User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
|
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
For wholesale prices on baseball gifts and equipment, check these stores out! |
Page rendered in 0.6008 seconds
51 querie(s) executed
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
While I don't disagree too much with the sentiment...part of it is the grind of the SEC (or the Big 12 or even PAC-12, though I think the SEC grind is tougher) week in and week out that causes issues. Boise State has one big game a year. South Carolina had a stretch of Georgia, at LSU, at Florida.
There's a difference between a real woman and that inflatable doll you're cuddling, love.
Yeah, that reason is because the computers can't take into account margin of victory.
Just imagine what an SEC powerhouse like A&M would do in the Big 12... they would go undefeated in conference for like a decade.
Well, Texas obviously doesn't get to agree. I am hopeful we win out, and I think if that happens we have a good shot of going to a BCS game over Oklahoma for the second Big 12 team. Likewise I think A&M is hoping right now that they get into a BCS game. Pretty much all of the SEC schools that are in the BCS hunt travel well to my knowledge - South Carolina may not, but they're also IMO clearly the worst of the teams with Lattimore hurt and are not going to get the bid no matter what. A&M would travel especially well because I don't think they've been in a BCS game. To a school like LSU or even Florida to an extent, a BCS at-large after the run of recent success isn't going to be as big of a deal.
Personally, I don't think Texas has the run defense to beat A&M and I don't want to play them as a result. Especially because I loathe A&M and I much prefer having the last game we play in a while be the win we had last Thanksgiving rather than having Manziel run for 200 yards on us. I'd also really like to see Texas play LSU, Georgia, or Florida. They never play those schools and it would be fun. It would be especially fun if it were in the BCS, though I don't imagine that would be an option due to how the teams are picked.
Month Date At/Hm/vs Opponent Site Non-Con W/L TM Sagrain Rank ELO Chess Nov 4 PredictorSept 8 Hm WASHINGTON X W LSU 15 41
Sept 1 vs Michigan Arlington, Texas X W ALABAMA 21 24
Aug 30 vs Louisiana Tech Shreveport X W TEXAS A&M 30 52
Sept 8 Hm KENT STATE X W KENTUCKY 35 71
Sept 15 Hm ARIZONA STATE X W MISSOURI 36 17
Sept 29 at Central Florida X W MISSOURI 48 49
Nov 3 Hm TULSA X W ARKANSAS 54 53
Sept 15 Hm LOUISIANA-MONROE X W AUBURN 62 60
Oct 20 Hm MIDDLE TENNESSEE X W MISSISSIPPI STATE 70 88
Aug 31 vs NC State Atlanta X W TENNESSEE 72 65
Sept 8 Hm WESTERN KENTUCKY X W ALABAMA 76 75
Technically, maybe. But I gotta think if UT doesn't want to play A&M in the Cotton, they can use their influence to avoid the match-up. Especially with a Texas based bowl, I bet they have a lot of pull.
Most recent years I would agree with this. In the past, even past the three or four title contenders, you would have really tough 7-9 win teams in the SEC that would have done major damage in any other conference. Teams like Ole Miss, Arkansas, and Kentucky were tough outs during the 6 year championship run. All of those teams beat a SEC champ in a year they won the MNC. Outside of their championship year, Auburn was pretty good under Tuberville and decent before this year. Tennessee used to win conference games. All of those teams suck now and the addition of A&M doesn't make up for that loss of depth.
This year, I don't see how the SEC grind is any different than the Big 12 or the PAC-12. I think the Big 12 is the most grinding league this year considering that they have one lousy team and 7-9 bowl teams that would likely be bowl teams in any league (Baylor probably won't make it, I suppose WVU might not too). And the PAC-12 is right up there with the resurgence of Oregon St., Arizona, and UCLA.
Boise State has one big game a year.
This I agree with, and they were getting tripped up in the Mountain West once a year.
