Who has best odds of winning '09 BCS title?

2010-01-07T11:48:46-05:00

2009-01-10T17:27:54-05:00

226

2009-01-10T17:27:54-05:00

2009-01-12T22:57:02-05:00

http://img.fannation.com/upload/user_profile/image/660/199/thumb/eagles_rice.jpg 43 VA

RichmondVTFan

Richmond 660839

Yes, 2000 and 2001 were the years to which I was referring, not 01 02...and Florida went to the championship in 2000 after losing to the Hurricanes who lost, at home to Washington, who DID NOT get to play in the championship...and that's the point. The PAC 10 doesn't win as many championships as it might, because, even when PAC 10 produce season results as powerful as SEC /BIG12 schools the PAC 10 is NOT allowed to play in the championship game. The evidence of the decade is hard to disprove. You COMPLETELY failed to come to grips with the pre-post ranking analysis. ESPN's analysis provides numbers that simply can't be ignored. The PAC 10 is consistently under-ranked. ONE MORE TIME: I am not dissing any conference or school. The SEC is magnificent. The BIG 12 is wonderful.So's the PAC 10. My only point.

235 So the Pac-10 wasn't allowed to play for a Championship after the 2000 season. Miami had the same problem. Miami (in the big east at the time) didn't get to play for it either. Nor did Virginia Tech. They even got smited from playing in a BCS bowl so that Notre Dame could get blown out again. I seem to remember one year when an undefeated SEC champ didn't get to play for a National Title so that a Pac-10 team (USC) could. Almost every year, someone gets dropped. The past two years it has not been the SEC. But in previous years it has been the SEC. 3960448

2009-01-13T08:57:39-05:00

vacquero17

Gervais 659464

So the Pac-10 wasn't allowed to play for a Championship after the 2000 season. Miami had the same problem. Miami (in the big east at the time) didn't get to play for it either. Nor did Virginia Tech. They even got smited from playing in a BCS bowl so that Notre Dame could get blown out again. I seem to remember one year when an undefeated SEC champ didn't get to play for a National Title so that a Pac-10 team (USC) could. Almost every year, someone gets dropped. The past two years it has not been the SEC. But in previous years it has been the SEC.

239 Yes, now and then some other conference is left out; an observation which obscures larger points: It happened to the PAC 10 two years running and to USC on occasion since. No other BCS conference can point to the snubbing with anything like the frequency the PAC 10 can. To leave Washington out in 2000 was amazing, as was Oregon's snub a year later. Also, as you pointed out, that Miami team was a Big East team, as was the snubbed Virginia Tech team; neither belonging to the "almighty 2;" the SEC and Big 12. The exception of course was undefeated Auburn. Unfortunately there were 2 other undefeated teams; one, as I remember from the Big 12; and the other, the only PAC 10 team, which, now and then, gets a chance at the marbles; USC. And USC must be undefeated, it seems, while the Big 12 and SEC are allowed a loss or two along the way. And even more importantly, PAC 10 schools are consistently, and significantly underrated in their beginning of the year rankings versus their end of year rankings; a FACT which feeds the myth the PAC 10 is weak and which limits their bowl and championship opportunities. It has never been my intention to insist that other conferences or schools are undeseving; only that the PAC10 is far stronger than the haters would have us believe. The OBJECTIVE (rather than subjective) numbers bear me out on this. Therefore, arguments regarding the relative strength of the conferences are based on entirely subjective analysis. It is a matter which can only be settled by a playoff. 3962975

2009-01-13T05:12:15-05:00

gold1959

Corona 240868

238 USC secondary should be even stronger next year: they return SS Taylor Mays (who would have probably been the first safety taken in the next NFL draft), FS Will Harris (who started the last half of the season), CB/S Josh Pinkard (back for a 6th year), CB Shareece Wright (considered the best USC corner until a season ending injury) and CB Kevin Thomas (who also started several games). The defensive line should be just as strong: they lose Fili Moala and Kyle Moore, but they replacements are more talented and have already been part of the rotation. Only linebacking should be weaker, with the loss of both Maualuga and Cushing. 3962221

