NCAA Bowls - Page 2

**SuperSlim** · 01-06-2005, 10:23 PM

wait a minute wait a minute.

Auburn would have given USC quite a run. The thing about the championship game was that OU didn't show up to play. Well they did on their first drive of the game and scored but after that they pretty much did nothin. So USC really didn't get that much of a challenge in that game. Auburn would have given it to them.

But one thing Ithat I really find retarded is that Utah is more than likely gonna be rated below OU in the next season.

**Jesus Shuttlesworth** · 01-08-2005, 01:40 AM

How can people say USC would kill Auburn? You really don't know. Nobody thought USC was gonna blow out OU and it happened. Its all about match ups, and actaully playing the game. You can't really predict when theres that much talent on both teams.

**BCWWF** · 01-08-2005, 04:53 PM

I didn't say that they would get killed, I just said that I don't think they could have won. USC was the number one team all year and I think beating OU like that proved it. Of course thats just an opinion, depending on the game situations Auburn could have come out and won 50-0. I am just saying that I think USC would have won regardless of who they played.

Also, it looks like for 2006 they are adding a fifth BCS Bowl game and are in meetings now to decide the details. Personally I think it would be kind of a mistake if they add more conference champions. I say they should keep the six BCS conferences they have and then have four wild cards. I just don't think that MAC and WAC and C-USA or any of those could produce a top 10 team each year. If there were five bowls this season then Cal and Boise both would have made it.

Its just kind of funny how each year there is a complaint about the BCS but its different each year. Last year it wasn't accurate because USC and LSU were considered by the writers to be the top two. This year, the BCS and the writers agreed, but now a team pretty unanimously third is making complaints. Its not going to be perfect until there is a playoff (even then there will still be plenty of controversy, purely because of the nature of it all), but really in my opinion the BCS system worked pretty well in terms of a national championship. It didn't do so well in some of the other games, Cal should have been in it over Pitt and V-Tech, but I think if they add a fifth bowl that would all solve itself.

01-06-2005, 10:23 PM	#1
SuperSlim Oh Sht* Posts: 19,302	wait a minute wait a minute. Auburn would have given USC quite a run. The thing about the championship game was that OU didn't show up to play. Well they did on their first drive of the game and scored but after that they pretty much did nothin. So USC really didn't get that much of a challenge in that game. Auburn would have given it to them. But one thing Ithat I really find retarded is that Utah is more than likely gonna be rated below OU in the next season.

01-08-2005, 01:40 AM	#2
Jesus Shuttlesworth Posts: 42,765	How can people say USC would kill Auburn? You really don't know. Nobody thought USC was gonna blow out OU and it happened. Its all about match ups, and actaully playing the game. You can't really predict when theres that much talent on both teams.

01-08-2005, 04:53 PM	#3
BCWWF The People's Member Posts: 18,092	I didn't say that they would get killed, I just said that I don't think they could have won. USC was the number one team all year and I think beating OU like that proved it. Of course thats just an opinion, depending on the game situations Auburn could have come out and won 50-0. I am just saying that I think USC would have won regardless of who they played. Also, it looks like for 2006 they are adding a fifth BCS Bowl game and are in meetings now to decide the details. Personally I think it would be kind of a mistake if they add more conference champions. I say they should keep the six BCS conferences they have and then have four wild cards. I just don't think that MAC and WAC and C-USA or any of those could produce a top 10 team each year. If there were five bowls this season then Cal and Boise both would have made it. Its just kind of funny how each year there is a complaint about the BCS but its different each year. Last year it wasn't accurate because USC and LSU were considered by the writers to be the top two. This year, the BCS and the writers agreed, but now a team pretty unanimously third is making complaints. Its not going to be perfect until there is a playoff (even then there will still be plenty of controversy, purely because of the nature of it all), but really in my opinion the BCS system worked pretty well in terms of a national championship. It didn't do so well in some of the other games, Cal should have been in it over Pitt and V-Tech, but I think if they add a fifth bowl that would all solve itself.