as possible and have no problem saying that while most years the SEC is obviously the strongest conference, this year they really weren't that good at all. So when folks try to discredit Big 12 teams because the conference wasn't that good, why don't they apply the same logic to Florida? Let's be realistic, who really did Florida beat this year other than Alabama in the title game? No one special, IMO. And even Alabama was never as good as they hype. So Florida is really the only top caliber team in the SEC this year, IMO. Don't get me wrong, I think they are REALLY good and probably the second best team in the country (I think USC would handle Florida quite easily in a bowl game), and will most likely win the BCS title game, but that's because they have a good team. They have a great offense and a pretty good defense. That has nothing at all to do with the SEC, who I think provided very little test to them this year.

You could go all over the place trying to map some kind of logical conclusions about conferences from bowl games. I don't care how many bowl games the Pac-10 won, I still think they were a very weak conference this year. Sample sizes of bowl games are way to small to draw solid conclusions, IMO. I so wish we saw more big time OOC conference games during the season. It would be easier that way.

Blimpie
01-03-2009, 11:44 AM
I saw an interesting stat the other day...

If Florida wins the game, it would only be the third time in history that a conference won 3 consecutive national titles.

The SEC did it last in 1978-1980 (Alabama, Alabama, Georgia). Before that, it was the Big 10 in 1940-1942 (Minnesota, Minnesota, Ohio State).

I look for the SEC to win it again this year: Florida 27 Oklahoma 24

Highlifeman21
01-03-2009, 11:59 AM
Gators 38

Sooners 17

dabvu2498
01-03-2009, 12:17 PM
Mwm - I must say this. Using your logic in this and other cfb threads I've come to the conclusion that there are no good teams in the country this year. Except maybe Utah.

MWM
01-03-2009, 01:02 PM
Mwm - I must say this. Using your logic in this and other cfb threads I've come to the conclusion that there are no good teams in the country this year. Except maybe Utah.

A little hyperbole there, ya' think? It was a clever zinger, but not really true of my opinion at all. I'm not sure what I said to make you think that. Is it that I think the SEC is really two deep this year? My logic is that I don't judge individual teams as much as others based on what conference they play in or by the result of other bowl games by two completely different teams. That's it. I think there's a tendency to put too much emphasis on it. You can go in circles all day long trying to look at individual gams to draw conculsions on conferences based on games like Ole Miss and Texas Tech. If you want to go that route, then how about Ole miss beating Florida in Florida.Ole Miss then beats Texas Tech who was destroyed by Oklahoma. So if we're using the logic of who played who, then why is every picking Florida to win? I know I'mpicking them because I think they're just a better team, both in talent and in coaching. But it has nothing to do with Ole Miss beating Texas Tech.

I don't think there are many great teams this year, but a lot of good ones. I've said very clearly that I think Florida is a really good team. I think USC is an excellent team, and the best team in the country. Alabama is good, but I never thought they were a great team. Yes, Utah is good. Texas is pretty good, but I think Oklahoma is better even with the head to head result. I think Penn State is a really good team, but was just overmatched against USC with that much time to prepare playing at home.

But aside from that, I don't see all that much in the way of really good teams. Not even I thought Ohio State was worthy of a BCS bowl and thought it a travesty they got one.

But I think there is some merit to the idea that an increase in parity has led to fewer really good teams. I see a small handful of really good teams and then a bunch of above average ones.

I'm not sure what you want me to say. We're talking college football and I've expressed an opinion. Disagree if you like, but I don't see the need for the snarkiness. I have no problem if people see it differently thatn I do, but I was just offering a different viewpoint. Who do you think are the good teams that I don't?

OnBaseMachine
01-03-2009, 01:29 PM
I saw an interesting stat the other day...

If Florida wins the game, it would only be the third time in history that a conference won 3 consecutive national titles.

The SEC did it last in 1978-1980 (Alabama, Alabama, Georgia). Before that, it was the Big 10 in 1940-1942 (Minnesota, Minnesota, Ohio State).

