Gentlemen, Start Your Boilerplate Columns: BCS Standings Released

You would probably have to look back a ways to find an undefeated team that didn't have to get lucky at least once to win the national title.

Any of the teams that had one loss (or more) are almost certainly deserving of criticism with their national titles.

 

I was not on the Boise bandwagon last year, but if anyone believes the Broncos could not hold their own in the SEC this year, they're not paying attention. The two undefeateds in that conference, Auburn and LSU, are a joke. LSU, especially. And while everyone is pimping Auburn after putting up 65 against Arkansas, they're forgetting two things: Arkansas' defense has been atrocious under Petrino and the Tigers gave up four TDs to a second-string QB that never plays. Auburn doesn't have the defense to win a national title.

 

Fixed for accuracy. You're welcome.

 

Perhaps, but that time Nebraska needed to get lucky to win is certainly more evidence of just how stupid it is to insist that they would have crushed Michigan despite the evidence pointing to those teams being even at best.

 

I'll accept the Michigan argument that season. But the people who think Penn State was more deserving of a share of the title in 1994 are on drugs. There's a reason why that title wasn't even close to being split.

People forget how dominant NU was during that first two-year run.

 

You might be forgetting just how dominant that Penn State offense was in '94. I do think Nebraska was the better team, but Penn State would have had a puncher's chance just because they were so tough to stop.

 

I also think he may be confusing the 94 Nebraska team with 95. The 95 Nebraska team might've been the most dominant ever, but 94 was not in their class.

Not sure why anyone sees Nebraska as a clear cut choice over Penn State in 94, because I see no real evidence to support it. According to this site (http://www.phys.utk.edu/sorensen/cfr/cfr/Output/1994/CF_1994_Ranking_Best.html), Penn State had the 14th strongest schedule in the country in 94, Nebraska only had the 49th. And Penn State steamrolled over their schedule as convincingly as Nebraska did.

Just saying the vote wasn't close doesn't prove a damn thing. What evidence setting Nebraska apart from Penn State were the voters basing it on? Nobody's been able to adequately answer that question yet.

 

No you remember the Nebraska teams of the late 1980's and early 1990's, the ones that got shit stomped by teams in Florida - the ones that convinced Tom Osborne he had to recruit more speed and athleticism, which is why those teams in the mid and late 1990's became so dominant.

That being said, I do think that Penn State in 1994 was every bit as good as Nebraska and that would have been an excellent football game.

 

Did Nebraska change its offensive system? Because that is a big part of what Junkie was talking about there. I figured I'd help you out since you have issues with reading comprehension.

 

Thank you for once again proving my point about you, Zag. You never disappoint, no matter how often you fail.