this is a must read -- great post to expand your thinking

[VOLinthaNATI]

whoops, i forgot them:

VaTech's best win was Wake Forest. Their second best win was against Clemson (who is ranked around the same as Penn St). Clemson got blasted by BC and beaten to the tune of 11 pts by GaTech (at home!)... the same team that Notre Dame beat at GaTech. VaTech's win over Clemson was nice, but ND's win over PennSt was better.

The nail in the coffin to me is the GaTech game tho.

I think the Clemson win is better than any win Notre Dame had all year, do you not agree?

 

[njuneardave]

not really. clemson ended up 8-4 (5-3 in the weak ACC) with losses to BC, Maryland, VaTech, and SCar (Maryland loss is glaring). they were overhyped, imo... they barely snuck out wins against pitiful teams (ala NCSt).

I think that the UCLA/GaTech/PennSt win combo is more impressive than Wake/Clemson/Cincy trio of VaTech. yeah, its hard to believe that cincy was VaTech's 3rd best win.

But, it WOULD be a LOT closer if VaTech beat GaTech... but they didn't.... and they weren't too close... and they lost against GaTech at home

 

[WA_Vol]

why is my statement ridiculous? Notre Dame didn't make the rule. I am saying that Notre Dame deserves a BCS bowl b/c these teams are not elligible. If these teams were elligible, then Notre Dame would not deserve a BCS bowl. Period.

The rules should be changed and you know it.

I expect the rules will be changed since more deserving teams like Wisconsin and Auburn are left out. Auburn has been shafted twice in 2 season.

Citing an unfair rule as justification of your argument carries no weight.

 

[njuneardave]

The rules should be changed and you know it.

I expect the rules will be changed since more deserving teams like Wisconsin and Auburn are left out. Auburn has been shafted twice in 2 season.

Citing an unfair rule as justification of your argument carries no weight.

the rule is the rule. i am not going to argue that a team is more deserving when the team is DISQUALIFIED. Wisconsin would not deserve the spot anyway. Wisconsin has the 88th ranked schedule in the nation.... their best win was PennSt. You can't argue that they deserve it any more than Notre Dame when they have the same credentials as Notre Dame. Should the rules be changed? It's the BCS... the BCS should be changed. Period. Changing a rule in the BCS won't make it any better b/c teams will still continue to get shafted. Your argument is quite ignorant... let's apply it to life:

"I know the rule says I have to go 55 officer, but it should be changed, and you know it! This is ridiculous!"

you may not agree with the rule, but all things must follow the rules. The rule is 2 teams from each conference, so it follows that Wisconsin and Auburn are eliminated.

"citing an unfair rule as justification carries no weight." lol. :blink:

 

[WA_Vol]

the rule is the rule. i am not going to argue that a team is more deserving when the team is DISQUALIFIED. Wisconsin would not deserve the spot anyway. Wisconsin has the 88th ranked schedule in the nation.... their best win was PennSt. You can't argue that they deserve it any more than Notre Dame when they have the same credentials as Notre Dame. Should the rules be changed? It's the BCS... the BCS should be changed. Period. Changing a rule in the BCS won't make it any better b/c teams will still continue to get shafted. Your argument is quite ignorant... let's apply it to life:

"I know the rule says I have to go 55 officer, but it should be changed, and you know it! This is ridiculous!"

you may not agree with the rule, but all things must follow the rules. The rule is 2 teams from each conference, so it follows that Wisconsin and Auburn are eliminated.

"citing an unfair rule as justification carries no weight." lol. :blink:

Yes, so if you were in Nazi Germany in 1940, and Hitler and the Nazi's told you to gas jews, then it was ok. BECAUSE THE RULES SAID TO DO IT, SO THAT MAKES IT RIGHT.

Great argument.

 

[AlabamaVolunteer]

Someone made the point earlier but you chose not to apply it NJ. ND is not in a conference. Place them in the big East or the Big 10 , or even the pac 10. Do they make it in with their record? No. Could they have the same schedule? No.

You talk about rules, but your Blessed ND doesn't want to adhere to rules. They want to tip toe along to the beat of their own drum. Which is crap. Make them play the conference schedule, make them compete for television exposure. MAKE THEM DO WHAT EVERY OTHER REPUTABLE TEAM IN THE NATION HAS TO DO. If they do all of that, then they have a gripe. Until then, go to the little room, shut the door, and tell the man on the other side of the screen your problems. My orange blooded ears do not want to hear whining from a frickin'
DOMER!!!:salute:

 

[jakez4ut]

wow, guys. as a vol fan, you are all very disappointing to me. please, for one minute, lay aside your own bias and read the article and assess the situation for what it is.

he states that quinn shouldn't have won the Heisman... THE ARTICLE ISNT EVEN ABOUT THE HEISMAN! the article is addressing the unwarranted attacks on Quinn when the guy hasn't done anything to deserve them. Please read the article before you comment. It has nothing to do with the Heisman.