2009-01-12T23:48:29-05:00

116

Sunshine Boy

Tallahassee 366547

237 Memo to SEC lovers -- more than half your BOWL teams this year finished the year with six or fewer wins against BCS opponents: Kentucky (3), LSU (4), SoCar (5), Vandy (5), Ole Miss (6). Only three of your teams had eight or more -- Alabama, Georgia, and Florida. By contrast, the Pac Ten had four of its ten teams finish with eight or more wins against BCS conference opponents. 3960806

2009-01-12T23:15:12-05:00

http://img.fannation.com/upload/user_profile/image/618/908/thumb/troy-smith-10.jpg 279 OH

Dragon Voyager

Mount Sterling 619548

236 Sweet baby Jesus. I can't believe I just read that load of crap. Dude, Vandy is to the SEC what Indiana is to the Big Ten; strap on your helmet, play one quarter, then go sit on the bench and think about how tough next week's game against Penn State/LSU is going to be since you're already winning by 30 points in this game. 3960535

2009-01-12T19:18:06-05:00

vacquero17

Gervais 659464

So um.... you do know that the 2001 Miami Hurricanes went undefeated throughout both the regular season and the post season, right? They did beat Washington 65-7 that season. If you are talking about the 2000 season, then yes, Washington did beat Miami. Miami beat FSU also. FSU was chosen, not Miami or Nebraska. Please get your history right before you post another vomit on this site. Thanks. PS-The evidence you have presented is completely wrong so it is unmistakable.. unmistakably CRAP

234 Yes, 2000 and 2001 were the years to which I was referring, not 01 02...and Florida went to the championship in 2000 after losing to the Hurricanes who lost, at home to Washington, who DID NOT get to play in the championship...and that's the point. The PAC 10 doesn't win as many championships as it might, because, even when PAC 10 produce season results as powerful as SEC /BIG12 schools the PAC 10 is NOT allowed to play in the championship game. The evidence of the decade is hard to disprove. You COMPLETELY failed to come to grips with the pre-post ranking analysis. ESPN's analysis provides numbers that simply can't be ignored. The PAC 10 is consistently under-ranked. ONE MORE TIME: I am not dissing any conference or school. The SEC is magnificent. The BIG 12 is wonderful. So's the PAC 10. My only point. 3958501

2009-01-12T22:57:02-05:00

http://img.fannation.com/upload/user_profile/image/660/199/thumb/eagles_rice.jpg 43 VA

RichmondVTFan

Richmond 660839

2009-01-12T02:17:07-05:00

http://img.fannation.com/upload/user_profile/image/660/199/thumb/eagles_rice.jpg 43 VA

RichmondVTFan

Richmond 660839

Please remember...these are oddsmakers, not fans, making this line. Their business is to make money, not friends.Now, as to those SEC, BIG 12 fans who dis the PAC 10 and USC's schedule. Sorry to have to break it to you, but the statistical evidence of bias is clear. I wouldn't call it an east coast bias, but, rather an eastern media bias. Consider:In 2007 ESPN published an analysis of the most overrated and underrated teams and conferences. They compared each teams ranking at the beginning of the year with their ranking at the end. Anyone who started or ended the season ranked outside the top 25 was assigned a value of 26. So, if a team started out of the rankings and finished 12th; the margin of difference would be plus 14.By this measure, the three most overrated BCS conferences: ACC, Big 12, SEC. No surprise.The most underrated conference: The PAC 10 by a mile.The two most underrated teams: 1) Washington State and 2) Oregon. While Washington State was miserable this year, it did not affect this measure because they started, and finished, the season out of the rankings. But the Ducks are a different story. Oregon, in most preseason rankings started the year out of the top 25, and finished it number 9 or 10...once again proving the point. THE PAC10 SUFFERS A MONUMENTAL DISADVANTAGE DUE TO NOTHING MORE THAN UNADULTERATED BIAS. Pure and simple.And it matters. The PAC 10 was perceived to be a "weak" conference, again, this year. That meant that a one loss USC team was eliminated from the championship picture in favor of one loss teams from other conferences. Yet, once again, the "weakness" of the PAC 10 was vastly overhyped. I don't know if SC, and by the way, I'm not a fan, would have been placed in the title game had the PAC 10 been rated correctly, but I do know they'd have been in the discussion.And, of course, this isn't the first time. In 2001 a one loss Miami team was sent to the NC game, over a one loss Washington team. Miami's defeat came at home to, you guessed it, WASHINGTON. Washington's lone loss was on the road to Oregon, which, as usual, was underrated. Oregon would go on to beat Texas in the Cotton Bowl and finish 10th in the country. The very next year a one loss Oregon team was passed over in favor of a one loss Nebraska team. Nebraska had just been defeated by Colorado, giving up more than 400 yards on the ground and more than 60 points. That same Colorado team was manhandled in the Fiesta Bowl, by, you guessed it, Oregon; who, as usual, finished way over their pre-season ranking.I am NOT saying the PAC 10 is better than the other conferences, merely underrated in comparison. The ACC, SEC, and Big 12, while very good and maybe even the best, are rarely as good as they are hyped. The PAC 10 is ALWAYS better. The margin of difference between the conferences is considerably less than you might think. The evidence is unmistakable.

