OU ranked ahead of Notre dame

[Da Manster!]

Notre Dame is not going to beat Stanford, anyways. They're way too banged up. The Procise injury is the big killer because is a "speed team" and if you've watched them the last two weeks, they've played poorly because they've been missing that speed at RB. Throw in missing Kevarae Russell and they're in deep do-do. They've got loads of talent in place for next year if they can avoid the injury bug, but they're playing a bunch of back up and even third stringers at the Farm on Saturday and I will take Stanford and the 4 points to the bank.

By the way, watch out for Penn State on Saturday. I could see both Iowa and Michigan State having major problems. I don't think the Spartans have the offense to score a lot, especially if Cook doesn't play.

if Notre Dame is so banged up and if Stanford is so good, then why is the spread only Stanford (-3.5) and hasn't budged on that number all week long?!......don't get me wrong...I kind of like Notre Dame and it seems Vegas once again knows something we don't!...

[navyblue81]

if Notre Dame is so banged up and if Stanford is so good, then why is the spread only Stanford (-3.5) and hasn't budged on that number all week long?!......don't get me wrong...I kind of like Notre Dame and it seems Vegas once again knows something we don't!...

I'm surprised on that as well. The only area Id be worried about if I pulled for Stanford is their defense. ND knows how to move the ball and Stanfords D has been suspect this year. The Irish O-line is still strong and Kelly is a hell of a game planner.

[homie1975]

Once again your stupidity show up. You really do not know caca do you boy? What happened last season when the committee had TCU ranked #3 at this time last season?

Way different scenario this yr u dumbshyte. Tcu had crappy iowa state on board while OU has highly ranked Okie st on deck. The pac 12 champ a non factor and nd will be as well as long as overrated stanford beats them.

That leaves sec cham, according champ, big 10 chanp, and big 12 chsmp, as the 4 in the playoff. Sukk it.

O yea amd your beloved pac 12 got stomped in OOC play this yr. Only stanford can redeem a tiny bit by beating the irish.

Stop getting banned from cappingthe game rotflmfao

[homie1975]

If favorites stanford, OU and mich st win on sat, the final 4 will have
Oklahoma and either mich st or iowa. Period.

[navyblue81]

If favorites stanford, OU and mich st win on sat, the final 4 will have
Oklahoma and either mich st or iowa. Period.

That will be Snoozeville compared to last years Final 4. Hoping Notre Dame, Baylor or Michigan make it just for some excitement. Not a Notre Dame fan, but they would at least add some intrigue to New Years Eve. Sorry but Iowa, MSU and Oklahoma put me to sleep...I just don't think those 3 teams are that great. Michigan State barely beat Rutgers and Purdue and lost to a horrible Nebraska team.

[indio]

I'm a big college football fan but let me put a different perspective on the Top 4. I DON'T CARE. Why? Because the NCAA is a fraud, and there is no such thing as a National Champion in college football. There never has been, and until they come up with at least an 8 team playoff with some results oriented criteria, there never will be. When you believe that a system is fraudulent before the season starts, you don't worry about the results week to week, or even the end result because if you truly hold to your ideals, it is meaningless. Just because a bunch of paid corporate mouthpieces tells you so and so is a "National Champion" or just because a bunch of shills keep telling you every week how important it is, you don't have to go along with it.

I was a kid in the 70's, wondering why there was always an AP "National Champion" and a UPI "National Champion"? I mean, look at 1975 or 1977, or 1978, even 1979 and it's just laughable. It was as silly to me as Eusebio Pedroza being the WBA Featherweight "Champion of the World" and the great Salvador Sanchez (WBC Champ) not even being ranked in the Top 10 by the WBA.

I mean, after we all got insulted in the 1990's by the NCAA and their greedy "old money" masters, whose corporate commitments and delusional self-importence robbed us of some great finales, and giving us duel national champions (while those "co-champions" always refer to themselves as "National Champions" like a bad wrestling script from the AWA/NWA/WWF days) we as a fan base should of put our foot down. It was like investing hours watching a great movie, or days reading a great book, and then having the last 10 minutes or last chapter removed.

While 1990 gave us two "National Champions', 1991 not only gave us two national champions, but robbed us of seeing two undefeated teams, who were arguably two of the best teams ever, from playing each other. Miami vs, Washington would have been a game for the ages, but now, it's nothing more than each team claiming themselves the 1991 "National Champions" as if the other one never existed. We were robbed of seeing undefeated Penn State play undefeated Nebraska in 1994, We were robbed of seeing undefeated Michigan play undefeated Nebraska in 1997. But the people making money didn't care.

