OT: And crashing the party continues...

[HornedFrog Purple]

43-10. 10-0 for the first time since 1938. The students threw Tostitos on the field. 42000+ at Amon Carter. It's fun to annoy the hell out of the BCS.

[JeeberD]

I'm rooting for the Frogs now, HFP. I really hope they win out and that their game against SMU doesn't damage their Strength of Schedule too much...

[NoMyths]

Originally posted by JeeberD
I'm rooting for the Frogs now, HFP. I really hope they win out and that their game against SMU doesn't damage their Strength of Schedule too much... That said, isn't their strength of schedule already like 7th or 8th worst in D1?

[Buccaneer]

Sorry to poop on the party but as I am intrigued by TCU's lofty standing, I take a look at their results and see absolutely nothing of any value...


September 1 at Tulane W 38-35 1-0 (1-0 Conf USA)
September 6 Navy W 17-3 2-0 (1-0 Conf USA)
September 20 Vanderbilt W 30-14 3-0 (1-0 Conf USA)
September 27 at Arizona W 13-10 4-0 (1-0 Conf USA)
October 4 Army W 27-0 5-0 (2-0 Conf USA)
October 10 at South Florida W 13-10 6-0 (3-0 Conf USA)
October 18 UAB W 27-24 7-0 (4-0 Conf USA)
October 25 at Houston W 62-55 8-0 (5-0 Conf USA)
November 5 No. 25 Louisville W 31-28 9-0 (6-0 Conf USA)
November 15 Cincinnati W 43-10 10-0 (7-0 Conf USA)


Questions. How did they get to be ranked so high with this schedule? Does having one or two losses with a real tough schedule really hurts in the standings as in the case of slightly lower ranking teams?

[IMetTrentGreen]

there is no reason for them to be in the bcs. they would get torched by any bcs calibur team. but 10-0 is 10-0, and even though they won't get in, it's fun to see the suits sweat

[Chubby]

I'm rooting for TCU in hopes that they help bring down the BCS.

Not that Tranghese would have a reason to do that now... oh wait... ;)

[HornedFrog Purple]

TCU was ranked 29th in the preseason polls as the defending C-USA and Liberty Bowl champions. As they have won, teams around them have lost. Is it not inconceivable that because of that they, in the course of 10 games be allowed to move up an average of 2 spots a week for every game they have won? (they are ranked 9th and 10th in the two polls)

If the team was not TCU or any other mid-major the answer would be no it is very conceivable and par the course.

If TCU ends up with one loss they are out of the BCS picture totally. That is where strength of schedule factors in.

If being undefeated this far into the season is so easy for any school in Division 1-A, then there should be a lot of mid-majors doing it right?

If the claim is strength of schedule is not a factor, then take a look at the only two undefeated teams in Division 1-A and look at the difference in BCS totals. Oklahoma's 1.68 to TCU's 17.65

[Easy Mac]

someones just mad TCU has the best record in Texas.

[Chubby]

I actually think it's quite impressive that TCU has pushed this high into the BCS polls considering that the BCS is SETUP to keep non-top tier conference teams out.

How is a non elite conference going to get a good strength of schedule when you can only realistically play 4-5 top 25 teams a season assuming ALL of your non-league games are against top 25 teams, which will never happen?

How are you supposed to get a high poll ranking, when you will always start out low, ensuring that teams in power conferences with 1-2 losses will still be ranked above you constantly?

If you look a the BCS breakdown, the only place they have aan advantage is in the computer polls since I think they don't take into account the difficulty of the opposition that much.

Strength of schedule and the 2 polls will always ensure that a non-BCS conference will NEVER play in the title game even if they happen to finish in the top 6 undefeated while other teams have 1-2 losses. Quality Win bonus points just further skew the balance away from 2nd tier conference teams.

[JeeberD]

Chubby-

Love your sig... :D

[Chubby]

Jeeber - Thanks. Besides, anyone who un-naturally unretires 900 times and takes advantages of drunken mules needs to be remembered negatively!

