NCAAF  > General NCAAF  > Pitt's Wannstadt thinks BigEast will look better in two months ....
October 7, 2010, 12:54 AM
And you what, he is probably right ...

Big East champ is going to LOOK great in a month or two, because the schedule is about to get really really easy ... it's mostly all in-conference games from here on out for the Big East.

So, in two months, whoever the champ of the Big East is, will be ranked in the mid teens, mostly on the strength of their impressive win over the second place Big East team, whoever that is. Because we all know that the only the best teams get to the BCS, and since the BigEast champ is in the BCS, they must be one of the best teams in the country, right?

Actually, while it is not what Wanny meant, I think he is right ... the BigEast is going to look alot better in two months ... because the Football season will be over and BASKETBALL will in full swing, and all of the BigEast can just forget that this football season even happened!!
October 7, 2010  09:54 AM ET

Meh, the Big East stinks, but I think by the end of the season that WVU will be able to at least hang with quite a few top teams. Pitt is an embarrasment and will likely get rolled by a weak Irish team.

October 7, 2010  11:10 AM ET

Yeah, and that is my point sort of ...

So, in the end, Pitt has loses to Utah, Miami, ND and WVU (for example). And WVU will then point to their game against Pitt as a "great win against a tough Pitt team" and proof that WVU should be ranked ... and I just don't buy it ....

October 7, 2010  11:42 AM ET

The truth will be revealed in the BCS game. Its hard to think of an opponent that the BE BCS partcipant could face that it could beat.

Comment #4 has been removed
October 7, 2010  03:28 PM ET

Wannstaedt will be gone in 2 months, so he is probably right.

October 7, 2010  04:15 PM ET
QUOTE(#4):

I read somewhere (it was on the internet, so it must be true), that the BCS has no provision for revoking a conference's AQ status. Can anyone confirm or refute? Does the Big East continue to get an AQ bid even if none of their teams have a single OOC win? If everyone outside of Kansas, K-State and I-State leave the Big XII, do the remaining three schools retain an AQ bid?

ESPN had an article a while back-basically for an AQ conference they keep the status as long as they maintain minimum conference memberships reqs (I think its 7 or 8 teams). The BE is going to be a huge headache for the BCS to explain away in front of congress this year, esp if TCU or BSU beat the living dogdroppings out of the BE champ in a BCS game.

October 7, 2010  04:16 PM ET
QUOTE(#5):

Wannstaedt will be gone in 2 months, so he is probably right.

Tough comment, the stache adds a certain hard-nosed look to CFB.... His teams have always under-performed though.

October 7, 2010  05:55 PM ET

The Big East is currently 2-10 against AQ OOC and clearly, this season, the worst of the AQ conferences. However, when the last four seasons (2006-2009) are considered (as the BCS sliding 4-year scale does) they are in jeopardy of losing their AQ status... ...but the ACC is!!

Currently, by BCS criteria, the MWC falls short and the WAC is a distant 8th place.

The BCS is due to be formally assess its compliance after the 2011 season. The 2006 season was great for the Big East and on this sliding four-year evaluation scale; these results will be replaced by the results of the 2010 season. As a result, the hierarchy cited above will most likely change.

October 7, 2010  05:57 PM ET

Teh above should read:

However, when the last four seasons (2006-2009) are considered (as the BCS sliding 4-year scale does) they are NOT in jeopardy of losing their AQ status

October 8, 2010  07:59 AM ET
QUOTE(#9):

Teh above should read:However, when the last four seasons (2006-2009) are considered (as the BCS sliding 4-year scale does) they are NOT in jeopardy of losing their AQ status

Yah, but this season is going to be grim on the stat books...

On a related note, does anyone know if you can watch the ND/Pitt game online....

October 8, 2010  11:05 AM ET
QUOTE(#7):

Tough comment, the stache adds a certain hard-nosed look to CFB.... His teams have always under-performed though.

I don't know that for a fact. Just disillusioned with him as a coach, not that Pitt is even my team. He seems to lose 2-3 games a year he should win, every year.

 
October 8, 2010  11:20 AM ET
QUOTE(#11):

I don't know that for a fact. Just disillusioned with him as a coach, not that Pitt is even my team. He seems to lose 2-3 games a year he should win, every year.

It's just my opinion, but I had him assessed as a terrible head coach when he was with the Dolphins. I can't remember all the specifics at this point, but I watched enough games and you just get a feel about certain coaches. He has only reinforced my opinion since he has been at Pitt. The first game of the year, I picked Utah because of the coaching factor.

Comment

Remember to keep your posts clean. Profanity will get filtered, and offensive comments will be removed.


Truth & Rumors

MOST POPULAR

  1. 1
    Clippers, Warriors exchange barbs
    Views
    427
    Comments
    234
  2. 2
    Tuukka Rask takes blame for Bruins' Game 1 loss
    Views
    2457
    Comments
    231
  3. 3
    Smush Parker allegedly punches high schooler
    Views
    2047
    Comments
    140
  4. 4
    Time to penalize NHL's perennial losers?
    Views
    332
    Comments
    107
  5. 5
    Quarterback freefalling down draft boards
    Views
    7085
    Comments
    90

SI.com

SI Photos