Give me a list of teams that deserve a BCS bowl over ND, please.

First, we don't care about disappointing you, and by the looks of it...that's almost a positive thing for us that we do.

now you changed "deserve" to "eligible" later on in the thread, but in line with your original thought process, i'd take any of Hatvol's teams he listed over ND any day, in the deserving category. at this point, eligibility has nothing to do with it.

Only 2 teams from each conference are allowed to go to the BCS bowls.

Ohio State and Michigan from Big-10 -- effectively eliminating Wisconsin.

Florida and LSU -- effectively eliminating Auburn. Auburn, by the way, lost badly to Arkansas and Georgia. Unranked Georgia. Notre Dame lost badly to two teams in the top 10. Notre Dame is more deserving than Auburn.

Any other teams?

now we've changed it to who's allowed, from who's more deserving...how convenient.
there's one thing i think that keeps getting lost when you talk about the USC and Michigan games. ND did lose those games...badly. why do people give so much credit for who they lose to? if that's the case, we should schedule the New England Patriots and the NFC East every year. that way we could guarantee ourselves 5 "moral victories" each year for having the gumption to schedule so toughly. amazing. now giving credit for losing....same mindset that took corporate punishment out of gradeschool and that took the score board out of little league baseball...(in my best whiny voice) there are no losers anymore....everyone has wins and well, wins, so long as you lose to the right team???? gimmie a break.
to quote Herm Edwards: You play to win the game.
and to quote Stroker Ace: 2nd sucks.

I'm sorry . . . There's just no way you're not a Notre Dame fan.

:thumbsup:

Go ahead guys.... i want to know WHAT BCS ELLIGIBLE TEAM HONESTLY GOT SHAFTED. I can not think of one team that got shafted. Your hatred obviously stems deeper than your logic.

we've gone from deserved to allowed to eligible. even more convenient.
uh, ok...remember, you did start this thread...buyer beware.:blink:

I think the Clemson win is better than any win Notre Dame had all year, do you not agree?

i sure do. and clemson beat UNC, and ND beat UNC, but Clemson beat UNC by this much and ND beat them by this much, so ND's win was more impresessive because of this and that and this and that and this and that.....jeez.......................:crazy:

 

[njuneardave]

Yes, so if you were in Nazi Germany in 1940, and Hitler and the Nazi's told you to gas jews, then it was ok. BECAUSE THE RULES SAID TO DO IT, SO THAT MAKES IT RIGHT.

Great argument.

wow, how dare you compare something as stupid and insignificant as college football to Nazi Germany. your arguments make you like very ignorant. This 2max rule is nothing like "kill a jew". you should be ashamed.

furthermore, Auburn does not deserve to be in the BCS either. They got stomped Arkansas (10-3) and unranked Georgia (8-4) AT HOME. Auburn had better wins than ND, but they also had much worse losses. ND lost to UM (11-1) at HOME and lost to USC (10-2) at USC. Honestly, i think that ND's beatings were way "better", seeing as they were against two top-5 teams and Auburn's spankings were at the hands at a top-15 team and an unranked team. Auburn was not deserving of a BCS.

 

[jakez4ut]

furthermore, Auburn does not deserve to be in the BCS either. They got stomped Arkansas (10-3) and unranked Georgia (8-4) AT HOME. Auburn had better wins than ND, but they also had much worse losses. .

i stopped reading right there. Let me get this straight....Auburn beat better quality teams than ND did, but ND lost to better teams than Auburn lost to, so ND gets the edge in that comparison????

Dude, you may want to re read some of this yourself.:thumbsup:

 

[hatvol96]

wow, how dare you compare something as stupid and insignificant as college football to Nazi Germany. your arguments make you like very ignorant. This 2max rule is nothing like "kill a jew". you should be ashamed.

furthermore, Auburn does not deserve to be in the BCS either. They got stomped Arkansas (10-3) and unranked Georgia (8-4) AT HOME. Auburn had better wins than ND, but they also had much worse losses. ND lost to UM (11-1) at HOME and lost to USC (10-2) at USC. Honestly, i think that ND's beatings were way "better", seeing as they were against two top-5 teams and Auburn's spankings were at the hands at a top-15 team and an unranked team. Auburn was not deserving of a BCS.