I look for the SEC to win it again this year: Florida 27 Oklahoma 24

Cal won three straight National Championships back in the 1920's as part of the Pacific Coast Conference.

LoganBuck
01-03-2009, 01:34 PM
I still remained surprised at how people let conferences dominate how they think about individual teams. The conferences are not playing each other. The other teams in the conference have nothing to do with the two teams playing for the national championship. It's Florida against Oklahoma, not the Big 12 versus the SEC.

If what you are saying is aimed at me, I was trying to provide a context about the Big 12. All season long, the defense in the Big 12 was kind of a running joke with scores like 66-45 showing up with regularity. We have gotten to bowl season and those teams are still scoring points, but not at the same level, and they are giving up points, and big plays. I see Florida as good enough on defense to slow down Oklahoma. I don't think Oklahoma can slow down Florida.

I predict a championship game with 76 points being scored. It should be fun to watch.

Blimpie
01-03-2009, 01:35 PM
Cal won three straight National Championships back in the 1920's as part of the Pacific Coast Conference.I saw where Cal won it in 1920--but then but then not again during that decade...You are not thinking about Cornell are you?

In any event, perhaps the stat I heard was involving the "modern era" or something like that.

OnBaseMachine
01-03-2009, 01:38 PM
I saw where Cal won it in 1920--but then but then not again during that decade...You are not thinking about Cornell are you?

In any event, perhaps the stat I heard was involving the "modern era" or something like that.

They won it in 1920, 1921, and 1922.

http://cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/div_ia/pac10/california/national_champs.php

MWM
01-03-2009, 01:43 PM
If what you are saying is aimed at me,

Well, itreally wasn't "aimed" at anyone. One of the downsides to this medium of interaction, is that no one can tell the tone in which things are being typed. I was expressing an observation that I see not just here, but all over. And I was offering a different viewpoint.

I, too, think Florida will win because they're better.

dabvu2498
01-03-2009, 01:50 PM
Mwm - I think I just have problems following your logic. No offense intended.

improbus
01-03-2009, 01:50 PM
MWM, I agree with both of your last two posts. I do think the SEC was down this year, and were a two team league. I even think that Alabama was overrated, they played in a division in which Auburn, LSU, and Arkansas were well off of their traditional play. But, I also think that the Big 12 love fest is slightly unwarranted.

LoganBuck
01-03-2009, 02:25 PM
Well, itreally wasn't "aimed" at anyone. One of the downsides to this medium of interaction, is that no one can tell the tone in which things are being typed. I was expressing an observation that I see not just here, but all over. And I was offering a different viewpoint.

I, too, think Florida will win because they're better.

No problem, I just thought you were talking about my comment. I too grow loathsome of conference commentary. In my opinion bowl records of the conferences are worthless measures of conference quality. It is all about the matchups. Georgia Tech - LSU is a perfect example. GT could not have picked a worse matchup for their offense. Same goes for Florida State - Wisconsin. Wisconsin happened to get the worst matchup for them. Florida State is big enough to matchup with Wisconsin, and fast enough to be real trouble. Any other ACC team outside of Miami, and they are going to be evenly matched.

MWM
01-03-2009, 10:59 PM
Mwm - I think I just have problems following your logic. No offense intended.

Well, I didn't think i was offering up any logic. I was more objecting to the logic of using conference strength at the expense of other things in comparing individual teams. When it comes to the college football system, I don't think there really is a lot of logic involved. I was also pointing out how you can't logically do the whole exercise of trying to look at who beat whom with a couple of degrees of separation in assessing a bowl matchup.

dabvu2498
01-03-2009, 11:37 PM
True. But it is what we're left with. Plus it's fun. Especially as an sec fan. ;)

MWM
01-03-2009, 11:49 PM
Yes, but even the SEC can get screwed (see Jason Campbell's Auburn team).

