Saturday, November 14, 2009

Yawn ...

The 2009 college football season has been about as dramatic as a textbook published by your average college professor. Dry as a bone.

Six undefeated teams, from five conferences. In fact, there are only eight teams with fewer than two losses in all of Division I-A (FBS). And a good number of these will not lose another game the rest of the season.

About the most interesting development this season is the implosion of the once-mighty USC empire. After their meltdown two weeks ago at Oregon, the Trojans bounced back briefly against Arizona State. That proved fleeting, however, as today they were absolutely throttled by Stanford, which managed to run up the score in an ugly 55-21 rout. At the L.A. Coliseum, no less.

The only audible part of the Pete Carroll-Jim Harbaugh post-game pleasantries was a tense-looking Carroll muttering "good game" among other things. Here's hoping someone will emerge with some audio on what was really said.

USC's loss has one major implication: The Trojans' record seven-year run in BCS bowls is over. And that means the probability of having two non-BCS teams in BCS bowls just improved dramatically.

As it is right now, the six BCS conference champions, plus TCU, will get automatic bids. The loser in the SEC championship game between Florida and Alabama will get an at-large berth, leaving two bids up for grabs. Barring a major upset in the Big 12 title game, the choices will be among a 13-0 Boise State team, two-loss Iowa and Penn State, and one-loss Cincinnati.

Given how uneventful this season has been, the top 14 teams in the BCS standings may not change very much from this point going forward. The possibility of having five unbeaten teams is very real.

The projected BCS Standings for this week ... and it looks a lot like last week's. Yawn:

1. Florida, 2. Alabama, 3. Texas, 4. TCU, 5. Cincinnati, 6. Boise State, 7. Georgia Tech, 8. Ohio State, 9. LSU, 10. Pittsburgh, 11. Oregon, 12. Iowa, 13. Penn State, 14. Oklahoma State, 15. Wisconsin.

15 comments:

Anonymous said...

Cincy hasn't lost a game yet, I assume you meant GT ?

Anonymous said...

Then again I'm not sure who you meant, GT if it wins the ACCCG would have 1 loss... as it is Cincy doesn't have a loss...

The Guru said...

Perhaps I could've made it a bit clear: If Cincy loses to Pitt, it'd be in the at-large pool. If it wins out, it'd be one of the automatic qualifiers and not be in this pool. So for Cincy to be an at-large, it has to lose a game.

I'm afraid this might confuse people even more.

Anonymous said...

The Guru appears to be suggesting Cincy will lose at Pitt on the 5th. Based on Cincy's performance on Friday, seems to be a good suggestion.

Pete Muhlenberg said...

Interesting that Stanford, which has beaten top 10 teams two weeks in a row is beneath the guru's consideration

Given the Guru's far right wing political views, the notion that Stanford University could field a decent football team is beyond his ability

Nick said...

7-3 bud. If you are suggesting Stanford is a good team (which they appear to be above average) then you are saying the PAC 10 is AWFUL

Anonymous said...

If you don't like/bored with the college football season. Quit using it to promote your website.

Anonymous said...

BCS Guru-
Is there any chance, the Big 12 could get two Big 12 teams in. Oklahoma State is 5-1 in conference with games against Colorado (Home) and Oklahoma (Road) coming up. I believe you have them at #14 in the BCA. Of course, winning out is the key .. but could they grab a BCS spot from the Big 10 (Iowa)
or others?

Anonymous said...

Really? "Yawn"? Watch TCU's game last night. They should be tearing down the wall keeping them out of the top 3. The only reason they're stuck at 4 is because of name rec.

Anonymous said...

Is it possible that the SEC could have three teams playing in BCS bowls?

Anonymous said...

Pete says: "Interesting that Stanford, which has beaten top 10 teams two weeks in a row is beneath the guru's consideration

Given the Guru's far right wing political views, the notion that Stanford University could field a decent football team is beyond his ability"


Maybe...just maybe the point of this site is to try to predict the actual BCS teams rankings each week. And thus he doesn't let politics enter into the rankings or it'd hurt his credibility. Maybe you need to not be an idiot thinking Stanford would be in the Top 15...as that would be stupid...as they aren't.

The Guru said...

Thanks for coming to my defense. Couldn't have said it any better myself.

Just curious, Pete, where did you get that "far right wing political views"? Because I read the Wall Street Journal, could that be it?

Dustin said...

I think the right wing comment was based on the health care comment last week. You said something about the cost. Being concerned with the cost of programs, and how they would add to a huge deficit and our debt to foreign nations, automatically make you a right wing wacko....If you were a commons sense "leftist" you would just give free health care to all, and just print the money you need, surely there can be no harm in that...AUDIT THE FED!

Ute Fan said...

I think we've come a long way. Two to three years ago, both TCU and Boise State would have been ranked below several one loss teams. Seems like the non AQ conferences are finally getting a little more respect.

Still I suspect TCU could handle Texas, Florida, or Alabama, but the only way they'll get a chance is by playing the SEC runner up like Utah did. I'm not saying that Texas and the SEC champ don't deserve the NC game, I'm just saying that TCU is just as deserving. Just as Cincy would be if they won out. But neither is likely to get the chance if the SEC champ is undefeated and Texas is as well.

I was at the Sugar Bowl, and watching the Utes go up 21-nil over the proud Tide, was oh so fun. But I really would have liked to have a shot at Urban Meyer in the NC title game.

More respect isn't enough, we need a playoff.

Xeifrank said...

8 team playoff. Any conference winner ranked in the BCS Top 12 qualifies first. After that you take the highest ranked non conference winners. First round games played at home field of highest ranked team, then semis and finals in three top flight bowl cities. Attendance won't be a problem, the other teams can play in meaningless bowl games like they currently do.

Google