College Football 2013 |Week 8| The best X-loss teams in the nation

Ohio State: Only the second biggest chokers in the BCS Era

There you go.

EDIT: Things you remember while doing research for these things, Florida State is also 1-2 in the National Championship Game.
 
Instead of railing on the dude why don't you guys go ahead and rank the best teams of the BCS era or something. I'm quite sure you can make a case for OSU being top 3. Early-decade USC and current Bama run are the only two teams that come to mind as being decidedly better. LSU? I mean it's not like OSU isn't the conversation. Geez Louise.
 
NEOPARADIGM said:
Instead of railing on the dude why don't you guys go ahead and rank the best teams of the BCS era or something. I'm quite sure you can make a case for OSU being top 3. Early-decade USC and current Bama run are the only two teams that come to mind as being decidedly better. LSU? I mean it's not like OSU isn't the conversation. Geez Louise.
Click to expand...

Bama, Florida, LSU, and USC.
 
The BCS era started in 1997, not 2008 Bama fans.

If you want to cite getting to a national title game and losing as reasons why Ohio State sucks, how about being complete trash for the first 10 years of the BCS as a knock against Alabama?
 
Has there been anyone in the B1G that has consistently hounded OSUn?

College Football started before 1900. No need to set up arbitrary starting points.
 
I don't understand why someone even mentioned Ohio State in the title game. Ohio State isn't even top five worthy and everyone knows it.

If Ohio State makes the title game that's more of a joke than Georgia being ranked this week.
 
The BCS era is not arbitrary lol. Historically, it will be known as it's own era. We all know this. It started in 97', Alabama was completely irrelevant for the majority of this time. Don't think recent success puts them at the top of the entire era and I can't be the only one.
 
peteykirch said:
7-8 years wasn't the start of the Greg era. He was there since '00. The difference was by 04-05 things started to change hence by 7-8 year estimate of when things started to click.
Click to expand...

I didn't say it was the "start" of the Schiano era.

His recruiting in 04-05 was worse than in the start in terms of "stars." However, that class had a lot of under the radar talent which turned out to be successful.

Greg was notoriously hard to work for, and pretty much the only two stalwarts of the staff were Joe Susan who left to be the HC at Bucknell, and Flood. There wasn't much continuity.

Pretty much taking the entire PITT staff helped out Greg and the recruiting, but there were still a lot of question marks in terms of players they took a chance on and didn't.
Click to expand...

I do agree here to a point. I think the players that Greg took on a chance post-Pitt stuff are looking better than the ones he took on before them. A lot of those guys are starting to bust through the depth charts.

The most notorious had to be Ray Graham who pretty much took all his game film to Rutgers and pleaded with the Coaching Staff to give him a look, but they refused.
Click to expand...

There were academic issues there with Ray Graham. Also, you are confusing the Ray Graham and the Dion Lewis stories.

Still, I understand your point. With that said, there were more Mo Sanu's than Dion Lewis types.


I think the biggest underlying issue has been Flood and his inability to strike gold with the OL like he did from 05-07. So many wasted recruiting classes on projects that never saw the field or were moved to DL.
Click to expand...

Flood was never really responsible for the OL that were recruited to the team in 05-07. Many of those guys were recruited before he got there.

I agree with you that with NJ there is enough talent if you take 3/10 of the Top 10, and a couple Top 5 kids from PA/NY/MD/DE/etc and just fill out the class with 3 stars to be more than competitive. I think the issue wasn't so much the recruiting it was the fact Greg was a really average to poor gameday coach.
Click to expand...

I will agree gameday coaching was a bigger issue than recruiting. However, my point is that Greg wasn't heads & shoulders above previous coaches, and certainly isn't someone you should be happy to have as your head coach.

I also vastly disagree with Yaboosh's assessment of Rutgers' place in the football hierarchy.
 
dont call it a comeback said:
The BCS era is not arbitrary lol. Historically, it will be known as it's own era. We all know this. It started in 97', Alabama was completely irrelevant for the majority of this time. Don't think recent success puts them at the top of the entire era and I can't be the only one.
Click to expand...
I'm sure you're not. But the BCS will be known as the SEC's era in general and Bama's era in specific. That's just how it is.
 
cdyhybrid said:
1) Bama
2) LSU/Florida
2) Florida/LSU
4) USC
5) Texas/Ohio State/FSU
Click to expand...

