They are going to win the National Title. I am convinced that Texas cannot beat them. Too bad PSU lost a game because the officials gave their coach an extra 3 or 4 seconds or maybe, just maybe USC could have faced them for the title instead.

__________________
Adam Leavelle
Westminster OPC
Roaring Spring Pa.

http://www.myspace.com/aleavelle
"Speak wisdom to a fool and he'll think you have no sense at all"

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

I disagree...don't judge the 'Horns by this game today...it was an in-state rivalry game at the opponent's field.

Texas CAN beat USC, whether they will or not remains to be seen...

__________________
Michael Gridley
Presbyterian in non-communicant attendance at St. Thomas Lutheran (LCMS),
Eastpointe, MI

Oh I think they can beat USC, I just don't think they will. I HOPE that UCLA beats USC!

GO UCLA.

If PSU moved up ONE PLACE in the computer rankings (which I hate, win or lose, I hate the BCS!) then they will go to the ROSE BOWL, which, as BIG TEN conference champs THEY DESERVE.


For those of you too young to remember, back in the day (of real bowls) the PAC 10 and Big 10 champs met each other in the grandaddy bowl of all of them, the ROSE. So PSU joined the conference later... SO WHAT? Conferences can't grow?

The BC$ is just a bu$ine$$ deal. A bunch of people who don't care about history, just $$$. National Champ hysteria has destroyed conference identity, conference champs, and the meaning of regional dominance. It is a way to squeeze the top talent into a handful of schools that rake in money, as well as providing the NFL with a FREE minor league system.

[Edited on 11-26-2005 by Contra_Mundum]

__________________
Rev. Bruce G. Buchanan
ChainOLakes Presbyterian Church, CentralLake, MI


When posting friends, kindly bear those words of earthly wisdom in mind:
Oh, that God the gift would give us
To see ourselves as others see us.
--Robert Burns, 1786 (modernized) ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions? --

I am hopeful Texas's poor performance may just cause that, but I know it won't. They are still undefeated. PSU should be. NCAA coaches simply MUST find out how to have time added to a game!

I wish Texas would lose the Big-(little)-12 champ game so USC can play Penn State. That would at least be a good game and worth watching. USC-Texas would be just like last year ... The best of the best in the Big-12 vs. USC won't be a close game. If you don't believe me or think USC is over-rated, then get a copy of last year's Orange Bowl (or watch any game footage of USC this year, and realize that they've beaten 7 ranked teams this year, compared to Texas'... what.. 2?).

Michigan beat Penn State legitimately.

That's not the point.

Without the time that was added to the clock they would not have had a chance for that last play. That was the first time in NCAA football that I have ever...EVER seen a coach ask for time to be added to the clock and have it happen.

As much as I wanted PSU to win, they could've won if their 2 missed field goals, much earlier in the game, had been on target. Michigan would have had no time for 2 scores and last second (or negative seconds, whatever) heroics. Football is a game of 60 minutes--when it comes down to the last few seconds, things could go either way. PSU could have owned them, and been undefeated, except for two kicks in the first half. That's the way I look at it.

Why are we talking about the lost undefeated season? Why isn't it the biggest deal that PSU won the confrence, and is going to the Rose Bowl as reward? Oh yea. That's right. Because the BSC has ripped the heart out of meaningful conference props...

It happens all the time, coaches asking for time to be put back on the clock you just don't usually see it because it usually just gets done if it's legitimate.

In this case they were about to whistle play and Carr had a fit (rightly).

You'd have a point if the time wasn't legitimate, but it was. If PSU had won for the lack of those seconds, they'd have cheated.

Just like the Spartan timekeeper cheated for Michigan State against Michigan a few years back.

I have yet to see why time needed to be added. I've watched it over and over I and don't see anything. It doesn't matter though, even if PSU won they would not be ranked over USC or Texas.

I was in a hurry and that didn't come out right.

Penn State would not have cheated, but they'd not have won fairly.

Joe Pa would have done the same thing under the same circumstances and I'd never argue about it.

Time wasn't "added" it was restored.

:P

I don't think UCLA will beat USC. Arizona killed UCLA and SC just has too many weapons. I also think SC will beat TX, or anyone else they play in any bowl game. Again, too many weapons.

That reminds me, did anyone see my alma mater almost beat USC last Saturday?

__________________
Richard C. Barcellos
M.Div., 1989, The Master's Seminary
Th.M., 2000, Whitefield Theological Seminary
Managing Editor, Reformed Baptist Theological Review (www.rbtr.org)
Part-time Lecturer in New Testament and Administrative Assistant to the Dean, Midwest Center for Theological Studies (www.mctsowensboro.org/), Owensboro, KY

Fresno?

I've always kind of liked them. They are tough and determined and I like that coach! I wanted them to win soooo badly last week.