The fans began demanding a playoff, so the NCAA gave you the BCS. This charade wasn't much of an improvement, but you were told it was "the answer" so fans went along with it. 2003 gave you a BCS title game with a team that had just lost it's conference championship by 4 touchdowns, and even though LSU won the BCS Championship and with it, the "National Championship", USC fans still call themselves the 2003 champs because the AP decided to vote them as such, BCS be damned. 2004 gave you a great undefeated SEC champion with Auburn, and a gritty undefeated Utah team led by Urban Myer, and neither one of them even got a chance to play for the "National Championship". So after 15 years of the BCS (and the television contracts that go with it), public demand wanted more, and we got the 4 team playoff. It only took 1 year to expose this as the fraud most of us knew it was. The worst part is the creation of a "selection committee", as if the teams are being chosen by great wise men (and woman) from Mt. Olympus itself. This, along with the now multitude hours a week of television punditry and promotion of this "playoff" is insulting to anyone with an IQ over 85. There is nothing more annoying than some moron saying "they got it right" because Ohio State happened to win the 2 playoff games last year. Doesn't seem to bother them one bit that TCU destroyed beloved SEC member Ole Miss in their bowl after getting left at the curb. While a rational person wants to know how getting soundly beaten at home to an unranked Viginia Tech team vs losing by a last second field goal on the road due to a controversial call vs. a Top 10 team doesn't seem to matter, those of us who know who the exalted committee really wanted aren't that surprised. Heck, it doesn't even matter who is "better", because this is sports, and it's supposed to be about earning the right to play for something, and maybe beating someone who's better than you to win something.

I'll still enjoy watching college football games, I'm still intrigued by watching games between great teams (heck, I'm even intrigued by games between any teams), and I'll always put my own betting lines on them, and look to bet on games I find value in. And I'll enjoy the simple pleasure of watching a good college football game just for that alone, and If I happen to have a little action going, I'll enjoy that aspect as well. But as far as who they want to call "National Champions', and as far as who they want to declare the "Top 4 " teams, I'm sorry, but I don't care. If they want to ever have a real playoff system (along with every other collegiate and pro league from every other sport), then I'll start to care.

[Booya711]

I'm a big college football fan but let me put a different perspective on the Top 4. I DON'T CARE. Why? Because the NCAA is a fraud, and there is no such thing as a National Champion in college football. There never has been, and until they come up with at least an 8 team playoff with some results oriented criteria, there never will be. When you believe that a system is fraudulent before the season starts, you don't worry about the results week to week, or even the end result because if you truly hold to your ideals, it is meaningless. Just because a bunch of paid corporate mouthpieces tells you so and so is a "National Champion" or just because a bunch of shills keep telling you every week how important it is, you don't have to go along with it.

I was a kid in the 70's, wondering why there was always an AP "National Champion" and a UPI "National Champion"? I mean, look at 1975 or 1977, or 1978, even 1979 and it's just laughable. It was as silly to me as Eusebio Pedroza being the WBA Featherweight "Champion of the World" and the great Salvador Sanchez (WBC Champ) not even being ranked in the Top 10 by the WBA.

I mean, after we all got insulted in the 1990's by the NCAA and their greedy "old money" masters, whose corporate commitments and delusional self-importence robbed us of some great finales, and giving us duel national champions (while those "co-champions" always refer to themselves as "National Champions" like a bad wrestling script from the AWA/NWA/WWF days) we as a fan base should of put our foot down. It was like investing hours watching a great movie, or days reading a great book, and then having the last 10 minutes or last chapter removed.

While 1990 gave us two "National Champions', 1991 not only gave us two national champions, but robbed us of seeing two undefeated teams, who were arguably two of the best teams ever, from playing each other. Miami vs, Washington would have been a game for the ages, but now, it's nothing more than each team claiming themselves the 1991 "National Champions" as if the other one never existed. We were robbed of seeing undefeated Penn State play undefeated Nebraska in 1994, We were robbed of seeing undefeated Michigan play undefeated Nebraska in 1997. But the people making money didn't care.

The fans began demanding a playoff, so the NCAA gave you the BCS. This charade wasn't much of an improvement, but you were told it was "the answer" so fans went along with it. 2003 gave you a BCS title game with a team that had just lost it's conference championship by 4 touchdowns, and even though LSU won the BCS Championship and with it, the "National Championship", USC fans still call themselves the 2003 champs because the AP decided to vote them as such, BCS be damned. 2004 gave you a great undefeated SEC champion with Auburn, and a gritty undefeated Utah team led by Urban Myer, and neither one of them even got a chance to play for the "National Championship". So after 15 years of the BCS (and the television contracts that go with it), public demand wanted more, and we got the 4 team playoff. It only took 1 year to expose this as the fraud most of us knew it was. The worst part is the creation of a "selection committee", as if the teams are being chosen by great wise men (and woman) from Mt. Olympus itself. This, along with the now multitude hours a week of television punditry and promotion of this "playoff" is insulting to anyone with an IQ over 85. There is nothing more annoying than some moron saying "they got it right" because Ohio State happened to win the 2 playoff games last year. Doesn't seem to bother them one bit that TCU destroyed beloved SEC member Ole Miss in their bowl after getting left at the curb. While a rational person wants to know how getting soundly beaten at home to an unranked Viginia Tech team vs losing by a last second field goal on the road due to a controversial call vs. a Top 10 team doesn't seem to matter, those of us who know who the exalted committee really wanted aren't that surprised. Heck, it doesn't even matter who is "better", because this is sports, and it's supposed to be about earning the right to play for something, and maybe beating someone who's better than you to win something.

