CF: MU vs. OU (in Off-topic)

Sir Leon [Soup Ream] December 1 2007 11:57 AM EST

Who's your pick? Willing to put your money on them?

I've got Mu. Will match any bet! More importantly i just wanted to let cb know i'm a proud Mu fan as well as a soon to be student!

Mikel December 1 2007 12:00 PM EST

500k on my Sooners.

Sir Leon [Soup Ream] December 1 2007 12:57 PM EST


Will entertain more offers.

QBOddBird December 1 2007 1:00 PM EST

I'll do my usual 100k bet against you, Sir L. ;'D

Sir Leon [Soup Ream] December 1 2007 1:57 PM EST

Accepted, Still have 10 Million to bet..


QBRanger December 1 2007 2:20 PM EST

One million on OU to win.

phrog December 1 2007 2:36 PM EST

I am currently at the firehouse (SAFD #1) just behind the Alamo. Fans from both teams are everywhere. An suv with huge OU flags and a tiger tied to the bumper keeps doing laps around downtown. A few of our roads are closed because ESPN is broadcasting from in front of the Alamo. It is pretty funny listening to all the tourists try to pronounce street and restaurant names.

While I don't really care about either team in this game, I don't want Ohio State to get into the national title game so I have to root for Mizzou.

QBRanger December 1 2007 8:49 PM EST

Well since I did not get a confirmation of my bet I am retracting the bet since the game already has started.

Sir Leon [Soup Ream] December 1 2007 10:35 PM EST

Thats acceptable.

Mikel December 1 2007 10:47 PM EST

21-14 4 minutes to go in the 3rd q. And you're lucky, I also forgot that Bradford was not playing.. Ooh INT... OU ball :)

Mikel December 1 2007 10:49 PM EST

oh good, Bradford is playing. I don't live in OK anymore, so I don't always have a chance to keep up with the updates on our QB since he got hurt recently..

Sir Leon [Soup Ream] December 2 2007 12:09 AM EST

wouldn't even call that a football game.

QBRanger December 2 2007 12:18 AM EST

Should have kept my bet.

But o well.

Now we get to see a team who played a schedule equivalent to high school teams (OSU) play a 2 loss team for the championship. The first time ever a 2 loss team will win it if LSU wins. Assuming LSU gets into the title game, which is what most of the BCS followers say.

Mem December 2 2007 1:08 AM EST

I'm rooting for a Kansas vs. OSU game, with Kansas murderlizing OSU.

Mikel December 2 2007 5:59 PM EST

Mem, that would be a dumb game. Neither team even participated in their Conference championship game(s). The Big 10 doesn't even have one, if the Big 12 didn't, then it would've been Mizzou in the final game and VT wouldn't have lost to Pitt (in their conference finals).

I still think OU is one of the best teams out there. We lost 3 weeks ago due to our QB getting knocked out of the game early, and we were also denied a TD that was a legit catch that would've sent that loss into OT.

Also, we just beat the number 1 team in the nation soundly, it wasn't a close game at all. That should hold some heavy weight. But alas, it will be LSU vs OSU. The whole thing is still flawed.

Mikel December 2 2007 6:03 PM EST

error: Not VT, WV is what I meant.

QBsutekh137 December 2 2007 6:54 PM EST

It will be flawed until it is a straight playoff or tourney type situation. But how do you do that with dozens of conferences and hundreds of teams in the hunt?

What if the BCS were used just to decide strong conferences, and then those conferences would be treated like a couple "conferences" in the NFL (like NFC and AFC). In other words, the winners of "divisions" in college (i.e the college conferences: Big 10, Big 12, etc.) would get playoff berths and one team in the overall "conference" would get a wild card berth. Then play it out just like NFL playoffs.

Then the most people could say would be, "so-and-so conference deserves a berth". Isn't that better than teams being singled out and marginalized (at least in the eyes of some fans)?