Handofdeath
01-04-2009, 12:33 AM
I think some perspective is needed here. I'm reading on this board and all over the internet about how much of a shocker Ole Miss pulled off beating Texas Tech, and make no mistake it was an upset. But, it's not like Mississippi was some 6-6 Notre Dame team going to a bowl on reputation alone. This was an 8 win team ranked in the Top 25 and who was 2nd in the SEC West. All four of their losses were by a combined 19 points and every team they lost to wound up going to a bowl. Texas Tech was out of gas and Mississippi just outplayed them because they are flat out good. Don't believe me? The #1 ranked Florida has lost just one game this year.

They lost to Ole Miss.

Oklahoma 56
Florida 24

GAC
01-04-2009, 05:44 AM
I have to admit that I was quite impressed, and gained new found respect, for Utah after their manhandling of Alabama.

And I say the same for Ol' Miss too. Not only did they beat Florida, but even in their four losses, to quality teams, they played them tough.

The Oklahoma-Florida game is not going to be a low scoring affair IMO. I wish it was played in a more "neutral" site other then in Florida though. C'est la vie!

Two very good QBs, and two very high-powered offenses, matched up in this one. I can easily see 70+ pts total, maybe even more then 80, being scored in this one. It's gonna be a race IMO.

Offensively - Oklahoma is superior to Florida. And that is not saying Florida is a slouch. Defensively - Florida is the only one that has a semblance of possessing one.

But I don't believe the Gator's defense can contain Iglesias, Gresham, Johnson, and Broyles. I don't see where they've faced an offense even remotely similar to the Sooner's. The loss of Murray hurts the Sooners, but I think Brown and Bradford will pick up the slack. They are just that talented IMO.

I'm not going to take an Oklahoma team lightly that scored at least 58 points in each of its last six games, winning by an average of 33.3 points. I also remember throughout the course of the season where Texas Tech and Oklahoma State were touted as a couple of the best teams in the country, and both got POUNDED by Oklahoma.

When I look at Florida's schedule, I'm just not as impressed by their wins and opponents. A good, sound football team for sure; but there is something about them that I just can't put my finger on.

I say the Sooners win...45-38

And have I mentioned I don't like Urban Meyers. ;)

improbus
01-04-2009, 07:57 AM
Here is my analogy for picking CFB games. I think we can probably all agree that the AL East is the division with the best teams (=SEC). Next would come either the NL East or Central (=Big 12). Finally, you have the NL West (=MWC). I would tend to value 95 wins in the AL East over 95 wins in the NL East, which I would value over 95 wins in the NL West. The NL West team can absolutely win against an AL East team, but I'm not going to be likely to give them the benefit of the doubt. It is an elitist approach, but CFB has ALWAYS been an elitist sport. ALWAYS.

No offense to the little guys, but in CFB, I want to see OSU v. Miami, USC v. Texas, etc...

Blimpie
01-04-2009, 02:37 PM
They won it in 1920, 1921, and 1922.

http://cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/div_ia/pac10/california/national_champs.phpHmmm.... One of our sources is grossly inaccurate.

Here is one that I looked at earlier:

http://www.collegefootballpoll.com/champions_national.html

This might involve some deeper investigation

;)

LoganBuck
01-04-2009, 04:07 PM
Hmmm.... One of our sources is grossly inaccurate.

Here is one that I looked at earlier:

http://www.collegefootballpoll.com/champions_national.html

This might involve some deeper investigation

;)

Back in the day, the titles were handed out by an alphabet soup of organizations. Multiple teams lay claim to the title in multiple years. For a true count of National Titles it needs to be the Associated Press title, which isn't even part of the current equation.

KoryMac5
01-04-2009, 05:35 PM
Florida beats the Sooners in Bob Stoops last game as head coach 31-20.

Personally I think USC is the best team in the country and until we get a better system than the BCS all we will have is debate and speculation on who is number #1.