A couple issues here. That three weeks was their season though. Fine, that tops Boise's one major non-conference foe and whoever ends up respectable out of the MWC. But three weeks is nowhere close to a week in week out gauntlet. And they went 1-2 during that stretch anyway. When their season was on the line, and they had the chance to be national title contenders instead of playing in the Peach Bowl, they did no better than what we'd expect out of these other fairly highly ranked teams we're discussing.
since the big east will have 12 teams, the conference will be divided into two divisions. the division that temple will be in will include boise state, san diego state, houston, SMU, and memphis. isn't that wonderful.
for majorly sucking at football. That and they had nil fan support. The NCAA at the I-A level has loose rules over minimum average attendance and Temple wasn't even coming close to hitting it.
I think Temple won 14 conference games in 14 years or something like that, beating Rutgers 5 of those times.
Even though I've generally disagreed with Wetzel's with-blinders view of "BCS = bad, playoff = good", I'm glad to see I'm not the only one ranting about how bad the polls are.
No kidding.
And as a longtime playoff opponent, nothing is more irksome than when idiots like him will spout with four weeks left in the season, "see this is the perfect season for a playoff (or plus-1), with all these unbeatens," ignoring that those things often have a way of sorting themselves out (which started last week, and I suspect will continue, leaving us with two or only one unbeatens at season's end).
so, a few years ago, temple was kicked out of the big east, and starting next season, they're back.
Starting next season? They're in the Big East THIS season!
I can understand why they stashed Temple in the West. The last thing they wanted to do is piss of a Louisville or Cincy...if Temple doesn't like it they can go back to the MAC. I'm sure they were told this was a possibility when they accepted the invite.
The Big East East is ok. The Big East West is basically a mid major pastiche. Adding BYU would definitely help.
Oh yeah, you can just feel it now can't you? Now that Alabama lost, all of a sudden everyone looks so much more vulnerable. Oregon has their toughest stretch coming up, Texas all of a sudden looks like a team that could push K-State and Notre Dame looks vulnerable enough to lose to USC.
I still think two of them will get through it, at least, I really hope two of them do, but I think it is extremely unlikely we will have three unbeatens at the end of the year.
Just about any criticism of the process or the rankings before the end of the season is foolish. It usually works itself out by the end of the season.
College football is terrible because money has corrupted it. Solution: more money.
Then "shocking" upsets occur, and the last couple weeks are a debate over which 1-loss team "deserves" to be in the title game.
I'm ok with it as long as the conference is renamed "Conference USA" and the football affiliations have absolutely nothing to do with the affiliations for other sports.
I think the guaranteed access for the highest ranked team in the remaining five conferences is going to be great for them. I have a hard time seeing how Rutgers, Louisville, Boise or Cincy (maybe a Houston or San Diego St. sprinkled in there) isn't going to be the highest ranked team out of the remaining non-power conference squads. So they basically retain their auto-bid, and have a much better chance of landing a team in the top four than the top 2. The new commissioner did alright considering the extremely weak position he inherited. Now the conference just needs to hold on to Strong, Jones, and Peterson.
The Pioneer League was just ahead of its time.
They will usually claim that spot, but 10 to 20 percent of the time they won't. So while they are still ahead of the rest of the mid-majors, they are slowly losing ground.
Look at this year, Kent State (#25 AP) and LA Tech (#20) are right there with Rutgers (#22) and Louisville (#19).
True, but that makes sense since they have lost three programs that had the most tradition in the conference. They were going to take a step down, deservedly, after what happened the last few years. But this is a pretty strong outcome considering how the conference had been gutted over the last decade.
Look at this year, Kent State (#25 AP) and LA Tech (#20) are right there with Rutgers (#22) and Louisville (#19).
Cincy would have to beat Rutgers and then Rutgers would have to beat Louisville for that to work out. And LA Tech and Kent State would have to finish with one loss, which is not guaranteed since they both have two tough conference games coming up. I mean, it will happen some years, but I think the Big East should be safe most years. Their new TV deal and the top tier of the conference should be enough to separate them from the other mid major conferences.
Nobody seems to want any of the other members. I'd say they are fairly safe/stable for now, although mediocre. If all goes to plan they will be at 12 next year and 14 the year after. If they can entice BYU to join, they will have some decent "brands": Louisville, Cincy, Boise, BYU, Rutgers, South Florida, UConn....keep an eye on Central Florida that could surpass USF in short order.
