So, at 6-2 with games against Cleveland, Detroit, Kansas City and Oakland, I'd say the Bengals are in the driver's seat when it comes to the playoffs.
Sunday was as impressive a win as they've had -- this team has swept the Ravens and have the inside track at the division title.
They also have another advantage this week -- Pittsburgh will be coming off of a short week after playing tonight, which could also help the Bengals.
* I'm not sure why everyone's freaking out about UC in the polls. Right now I don't see the SEC champ (Florida or Alabama) or Texas losing -- so if that stays and UC wins out and takes the Big East title, it doesn't matter if they're third or 73rd in the BCS standings, they'll head to a BCS game but not the national title game.
(That said, if Texas were to lose, I'd expect an undefeated UC team with wins over West Virginia, Illinois and Pitt to leapfrog an undefeated TCU with added wins over Utah, Wyoming and New Mexico -- Utah'd be a good win for TCU, but Pitt would equal it and WVU and Illinois are better than the other two)
And the people not whining about the BCS standings are whining about Brian Kelly leaving for Notre Dame.
Seriously folks, stop whining and just enjoy that the Bearcats are 9-0. Why worry about what's next so much that you can't enjoy the present?
* And for the it's not fair no undefeated SEC team would get left out argument, ask Auburn.
* That said, how about this -- teams in the BCS top 25 -- Big East 4, Pac 10 4, Conference that can't count 4, SEC 3, ACC 3, Mountain West 3, Big 12 2.
Also, UC vs. BCS Top 25 -- 2-0. Florida 1-0, Texas 1-0, Alabama 2-0, TCU 1-0, Boise State 1-0, Georgia Tech 1-1, LSU 0-2.
UC also has two more games against BCS Top 25 teams left, vs. West Virginia this week (although they'll likely drop out with a loss to UC) and Pittsburgh.
* If I were worried about UC, it'd be how they match up with Pitt's power running game.
* I think Tony Pike is a hell of a quarterback -- but I've gotta say stick with the hot hand in Zach Collaros. (And maybe I -- along with some others -- owe Steve Kragthorpe an apology for making fun of his 'I'd rather face Pike' statement a couple of weeks ago.) West Virginia coach Bill Stewart agrees.
* UCF coach George O'Leary wasn't a big fan of an accurate report. But, you know, O'Leary has a history of not being a big fan of the truth.
* If you have a ton of money, this is one of the coolest piece of memorabilia I've ever seen -- a game-worn Jim Brown Syracuse helmet.
* Poz writes about the Hall of Fame and he's voting for Barry Larkin (as he should).
* Congrats to Jeff Berding for winning the Cincinnati Man's Biggest Asshole in Cincinnati tournament.
* Fellow fans of The Wire -- a story on David Simon's new series, set in New Orleans.
* If you missed this the other day, the Pixies have a free EP to download.
(Sorry it's short today, folks, had a long, long weekend, will do better tomorrow -- I decided to watch the Mad Men finale -- which was awesome -- and get more than 4 hours of sleep last night instead of working more on TOL)
Sunday was as impressive a win as they've had -- this team has swept the Ravens and have the inside track at the division title.
They also have another advantage this week -- Pittsburgh will be coming off of a short week after playing tonight, which could also help the Bengals.
* I'm not sure why everyone's freaking out about UC in the polls. Right now I don't see the SEC champ (Florida or Alabama) or Texas losing -- so if that stays and UC wins out and takes the Big East title, it doesn't matter if they're third or 73rd in the BCS standings, they'll head to a BCS game but not the national title game.
(That said, if Texas were to lose, I'd expect an undefeated UC team with wins over West Virginia, Illinois and Pitt to leapfrog an undefeated TCU with added wins over Utah, Wyoming and New Mexico -- Utah'd be a good win for TCU, but Pitt would equal it and WVU and Illinois are better than the other two)
And the people not whining about the BCS standings are whining about Brian Kelly leaving for Notre Dame.
Seriously folks, stop whining and just enjoy that the Bearcats are 9-0. Why worry about what's next so much that you can't enjoy the present?
* And for the it's not fair no undefeated SEC team would get left out argument, ask Auburn.
* That said, how about this -- teams in the BCS top 25 -- Big East 4, Pac 10 4, Conference that can't count 4, SEC 3, ACC 3, Mountain West 3, Big 12 2.
Also, UC vs. BCS Top 25 -- 2-0. Florida 1-0, Texas 1-0, Alabama 2-0, TCU 1-0, Boise State 1-0, Georgia Tech 1-1, LSU 0-2.
UC also has two more games against BCS Top 25 teams left, vs. West Virginia this week (although they'll likely drop out with a loss to UC) and Pittsburgh.