Are all the Notre Dame sites down? Why don't you try a Boise State site? Then you can talk with fans of a team that shares Notre Dame's position of having no business in a major bowl.

 

[GAVol]

Auburn had better wins than ND, but they also had much worse losses. ND lost to UM (11-1) at HOME and lost to USC (10-2) at USC. Honestly, i think that ND's beatings were way "better", seeing as they were against two top-5 teams and Auburn's spankings were at the hands at a top-15 team and an unranked team. Auburn was not deserving of a BCS.

Did you seriously just trump Auburns' quality wins with Notre Dames' "quality losses"?

There are 100 arguments you could make for Notre Dame. 99 of them are better than that one.:swoon3:

 

[tvolsfan]

Arkansas is not elligible. Again, 2 teams from each conference. Arkansas has 3 losses. Notre Dame has 2. Arkansas lost to USC by 36 points -- Notre Dame lost by 20.

Tennessee. LoL :rofl: even my prejudice to the big orange wouldn't be as bold to say this. we don't deserve it. we have 3 losses.

Texas. 3 losses. 2 losses to unranked teams (KSU and TTU). Nope.

Rutgers. 1 word: Cincinnati.

WVU: 2 losses. One loss to an unranked and terribly mediocre USF.


I'm not buying it.


What have these teams done to merit a spot over the Irish?

If ND played our schedule, they would have lost to the three we lost to, plus Georgia, South Carolina, and maybe some other upset in there.

 

[hatvol96]

Did you seriously just trump Auburns' quality wins with Notre Dames' "quality losses"?
:swoon3:

That is a candidate for the stupidest post in the history of the internet. To paraphrase:"It doesn't matter who you beat, who you lose to is more important." Brilliant. Doesn't that guy have a Charlie Weiss worship mass to attend?

 

[tvolsfan]

Did you seriously just trump Auburns' quality wins with Notre Dames' "quality losses"?

There are 100 arguments you could make for Notre Dame. 99 of them are better than that one.:swoon3:

No, there are 98 reasons. The other reason is Auburn was home eating cheeseburgers when Notre Dame lost their last game.

 

[volinbham]

Did you seriously just trump Auburns' quality wins with Notre Dames' "quality losses"?

Help me remember who those wins were against...Hmmm. Oh yeah, the #2 and #4 team in the country! :crazy:

 

[volinbham]

Did you seriously just trump Auburns' quality wins with Notre Dames' "quality losses"?

Okay, using this logic UT is more deserving of the BCS than ND because our losses are quality losses and we have one more than ND! :dance2:

 

[GAVol]

I knew we had a BCS argument somewhere! :wacko:

 

[tvolsfan]

Help me remember who those wins were against...Hmmm. Oh yeah, the #2 and #4 team in the country! :crazy:

What win makes you think they are worthy of hanging with LSU. We already know they can lose to good teams, they need to prove they can beat them.

 

[WA_Vol]

i read tons of blogs a day ... even blogs for teams i really dont care for: UF, ND, GaTech, WVU, Uga, Ucla, Texas, USC just to name a few.

Like your not a closet ND fan lol.

 

[jakez4ut]

Did you seriously just trump Auburns' quality wins with Notre Dames' "quality losses"?

There are 100 arguments you could make for Notre Dame. 99 of them are better than that one.:swoon3:

That is a candidate for the stupidest post in the history of the internet. To paraphrase:"It doesn't matter who you beat, who you lose to is more important." Brilliant. Doesn't that guy have a Charlie Weiss worship mass to attend?

:thumbsup: k:

 

[Bennett4UT]

That is a candidate for the stupidest post in the history of the internet. To paraphrase:"It doesn't matter who you beat, who you lose to is more important." Brilliant. Doesn't that guy have a Charlie Weiss worship mass to attend?

They worship his gunt on Thursdays and his "Genius" on Fridays.....

 

[njuneardave]

so many posts to address:

1) if ND had UT's schedule, ND would not be considered for a bowl at all... they would have 4 losses, minimum... but they didn't have our schedule.

2) i'm sorry that i didn't mention "elligible" on my first post. i think you are reading too much into my words. im not going to argue that we deserve a BCS bowl... b/c we are not elligible for one. why would you argue that an inellgible team deserves a BCS over an elligible team? if you want to get hung up on syntax and verbage, jake, be my guest.

