Hey... you do the best you can. A team can't help other teams in the league cheating/etc and getting championship or bowl bans. And other teams REALLY sucking. See Wake, Maryland, Virginia and so on and so forth.
2012 NCAA Football Thread
- Thread starter downtown
- Start date
Hey... you do the best you can. A team can't help other teams in the league cheating/etc and getting championship or bowl bans. And other teams REALLY sucking. See Wake, Maryland, Virginia and so on and so forth.
Yeah, there's no way that's gonna happen. Trust me, I'm a 1L.
Nah but seriously, I've seen nothing to suggest that the lawsuit has any real chance of success. They'll settle it.You think that means doom? If this all goes belly-up, you'll make some calls for me, right? (I'm actually pretty confident that UVA will end up with a seat at the table somewhere, though maybe I shouldn't be.)
Odd, isn't it? The ACC was always pretty second-rate in football, frankly.
Yeah, there's no way that's gonna happen. Trust me, I'm a 1L.
You think that means doom? If this all goes belly-up, you'll make some calls for me, right? (I'm actually pretty confident that UVA will end up with a seat at the table somewhere, though maybe I shouldn't be.)
Odd, isn't it? The ACC was always pretty second-rate in football, frankly.
I don't think so... after all they have some backup from their clothing supporter.
Coming up with the money will not be THAT big of a problem... eventually.
The ACC needs/has to keep the fine at 50 million IMO.
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2007
- Messages
- 9,284
But, downtown is right. Especially about the owning Michigan part.
I think there's also a lot of sentiment that as NCAA scandals go, this one wasn't that big, even though the punishment was. Several players sold memorabilia for various benefits from people not associated with the university, or otherwise received benefits because they played football (again, from people not affiliated with the university), and it wasn't reported/followed up on as it perhaps should have been. Yes, they were receiving benefits from the fact that they played football, and selling memorabilia is reason to question what their real values were (the team, or money?). But is the issue more with the players in question and their associates, or the program?
I think it would have been less controversial if disciplinary actions were targeted to the specific players involved (suspensions, or fines proportionate to benefit gained if they'd already graduated/decided to leave), and against the coach for not reporting it. I thought the originally proposed suspension of Tressel for 5 games and fine of $250,000 was reasonable, given that it was the first such incident in a decade, and on the grand scheme of things, it isn't that bad. Let him know it isn't acceptable, but recognize that generally he's done well. That this was originally announced as the plan and that he was then fired also makes the actual punishment seem excessive.
So, it makes sense to me why he received an ovation, and I don't have a problem with it. Everyone makes mistakes, his wasn't that bad, and he did a fantastic job for a decade. And it wasn't just on the football field - OSU football's academics also rose a good amount from before his tenure, and he was well-respected in the community.
But despite the lack of a postseason, I don't think any OSU fans are disappointed with finishing the season 12-0 and beating Michigan. Sure, winning a BCS game would be nice. But what really matters is beating Michigan, and you'd be hard-pressed to end the season on a much better note than that.
--------------------
A few of the other cases that do seem a lot more serious...
- OSU basketball coach Jim O'Brien personally gave financial assistance to players. While apparently well-intentioned, it's easy to see why that was unfair and he couldn't continue coaching. It's also clear that he was personally involved.
- Woody Hayes punching a player in 1978. Not reporting some relatively minor financial transactions versus physically punching a player are two different realms.
- The Penn State fiasco. There's still the issue that the current players for Penn State are taking a lot of the punishment despite not being personally involved at all. But, in that case it's clear that the failings were very much at the institutional level (as well as personal), were over a long period of time, were intentionally not followed up on, and were causing much, much greater harm than some improper financial benefits. While unfortunate for the current players, there had to be punishment to the program at large.
- The various cases over the years of players committing various small (or not so small) crimes or totally not caring academically but still being able to play.
- Performance-enhancing drug cases that are quite prevalent in sports such as cycling or baseball.
Personally, I have mixed feelings about NCAA violation penalties in some cases. For example, retroactively vacating wins/seasons, such as for USC in 2004. Did the fact that Reggie Bush received improper gifts affect the outcomes of the game? Highly unlikely. I could still see some room for argument if the gifts appeared to be the reason he had chosen that school, but that didn't appear to be the case. So, it seems to be more a case of historical revisionism in the name of punishment than anything. It isn't easy when sometimes the people responsible aren't around anymore. But there should be a distinction between when the problem is institutional versus with specific people, and vacations should only happen when the outcome of the games was likely affected (such as with drugs).
On the plus side, at least the NCAA can focus on this type of violation. I'm sure Major League Baseball and the Tour de France wish their
Edit: It isn't their biggest problem, the Penn State fiasco is. But they can still somewhat focus on it, which is nice.
----------
I think Nebraska deserves the Big Ten championship, but I'll be rooting for Wisconsin, mainly because of the silliness of a 7-5 regular season team being in a BCS bowl, and the fact that they are only 3rd place in their division. A better Big Ten championship would be either Nebraska vs. Michigan (who has the second-best record of bowl-eligible teams, and is thus more deserving of a shot at a BCS bowl), or Purdue (the best Big Ten team that hasn't lost to Nebraska other than Ohio State, and not much worse than Wisconsin at 6-6).