* If I were worried about UC, it'd be how they match up with Pitt's power running game.
* I think Tony Pike is a hell of a quarterback -- but I've gotta say stick with the hot hand in Zach Collaros. (And maybe I -- along with some others -- owe Steve Kragthorpe an apology for making fun of his 'I'd rather face Pike' statement a couple of weeks ago.) West Virginia coach Bill Stewart agrees.
* UCF coach George O'Leary wasn't a big fan of an accurate report. But, you know, O'Leary has a history of not being a big fan of the truth.
* If you have a ton of money, this is one of the coolest piece of memorabilia I've ever seen -- a game-worn Jim Brown Syracuse helmet.
* Poz writes about the Hall of Fame and he's voting for Barry Larkin (as he should).
* Congrats to Jeff Berding for winning the Cincinnati Man's Biggest Asshole in Cincinnati tournament.
* Fellow fans of The Wire -- a story on David Simon's new series, set in New Orleans.
* If you missed this the other day, the Pixies have a free EP to download.
(Sorry it's short today, folks, had a long, long weekend, will do better tomorrow -- I decided to watch the Mad Men finale -- which was awesome -- and get more than 4 hours of sleep last night instead of working more on TOL)
If Ozzie Smith is in the Hall of Fame, Barry Larkin should be a shoe in. That's all I'm trying to say. Larkin had 300 less at bats and about 120 fewer hits. But every other number Larkin had more. He had more steals, more homeruns more doubles, more tripples, his batting average is 33 points higher. He has more runs and RBI's also.
Everyone knows Ozzie didn't make his carreer at the plate it was in the field where he had a .978 fielding percentage. Barry Larkin has a .975 lifetime field percentage. I am not counting Gold Glove and All Star appearances because I do not believe them to be important because they are popularity contests, and don't judge how great the player is. That being said, there were years Ozzie won both that Larkin was more deserving. Thrown in Larkin's 30/30 and MVP award and I think he has a better resume than the Wizzard. In fact, the only thing Barry Larkin didn't do was a flip. That is what makes Ozzie a first ballot guy and Larkin may not get in because he didn't do a flip.
I agree with you about UC. It's really going to take Texas and or Florida/Alabama losing before the SEC championship game to get UC in the BCS title game. People just need to enjoy the success and not worry about things they can't control.
I guess fans are never happy enough, I've seen Ohio State fans doubting the Penn State win this weekend. I was so happy Saturday night that they gave them a beatdown, but people are saying maybe Penn State wasn't that good and you can't tell how good Ohio State really was. I'm thinking you are a win this Saturday away from another Big 10 title and a trip to the Rose Bowl. Be happy!
whenever anyone says all ozzie smith did was backflips, i wonder if they ever watched ozzie smith play.
larkin should be in. ozzie should be in. plain and simple. larkin's greatness doesn't take away from ozzie smith's greatness and vice versa.
and fielding percentage is a crappy stat, especially when talking about top-tier fielders
I know Ozzy was great, but was he that much better than Alan Trammel and Davy Concepcion. I just don't know that he was so much better than them that he was a no brainer and those guys will never get in or be on ballots forever and have to get voted in by the veteran's committee. I'm definitely think that Barry Larkin was every bit the shortstop Ozzie was defensively and was much better offensively.
I don't care about Gold Gloves because a guy like Rafael Palmero gets it a year where he only plays 30 games in the field and has over 40 homeruns as a DH for the rest of the season. Ozzie Smith was great to be sure, I'm just not sure that he was so head and shoulders above similar shortstops.
I really don't like the idea of benching Tony Pike if he is ready to go. The guy was in the conversation for Heisman before he went down. He's a veteran, he got UC in the conversation for being relevant nationally, and I just don't think that warrants a benching. It's not like he didn't have a hot hand before he went down. However, if that defense doesn't tighten down the last couple of weeks it may not matter who is at QB. They need that to be the only game they give up 40 plus points because there are beter offesnes than UConn coming up.
I think any frustration that UC or even Ohio State fans feel stems from the flaws of the BCS system. Yeah, we can all say it's great to win a Big Ten or Big East championship and to be headed to a "bowl game." However, what does winning a random bowl game really mean? It's one game. It's not a championship game. You aren't the champion of anything anyone cares about. You basically won a sufficient number of games in your season, then you won one more game. Period.
Every other sport has an official winner. An official champion. Winning a BCS bowl doesn't mean the same thing as making a postseason run and winning an actual sports championship. It's one game against a team you were arbitrarily matched against. Even winning the actual National Title game doesn't mean much. It means more in that you get to call yourselves national champions, but you didn't earn it in the way we associate with earning a championship in any other sport.