For the sake of West Virginia ever being relevant again, I hope they do. I don't think so though. This article briefly touches on Louisville and the Big 12, and indicates the Big 12 is not interested in expanding.
You'd think the Big East might want to buy early on the middle tier Louisiana schools that have been giving people fits this year. Those seem to be the next USF/UCF type of programs.
The first time I missed the fewer and thought you only wanted 40 FBS schools. Big difference.
I wonder what a lot of the new FBS schools get out of going up a level. It costs much more money to have a FBS program and I'm not sure the financial gain from being part of the Sunbelt conference makes up for that. There is practically no hope for these programs to ever really achieve any meaningful success at that level. I suppose it might raise the school's profile for application purposes, but it still seems like a high risk, low reward move for these schools.
433 - Sure, that would be nice for us big program fans, and eliminating quite a few early season scrimmages would have to mean more inter-BCS conference games, which are always fun, but I'm not sure how you're going to tell UMass and Texas St that they don't get at least a chance at some of that huge D1 football money.
434 - Occam's Razor. UMass didn't move up to both get blown out and go broke.
http://www.thebiglead.com/index.php/2012/11/13/big-east-temple-may-be-screwed-with-unwieldy-western-division/
driving mileage distance from Temple to the other Big East schools:
East: Rutgers (59), UConn (244), Cincinnati (574), Louisville (673), Central Florida (992), South Florida (1,042)
West: Memphis (1,015), SMU (1,465), Houston (1,547), Boise State (2,441), San Diego State (2,701), Temple
So Memphis is closer for Temple fans than South Florida is! I see no problem.
This only goes for 2013-14. Then Navy arrives in 2015 (yes, really) plus another school like Air Force or BYU or - well, we haven't exactly boxed ourselves in geographically here, have we?
Probably by the time Div IA college football is "officially" pro and tosses off the fetters of the NCAA.
Tulane also plays in the Superdome, yeah that makes sense.
Never going to happen. There may be four conferences some day, but they won't be a pretty little 16x4. Reality gets in the way of fan dreams.
Georgia State is fielding a football program to drive applications. They want to cease to be "the other GSU" and "the commuter campus in downtown Atlanta." At this point, GA State has a lower profile *as a university* than Georgia Southern (the "real GSU") and they don't like that.
GA State plays home games in the GA Dome because they don't have any other facility to play at. They won't be building a college only stadium any time soon, and if the Falcons actually manage to sucker Gwinnett into building them a new outdoor stadium GSU will be the only regular occupant of the Dome.
Why are you saying these don't make sense? Playing in an existing stadium instead of building your own sounds like the obvious thing to do for a marginal program.
An on-campus stadium gets students to your game and everyone else to your campus.
Can you drive applications being a joke? Georgia State is 1-10 this year. And moving up to FBS status next year? Sounds like a disaster.
To this day, the student store sells "Undefeated in Football" T-shirts.
It calls into the question the logic of having the program.
I can't see it happening, even if ND blasts USC (unlikely) and Oregon only slips by them in the Pac-10 title game. ND has only one good opponent left - KSU has two and Oregon has three.
I think for Bama to play ND, you'd have to have a different SEC team in the title game, which could happen I suppose.
I think it's more likely than not that at least one loses.
Well then it has to be for the title game!
EDIT: "They" being Alabama and ND.
Wonder what the odds of that are? Like maybe 5%?
You just need Bama to win 3 times - and I think it is dang near 100% the win the next 2. Maybe 66/33 in SEC title game? So 66%
Notre Dame to win two, lets say they do that 75%
Let's give Oregon a 90% chance to win each of their three games, two are at home and at OrSt, they do that 73% of the time.
KSU I'd say is about a 75% chance to win each of the next two, so 56% to win out. Oh, Spivey, I meant 100% they beat Baylor and 56% they bear UT - only cause it is in Manhattan - so 56%.
Invert the KSU and Oregon win%, multiply it all up,
5.62% chance Bama and ND play in title game.
