broganreynik

You honestly think Boise woulda went undefeated in the SEC last year? They couldn't even go undefeated in the WAC ffs. I didn't say were they better last year. I was speaking hypothetically if Boise goes undefeated, we have no way of knowing they're better or worse other than playing the game. I don't believe they would've went undefeated in the SEC last year, no. I don't even like Boise, heck, I was thrilled when Nevada beat them, so I'm really playing devil's advocate more than anything, but I still think it's wrong to just write off teams in 5 conferences before a down of football is even played.

My wife and I used to go to games at a couple's house that she's friends with the wife. Every time we went there in 2009 we lost. Va. Tech, Texas, Texas Tech, Iowa State.... all of 'em. When I told my wife we were never going there for a game again, she said "yeah right" so she tried her luck and we went there for the Texas game last year. I flat out told them that I hate them and I'm never coming to their house for a Husker game again. Granted I hate them for reasons more than just that, but it seemed like the time that I could get away with telling them that, lol.

double post

They don't get a pass. And neither do Big East teams. That was my whole point. It's not exactly an easy thing to up and join a conference to up you strength of schedule. The fact of the matter is, do you know for a fact that Boise is worse than say Auburn? No. You can make objective decisions, but you can't prove it without them playing. Nobody has come out and said it yet, but are we all just saying no non-BCS school can play for the championship no matter what? That's the entire basis of the anti-trust lawsuit, and the attitude that you guys have, is the attitude that fuels that lawsuit. I ask yet again: WHAT MORE CAN THEY DO? All a team can do is beat every obstacle in their way. If you're eliminating them before the season even starts, then THAT means the season is a waste. Also, in 2009, it wasn't like Cincy was passed over by a one loss team. I believe there were five no loss teams heading into the bowl games. If you give me just 3 undefeated teams and two are from BCS conferences, I'll side with them over Boise State.

I don't know if you guys have been reading the PS3 online dynasty thread, but if not, here's what your posts would have been replied with: By the way, I think none of those things, it's just refreshing to read that other people who play the game are having the same problems. If for no other reason than to feel better about myself, and feel vindication against that dude. Of course, presumably none of us cheese/exploit the game.

I am scheduled to have Dish Network installed next weekend. That had much lower prices for what I need and I get a free sling box which to me is an awesome deal. When I told the rep at the Cox store I was leaving them for Dish Network because the price was much lower they didn't seem to care and gladly cancelled my service. How'd you score the free slingbox? I've been waffling back and forth between Dish's lower monthly rates and DirecTV's free installation, but a free slingbox would probably sway me to Dish.

I'm sure this has been asked before, but why is the "University of Nebraska" shortened to "NU"? Shouldn't it be "UN"? Just something that's puzzled me for a long time. I remember a friend had a shirt in like third grade that said "UN" and I made fun of him because Nebraska is "NU".

They shied away from playing Nebraska. Follow the link My link I meant they don't shy away from scheduling BCS schools. Plus, I'd say they shied away from not having their way about home and home, or getting paid or whatever, not exactly from playing us, because it's not like they then didn't schedule a top team, they still did, they just didn't want to meet our offer.

Ridiculous. You're telling me that if the end of the 2011 season comes down to an undefeated SEC team and a 1-loss Nebraska team or an undefeated Boise State, you would think it's fair to put the team who played no one in the national title game? What's the worst that could happen? That IS the worst thing that could happen, wasting an entire season of college football so a team from a joke of a league could have a shot at a title they had no business playing for. By this logic any undefeated team from any conference should supersede any 1 or 2-loss team from the best conferences. You're right about this, tough: the structure of D1 football needs serious reexamination. There is simply no way to ever determine a real national champion when you are picking from a pool of 119 teams. In a superconference scenario with a plus 1 playoff, this would be resolved. The fact that a team like Boise can eek into BCS games playing the (currently) #14 and #19 teams as cherries on a cupcake schedule and be seriously considered for the BCS is absurd. It wouldn't be the team that played no one. They schedule a top team every year, and if they WIN EVERY GAME THAT'S SCHEDULED, what more could you ask of them? You want them to just mosey into Pasadena and be like "hey, Bruins, sit this one out, we'll play USC for ya"? So you're saying that we should never let anyone outside of a BCS conference ever have a shot at a national championship? What's the point of them playing? The whole football season wouldn't be a waste because, hey, in that football season, they won all their games. That's not wasting anything. How many times have we seen a team from a BCS conference end up getting spanked in a national championship game? You don't know until you play the game. That's why making comparisons between teams with zero losses and one loss is ridiculous. Why not go with the team that has proved themselves up to every challenge that has been placed in front of them? Hell by your reasoning, the Big East shouldn't get into the MNC either (not that they do), and they're a BCS conference.