My parents know Pat Hill and host a fund raiser at their ranch every Spring. He's a very down-to-earth kinda guy. The team has embrassed his personality. They are a tough and determined bunch. Our only two losses this year came at Oregon, by 3, and at USC by 8. We should have won both games.

Fresno State is a very good team (unlike the jr. high teams Texas has played all year). Unfortunately, they had to play two top-10 BCS teams this year, or they would've gone undefeated.

Wow, get me an autograph for my office! :bigsmile:

USC is ranked #2 in offense, #30 in defense (1-0 v top ten - and should have lost - 4-0 v top 25)
Texas is ranked #1 in offense, #5 in defense (2-0 v top ten, 3-0 v top 25)
Texas not only can but probably will beat USC. Anybody in the top 15 could.

Other teams that could very well beat USC:
Penn St #13 offense, #10 defense (1-0 v top ten, 3-0 v top 25)
VT #12 offense, #3 defense (0-1 v top ten, 3-1 v top 25)
Auburn #16 offense, #6 defense (2-1 v top ten - lost to LSU at LSU in OT after missing 5 field goals, 2-1 v top 25)

Unfortunately,
UCLA #6 offense, #96 defense (a typical western team that would get absolutely crushed in the SEC or ACC) (1-0 v top ten, 2-0 v top 25 - though neither team is actually still ranked - Cal and Chokelahoma, need I say more)

__________________
If the turning of a straw would save my soul I would not move it, oh! no, I would not be a traitor to Jesus, I would not take His work out of His hands. - Martin Luther

Daniel L Cohee
Under the care of Evangel Presbytery,
Member, Decatur Presbyterian Church (PCA)
MDiv student, WTS Dallas

Great points!

None of those stats mean ANYTHING, Daniel. Just read everything the ESPN writers have been saying for weeks. Those teams with "top 10 defenses" are in conferences and playing against teams with NO OFFENSE. Anybody who plays 10 games against teams with less than 250 yards average offense can have a top 10 defense! That proves nothing. USC plays against teams that average 500+ yards of offense every week, and when they play the same teams that these "top 10 defense" teams play, they hold them to FEWER YARDS than the teams with the "top 10 defense." Those stats are worthless, because the Pac-10 is a completely different offensive conference than the Little-12 or the SEC. Both of those conferences have very low yardage offense, with the exception of one or two teams, while even the WORST teams in the Pac-10 usually double the yards of the better SEC or Little-12 teams.

This is no different than last year, folks. The best of the Little-12 will be embarrassed against the best of the Pac-10.

Oh, and by the way, your stats are wrong. Total offense, according to yards per game:

1. USC
2. Texas
3. Arizona State

More interestingly,
Number of Pac-10 teams in the top-50 of offensive production (by yards): 7
Number of Big-12 teams in the top-50 of offensive production (by yards): 4

According to the same stats, offensive production (by yards), how many teams in the top-25 did Texas defeat/play this year? 2 And USC? 6

Those defensive stats mean a lot more now, don't they?

Also, three of the top-5 Quarterbacks in the nation are in the Pac-10 (only one from the Big-12, Texas' VY), and two of the top-5 Running Backs are in the Pac-10 (none from the Big-12). The offensive production from the Big-12 and SEC just don't compare to the offensive production in conferences like the Big-10 and Pac-10. Therefore, those defensive 'stats' are pretty worthless, as anyone who plays a bunch of weak offensive teams can put up good numbers.

Actually if either Ronnie Brown or Cornell Williams were in the Pac 10 last year, they would have been last year's Reggie Bush. The reason they didn't win is not because they there is no offense in the SEC, but because the SEC's defense actually plays football - thus they didn't have inflated stats.

The NFL knows this, which is why more players get drafted from the SEC than anywhere else, and why people like Brown and Williams get drafted in the first round and then tear up the NFL, even though they aren't even mentioned come Heisman time (cause they don't have inflated stats). The QB, Jason Campbell, had a higher QB rating than Leinart and Jason White, won SEC player of the year, was drafted in the first round (White wasn't drafted at all) and went 13-0 including 4 wins over top ten teams (USC in contrast, only had two - Cal and Chokelahoma, need I say more), but wasn't mentioned either.
The little 12 (except for Texas this year) is similar to the PAC 10 (offense in a defenseless world). Last year, Chokelahoma would have been destroyed by at least three SEC teams (AU, GA, LSU) just like LSU thrashed them two years ago when LSU won the National Championship.
But I'll let last year's mistakes go by (we all know what should have happened). The point is that the NFL disagrees with you about offense in the SEC.

My fatherinlaw insists that the reason California and FLorida teams do so much better is because of the weather. Both in football and baseball. They are not inhibitted by the weather the way teams from the North East are.

I find that an intresting idea.

Hmm, how did Arkansas' defense do against USC this year? And Auburn two years ago? USC put 70 points on Arkansas, and SHUT OUT Auburn AT AUBURN in front of a shocked SEC crowd. Talk talk talk.