How is Texas And Florida State even close to the level of Ohio State? Texas has gone to just 4 BCS game compared to Ohio States 10 after this season. Florida State is 2-5 in BCS games.

Ohio State is 6-3 in BCS games, yes the Arkansas game counts for in the BCS record book. http://www.bcsfootball.org/news/story?id=4819309

You guys are not being rational here.
 
ConfusingJazz said:
What is that in tats?
Click to expand...

Depends. Is there a current NCAA probe, and how is it affecting the exchange rate?

dont call it a comeback said:
How is Texas And Florida State even close to the level of Ohio State? Texas has gone to just 4 BCS game compared to Ohio States 10 after this season. Florida State is 2-5 in BCS games.

Ohio State is 6-3 in BCS games, yes the Arkansas game counts for in the BCS record book. http://www.bcsfootball.org/news/story?id=4819309

You guys are not being rational here.
Click to expand...

Texas, FSU, and Ohio State have the same number of rings and Texas' ring was won in arguably the best college football game of all time, with a pantheon-level performance from their star QB. The fact is that Ohio State has never beaten an SEC team in a BCS bowl game in an era dominated by SEC teams, and they won their ring as a result of a dubious pass interference call.
 
dont call it a comeback said:
How is Texas And Florida State even close to the level of Ohio State? Texas has gone to just 4 BCS game compared to Ohio States 10 after this season. Florida State is 2-5 in BCS games.

Ohio State is 6-3 in BCS games, yes the Arkansas game counts for in the BCS record book. http://www.bcsfootball.org/news/story?id=4819309

You guys are not being rational here.
Click to expand...
You're being irrational if you think anything but rings count for shit. Who cares how many Rose Bowls you played in? If you didn't win the championship, nobody cares.
 
mre said:
You're being irrational if you think anything but rings count for shit. Who cares how many Rose Bowls you played in? If you didn't win the championship, nobody cares.
Click to expand...

For example, until this page, I completely forgot about the 2009 Fiesta Bowl.. and we won that!
 
mre said:
You're being irrational if you think anything but rings count for shit. Who cares how many Rose Bowls you played in? If you didn't win the championship, nobody cares.
Click to expand...

Everyone. Every one cares. You still have a great season even when you don't win the national title. The only reason you are putting it on such a pedestal is that your team has not shown any consistency over the period besides the pat 4 years, so you want to dismiss everything else as much as possible. In other words, it is more convenient for you to ignore the big picture because Alabama was pure shit for the majority of the BCS era.
 
Guys, maybe in the B1G they care about Fiesta Bowl wins just as much as national championships.

It's kinda like the Pac-12 and the Rose Bowl.
 
dont call it a comeback said:
Everyone. Every one cares. You still have a great season even when you don't win the national title. The only reason you are putting it on such a pedestal is that your team has not shown any consistency over the period besides the pat 4 years, so you want to dismiss everything else as much as possible. In other words, it is more convenient for you to ignore the big picture because Alabama was pure shit for the majority of the BCS era.
Click to expand...

Everyone? That's demonstrably false, from this thread alone. The only reason why you're bringing non-championship BCS games into the discussion is because OSU doesn't stack up when it comes to championships.
 
ConfusingJazz said:
Consistency?

Fuck it, Texas Longhorns, 1996-2009, best team ever.

SUCK IT, SEC!
Click to expand...

Alabama Crimson Tide 1892-2013 (Minus 1993, 2005-2007 because they on VACATION): So Many National Championships, we don't know which ones are real and which ones ain't.

So we count them twice.
 
Interesting stat in the a Feldman article I am reading right now: "according to ESPN's research crew, Winston had 293 passing yards against the blitz -- the most by a BCS AQ quarterback in the last three seasons."
 
BCS stats that may have relevance:

AQ Conference: W-L %

SEC: 17-8 .680
PAC: 13-7 .650
BEAST: 8-7 .533
B1G: 12-14 .462 (most appearances)
B12: 9-11 .450
ACC: 3-13 .133
Click to expand...