[Buccaneer]

How is a non elite conference going to get a good strength of schedule when you can only realistically play 4-5 top 25 teams a season assuming ALL of your non-league games are against top 25 teams, which will never happen?

Which was my initial assumption before I checked, I had assumed TCU had beaten a top-caliber team or two in the non-conference schedule.

[Chubby]

Buc - They are so high due to the computer polls. They actually have the 4th best composite comp score out of all teams. They only place they can gain pts is IF the teams above them lose. They won't hop them in the voting polls and prob won't hop them in any more comp polls but their strength of schedule can drop along with the polls unfortunately.

[HornedFrog Purple]

Originally posted by IMetTrentGreen
there is no reason for them to be in the bcs. they would get torched by any bcs calibur team. but 10-0 is 10-0, and even though they won't get in, it's fun to see the suits sweat

yeah goodness knows it would be nice if some major Texas school can hang with any bcs caliber team. I mean all the big dogs here lost to one by a combined score of 183-16. :rolleyes:

[GoldenEagle]

Do you think TCU would like to play Memphis right now?

[thealmighty]

Maybe the Frogs WOULD get their ass handed to them in a BCS bowl, but for you non Horny people (in the frog sense, of course), TCU has a history of playing very well in bowl games with a month to prepare.

[HornedFrog Purple]

Sure, I would much rather play them than SMU at the moment but alas C-USA didn't schedule us. Memphis is a good team that has been playing well. Southern Miss in Hattiesburg is a tough place to win. If they win they win the conference.

[mckerney]

Originally posted by IMetTrentGreen
there is no reason for them to be in the bcs. they would get torched by any bcs calibur team. but 10-0 is 10-0, and even though they won't get in, it's fun to see the suits sweat

Like it or not, the BCS needs them at this point.

[GoldenEagle]

Was the TCU-Louisville game in Dallas or Louisville?

[HornedFrog Purple]

It was here in Fort Worth. We don't play in Dallas unless we have to. :D

The thing that worries the BCS is if they did hang with a BCS team. If they win out, they will probably finish 9th-11th in the BCS which means invitation only and not automatic entry into the bowl games. They will not get invited.

[SackAttack]

Dear God, a Chubby sighting. The ancients of the FOF community are rising from their graves like...well, like things that rise from their graves.

Flee, flee, you fools!

;-)

[TroyF]

I hope TCU wins out and then gets left out of the BCS. It'll show what a sham the system is.

TCU would gladly schedule some bigger teams if they'd have the guts to play them. I'm sure they'd take Texas on in a home and home tomorrow if Texas agreed to it.

They won't. Nothing in it for the Horns to play a solid mid-major instate rival. Arizona did agree to play them and then went into the tank. TCU played them in '99 after Arizona had went 12-1 the previous year. Arizona has now bought the farm and TCU paid for this.

How fair is it to a mid-major to be forced to schedule 4 consecutive top 25 opponents in their non-conference schedule anyway? None of the big shots outside of CU or the Florida schools ever do that anyway. (Florida usually has a cupcake in there, Miami and FSU know they have major cupcakes already on their schedule)

TCU probably would get ripped in a BCS game. Maybe they'd pull off the Valpo moment of a football playoff though.

It's a shame they likely won't get a shot.

For another example of now the little guys get screwed, look at the CU Buffs. They beat Nebraska, they are bowl eligible. 6-6, with a loss to Baylor (that alone should eliminate them from any type of bowl consideration). Meanwhile, only two MAC schools will get bowl bids. Bowling Green, Miami(OH), Northern Illinois, and Toledo. There isn't anyway you could convince me CU is more deserving of a bowl game than ANY of those other four teams.

I know, I know. . . the regular season MEANS something in college football. That's why average football teams like the Buffs are allowed SIX off days a year, while the MAC schools aren't allowed TWO. It's also why a majority of the BCS represented schools will go in with two losses and an unbeaten TCU team will be stuck outside.