I'll still enjoy watching college football games, I'm still intrigued by watching games between great teams (heck, I'm even intrigued by games between any teams), and I'll always put my own betting lines on them, and look to bet on games I find value in. And I'll enjoy the simple pleasure of watching a good college football game just for that alone, and If I happen to have a little action going, I'll enjoy that aspect as well. But as far as who they want to call "National Champions', and as far as who they want to declare the "Top 4 " teams, I'm sorry, but I don't care. If they want to ever have a real playoff system (along with every other collegiate and pro league from every other sport), then I'll start to care.

Jesus...cliff notes pal

[smitch124]

Jesus...cliff notes pal

Dude don't like this playoff format.

[ByeShea]

Glad ou still has a shot at nat title. Its only fair. A out of state loss to rival texas can and does happen.

OU's loss to Texas was inexcusable and no amount of style points can mask it. ND's lone loss was 2 pts to Clemson.

[BigDofBA]

That will be Snoozeville compared to last years Final 4. Hoping Notre Dame, Baylor or Michigan make it just for some excitement. Not a Notre Dame fan, but they would at least add some intrigue to New Years Eve. Sorry but Iowa, MSU and Oklahoma put me to sleep...I just don't think those 3 teams are that great. Michigan State barely beat Rutgers and Purdue and lost to a horrible Nebraska team.

You're a fan of a team that does nothing but run and you think Michigan State, Iowa and OU are boring?

Do you think Navy is boring too?

[homie1975]

OU's loss to Texas was inexcusable and no amount of style points can mask it. ND's lone loss was 2 pts to Clemson.

For the hundredth time do u only look at the loss each team has or do u compare the wins? Luckily the committee has the brains to look at the wins and OU is superior to ND in that category

[The Kraken]

Style points

Considering the source, it makes sense.

Homie it's like trying to teach a retard quantum physics

Good luck

[The Kraken]

Jesus...cliff notes pal

booya you stupid hick

Try expanding your attention span past two sentences

Jesus you're not too bright if a few paragraphs is too much for you

[ByeShea]

For the hundredth time do u only look at the loss each team has or do u compare the wins? Luckily the committee has the brains to look at the wins and OU is superior to ND in that category

They lost to Texas, who'd been losing games to anybody and by any amount of points. TCU beat them by 40? Inexcusable loss and unacceptable. You may thank style points.

[navyblue81]

You're a fan of a team that does nothing but run and you think Michigan State, Iowa and OU are boring?

Do you think Navy is boring too?

Haha yes I do. But theyre my alma mater so I root for them. But if I wasn't a fan they'd bore me to death.

[navyblue81]

For the hundredth time do u only look at the loss each team has or do u compare the wins? Luckily the committee has the brains to look at the wins and OU is superior to ND in that category

Losses have to be factored. If they weren't, then a team like Alabama could simply say "Hey boys, we are playing Vanderbilt this week. We can afford a loss so let's play half-ass." Wins obviously count a lot, but when two teams are pretty close in SOS, you look at other factors like losses and common opponents.

The committee chair himself said that OU, MSU and ND are so close that they had to do several re-votes the other day and a lot of things can change it even the slightest bit. I personally think OU is probably slightly better than ND right now with ND banged up but I think ND is better than MSU. I am not impressed with MSU despite their win over OSU. They've looked rocky all year long against some bad teams. They barely beat Purdue and Rutgers and got extremely lucky vs Michigan

[meader99]

OU's loss to Texas was inexcusable and no amount of style points can mask it. ND's lone loss was 2 pts to Clemson.

Dont think Ohio States loss to va tech at home last year was excusable, but they managed to get in.

[Vegas39]

Dont think Ohio States loss to va tech at home last year was excusable, but they managed to get in.

They had more final 4 marketability than TCU

[ByeShea]

Dont think Ohio States loss to va tech at home last year was excusable, but they managed to get in.

Right - but I'm looking at and addressing these two specific teams.

I'm largely a Big 12 fan, too. More than anything I despise the Longhorns, my stance isn't personal. I also think OU could probably beat any team in the nation.

But I just think losing like OU did to Texas should count lightyears more as a mark against than losing to Clemson in a 2-pt loss that came to the final play. There should be ramifications for OU's shameful loss. It was offensive to the senses.