And maybe in the future, the Big Ten should simply give their BCS bid to the top team in one division outright if the other conference's winning team isn't eligible, and the next-best eligible team isn't within, say, one win of the first divison's winner. Because unless Wisconsin destroys Nebraska, I'll still think Nebraska was more deserving. You could still have the championship game for formalities and a little bit of revenue. It just seems silly to think Wisconsin deserves a BCS bowl this year.
DroopyTofu
Double Bass Double Bass
Roll Tide.
By the way, what is the penalty in football for calling a timeout when no time outs are left?
By the way, what is the penalty in football for calling a timeout when no time outs are left?
8-5 Big Ten champion! Way to live up to our reputation.
We're mediocre! We're mediocre!
madviking
north american scum
Wisconsin rushed for 540 yards..!
Waiting for the articles:
"Wisconsin, who finished third in the some-division-starting-in-L..."
"Wisconsin, who finished third in the some-division-starting-in-L..."
ummmm........
Extremely normal.
I can't believe we ran for 350 and only won by 4.
That stat alone tells you the kind of night the Tide had -- full of ill-timed errors and unlucky bounces.
And while I don't think anyone's going to complain that it was boring, it wasn't really quintessential SEC football either. Way too much offense, and too many points.
The most impressive thing to me was that we successfully ran a 3-4 defense for a quarter without a functioning nose guard, with both 1 & 2 on the depth chart down with injuries.
Also on the overcoming injuries front, this was maybe the first game where it was really obvious how much we missed Fowler. Williams had been a serviceable substitute in goal line situations, but with him out the deficit was glaring. Seeing Kelly Johnson line up at fullback on the goal line crystallized the personnel issues we've had all year.
The least impressive thing to me was Dial's hit on Murray. I'm not going to go so far as to call it dirty, and I'm even going to put a little of the blame on Murray, who has played in this league for three years and was apparently unaware that linemen like to hit quarterbacks after interceptions. But if the SEC sits Dial for the NC game, I'm not going to complain, despite how inconsistent they've been on this issue all season. If Alabama sat him I think it would be a little self-serving -- Dial's a role player who's not likely to be the difference between winning and losing vs. Notre Dame anyway, unless we lose both nose guards again.
That stat alone tells you the kind of night the Tide had -- full of ill-timed errors and unlucky bounces.
And while I don't think anyone's going to complain that it was boring, it wasn't really quintessential SEC football either. Way too much offense, and too many points.
The most impressive thing to me was that we successfully ran a 3-4 defense for a quarter without a functioning nose guard, with both 1 & 2 on the depth chart down with injuries.
Also on the overcoming injuries front, this was maybe the first game where it was really obvious how much we missed Fowler. Williams had been a serviceable substitute in goal line situations, but with him out the deficit was glaring. Seeing Kelly Johnson line up at fullback on the goal line crystallized the personnel issues we've had all year.
The least impressive thing to me was Dial's hit on Murray. I'm not going to go so far as to call it dirty, and I'm even going to put a little of the blame on Murray, who has played in this league for three years and was apparently unaware that linemen like to hit quarterbacks after interceptions. But if the SEC sits Dial for the NC game, I'm not going to complain, despite how inconsistent they've been on this issue all season. If Alabama sat him I think it would be a little self-serving -- Dial's a role player who's not likely to be the difference between winning and losing vs. Notre Dame anyway, unless we lose both nose guards again.
I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and presume that you are not fully acquainted with the facts. While I personally agree that the underlying violations were minor and even excusable, they unquestionably made the players ineligible and OSU knew it. So the violations weren't 'unreported', they were covered up, in a conscious and deliberate effort to deceive the sport's governing body. The NCAA lacks subpoena power, so when it can actually prove that it has been lied to it brings the hammer down hard and always has. It's the only tool in its arsenal that it can use to encourage honesty and full disclosure.
The program. Again, OSU was punished for the cover up, not the underlying offenses.
I agree that a system of discipline designed to punish the wrongdoers rather than the wrongdoers' institutions would be a step in the right direction, and it seems to be what the NCAA is moving towards with its new system that places more of the responsibility for compliance on the head coach.
Right. He cheated and lied but he won. Again, that's the attitude I was objecting to.
There's no reason for OSU fans to be disappointed at all. Going undefeated in any major conference is an exceptional thing and the fans have every right to treasure this season, especially since there's no reason to doubt similar success in the next few years.
AFAIK there's not one, it's on the refs to know not to stop play. But I'm not sure.
Sad but true. Nothing wrong with parity though
Which should just. never. happen. I thought 350 was bad . . .
DroopyTofu
Double Bass Double Bass
I was thinking of the '93 NCAA Basketball Championship when Michigan lost because a player called a time out with none left. I thought maybe Georgia could turn it around and call one, stop the clock, take a penalty, but still enjoy an extra play. That or the coach could cuss out a ref or a Georgia player could take out an Alabama guy after the whistle. Either way, the clock would stop to process the flag and move the ball. Georgia would have to throw farther to get to the endzone, but atleast they would get an extra play. Similar thing as when basketball team intentionally fouls with hopes of getting the ball back off of a rebound from a missed free throw.