TroyF

[MrBug708]

Why does everyone think that TCU finishing undefeated will do anything to the BCS? Tulane did it in 1998 and nothing happened

[HornedFrog Purple]

Because the failsafes that were put in to prevent the mid-majors from ever reaching the top 12 in the BCS after Tulane have failed. TCU is a rash that will not go away for the BCS right now, unless they lose.

[TroyF]

The other thing, as has been pointed out by HFP already, is that TCU was thought of as a good team at the start of the year. I said in the second week of the season they wouldn't get beat. I'm not taking any credit for that. They have had a lot of close games I didn't expect them to have.

Yet, while Tulane went to 8 or 9 wins in a row before getting ranked, TCU was ranked after week 2. They've been somewhat in the national spotlight and have moved up as their wins have piled up.

Not only that, but congress is already nosing its way around the BCS. That wasn't happening when Tulane was on their run.

I don't think things will change overnight, but the more controversy the better.

TroyF

[GoldenEagle]

TCU barley beat Louisville at home, 31-28 and needed help to beat them. Memphis goes in and just demolishes Louisville at Louisville 37-7 (and it could have been alot worse) and your not just a little bit scared to play them? C'mon HFP. :)

(Just a little C-USA ribbing).

[HornedFrog Purple]

Of course I would be worried, but Memphis beating TCU or TCU beating Memphis doesn't help either one of us. Besides as a Memphis fan you should root for TCU to get in one of those bowls. $14 million spread around the conference. :D

Just to play the who beat who game for fun, TCU spanked Cincinnati, who had beaten West Virginia who in turn demolished Pitt.

UAB with their 2nd string QB (who TCU knocked out) barely lost to a highly ranked Georgia team.

You can never know for sure until you play somebody. Oklahoma and USC I believe are the best two teams right now barring major injuries. There are about 15-18 teams below them that can beat each other on a neutral field.

[GoldenEagle]

Sure I want TCU you to win, but I dont know...

There is talks of setting up a BCS bowl where the C-USA champ plays the MWC champ. It would be a 'real' BCS bowl. It would also be the Liberty Bowl, right in my backyard.

If TCU does make the BCS, Lousiville, South Florida, and Cindy should get no share of the money.

[GoldenEagle]

Did I mention Memphis has only 4 seniors on its entire roster? Only two of those are starters (on the defensive side of the ball). TCU does not play Memphis next year either.

Tommy West has pulled in great recruiting classes while losing, I cant wait to see what he does when winning.

[HornedFrog Purple]

That would be fine by me, even if it were the two highest non-BCS schools not even associated by conference and just go by the rankings with a BCS payoff. It is just a travesty that a 5th or 6th place finish in a BCS conference gets you a bowl with as much payoff as the Liberty Bowl when a 2nd or 3rd place team in a non-BCS conference gets shafted and doesn't even get one.

[IMetTrentGreen]

my post has nothing to do with texas. texas blows, i have admitted it for the past two years. tcu would get beat down by the likes of lsu, or, god willing, texas

but the point was, tcu will do nothing to the system. for once in his life, mrbug is right. the voters will not let tcu get high enough to make the bcs top 6

and even if tcu gets high enough, they are going to get smoked, and everyone will say "see, this is why they don't belong"

the best scenario for everybody right now is that tcu beats sourthen miss, but misses the bcs. that way, tcu doesnt get embarrased on national tv, and everyone can complain about how the bcs sucks and we need a playoff. they can be the byu of the new century

[ice4277]

I agree with Troy that there are always going to be some mid-majors deserving of bowl births that are going to be left out of the picture. This year, the MAC deserves at least one more bowl birth and possibly two. However you will never be able to convince me that C-USA deserves the FIVE bowl tie-ins that they currently have either.

[oykib]

Didn't we have this discussion about eight months ago?

[Chubby]

Sack - oooooooooooooooooooooh (in a spooky ghost-like voice) <cough> <hack> <weeze> ooops sry.

I just want a playoff, this whole bowl system mhas long outlived its usefulness.