196 So um.... you do know that the 2001 Miami Hurricanes went undefeated throughout both the regular season and the post season, right? They did beat Washington 65-7 that season. If you are talking about the 2000 season, then yes, Washington did beat Miami. Miami beat FSU also. FSU was chosen, not Miami or Nebraska. Please get your history right before you post another vomit on this site. Thanks. PS-The evidence you have presented is completely wrong so it is unmistakable.. unmistakably CRAP 3947276

2009-01-12T19:18:06-05:00

vacquero17

Gervais 659464

2009-01-12T16:18:37-05:00

http://img.fannation.com/upload/user_profile/image/335/939/thumb/ucla_helmet.jpg 312 CA

El_Guapo

Los Angeles 336319

I couldn't even watch past halftime of the USC/Penn State game. It was like Brent and Kirk were USC cheerleaders. I have said it before and I will say it again. The Big10 is not a powerhouse conference as in the past. The PAC10 is a joke with one team (USC) that is always one win away from the BCS Championship. But Peteeee's always complaining that his team should be this or that. Win games and play a schedule that is comparable to other teams and then complain. I am putting my money on Alabama for 09'

228 The 2009 Gator Football Schedule 9/5 Charleston Southern 9/12 Troy 9/19 Tennessee 9/26 at Kentucky 10/10 at LSU 10/17 Arkansas 10/24 at Mississippi State 10/31 vs. Georgia (Jacksonville FL) 11/7 Vanderbilt 11/14 at South Carolina 11/21 Florida International 11/28 Florida State 12/5 SEC Championship Game Tell me what is so hard about that schedule? This is probably the easiest route to the NC next year! 3956143

2009-01-12T17:30:47-05:00

SCwarrior

Marina Del Rey 654338

The 2009 Gator Football Schedule9/5 Charleston Southern9/12 Troy9/19 Tennessee9/26 at Kentucky10/10 at LSU10/17 Arkansas 10/24 at Mississippi State10/31 vs. Georgia (Jacksonville FL)11/7 Vanderbilt11/14 at South Carolina11/21 Florida International11/28 Florida State 12/5 SEC Championship Game Tell me what is so hard about that schedule? This is probably the easiest route to the NC next year!

233 Charleston Southern, Troy, Florida International? Do Gator fans not feel they are being cheated out of some good games? Having Florida State and Miami is respectable even if they are in down years because these are traditional rival games... sort of like USC playing ND but the rest of Florida's OOC is just plain sad. No wonder Tebow is coming back. 3957232

2009-01-12T16:18:37-05:00

http://img.fannation.com/upload/user_profile/image/335/939/thumb/ucla_helmet.jpg 312 CA

El_Guapo

Los Angeles 336319

2009-01-12T17:27:06-05:00

http://img.fannation.com/upload/user_profile/image/335/939/thumb/ucla_helmet.jpg 312 CA

El_Guapo

Los Angeles 336319

This is probably the easiest route to the NC next year!

232 Next Year = Next Season 3957119

2009-01-12T10:32:08-05:00

http://img.fannation.com/upload/user_profile/image/487/031/thumb/gator_longhorn_jersey.jpg 429 DC

gatorlonghorn

Washington 487471

Arkansas, Auburn, UK, Miss St., South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt...oh the horror! The SEC is one tough conference!