YMMV
Yes. Going from "no visibility whatsoever" to "a school with a program that you might start for" is a recruitment tool. Drive down I-16, the corridor from Macon to Savannah. You'll see four or five GA State billboards. They're targeting the Georgia Southern student demographic, and their selling point is "you can go to this D-II school in Statesboro, or you can go to this D-I school in Atlanta and play for a bowl eligible program."
But is it worth the financial losses having a shitty Sun Belt program has?
I don't know. The admin says yes. More than a few folks in the city say no. The GSU2 program is not unfraught with controversy.
I've been told that the real GSU (and App St for that matter) have turned down the Sun Belt at least once, hoping for CUSA, or some other league to come calling. The way Ga State draws, I don't think being in the Sun Belt is going to get them out a 'probationary' period as it relates to attendance, although as I've stated before, if somebody can show me how the NCAA applies its own rules re: attendance, I'll buy you something of value. There are a few MAC teams that seemingly are perpetually in violation of the 'rolling 2 year period of 15k average attendance, w/o consequence. Temple's eviction from the BE the first time was about the only time I recall actual punishment.
Agree that the NCAA attendance minimums are basically ignored. Herndon Stadium holds 15k, so if they sellout every game they'll make the minimums. And if they don't, the NCAA won't do anything about it.
Check out this MAC attendance report: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/432825-football-attendance
The entire conference averaged 15,317 in 2009. EMU averaged 5,106!
The answer is no. Most of these teams lose money. They're going to need the extra enrollment when they have to raise tuition to pay for it.
They don't draw because they're a commuter school in a major city with no historical fan base and they hope they can pick up the scraps on the much better in-state teams. Yeah, we really needed another FIU and FAU.
Is there any truth to the rumor that I just started that the NCAA keeps the MAC around as a D-I conference to give Big 10 schools someone to play early in the season?
And quite often, lately, someone to lose to.
Central Michigan beat Iowa, Ohio beat Penn State, and Northern Illinois beat Indiana.
note: oddly enough, the genesis of the offense can be traced to LaVell Edwards at BYU in the mid 70s.
Hey, bootlegs are still cool!
Wofford was moving the ball really well against South Carolina until they fumbled near inside the Gamecock 30. Still 7-7 though.
This is one of the weirdest, least-entertaining, least-impressive 10-win teams I can remember.
They seem to have gotten worse over the course of the season. The FSU game should be telling. I don't think UF will win, but they have beaten some impressive teams this year, so maybe they will rise to the occasion again.
now, the thing about the WCO is that it really can bog down if you have a poor QB, or if your receivers can't break off big chunks of yardage after the catch. when that happens, you get a lot of 3 or 4 yard catches/incompletions, and it makes for a lot of really short possessions.
I think all of this is right. Through the LSU game, the offense's numbers were bleh-to-bad, but I still thought the offense was basically effective at what it wanted to do (running the ball, preventing turnovers). Starting with the USC(e) game, the whole thing just collapsed into "Bad would be an improvement" position.
But those wins against A&M, LSU and South Carolina are great freaking wins. So...I don't know. It might just be a fluky season of the kind we see from time-to-time.
I'm not expecting Florida to beat FSU. FSU's defensive line is going to shred UF.
nvermind, 24-7 late.
Yeah, USCe woke up after the fumble. Too bad, Wofford looked like they had a shot today. Still, pretty uninspired play from a top ten team against a FCS team, albeit a pretty good FCS team.
Isn't this why Kelly should probably avoid the NFL? Not that he can't succeed there, but his scheme is about finding someone with speed matched up one on one with a LB who will never make the NFL. I don't see how he's going to do that at the next level.
Also, I'm really hoping South Carolina moves up a spot or two in the polls, and no complaints about it.
The only way the shine is gonna come off the SEC also-rans is if they lose out of conference. I think South Carolina and Florida are good bets to go down against their ACC rivals.
If they play decent teams in bowls they will also be in danger, but chances are they are going to get teams that are the 3rd-5th best in the Big Ten or ACC and they probably won't lose to a team like that, unless they get Michigan or Nebraska.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main