[Samdari]

Originally posted by HornedFrog Purple
If being undefeated this far into the season is so easy for any school in Division 1-A, then there should be a lot of mid-majors doing it right?

Do they all play a schedule that bad?

[Buccaneer]

How fair is it to a mid-major to be forced to schedule 4 consecutive top 25 opponents in their non-conference schedule anyway?

Troy, how about just ONE top 25 opponent. You have railed against KSU for padding their record against soft opponents, but at least they have to play the likes of OU, Neb, Texas, etc. TCU's schedule is shameful for a top ranked team, whether it's their fault or not. Besides, as GoldenEagle alluded to, they haven't exactly dominated their easy schedule either. If the BCS doesn't keep this team out, then that is what I would consider a sham.

Sorry HFP, nothing personal.

[oykib]

Quouting oneself is bad form. But we had this discussioon eight months ago in regard to the NCAA basketball tournament selections and seedings.

It's the same problem. What can a GOnzaga do? They can't schedule any good teams, because good teams see nothing to gain by playing them.

Either throw out this RPI/SOS/good win stuff, or make some guidelines that force the good conferences to tie in with the other conferences in scheduling. I'm not sure how you'd do it. But it could be done.

Basically, what you have now is the have's telling the have not's that they're not good enough, but that they won't give the have not's the chance to prove it. Then at the end of the year they point to the fact that the have not's haven't played any of the have's to prove their worthiness.

[HornedFrog Purple]

I don't take any of it personally...

It is not easy to get a BCS team to play a good mid-major. I don't think Alabama, Maryland, Kansas State or Purdue enjoyed getting beat by Northern Illinois, Bowling Green or Marshall. These type of teams are not there to give them reps. That's what they thought they were getting when they scheduled them.

I doubt anyone could have predicted Arizona would have tanked as bad as they did when the game was scheduled, or Nebraska would have paid TCU $25000 to cancel the game scheduled here as return for playing them in Lincoln in the Pigskin Classic a couple years ago. That is what forced them to pick up Vanderbilt in the first place. SMU? The little guys have rivalries also.

Conference games are required just like everyone else.

You can only play the cards you are dealt and all you can do is win or lose. If a team is ranked, why does it matter where they are from. Should they not be allowed the opportunity to move up if teams around them have lost?

[QuikSand]

What baffles me is the criticism of "the BCS" as if that's what really matters here.

Put this season into a time capsule, and go back ten or twenty years to per-BCS times. We still have an undefeated TCU, and they are still rated about where they are by the polls. They ar not going to get invited to one of the "top" bowl games, are they? Would they go play Oklahoma in the Orange Bowl? Really? Or would we be much mroe likely to see, say, Florida State in that game?

The BCS has its problems, almost everyone can agree. Everyone seems to hate it, though hardly any two people can agree on exactly what is better. But look at this case... basically, nobody is hackling for "the BCS" to put TCU into the title game, so we're not even talking about the so-called national championship at all. All we're talking about is whether TCU ought to get into a major bowl game, rather than a second-tier one. It's a money difference, not something really essential to the integrity of the sport or its results.

Back in the old days, TCU might have gotten a nice at-large bid to play in a pretty deent bowl game, or they might have had a shot to sufficiently impress the bigwigs at, say, the (non-championship) Sugar Bowl to battle against a good top-class team from the SEC. It's also pretty possible that they'd have to settle for a second-tier bowl game -- maybe the pre-BCS Fiesta Bowl. Would they have a shot to win the national championship? Probably not (Robbie Bosco's BYU team notwithstanding), but it's possible, I suppose.


If where we are right now is having a debate about whether TCU gets to play in a big-money BCS Bowl or a smaller-money bowl of some sort... this just doesn't seem like that compelling a debate in my mind. Now that the BCS has assured a "national championship game," who the hell cares who plays in other bowl games? (I mean this facetiously - I still watch and love college bowl games, but you get my point -- there's nothing meaningful on the line in the big picture)