215 I love how everyone says that the SEC lacks a strength of schedule. It's ridiculous. Florida's Challenging Games 2009 - Tennessee (will be ranked in 2009 with Kiffin) - Georgia (will be ranked between 15 and 25) - Ole Miss (Top 10) - LSU (Top 10 with the new QB) - Alabama (Top 5) - FSU (Top 15 and winner of the ACC in 2009) And, as for Vanderbilt, they had a winning schedule and won their bowl. Eight teams from the SEC played in bowls, and all but two of them won. That's 8 out of 12 teams. And, it will not take long for Auburn to have a winning record either; try one year. In 2009, the SEC will have six ranked teams and at least 3 in the top 10. Florida's road to the championship will be a challenging one. 3949730

2009-01-12T16:51:59-05:00

http://img.fannation.com/upload/user_profile/image/335/939/thumb/ucla_helmet.jpg 312 CA

El_Guapo

Los Angeles 336319

I love how everyone says that the SEC lacks a strength of schedule. It's ridiculous.Florida's Challenging Games 2009- Tennessee (will be ranked in 2009 with Kiffin)- Georgia (will be ranked between 15 and 25)- Ole Miss (Top 10)- LSU (Top 10 with the new QB)- Alabama (Top 5)- FSU (Top 15 and winner of the ACC in 2009)And, as for Vanderbilt, they had a winning schedule and won their bowl.Eight teams from the SEC played in bowls, and all but two of them won. That's 8 out of 12 teams. And, it will not take long for Auburn to have a winning record either; try one year.In 2009, the SEC will have six ranked teams and at least 3 in the top 10. Florida's road to the championship will be a challenging one.

231 You see, you proved my point. The problem with what you said is that the SEC is constantly overrated and ends up worst than when it started (rank wise). Take this season for instance: Georgia (1), Auburn (9), LSU (7), and Tennessee (18). All of these teams were vastly overrated and they finished 13th, unranked, unranked, and unranked respectively. Now you see why A) Florida's sos looks very strong and B) why SEC teams end up ranked so high, because the teams are highly overrated! I wont even get into why Alabama is overrated because I explained that one already (see previous post). Also, as to your point that Vanderbilt is good...that is laughable. They made it to a bowl game ona 6-6 season! That is not good by any means. Vanderbilt is horrible and continue to be so. It will take another 55 years for Vanderbilt to make it to another bowl. 3956638

2009-01-12T10:36:53-05:00

http://img.fannation.com/upload/user_profile/image/487/031/thumb/gator_longhorn_jersey.jpg 429 DC

gatorlonghorn

Washington 487471

QUOTE(#106):Originally posted 12:28 PM ET 01.11 by HuskerTx ..Until USC and it's Pac 10 wannabe's have an actual conference playoff, I thinkthey need to shut up. Plain and simple. (along with the Big Bore 10 conference)..The Pac-10 has 10 schools.They each play nine conference games.You do the math - oops, sorry, I didn't mean to place so much strain on what few brain cells you have. So fto do the math for you: When you play every team in the conferenceduring the regular season, there is no need for a conference championship game. Until homers from the Schools for Educational Casualties and the Big "Only-12-points-needed-on-the-SAT-for-admission" can learn to count to ten, they need to shut up.

216 With a championship game, the top two teams in a conference play again. In this case, it is not necessary to get tied up with 9 regular season conference games out of 11 total games. That's how Florida plays FSU each year. Then, they have to play in the SEC Championship game a week later against the top team in the SEC West. No one cares if Florida plays Mississippi State every year. They care if they play Alabama at the end of the season. No one cares if USC plays Washington State. They would prefer for them to play Oregon and maybe someone else from the Mountain West, a conference that seems to kick the PAC-10's ****. 3949790

2009-01-12T16:31:31-05:00

http://img.fannation.com/upload/user_profile/image/335/939/thumb/ucla_helmet.jpg 312 CA

El_Guapo

Los Angeles 336319

With a championship game, the top two teams in a conference play again. In this case, it is not necessary to get tied up with 9 regular season conference games out of 11 total games. That's how Florida plays FSU each year. Then, they have to play in the SEC Championship game a week later against the top team in the SEC West.No one cares if Florida plays Mississippi State every year. They care if they play Alabama at the end of the season.No one cares if USC plays Washington State. They would prefer for them to play Oregon and maybe someone else from the Mountain West, a conference that seems to kick the PAC-10's ****.

