Feeling a little better about the '93 CCG loss

[jkjsooner]

That KSU running back was/is pretty good.

[StormySooner-IN]

!@#!@#!@#!@#!@#! :mad:

Next week will be the first time I have ever rooted for the Steelers/Titans....gahh

[adoniijahsooner]

Who did we play in the 93 ccg? I think KState was like 1-10 then.

[sooner59]

Who played in the 1993 CCG? I forget.

[007sooner]

pretty sure its sposed to be '03. and dayum could they have gotten any more help from the refs in overtime? "you can't get a first down... too bad... here have THREE free ones"

[SanDiegoSoonerGal]

I think someone time warped.

[StormySooner-IN]

pretty sure its sposed to be '03. and dayum could they have gotten any more help from the refs in overtime? "you can't get a first down... too bad... here have THREE free ones"
No fricking kiding.

Excuse me now, my going to go use the bathroom. I hope I don't get a penalty for not putting the toilet seat back down.



Jezzus **** Crhist

[Curly Bill]

You guys do know they're not supposed to stop call penalties just because it's overtime right? A penalty, is a penalty, is a penalty.

[bri]

http://media.coveritlive.com/media/image/200901/sLfW2mKnE0darrenhand.jpg

[StormySooner-IN]

You guys do know they're not supposed to stop call penalties just because it's overtime right? A penalty, is a penalty, is a penalty.
:confused:

Then why was everyone so mad about the flags against us after the late hits on McCoy during the Whorn game...?

Surely the same applies to the 4th quarter
:confused:

[Salt City Sooner]

Who did we play in the 93 ccg? I think KState was like 1-10 then.
If KSU was 1-10, then OU was in worse shape than I thought, because they beat OU that year. :eek:

[007sooner]

because they were bull**** calls without real "hits" called only because of coys play acting on the field. ****er.

[SoonerBacker]

Yet all 3 times, replays showed very clearly that the penalties that were called did happen. (In the SD v Ind game, for clarification.)

[adoniijahsooner]

That was payback for getting screwed against denver earlier this season.

[Frozen Sooner]

1. If you don't want defensive holding called against you, don't put your hand inside an offensive lineman's jersey.

2. The second defensive holding call WAS bogus. The ball was in the air. It was pass interference.

3. Exactly what should the referee call when a defensive player grabs an offensive player's facemask and jerks it around while making a tackle?

The Colts self-destructed in OT. The refs didn't give the Chargers crap (well, except for a pretty generous call for a catch in the second quarter.)

And I still hate Darren Sproles from KSU. The player for the Chargers isn't the same person. ;)

[Curly Bill]

:confused:

Then why was everyone so mad about the flags against us after the late hits on McCoy during the Whorn game...?

Because those should not have been penalties at any time in the game. The penalties against Indy tonight in OT, while certainly ill-timed, did in fact appear to be penalties.

[Frozen Sooner]

If KSU was 1-10, then OU was in worse shape than I thought, because they beat OU that year. :eek:

First time they'd beaten OU in like 20 years or something, too.

Gibbs called for a FG down a bunch in the fourth so we wouldn't get shut out. I remember being annoyed by that.

[adoniijahsooner]

If KSU was 1-10, then OU was in worse shape than I thought, because they beat OU that year. :eek:

Your right. Snyders first bowl season.

[Curly Bill]

Penalties are penalties whenever they happen in a game. I hate the mindset that since it's late in a game, or it's OT, that officials are now not supposed to call something that they would have called earlier.

[Frozen Sooner]

For what it's worth, had all three of those penalties been called against OU while an opponent went on a game-winning drive, I'd have probably been pissed.

That being said, that wasn't the referees giving the game to the Chargers. That was Indianapolis making boneheaded mistakes and giving the game to the Chargers. Not like the Chargers didn't make their own boneheaded mistakes-turning the ball over twice in the endzone, not looking at Reggie Wayne, etc.

[Sooner in the Bluegrass]

My question is this-- what is wrong with the NFL when an 8-8 team hosts a 12-4 team just because they won their weak sauce division, and the team that finished ahead of the 12-4 team in *their* division managed to do so by feasting on a largely weak schedule? I could care less who the teams are, that's just wrong.

[jkjsooner]

Oops, sorry, that should have been '03. I promise I'm sober but kinda wishing I could blame it on alcohol.

[Frozen Sooner]

My question is this-- what is wrong with the NFL when an 8-8 team hosts a 12-4 team just because they won their weak sauce division, and the team that finished ahead of the 12-4 team in *their* division managed to do so by feasting on a largely weak schedule? I could care less who the teams are, that's just wrong.