In short, bowl games make college football suck.
the only purpose of a playoff is to give mediorce teams a second chance. the 05 steelers and 06 cardinals did not enhance their sports,they only prooved their leagues' mediocrity
i say go back to the old system and have #1 and #2 play after the bowls. college football is more popular and has more tradition than any other sport. it shouldn't have to follow the nhl.
interesting stat... both bengal losses have come on the two sundays following buckeye losses. just sayin
I don't like conference championship games because I think it's a ploy for the conference to make more money. I like how the Pac 10 does, it the whole season is one big round robin and they have a system of tie breaks to come up with a winner.
That being said, I hardly think an 8-12 team playoff would be giving Mediocre teams a 2nd chance. Really, do you think the team that loses the game between Alabama and Florida is mediocre?
i dont think any confrence champion with two losses deserves a second chance
under the old system (assuming the top five win out), the sec champ plays in the sugar bowl, texas plays in a major bowl, and uc plays in the orange. boise and tcu either get invited to play in these bowls, or they play a quality major confrence opponent (or each other). even if all 5 win, a top pairing would be voted to play for the nc. but one or more teams would likely lose or show poorly in their bowl. this system assures top teams at least one upper-tier out-of-confrence game to allow voters to better guage teams before the final vote. giving power to voters isn't unfair, but not giving all teams high quality tests before the final vote is unfair. that is the problem with the bcs.
a playoff lets ohio state in this year... a shot they don't deserve, but could win, as they are now starting to peak
I'm backing the Bengals but I'm still leary for a couple of reasons:
1) 3 of the last 4 games (@ Minn, @ SD, and @ NYJ) will be very, very difficult, right now. In December, they become even more difficult especially if they [gulp] lose one of the Detroit, Cleveland, Oakland games.
2) The painful ends of seasons (under Marvin) when one win would get us in the playoffs has been futile.
Prove me wrong but danger lurks if you don't take care of business in the next few weeks.
One final thought, Philip Rivers is near the top of my list of least favorite athletes - running around Giants Stadium like a twelve year old that hadn't been humbled by a coach in his life.
But the current system has allowed a 2 loss team to win the championship. I also don't think because you lose 2 games you aren't deserving. Do you honestly think an undefeated TCU would beat a 2 loss team like Ohio State, LSU, or USC. I seriously doubt it. I know last year Utah won, and Utah was a great team, but this Boise State team, while undefeated is not nearly as good as that Utah team last year. They have a great team every year, but I'm not sure if Boise or TCU plays in a major conference, yes event he big 10, that they finish in the top 3 this year.
I look at last year, Ohio State took Texas to the brink last year, a Texas team that may have been good enough to beat Florida. Utah destroyed Alabama in a fashion that no one else could do. So who truly was number 1? Florida because a few computers and coaches voted them that way? And they beat a team that wasn't even the best in their conference? It just leaves things not finished.
Deepbutplayable, I agree with you about the Bengals. I'm pretty excited about how they are playing and enjoying the wins, but I'm not sure sure that their schedule is as easy as everyone thinks to close out the year. They have 4 games that are very loseable and 4 that are very winable as well. Pittsburgh isn't going to be easy, Minnesota is going to be very tough, and San Diego out west is never easy. Not to mention the Jets that aren't slouches. I am very worried about Oakland and KC. I don't know what it is about those 2 teams, but for some reason I just dont' feel like those are going to be easy games. They have to win those 4 games against the really bad teams that are left.
Outrageous THEORY of the the week
I agree that the BCS is flawed. However, this may play to UC's advantage. If you look at the BCS rankings, the computers love UC. If the teams that they have beaten continue to excel(Ore St, S. Fla, Rutgers), they will stay #3 behind FLA and ALA(of which 1 will lose) in the Computer rankings. If UC can jump ahead of TCU into the #4 spot, they will be very close to Texas for #3.
In addition, UC has games left that will enhance their computer rankings if they win. Texas doesn't.
FLA or ALA will have a loss. When this happens, texas will move to 2 in the polls and UC will move to #3.
Texas plays no one for the rest of the year, UC has 2 games against top 25 teams including 1 against a top 12.
I'll say it now, if UC and Texas both win out - UC will jump ahead of Texas in the BCS rankings.
I just can't see UC jumping Texas in the BCS. They may have a hard time jumping the 1 loss SEC team. UC would really need Pitt to beat Notre Dame in order to have that quality top 12 win. I think UC will stay in the top 4, but I'm not so sure they will jump Texas. Of course it will all be irrelevant if they don't keep winning.