While I agree that they don't face much competition, they can only win the games that they're scheduled to play. And they don't shy away from non-con games. Virginia Tech also went on to win how many games after that FCS loss? If we're going to write off 5 conferences from the get go, then they shouldn't even be part of the FBS, because they truly have no shot at a title. Now if they're having games like we had against Iowa State last year, then that's one thing, but if they're thoroughly dominating every game, then I say why not. Now I'm not saying put them in over an undefeated SEC team or anything, but if there's two undefeated teams at the end of the year, and Boise happens to be one of them, hell let 'em play. What's the worst that'll happen? They'll prove everyone right that they didn't belong? Maybe they win the MNC? Can't say it's because the other team didn't get up for that game. If a team with a loss has a beef with them being left out in favor of Boise, tough, you should've won all your games. Much like I believe you have no argument to be in the MNC if you didn't win your conference, you have a significantly weaker argument to be in it if you lost a game. Hell, everyone thinks that Oregon should've been in the MNC in 2001, they lost to an unranked team for crying out loud.

So that's how they do math in Texas? No wonder games are a second longer.

Before I watched the video I was thinking the dude must've been nuts to have '72 Nebraska. That team lost twice and had a tie. But it was '71. That makes a helluva lot more sense.

I didn't even know about this so I googled it and pulled up an article from the SI vault. He was paid $200/mo. and admitted to it, to which the university said they had no knowledge and the NCAA decided not to punish the school. That's insane that something like that was allowed to slide. But you know, relatively speaking, that was nothing compared to the SWC stuff of the time. If that happened now, heck, we'd be seeing scholarships taken away and wins vacated.

Jesus, Trent Richardson is RIPPED.

Ahhhhh...this would explain why Beebe was recently hot to trot to get new penalties and deadlines in place before the Big XII meetings. My understanding is that it didn't happen (why close your escape hatch if you intend to use it?), so the deadlines and penalties would be the same as they were for us... But if that's the case with the ACC, then that pretty much would confirm that Missouri is their moving buddy--no way in hell A&M sticks around for two years, as they got a first-hand glimpse into what their football program will run into when they leave. Well we announced before July 1, so it was over a year (academic year begins July 1). According to Big 12 rules, you give up 80% of revenue if you give 1 years warning, 90% if you give 6-12 months, and 100% if less than 6 months. Although I believe we and Colorado settled for significantly less than that, so I would imagine Texas A&M and/or Missouri could too.

I don't remember where I read it, as there's been a lot of stuff flying around lately. But I read somewhere that if an ACC school leaves, the deadline they have to leave to play in the SEC in 2012 is August 15. Whereas anywhere between July 1 and December 31 will be the same penalty for a Big 12 school. So what I gathered is that if A & M joins, barring an unexpected announcement from an ACC school today, Missouri will be their 14th. Maybe Clemson and Florida State join in 2013 to bring the conference to 16. Unless A&M doesn't join until 2013. I can't imagine if we had to play 2 season in the Big 12 after our announcement. Yikes.

That's why Kansas is easily my favorite Big 12 team now. And Ohio my favorite MAC school. etc. Wisconsin is my second favorite B1G team as well. Although, I actually have admired/respected the Iowa football team from afar. I've liked the way Ferentz runs his program, and their style of play really suits my tastes. That said, their fans leave a lot to be desired. And my mother-in-law is from Iowa.

I think if the move to super conferences happens, Notre Dame will be a lot more willing to join a conference. That alone adds a lot of worth. I'm not sure how Virginia Tech is academically, but they would add competition and a big market (Washington DC) if we were to pursue them. Missouri and Kansas would add academics similar to Nebraska, but not so much in the way of markets, I guess Kansas City and St. Louis. I honestly think those are the four teams to focus on. That said, a school like Maryland, Rutgers or possibly Pitt could possibly could pop up, but I doubt it. A team that isn't mentioned much, possibly Kentucky. They would definitely add to the basketball side of things.

This means nothing, other than the SEC doesn't want to be accused of poaching teams from the Big XII. If aTm applies, the SEC will readily accept. And doesn't it strike anyone as odd that Missouri, whose government and campus leaders were so outspoken during the last conference expansion tumble, hasn't said jack or **** this time around? Something's up in Columbia, besides the number of meth labs. Fixed.

Have fun trying to deny the facts that you're playing a flawed game. Or hell, maybe have fun exploiting the hell out of those flaws.