That's a legitimate beef. The reasoning is that there should be a reward for winning your division vice being a wild card. I don't know that I agree with it, but there it is.

[007sooner]

those arguments are all well and fine guys, esp when you have winters who just adores to fly those yellow handkerchiefs. HOWEVER when you consider some of the really bogus missed calls that woulda been pro-indy during regulation (the fumble that never was early in the game on kickoff return comes to mind) it just doesnt fly. the refs really only woke up and kept em flying when it really mattered most. anyway the chargers are hated division rivals to me so yes, i'm biased...

[Curly Bill]

My question is this-- what is wrong with the NFL when an 8-8 team hosts a 12-4 team just because they won their weak sauce division, and the team that finished ahead of the 12-4 team in *their* division managed to do so by feasting on a largely weak schedule? I could care less who the teams are, that's just wrong.

That's the magic of playoffs! ...and yet we have peeps on here that proclaim we absolutely must have playoffs for college football. :rolleyes:

[Frozen Sooner]

those arguments are all well and fine guys, esp when you have winters who just adores to fly those yellow handkerchiefs. HOWEVER when you consider some of the really bogus missed calls that woulda been pro-indy during regulation (the fumble that never was early in the game on kickoff return comes to mind) it just doesnt fly. the refs really only woke up and kept em flying when it really mattered most. anyway the chargers are hated division rivals to me so yes, i'm biased...

Er, Indy kept the ball on the non-fumble on the kickoff return, so I'm not particularly sure what you're beefing about there. It was also the correct call. The returner's knee was down with the ball in his possession.

[007sooner]

the drive before that, I think, it was a charger kickoff return that they didnt even bother to replay so we could get a second look at it...

[Frozen Sooner]

That's the magic of playoffs! ...and yet we have peeps on here that proclaim we absolutely must have playoffs for college football. :rolleyes:

No matter which way someone comes up with to crown a champion, the teams that lose are going to be upset about it.

Even in the NBA there's people who are mad that the entire league isn't seeded instead of being divided into conferences.

[Frozen Sooner]

the drive before that, I think, it was a charger kickoff return that they didnt even bother to replay so we could get a second look at it...

The one where the whistle blew?

Can't review it, so no point.

[bri]

First time they'd beaten OU in like 20 years or something, too.

Gibbs called for a FG down a bunch in the fourth so we wouldn't get shut out. I remember being annoyed by that.

Coulda been worse. Boo would have called for a FG, only to have it wiped out by having 17 men on the field. THAT'S NOT FAIR! ALL THE KEEDS SHOULD GET TO PLAY!!

[Curly Bill]

No matter which way someone comes up with to crown a champion, the teams that lose are going to be upset about it.

Even in the NBA there's people who are mad that the entire league isn't seeded instead of being divided into conferences.

Yup. I just like poking a sharp stick at those peeps who have no doubt that a playoff would cure everything that ails college FB. Playoffs might in fact be better then the current system, but there will still be problems, and there will still be complaints from someone.

[007sooner]

hmm, I like our bowl system. and we wouldn't be whining about the 6-6 teams getting bowls if we were fans of a team that just barely squeaked by with that record and got the chance to prove themselves against a team with a better win percentage but from a weaker conference. sometimes you need to give the little guys a chance!

also, yes, someone will always whine about being left out even with playoffs.

[Frozen Sooner]

Coulda been worse. Boo would have called for a FG, only to have it wiped out by having 17 men on the field. THAT'S NOT FAIR! ALL THE KEEDS SHOULD GET TO PLAY!!

Or Wifebeater McWinshisbowls could have 11 guys out there in hideous Louisville-looking uniforms and they'd kick the ball backwards or something.

[bri]

No matter which way someone comes up with to crown a champion, the teams that lose are going to be upset about it.

Even in the NBA there's people who are mad that the entire league isn't seeded instead of being divided into conferences.

Or the dickholsters that always whine 'cause they don't re-seed the NCAA basketball tourney on the fly. F*ckin' Billy Packer. Die.

[007sooner]

The one where the whistle blew?

Can't review it, so no point.

That may have been right where the problem was. anyway, whatever, very moot at this point...

[StormySooner-IN]

Coulda been worse. Boo would have called for a FG, only to have it wiped out by having 17 men on the field. THAT'S NOT FAIR! ALL THE KEEDS SHOULD GET TO PLAY!!
:D

I should be thankful I didn't have to suffer those years....:( :)

[Frozen Sooner]

That may have been right where the problem was. anyway, whatever, very moot at this point...

True.