3) auburn got humiliated by two teams (one unranked) at home. it depends on how you look at "deserving"... and to me, auburn is very inconsistent. maybe if tuberville focused more on football and less on whining, auburn would be more consistent. the point that i am making is simply this: auburn lost to unranked Georgia, at home, by a humiliating margin, and that eliminates them in my mind. i dont have an SEC homer love, so i dont lobby for more SEC teams in the BCS.

4) so, because i stand up for a team that is not the Vols, i am automatically a notre dame fan? get real guys. so i dont lobby for Auburn (an inelligible team in the first place) to get a BCS bowl.... this consequently asserts me as a domer? no. its called an opposing viewpoint. you guys jump to ridiculous conclusions that anyone who sympathizes with another team is obviously a fan of the other team. i tried to post a blog from another fan from another team b/c i thought it was an interesting read. i am not so shamelessly biased to argue against any team that is not in the SEC. auburn doesn't deserve the BCS over ND -- im not a domer -- i dont think a team that gets demolished by an unranked team deserves a BCS bowl.

5) if i post an article from a USC Trojan blog that sympathizes with them, am I a USC fan, too? if i say that USC is better than UF, am I a trojan fan? give me a break... it is an oppinion. how many times do i have to reiterate that stating that one team is better than another in no way makes you a fan of the one team. i think Michigan is better than UF. I'm not a wolverine fan, and I didnt want a rematch NC game, but I think UM is better. put down your guns and simply read what im writing. Of the elligible teams for a BCS bowl, none deserve it more than ND. that is my oppinion whether you guys agree or not -- but i dont think rutgers, wvu, or vatech deserve it more.

 

[Fine Vol]

so many posts to address:

1) if ND had UT's schedule, ND would not be considered for a bowl at all... they would have 4 losses, minimum... but they didn't have our schedule.

2) i'm sorry that i didn't mention "elligible" on my first post. i think you are reading too much into my words. im not going to argue that we deserve a BCS bowl... b/c we are not elligible for one. why would you argue that an inellgible team deserves a BCS over an elligible team? if you want to get hung up on syntax and verbage, jake, be my guest.

3) auburn got humiliated by two teams (one unranked) at home. it depends on how you look at "deserving"... and to me, auburn is very inconsistent. maybe if tuberville focused more on football and less on whining, auburn would be more consistent. the point that i am making is simply this: auburn lost to unranked Georgia, at home, by a humiliating margin, and that eliminates them in my mind. i dont have an SEC homer love, so i dont lobby for more SEC teams in the BCS.

4) so, because i stand up for a team that is not the Vols, i am automatically a notre dame fan? get real guys. so i dont lobby for Auburn (an inelligible team in the first place) to get a BCS bowl.... this consequently asserts me as a domer? no. its called an opposing viewpoint. you guys jump to ridiculous conclusions that anyone who sympathizes with another team is obviously a fan of the other team. i tried to post a blog from another fan from another team b/c i thought it was an interesting read. i am not so shamelessly biased to argue against any team that is not in the SEC. auburn doesn't deserve the BCS over ND -- im not a domer -- i dont think a team that gets demolished by an unranked team deserves a BCS bowl.

5) if i post an article from a USC Trojan blog that sympathizes with them, am I a USC fan, too? if i say that USC is better than UF, am I a trojan fan? give me a break... it is an oppinion. how many times do i have to reiterate that stating that one team is better than another in no way makes you a fan of the one team. i think Michigan is better than UF. I'm not a wolverine fan, and I didnt want a rematch NC game, but I think UM is better. put down your guns and simply read what im writing. Of the elligible teams for a BCS bowl, none deserve it more than ND. that is my oppinion whether you guys agree or not -- but i dont think rutgers, wvu, or vatech deserve it more.

I think ND is a pretty solid team. ND is like Miami you either hate them or you love them, so anytime you bring up the name ND its like swating a hornets nest.

 

[VOLinthaNATI]

not really. clemson ended up 8-4 (5-3 in the weak ACC) with losses to BC, Maryland, VaTech, and SCar (Maryland loss is glaring). they were overhyped, imo... they barely snuck out wins against pitiful teams (ala NCSt).

I think that the UCLA/GaTech/PennSt win combo is more impressive than Wake/Clemson/Cincy trio of VaTech. yeah, its hard to believe that cincy was VaTech's 3rd best win.

But, it WOULD be a LOT closer if VaTech beat GaTech... but they didn't.... and they weren't too close... and they lost against GaTech at home

I'm sorry but this argument is bad. :no: Virginia Tech beat the winner of the ACC. That alone is better than any win Notre Dame had all year.

