It was funny talking to a guy last nite that never bets on any game of any type, he started talking about college bs bowls game and why in the hell you have 6-6 teams playing.The 1st thing he said that in his opinion Utah was the champs this yr and in my eyes they are too.screw the bcs crap, Utah played the games thay had and won them all and in the end beat the crap out of a bama team that was number 1 this yr.Congrats Utah.......ck
I can see an agument for Utah, but I think their schedule strength is not strong enough to be considered co-champions.
I agree they are a damn good team, and it is very impressive to go undefeated. Their win over Bama was very impressive as well. However, place them in a big division such as the SEC, ACC, Big 12, Big 10, or even weak-ass PAC-10, and they do not go undefeated.
Just my opinion, and you know what they say about opinions...they are just like assholes. Everybody's got one and most of them stink.
BOL with your last play on tonight's game! :drink:
I agree they are a damn good team, and it is very impressive to go undefeated. Their win over Bama was very impressive as well. However, place them in a big division such as the SEC, ACC, Big 12, Big 10, or even weak-ass PAC-10, and they do not go undefeated.
Just my opinion, and you know what they say about opinions...they are just like assholes. Everybody's got one and most of them stink.
BOL with your last play on tonight's game! :drink:
you know, i just have to vent. i get so sick and tired of hearing about s.o.s and confrences being better than the next conference, blah blah blah..it doesn't matter people say that Utah "can't" beat USC, or Florida, or whomever. How do you know? They played the conference they are a part of, won every game, played in a BCS game where they dominated a very good football team. They deserve to be #1. Now in Texas' defense... What the F does it mean that they struggled vs OSU???? They won the GD game! What the hell difference does it make if the score is 24-21, or 48-21? A win is a win is a win. I'm so sick and tired of all this college bcs crap. It's a complete joke and the ncaa should be embarrased by using it.
now, i feel better.
fwiw, im not a utah fan or a texas fan.
now, i feel better.
fwiw, im not a utah fan or a texas fan.
Utes should just claim they are champions. Have several of the papers come out tomorrow with 12 inch headlines on the front declaring them national champions. Print up a ton of tee shirts and hats and make a trophy. Hold a small parade in town or on campus with ticker tape and speeches. It'd be just as legitimate as the BCS....BS.
I thought I read somewhere that the AG in Utah was considering a lawsuit against the BCS.
I thought I read somewhere that the AG in Utah was considering a lawsuit against the BCS.
utah has a legit claim bc of who they beat this year
bama who was 1Q away from playing TONIGHT
colst who went to a bowl and WON
airforce who went to a bowl
byu who went to a bowl
TCU who went to a bowl and WON and has one of the best teams in the country IMO and held OU to their lowest point total of the year
oregon st who went to a bowl and WON and was the 1 team to defeat USC
that is a pretty impressive resume IMO....certainly enough wins on their to warrent a piece of something....
bama who was 1Q away from playing TONIGHT
colst who went to a bowl and WON
airforce who went to a bowl
byu who went to a bowl
TCU who went to a bowl and WON and has one of the best teams in the country IMO and held OU to their lowest point total of the year
oregon st who went to a bowl and WON and was the 1 team to defeat USC
that is a pretty impressive resume IMO....certainly enough wins on their to warrent a piece of something....
What would prevent them from just simply calling themselves National Champs? I think they should just do it. Market themselves that way. Make a big banner and hang it at the stadium. If anyone has a problem they can lump it. Of course the big market areas will sneer at them but who gives a fuck?
Utah co- national champions...
1. They finished with no losses.
2. Final victory was against an SEC team which was ranked number 1 for a long period of time.
I would say no to co national champs if..
1. They played like a 9-3 team in a bowl but since they played such a highly ranked team that had their last loss so late in the season its a no brainer.
1. They finished with no losses.
2. Final victory was against an SEC team which was ranked number 1 for a long period of time.
I would say no to co national champs if..
1. They played like a 9-3 team in a bowl but since they played such a highly ranked team that had their last loss so late in the season its a no brainer.
This is exactly what Washington did. It was a farce. But in this instance by virtue of being undefeated UTAH has at least a far more legitimate claim.
Washington, Your 1960 National Champs
Posted Sep 27th 2007 8:29AM by Sean Hawkins (author feed)Filed under: Washington Football, Pac 10, Seattle, Washington
Here are the facts. In 1960, several of the major polls would actually do their voting before the bowl games were played. A weird way to do it, no doubt about it. Can you imagine if, for example, Ohio State would have been voted the national champions before the BCS title game vs. Florida last year? The outrage would flourish from sea to shining sea. Back then, the bowls were seen as more of a reward for the season and viewed basically as exhibition games, and/or a boost for tourism in the cities where the bowls were played. Minnesota was crowned the national champions by the AP and UPI, among other polls, after the 1960 season was in the books. Washington would lose just one game that season, but they still finished sixth in the major polls heading into the 1961 Rose Bowl. UW would then beat top-ranked Minnesota 17-7 in that Rose Bowl, so in doing the math, they figured they were the champions.
But what about the little matter of the polls? Shouldn't that be the official deal in all this? UW was, in fact, given the national title by one outfit, called the Helms Athletic Foundation. If you haven't heard of the Helms poll, you aren't alone. The poll began in 1936 and disbanded in 1982. They were one of the few polls at the time that did the voting after the bowls were played, so at least that is legit in today's standards. But what about Minnesota's banner? After all, the AP and UPI carried the most weight, and they were given the title. Should they now take their banner down? And what about Mississippi? They may have the strongest claim of anyone. They went undefeated that year, with one tie, and were given the title by the Football Writers of America. In Mississippi, they actually do recognize themselves as the champion that year based on the FWA poll.
It's a cloudy picture, with each program believing they were #1. But even NCAA historian Beano Cook is weighing in on the matter in today's Seattle P-I:
"Mississippi has as much right to claim it as Washington," said Beano Cook, an ESPN commentator and college football historian who can be heard Tuesday mornings at 8 on KJR-AM/950. "They can do what they want -- it's a good way to get the team up for USC -- but nobody else is going to recognize them officially."
So, it's a nice idea and a cool way to honor a great team in school history. And UW claiming at least a fraction of the title from that year isn't going to cause anyone any pain. But UW shouldn't be shocked if ESPN doesn't dedicate a lot of their Gameday coverage about the 1960 team. In fact, outside of Seattle, the event won't likely generate much more than a collective shrug of the shoulders among college football fans. But so what. UW was given the title by one poll, and that's all that matters here. Celebrating history and tradition is a huge part of the college football experience, so if UW wants to add a national championship in their media guide and by hoisting a banner, then go for it. Why not honor a great team from the past, even if nobody else will do the same?