NCAA basketball championship is already like that, with a mix of automatic bids and "at-large" berths. They get to have more teams, but still... Could a playoff system not work in college pigskin? As far as I can tell, the Bowl system now extends over at least 4-5 weekends (used to be closer to 2-3), so it's not as if there aren't enough weekends for this. NFL playoffs take, what, 3-4 weeks, plus the Super Bowl?

I'm clearly missing something logistic or political here, since I am sure this idea has been thought of before... Why hasn't it been implemented?

QBRanger December 2 2007 7:22 PM EST

Of course there could be a playoff in CFB.

However, the university presidents are reluctant to give up the power they currently have in letting a playoff system occur.

InebriatedArsonist December 2 2007 8:22 PM EST

Power and money, that is. I'm watching the BCS announcements on Fox right now, and I have to say that Missouri should have taken the spot Kansas was awarded. Yet another year of unnecessary stupidity.

th00p December 2 2007 9:09 PM EST

LSU does NOT deserve to be in the championship game. Then again, almost no one does this year. My personal opinion is that VT and Oklahoma should be playing because LSU looked terrible in a few more games than just the 2 they lost, and if a 1 loss OSU with their terribly weak schedule is #1 then Hawaii should be in the top 3 as well.

If only the money-driven bowl system could work as effectively with a 4 game playoff... oh wait, it could. #1 plays #4 in the ___ Bowl, #2 and #3 square off in the ____ Bowl, then the winners play in the ____ Championship Bowl. Gee, that was hard...

QBRanger December 2 2007 9:28 PM EST

LSU certainly deserves to be in the championship game. They lost 2 games in overtime (3 overtimes each). They won what most people call the toughest conference in the game.

OSU, however should not. One loss but they played no team who was ranked 20 or more at the time they played them. But, they are the "last man standing".

IMO, OU should be facing LSU. They beat the number 1 team in the nation twice.

USC lost to Sanford, enough said.

Georgia did not even win their 1/2 of the conference.
Kansas as well, even though they have 1 loss.
Missouri did not win their last game or conference.

VT lost to LSU by over 30 points early in the season. Remember, according to the people who love the BSC, every game matters.

Just my thoughts on it. Should be OU vs LSU.

[P]Mitt December 2 2007 9:51 PM EST

USC lost to Sanford, enough said.

hey hey hey, don't hate on Stanford... they won the 2 games that mattered :P USC and Cal!

Mem December 2 2007 10:04 PM EST


So just because the Big Ten doesn't have a championship game (which would be incredibly redundant since Michigan and Ohio State almost always play for the title in the last game of the season...) means they don't deserve a chance at the National Championship? Sounds rather absurd to me. OSU's been in a BCS bowl five of the last six years. Illinois is also in one this year. There've been years in the past where four of the eight teams in BCS bowls were from the Big Ten. Just because the Big Ten had a bad year this year doesn't mean that everyone has to take a big dump on them from here to eternity. I give the Big Ten credit for not giving in to the promise of one more game's worth of ticket sales just for money's sake. There isn't another conference out there that didn't jump at a chance for that money.

That said, Kansas deserved that BCS bowl game. Of course, so did Mizzou, but a 2 loss team never deserves a right at a National Championship. Especially when there's an undefeated team and several one loss teams. I don't care how late they lost. Kansas' loss was to the fourth ranked team in the country, that became the number one team afterwards. How does warrant not being in the championship game over LSU? I smell something fishy. BCS= Bullion Cube Source. Or in layman's terms, money. It's all about the Benjamins. LSU will get more people to watch than any of those other teams. Plus, they'll be at home, so the local interest will be through the roof for the game.

When will we learn that money ruins any chance at having a fair outcome in college football as it is right now? Weren't the bowl game titles a good enough clue?

QBRanger December 2 2007 10:12 PM EST

Actually Mem,

The BCS was not designed to do anything other then pit the 2 top teams.
The inclusion of teams into the BCS is by ranking and conference championships.

However the at large teams just have to be in the top 14 of the ranking. The bowls can choose any at large team they want from those left in the top 14, based upon who they think will draw more people to the game.

Obviously they felt Missouri was a better draw then Kansas.