Also, I'm not sure why you are so quick to discount Cincy as a pretty sold win. They beat Rutgers and took Louisville (a top 10 team) all the way to the end. Notre Dame when they played top 10 teams they were blown off the field. They weren't even competitive. You are making arguments to simply try and help your point and forgetting things such as this.

Last, I know we play thme in a bowl game and we BETTER win or this wasn't a good rebound season from last year but that's another story. Penn State is not that great of a win. They beat 1 team with a winning record the entire year. That win came against Purdue. They beat 2 teams with a .500 record, Iowa and Minnesota who were 3-5 and 2-6 against the weak Big Ten.

So, again I'll take Virginia Tech's Clemson win and it's better than any win Notre Dame had.

My work here is done.......:the_finger:

 

[jakez4ut]

so many posts to address:

1) if ND had UT's schedule, ND would not be considered for a bowl at all... they would have 4 losses, minimum... but they didn't have our schedule.

2) i'm sorry that i didn't mention "elligible" on my first post. i think you are reading too much into my words. im not going to argue that we deserve a BCS bowl... b/c we are not elligible for one. why would you argue that an inellgible team deserves a BCS over an elligible team? if you want to get hung up on syntax and verbage, jake, be my guest.

3) auburn got humiliated by two teams (one unranked) at home. it depends on how you look at "deserving"... and to me, auburn is very inconsistent. maybe if tuberville focused more on football and less on whining, auburn would be more consistent. the point that i am making is simply this: auburn lost to unranked Georgia, at home, by a humiliating margin, and that eliminates them in my mind. i dont have an SEC homer love, so i dont lobby for more SEC teams in the BCS.

4) so, because i stand up for a team that is not the Vols, i am automatically a notre dame fan? get real guys. so i dont lobby for Auburn (an inelligible team in the first place) to get a BCS bowl.... this consequently asserts me as a domer? no. its called an opposing viewpoint. you guys jump to ridiculous conclusions that anyone who sympathizes with another team is obviously a fan of the other team. i tried to post a blog from another fan from another team b/c i thought it was an interesting read. i am not so shamelessly biased to argue against any team that is not in the SEC. auburn doesn't deserve the BCS over ND -- im not a domer -- i dont think a team that gets demolished by an unranked team deserves a BCS bowl.

5) if i post an article from a USC Trojan blog that sympathizes with them, am I a USC fan, too? if i say that USC is better than UF, am I a trojan fan? give me a break... it is an oppinion. how many times do i have to reiterate that stating that one team is better than another in no way makes you a fan of the one team. i think Michigan is better than UF. I'm not a wolverine fan, and I didnt want a rematch NC game, but I think UM is better. put down your guns and simply read what im writing. Of the elligible teams for a BCS bowl, none deserve it more than ND. that is my oppinion whether you guys agree or not -- but i dont think rutgers, wvu, or vatech deserve it more.

1. the first thing you've said i agre with.
2. it was your word choice...not mine, and in this case it did matter...there is no arguement over who is elligible, there is though an arguement on who could be considered more deserving. that's the difference. if you don't want to debate the deserving aspect, you had the opportunity to squelch that by simply stating that the system doesn't allow for it, so it's not an issue. that isn't what your question asked or stated. it asked who was more deserving. and there are teams that are more deserving. So don't ask that question, and use the eligibility rules as your defense of why they aren't deserving. stating such, really just refutes your original point, as there is no other reason for ND to be in o/t than that rule.
3. SEC "homer love" has nothing to do with the opinion that giving credit to a team for losing is ridiculous, just because of who they lost to? it still makes no sense to me, and i beileve GAVol, Hat and myself, along with others, are still perplexed as to how you can, in the same breath say Auburn beat better quality teams than ND, but since ND got waxed by Mich and USC, that in some way makes their season better? that still makes no sense to me. who did ND beat to garner such respect? is all the respect you show them simply based on the fact that USC and Mich are simply on the schedule, regardless of outcome???? If that's the case, why play the games? just line up a schedule with a bunch of big boys each year and compare...who ever has the better schedule wins...no need to play the games...because you simply have them on the schedule??? can i assume then that Vandy gets as much or more credit for losing to michigan, but by not such a great margin as ND dont' forget, Vandy also only lost to FL by a TD, Vandy could, by your logic, based on who they lost to, be as "deserving" as anyone??? i doubt it. it's a ridiculous argument.
4. as for your opposing viewpoint debate....it's the same for me. I oppose your view point, so why don't you "expand your horizions" and take your own advice.

not everyone is going to agree with you when post a topic. so just don't get on a high horse when someone calls you out on something, like we're all doing some great injustice by saying this is a ridiculous standpoint to take regarding an issue.