[navyblue81]

Dont think Ohio States loss to va tech at home last year was excusable, but they managed to get in.

That loss was on Sept.6. Much different if you lose then compared to October or November.

[Vegas39]

That loss was on Sept.6. Much different if you lose then compared to October or November.

September loss gives them more of a bounce back chance. To improve their stock with committee

[The Kraken]

Is there any way ND will leap frog Oklahoma if they both win?

ND plays #9 Stanford, who has two losses to #16 Northwestern and #17 Oregon
Oklahoma plays #11 Oklahoma State, who has one loss to #7 Baylor

Honestly, how Stanford is ranked above Oklahoma State is kind of screwy any how

But if both teams win, how could ND leap frog Oklahoma?

[Vegas39]

Is there any way ND will leap frog Oklahoma if they both win?

ND plays #9 Stanford, who has two losses to #16 Northwestern and #17 Oregon
Oklahoma plays #11 Oklahoma State, who has one loss to #7 Baylor

Honestly, how Stanford is ranked above Oklahoma State is kind of screwy any how

But if both teams win, how could ND leap frog Oklahoma?

won't say no way as last year didn't think OSU would jump TCU so guess it depends how each looks

[homie1975]

I think that OU win at baylor trumps out any ND win by a Longshot and the preponderance of this outweighed the losses by each team, in the committees mind.

[navyblue81]

Is there any way ND will leap frog Oklahoma if they both win?

ND plays #9 Stanford, who has two losses to #16 Northwestern and #17 Oregon
Oklahoma plays #11 Oklahoma State, who has one loss to #7 Baylor

Honestly, how Stanford is ranked above Oklahoma State is kind of screwy any how

But if both teams win, how could ND leap frog Oklahoma?

According to the committee, the margin between ND and Okla is extremely close and they had to have several revotes to determine ranking. So it's very possible things can switch depending on how they look should they both win.

[Vegas39]

According to the committee, the margin between ND and Okla is extremely close and they had to have several revotes to determine ranking. So it's very possible things can switch depending on how they look should they both win.

Thinking both lose and a moot point

[homie1975]

Thinking both lose and a moot point

ND yes. OU I think wins

Right now there's a big difference between 3 and 6. Committee made their statement

[homie1975]

According to the committee, the margin between ND and Okla is extremely close and they had to have several revotes to determine ranking. So it's very possible things can switch depending on how they look should they both win.

Then why is OU 3 and ND 6.

[Vegas39]

ND yes. OU I think wins

Right now there's a big difference between 3 and 6. Committee made their statement

TCU thought a lock last year. look how that worked out. Don't even think a win guarantees they are in

[homie1975]

TCU thought a lock last year. look how that worked out. Don't even think a win guarantees they are in

Not me. I was always concerned that they lost to baylor, their weak SOS, and no b12 title gm. At halftime of the B1G title gm when osu was pummeling wisky, I posted here that osu would jump them.

I keep saying to u guys and u need to listen: This year is WAY different. The pac 12 champ will have minimum 2 losses, they are out. ND will likely lose so they are out. If OU wins in stillwater they are almost a guarantee as it should then be:

Clem unless they lose
Bama unless they lose
OU regardless of the two above
Iowa / mich st winner

Bye bye pac12 and bye bye ND

[Vegas39]

Not me. I was always concerned that they lost to baylor, their weak SOS, and no b12 title gm. At halftime of the B1G title gm when osu was pummeling wisky, I posted here that osu would jump them.

I keep saying to u guys and u need to listen: This year is WAY different. The pac 12 champ will have minimum 2 losses, they are out. ND will likely lose so they are out. If OU wins in stillwater they are almost a guarantee as it should then be:

Clem unless they lose
Bama unless they lose
OU regardless of the two above
Iowa / mich st winner

Bye bye pac12 and bye bye ND

If OU wins close game and ND blows out Stanford OU will be out I'd bet. Doubtful but we shall see

[homie1975]

If OU wins close game and ND blows out Stanford OU will be out I'd bet. Doubtful but we shall see

If ND wins by DD I won't post about this subject until the playoffs are announced sunday 12/6

[Vegas39]

If ND wins by DD I won't post about this subject until the playoffs are announced sunday 12/6

was hypothetical, I think they lose. Too beat up and think McCaffrey has huge running day

[homie1975]

Hou all over navy dropping nd sched strength as we speak

[chico2663]

Notre Dame lost to the #1 ranked team by 2 points at an away game, yet is ranked behind teams that lost to teams that are ranked around 30

Also, when did Notre Dame stop playing against Michigan/Michigan St?

When that p.o.s kelly got there. He said that schedule was to tough but at that time kept perdue on schedule. When they went into acc got rid of more.