Regardless, does anyone really think OSU can hang with LSU?

This OSU team is far less talanted then the one that was blown out my UF (another SEC team).

QBsutekh137 December 2 2007 10:48 PM EST

What power would the Universities lose in a true playoff system?

(seriously, I don't get it...)

Sir Leon [Soup Ream] December 2 2007 11:26 PM EST

"That said, Kansas deserved that BCS bowl game. Of course, so did Mizzou, but a 2 loss team never deserves a right at a National Championship."

Then why doesn't Hawii get a shot at the title? They're undefeated.

Kansas did_not_deserve a shot at the national title. They were undefeated. Every other team would have been too if they had the schedule KU had. Their schedule strength was ranked 109th while Mizzous was 24th. We loss to the same team twice! We beat Illinois and kansas. Our final rank is far higher than either of them.

Mizzou deserves a better bowl than The Cotton Bowl. This is ridiculous! I hope Chase Daniels gets the Heisman Trophy.

VT is going to murder KU.

Roughneck December 3 2007 2:17 AM EST

I dont believe Hawaii played anyone in the top 50 rankings,So thats why they did not get a shot. I am not a Georgia fan but i will always pull for a SEC team . Geaux Tigers

Mem December 3 2007 10:19 PM EST

Hawaii beat Boise State when they were ranked #19. Sounds like the top 50 to me.

There's no arguing that Hawaii also deserves a chance at a title game after going undefeated, but mid-major teams rarely get what they deserve.

Any team in the nation could schedule like Kansas did. And most do, at least for their non-conference games.

LSU, again, does not deserve a shot at the national title. They have two losses. How has the BCS put the two best teams into the title game when one of those teams has two losses? The BCS does not work. Not this season. Not ever. It was mere coincidence every time it appeared to work correctly.

Sir Leon [Soup Ream] December 4 2007 12:12 AM EST

As stated before. The BSC boils down to revenue. Extremely stupid but such is life.

But i need to make my money back! lol

Any bets, my picks i'll be betting on are.

VT over KU--will wager up to 5 million MU over AK-- up to 3 million OU over LSU--up to 1 million

QBRanger December 4 2007 12:13 AM EST

I will take all million on LSU to romp over Ohio State.

Mikel December 4 2007 12:17 AM EST

You are right about the Big 10 and Money, the real reason they don't have a Championship game is because they are too afraid to lose out on the big money by having their top team knocked out of the top spot. :)

The Championship games are supposed to set help filter out the contenders and pretenders. Mizzou deserves a better bid than K-State does, based on SoS, OSU shouldn't even be in the top 10, now try to explain that to the Rainbow fans.

Roughneck December 4 2007 1:03 AM EST

When Hawaii loses to Georgia by a pretty big margin then we will know they didnt deserve a shot at the title. I feel like the rest of the nation that the BCS does not work but i just dont think Hawaii or Ohio has a chance at all at winning. Ive been just wishing USC would get a chance to play any SEC team just to see if they are really any good or not.

Mikel December 4 2007 1:21 AM EST

I feel sorry for any team that has to play USC or OU in the bowl games. Both of those teams are playing some ball right now.

QBOddBird December 4 2007 1:36 AM EST fair Ranger, I so want in on that bet to see LSU creaming OU into whipped meat. T-T

QBRanger December 4 2007 8:02 AM EST

Another reason the Big 10 does not have a championship game is the fact they are only 11 teams.

12 teams is the best for having one.

Only if ND would get their head on and join them.

Sir Leon [Soup Ream] December 4 2007 9:29 AM EST

For whatever reason i got ahead of myself messed up my previous bets.

Lets try this again:

VT over KU--will wager up to 5 million
MU over AK-- up to 3 million
OU over WV--up to 1 million
LSU over Ohio--up to 1 million

Now that is cleared up. Sorry Ranger for my previous error.
This thread is closed to new posts. However, you are welcome to reference it from a new thread; link this with the html <a href="/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=002I15">CF: MU vs. OU</a>