The main thing, I think, is that it's hard to accept for Indy fans (and most NFL fans) that the Chargers play so well against the Colts. For a number of reasons (The Williams/Saturday matchup being one of the more glaring) the Chargers are just a terrible matchup for Indy. Williams beats Jeff Saturday off the snap so badly that it disrupts everything Peyton does-and when they bring a guard to help out, it leaves a one-on-one matchup on the edge.

I'd like to see Mannings yards per attempt numbers vs. San Diego and then vs. the rest of the league.

[bri]

I should be thankful I didn't have to suffer those years....:( :)


Yeah, well, I did. So shut up. :D

[jkjsooner]

Yup. I just like poking a sharp stick at those peeps who have no doubt that a playoff would cure everything that ails college FB. Playoffs might in fact be better then the current system, but there will still be problems, and there will still be complaints from someone.

There will always be complaints but the relevancy and magnitutude of them decrease significantly with a playoff.

That being said, with a playoff you will have to have home field advantage as you can't incorporate the current bowl system into every round of a playoff. It's just impossible for fans to travel to 3 sites across the country with less than a week's notice. (We're talking tens of thousands of fans not the couple of thousand who go to NCAA bball tourney sites.)

Picking home field advantage is much harder in college than the NFL. The NFL controls scheduling so schedule strength tends to even out over time and so W/L percent (and divisional champs) is a good way to determine home field advantage. Plus, the NFL has built in equilizers with the draft and salary caps so one division won't stay strong forever. There are years where home field advantage doesn't seem fair but these things even out over time.

In college this is not that case. It's hard enough to determine the top 8 but then you have to rank them and choose who gets home field advantage. Would an undefeated Boise St. or Utah get home field advantage over UF, UT, or OU?

For those who think controversy increases the the interest in NCAA FB then you'll still have enough to keep the talking heads interested. But we'd be replacing a system that is utterly absurd with one that isn't perfect but about as good as it can get.

[Curly Bill]

There will always be complaints but the relevancy and magnitutude of them decrease significantly with a playoff.


Eagerly awaiting your explanation of this...

...backed up with the relevant facts.

[jkjsooner]

Or the dickholsters that always whine 'cause they don't re-seed the NCAA basketball tourney on the fly. F*ckin' Billy Packer. Die.

I hate the idea of reseeding. If a 16 seed beats a #1 seed, well, they've earned their way into an easier second round matchup.

If the these reseeding idiots had their way, they would force the 16 seed to beat a #1 seed, then beat another #1 seed, and then beat another #1 seed.

I'm not totally against reseeding the Final Four but IMO that isn't necessary either.

[jkjsooner]

Eagerly awaiting your explanation of this...

...backed up with the relevant facts.

I can't give you facts as what I expressed is an opinion.

I will give you an analogy though. Do you honestly think the #66 team who didn't get into the NCAA tourney has as big of a complaint as the #3 team who didn't get chosen for the football national title game? If we had an 8 team playoff, do you think the #9 team has as big of an argument as the #3 team in the current system?

Do you think an argument over which team gets home field advantage is as important as an argument over a #3 team (or a team like Utah) getting excluded based on voter's opinions on who is #1 and #2?

In basketball, bubble teams always argue they should have made the tourney but nobody questions the legitimacy of the champion just because some seventh place Big 12 team didn't get into the tourney.

As you add more teams to a playoff the arguments for those left out become less and less significant.

If you disagree then, well, I suppose we'll just agree to disagree...

[Curly Bill]

If we had an 8 team playoff, do you think the #9 team has as big of an argument as the #3 team in the current system?


Yes, because once you let however many teams into a playoff they all have an equal chance of winning. In your scenario therefore the #9 team would have just as much complaint as the #3 team does under the current system.

...and in fact with the more teams allowed into a playoff the more teams you'd have out there thinking they deserved to be one of them.

[jkjsooner]

Yes, because once you let however many teams into a playoff they all have an equal chance of winning..

So the #65 team in the NCAA tourney has an equal chance of winning as the #1 seeds?

If all have equal chance of winning, then that means seeds 9-16 have just as much of a chance as 1-8. Nevermind that no 9-16 seed has ever won the tourney since it expanded in 1985.

So if they all have an equal chance, then that means we've had quite a remarkable 24 year run with all the 1-8 seeds winning it. The odds of that happening are 1/(2^24). That's about 1 in 16 million.

I'm sure you meant to say all teams are on equal footing. That ignores the fact that there's probably a 1 in a million shot of the #16 seed of winning the tourney. I would say the #3 team in CFB can make a claim that they have a much, much larger shot at winning the football national title.

Again, if you can't see how the argument of being excluded becomes less and less relevant as you add more teams then I suppose I just can't help you.