230 If you are implying that the MWC is better than the PAC-10 based on this seasons results then let me add something to the conversation. The PAC-10 is 10-7 vs the SEC in the BCS era, does that make them better? Anyway, make a substantial argument or don't make one at all! Also, in a championship game, the top two teams do not necessarily play each other again. Last time I checked Alabama and Florida played each other only once. The reason there is a championship game is because the sec is a 12 team conference and cannot play each team once! 3956327

226

<div class="photo_container image_right"> <div class="photo"><img src="http://img.fannation.com/upload/si_blog_post_images/stafon-johnson.ftr.jpg" alt="Stafon-johnson" width="298" height="300" /></div> <div class="photo_attributes" style="text-align:right;">Stafon Johnson and USC are the favorites to win in '09. Peter Read Miller/SI</div> </div> Some have USC as the early favorite to win the BCS Championship next year. Of course, that’s assuming quarterback Mark Sanchez returns. He has yet to announce whether he will enter the draft. That didn’t stop <a href="http://www.betonline.com">BetOnline.com </a>from making the Trojans a 4-to-1 favorite to win it all. BCS champion Florida and runner-up Oklahoma are listed at 5-to-1 and 7-to-1, respectively, with Texas (8-to-1) and Ohio State (9-to-1) next. Oddsmaker Stan Simmons says the odds are determined by several factors, from how a team finished the season to the number of starters returning to the schedule and recruiting class. Also taken into consideration is the public’s perception. "USC is a very good team," Simmons said. "We all know they reload, and if Sanchez comes back they would probably be an even heavier favorite." If I were a betting man, I’d say Sanchez will be suiting up on Sundays in 2009 after coming off the performance he had in the Rose Bowl. In case you’re wondering, Notre Dame was listed at 25-to-1. The Fighting Irish whipped Hawaii 49-21 in the Sheraton Hawaii Bowl and have a favorable schedule. "[They have] lots of five-star recruits coming next year," Simmons said. "They have the players. If there's any team that's kind of gonna put it together and Charlie Weis figures things out, Notre Dame could be the team that goes from the outhouse to the penthouse." I wouldn't bet on that happening. Here is the list of BetOnline.com’s 2009 BCS Championship odds: USC 4-to-1 Florida 5-1 Oklahoma 7-1 Texas 8-1 Ohio State 9-1 Florida State 15-1 Virginia Tech 15-1 Georgia 20-1 Miami ( Fla ) 20-1 LSU 20-1 Alabama 25-1 Notre Dame 25-1 Oregon 30-1 Penn State 30-1 Texas Tech 30-1 Nebraska 40-1 Georgia Tech 40-1 North Carolina 40-1 West Virginia 40-1 Illinois 50-1 Tennessee 50-1 Oklahoma State 60-1 Missouri 60-1 Utah 60-1 California 60-1 Wisconsin 60-1 Michigan 60-1 Iowa 75-1 Kansas 75-1 South Carolina 75-1 TCU 100-1 Arkansas 100-1 Michigan State 100-1 Cincinnati 100-1 Boston College 100-1 http://img.fannation.com/upload/user_profile/image/580/015/thumb/thumb.jpg 5 XX

Dave Heuschkel

No City 580575 39661 <div class="photo_container image_right"> <div class="photo"><img src="http://img.fannation.com/upload/si_blog_post_images/stafon-johnson.ftr.jpg" alt="Stafon-johnson" width="298" height="300" /></div> <div class="photo_attributes" style="text-align:right;">Stafon Johnson and USC are the favorites to win in '09. Peter Read Miller/SI</div> </div> Some have USC as the early favorite to win the BCS Championship next year. Of course, that’s assuming quarterback Mark Sanchez returns. He has yet to announce whether he will enter the draft. That didn’t stop <a href="http://www.betonline.com">BetOnline.com </a>from making the Trojans a 4-to-1 favorite to win it all. BCS champion Florida and runner-up Oklahoma are listed at 5-to-1 and 7-to-1, respectively, with Texas (8-to-1) and Ohio State (9-to-1) next. Oddsmaker Stan Simmons says the odds are determined by several factors, from how a team finished the season to the number of starters returning to the schedule and recruiting class. Also taken into consideration is the public’s perception. "USC is a very good team," Simmons said. "We all know they reload, and if Sanchez comes back they would probably be an even heavier favorite." If I were a betting man, I’d say Sanchez will be suiting up on Sundays in 2009 after coming off the performance he had in the Rose Bowl.