Oh yeah. Case of the Mondays? Not quite. More like fed up with the game, and then having someone call out my skill level, on a game which skill level has almost no bearing on the outcome because of stupid computer glitches and mistakes. Then to top it off, comparing me to the Calliban and throwing someone else under the bus to try to prove a point?

I'm not just quitting the league, I'm selling the game. Have fun playing a game that EVEN THE DEVELOPERS HAVE SAID HAS BEEN SCREWED UP. Why none of you seem to care about that is beyond me. I have adjusted. I've tried about 20 different playbooks. There's no adjustments to make when the pass is taken completely away by flubber shoe wearing linebackers, ESP eyes in the back of their heads defensivebacks and quarterbacks who throw it to the wrong receiver. Of course, my idea of adjustments are what makes the most sense based on what the situation predicates. As in: the same thing that happens in actual football. I don't see adjustments as: find the money plays and ride them to victory. That's cheap. One thing that infuriates me more than this p.o.s. game is playing the p.o.s. game against cheesers. I guess if you guys are ok with cheesing the hell out of the game, that's fine. But I like to run an actual balanced offense, and use my entire playbook. Not just a few plays over and over. It's just unrealistic. If I play a game as USC and play against San Jose State, are you going to tell me they're set up to stop USC's offense perfectly. Then I go to Arizona State, what they're set up to stop that offense perfectly as well. Oh holy hell, they're set up to stop Florida's offense perfectly. And even Georgia Tech's? It's not something you make adjustments for. Even if you have mismatches on the edges, it doesn't matter. You can go against a team with D- defense rating, and all their DBs are 5'9" and play as a team with an air raid offense with WRs all over 6'4" and you still cannot pass the ball. There are adjustments and there's a sh** game.

You use cover 3. Well then I'm assuming you've not noticed every one of your defenders going to the o-line at once. Do you not know what FREAK/FLUKE occurrence is? Did I say it happens every time I run cover 3? No. And so those 12 years I've been playing on Heisman difficulty and winning regularly mean that I'm just experienced and not good right? So experienced that when I drop a difficulty level on this year's game, I suck. So once again, I bring up the fact that EA THEMSELVES HAVE SAID NAMED ROSTERS HAVE F'D THE GAME UP. I highly doubt you know more than EA about their own game. It doesn't matter if you're good or not if the game screws up in different ways. I don't have to give any more examples. And by the way, the first time I "bitched" I hadn't even lost. So why the hell would I have to make up excuses for winning a game? So you're either lucky or blind and haven't seen any glitches. That doesn't mean it doesn't happen. So don't act like everyone else sucks and you're the God of NCAA Football. Far from it. You want a cookie for that win? For all I know, he was on the crap end of some computer hijinx. All you're doing is confirming moreso that the game pulled a fast one. I'm pretty sure anyone who has played the game and actually noticed these stupid things happening would agree that anyone could get blown out at any time because of stupid stuff happening. Tell me. How many times have you watched a game and seen a player with his back to the ball and not looking at the quarterback jump and get an interception? Or a linebacker slide three yards and jump 8 feet in half a second? It doesn't happen in real life. If you haven't noticed those things on the game, then I don't know what else to tell you, because they exist. You are seriously the only one I know who's played the game and doesn't think there's anything wrong with it. What does it cater to your style of offense or something? Because I see no way how you could have played a single game and not noticed a damn thing. If I wasn't quitting already because of the sh** game, acknowledged by most that play it and even EA, I'd be quitting because of your holier than thou piss poor attitude.

Up until this year, the only player I would ever lose to is my brother, and that was back and forth. Don't give me that sh** step up your game. Did you see the games that that crap happened? No, so don't spout of sh** that I can't play or I have a low skill level. I've been playing NCAA Football every year since '99. I highly doubt that someone playing that long has a "low skill level". It's not just me. You look everywhere online, people say stupid sh** happens on this game. If you don't want to adjust sliders or whatever that's fine, but don't say I'm losing because I have a "low skill level". How do I know you're not cheesing the hell out of the game? Maybe you have a ridiculously low skill level and bank on the same few money plays. EA themselves have admitted that any named rosters pretty much screwed up the whole game anyway. So yeah. I suck. That's it. EA doesn't know what they're talking about. You wanna tell me when the hell you've ever seen a cover 3 defense run and then every single defender runs straight to the offensive line? That negates the whole premise of a g** d*** cover 3. Which I was running because .... dun dun dun... my guys were getting sucked into play actions and sh**. So I defensive key on pass and run a cover 3. How the hell do you explain that? "low skill level" my a**. Hell, even the guy I played last night said he didn't deserve half his yards.