Top 10 Schools Record (Appearances)

Ohio State 6-3 (9)
Oklahoma 3-5 (8)
USC 6-1 (7)
Florida 5-2 (7)
Virginia Tech 1-5 (6)
LSU 4-1 (5)
Alabama 3-2 (5)
Oregon 3-2 (5)
Michigan 2-3 (5)
Wisconsin 2-3 (5)
Click to expand...
 
mre said:
You're being irrational if you think anything but rings count for shit. Who cares how many Rose Bowls you played in? If you didn't win the championship, nobody cares.
Click to expand...


Spoken like an Alabama fan after the last couple of years.

Taking pride in winning big fun bowl games is not uncommon and is one of the best things about college football. An over emphasis on championships is bad for the sport in general I think.

A BCS bowl win is a big deal and should be celebrated, especially when it isn't against Northern Illinois.
 
When you are talking about a team of the ERA, of a 17 year span, you have to take into account more than just how many rings. When you attempt to analyze and rank overall performance over a span that long, and you have a team that has been consistent throughout (Ohio State) with 10 BCS bowl appearances, and then you have a team that took a break for the first twelve years of that era (Bama)....well I shouldn't have to spell it out for any one here. You all seem like educated gentleman.

Do we really all forget Alabama lost to mid major Utah in a BCS bowl game. How is that not more embarrassing than making it to the title game and being the 2nd best team in the nation that year?
 
As a major program, you should care about your first BCS bowl. Caring about anything else after that besides the National Championship is weird to me.

I care about the 2005 Rose Bowl win over Michigan, I expect no other fanbase else to. Except Cal, because roses smell so delicious.

The 2006 Rose Bowl and the 2010 Championship game? Yeah, people probably know those.

And the 2009 Fiesta Bowl? Literally zero shits given.
 
dont call it a comeback said:
When you are talking about a team of the ERA, of a 17 year span, you have to take into account more than just how many rings. When you attempt to analyze and rank overall performance over a span that long, and you have a team that has been consistent throughout (Ohio State) with 10 BCS bowl appearances, and then you have a team that took a break for the first twelve years of that era (Bama)....well I shouldn't have to spell it out for any one here. You all seem like educated gentleman.

Do we really all forget Alabama lost to mid major Utah in a BCS bowl game. How is that not more embarrassing than making it to the title game and being the 2nd best team in the nation that year?
Click to expand...

Even if you ignore rings I'd still put USC, Gata, and LSU over Ohio State.
 
All the "other BCS" bowl games will mean even less in the Playoff Era.

You guys wanted to get "true champions" in the BCS (and beyond) era, and this is the price you pay for it. Rose/Sugar/Orange (and that other game) mean squat on the national recognition level.
 
Lonestar said:
All the "other BCS" bowl games will mean even less in the Playoff Era.

You guys wanted to get "true champions" in the BCS (and beyond) era, and this is the price you pay for it. Rose/Sugar/Orange (and that other game) mean squat on the national recognition level.
Click to expand...

Fucking Fiesta Bowl. Should have been the Cotton.

And the Cotton should still be in the Cotton.
 
I consider 2007 Fiesta to be important, and I'm a fan of neither team.

I mean, how does Disney not make a movie for a game that literally ended with a hook-and-ladder, then Statue of Liberty, then star RB proposes to cheerleader girlfriend?

...

...

Yeah, still bitter about our defense costing us the Auburn game. Honestly, they also cost us the Bama game, and will cost us the LSU game. I remember when a 10-2 season would be mildly disappointing. Now it would be miraculous.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

College Football 2017 Week 8 |OT| Top 25 Coug'd it. Or is it Clemsoning?
8 9 10 11 12
573
45K
Bigby_Wolf replied
College Football 2017 Week 6 |OT| It Just Means More (TM)
23 24 25 26 27
1K
65K
ryseing replied
The Crisis in Venezula
2
2K
God Enel replied
NFL Week 8 |OT| Is anybody still here?
2 3
104
15K
manfestival replied
  • Locked
College Football 2016 Championship Week: Of Meaningless Titles
43 44 45 46 47
2K
108K
mre replied
Top Bottom