Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Krieg" data-source="post: 1231337" data-attributes="member: 5282">Re-read the original post. He included a hypothetical win over Michigan. 3-1=2 "Definitely"?! lol sorry no dice. I've watched USC & Washington State a good bit over the past two years (including when Ohio State smoked a Washington State team that wasn't any worse than this years). While I don't doubt that USC & Washington State could beat the top two in the Big-10, I'd put my money on the Bucks & Wolverinees. USC & WSU just aren't physical enough at the point of attack right now to consistently hang with the Big Boys (and USC's D is VASTLY overrated).  No, it isn't nonsense. It's been Tressell's modus operandi since he was at YSU. Many times he's called off the dogs when up by 10-14 pts. Does he want the game to come down to missed FGs by opponent's at the end of the game to win (PSU, PU)? No of course not. However he is VERY happy to get a 2 TD lead & sit on it while relying on ball control, field position & special teams to carry the day.Take the time to look up Coach Ts stats in close games over his career, the numbers are mind boggling.FYI Fans hate close games more than anyone (at least the fans of big time programs that expect to beat everyone by 50)."Rational" is certainly a matter of opinion here. A 4 team playoff would eliminate 90% of the criticism of the current system. In 2002 that would have thrown USC & Georgia into the mix.2001 - Oregon & either Colorado or FL would have been added (although it probably would have been better to add both & ditch the Nebraska debacle).2000 - Washington & Miami1999 - Nebraska & AlabamaPersonally I'd rather just go back to the old bowl system & let the top two teams after the bowls play for it all. *shrug*</blockquote>

Verification