I find it ridiculous that Georgia lost to a higher ranked team by a hair and dropped 3 points for it. There's something wrong with how we do rankings.
http://espn.go.com/college-football...orthern-illinois-huskies-earn-orange-bowl-bid
OH GOD PLEASE HAPPEN PLEASE HAPPEN
It's happening. Way to stick it to the man little guys.
Also, I can't believe Louisiana Tech decided to stay at home after a 9-3 season because they didn't want to play ULM. THAT'S QUALITY LOUISIANA TROLLIN' RIGHT THERE YALL
Also, I can't believe Louisiana Tech decided to stay at home after a 9-3 season because they didn't want to play ULM. THAT'S QUALITY LOUISIANA TROLLIN' RIGHT THERE YALL
ummmm........
Extremely normal.
An offensive penalty against a team with no time outs when there is less than one minute to play in a half and the clock is running results in a ten-second runoff, with the clock starting again once the ball is declared ready for play, not at the snap.
Yes. Yes there is.
No one is more excited about the end of the BCS than the Orange bowl. At least they get the national title game to make up for it. But still, there are at least a couple dozen games more interesting than NIU/FSU. I never thought I'd be glad that the Sugar got the Big East champ. Actually, all the non-Orange BCS bowls look pretty good for a change.
It's amazing LaTech would forfeit the extra practice time. Perhaps they're still intimidated by La-Monroe's win over 'Bama back in '07
As bad as the Orange bowl looks, there are plenty of good bowls to get excited about this year. The SEC slate has a lot of good matchups, and no real duds:
1 Alabama vs. National 1 Notre Dame -- For all the marbles!1!!1
2 Georgia vs. Big Ten 3 Nebraska -- The Letdown bowl, after both teams lost their conference title game.
3 Florida vs. Big East 1 Louisville -- Okay, maybe not a great game, but there is the Charlie Strong factor.
4 LSU vs. ACC 2 Clemson -- I don't think the SEC needs to further prove its dominance over the ACC this year, but hey, why not?
Poor Dabo.5 A&M* vs. Big XII 2 Oklahoma -- The Big 12 title game. Wait a minute . . .
6 SCAR* vs. Big Ten 4 Michigan** -- It's still weird to me seeing South Carolina in these big bowl games. Michigan tries to avoid going 0-2 vs. the SEC this year.
7 Vandy vs. ACC 7 NCState*** -- Okay, the last three matchups are less impressive. The coaching change at NCState could make this one a little less competitive than it should be.
8 Miss State vs. Big Ten 6 Northwestern -- Mississippi State's kind of limping in to this one. Still a decent mid-tier matchup for both conferences.
9 Ole Miss vs. Big East 5 Pitt -- Pitt's third straight B'ham bowl. They just can't stay away from the Civil Rights Institute. Freeze has Ole Miss pointed in the right direction, and I'm not sure this one's going to be very close. Still, always nice to see a Sunseri in Alabama.
* There's no tiebreaker between A&M and SCAR. They have the same record against common opponents, even beating and losing to the same exact opponents within that set. They also each beat an SEC title game participant. I gave A&M the edge because SCAR got blown out by Florida, and both of A&M's losses were close.
** Michigan and Penn State presented the same problems in the Big Ten as A&M and SCAR did in the SEC. They have the same conference record, didn't play head to head and won and lost to the exact same common opponents. So I went with margin of victory again. At least Michigan kept OSU within a touchdown.
*** NCState and VT were both 4-4 in the ACC. NCState beat FSU and lost to UVA; VT beat UVA and lost to FSU. Other wins and losses were to the same teams. I decided beating FSU and losing to UVA was worse, especially since VT kept their loss to FSU close but NCState got blown out by UVA.
Orange Bowl looks like a better game than the Sugar Bowl.
Yeah, especially if Teddy Bridgewater can't really play. I'm not sure Florida can attack the Cardinals crappy secondary very well though.
Toledo/Utah State could be really fun, along with Nevada/Arizona.
For those interesting in college football media stuff, there is this thread in OT http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=482035
Finally, I look forward to making "Mark Richt has lost control" jokes when they beat Nebraska by 40. It is entirely possible the Big Ten doesn't win a single bowl game. Winning three would be HUGE.
Toledo/Utah State could be really fun, along with Nevada/Arizona.
For those interesting in college football media stuff, there is this thread in OT http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=482035
Finally, I look forward to making "Mark Richt has lost control" jokes when they beat Nebraska by 40. It is entirely possible the Big Ten doesn't win a single bowl game. Winning three would be HUGE.
Yo, DT
I lol'd.
I lol'd.
I'm not sure that he did to be honest. Miller had an outstanding season, but he was fairly average against Wisconsin and Michigan (and actually bad against Purdue).
He'll be in the top 3 going into next year's preseason.
Buuuuut that does sound like something I would say/my kind of nick lol.
He'll be in the top 3 going into next year's preseason.
Buuuuut that does sound like something I would say/my kind of nick lol.
