2013 BCS Bowl Chatter

• Terry_Tate

  

  LOL. Did he just say this win is for David Pollack who said it would be a 15 point game that looked like a 30 point game?
• Speedofsand

  

  I ain't even mad. I love Charlie. I wanted him to get the job when Foley hired Meyer. I guess things worked out ok, but if the opportunity ever knocks again I'd sure want him back. Vance Bedford too.
• ytownfootball

  

  I'd be a little bit concerned about how poorly Muschamp prepared his team...not good. Not good at all.
• sleeper

  

  cats gone wild;1356372 wrote:Maybe your 5 loss representative Wisc would of done better.

  I think Wisconsin could handle a Big East school or even an ACC school. SEC 0-2 against the Big East/ACC LOL
• friendfromlowry

  sleeper;1356382 wrote:SEC 0-2 against the Big East/ACC LOL

  And just think, B1G went 1-2 against the SEC. LOL
• believer

  

  cats gone wild;1356372 wrote:Maybe your 5 loss representative Wisc would of done better.

  Perhaps the over-reaching sanctions of the $EC loving NCAA effected that a bit?
• lhslep134

  

  Florida didn't seem to care about being there at all. That's the reason they lost. Some people look at that as an "excuse", I look at it as a reason, and a reason that can't be put squarely on the coaches. At some point, players' disinterest is their fault.
• gorocks99

  

  lhslep134;1356473 wrote:Florida didn't seem to care about being there at all. That's the reason they lost. Some people look at that as an "excuse", I look at it as a reason, and a reason that can't be put squarely on the coaches. At some point, players' disinterest is their fault.

  Relevant...
  
  
• vball10set

  ^^^reps, and IMO, Florida was not only an embarrassment to the SEC last night, but to college football as well...frickin' pathetic
• vball10set

  Speedofsand;1356345 wrote:somebody got totally outcoached tonight

  cats gone wild;1356351 wrote:Now you know what it feels like.

  SEC-SEC-SEC
• LJ

  

  cats gone wild;1356372 wrote:Maybe your 5 loss representative Wisc would of done better.

  
  Would have*
• sleeper

  

  friendfromlowry;1356392 wrote:And just think, B1G went 1-2 against the SEC. LOL

  Would have been 3-0 if the B1G had it's 2 best teams in a bowl game.
• SportsAndLady

  

  lhslep134;1356473 wrote:Florida didn't seem to care about being there at all. That's the reason they lost. Some people look at that as an "excuse", I look at it as a reason, and a reason that can't be put squarely on the coaches. At some point, players' disinterest is their fault.

  What garbage philosophy that is. SEC logic is so ridiculous.
• Midstate01

  

  lhslep134;1356473 wrote:Florida didn't seem to care about being there at all. That's the reason they lost. Some people look at that as an "excuse", I look at it as a reason, and a reason that can't be put squarely on the coaches. At some point, players' disinterest is their fault.

  
  Osu wasn't interested in 06 then.
• thavoice

  I wouldnt say florida was disinterested at all. I dont think taht excuse works when you are in a BCS bowl. Maybe if a FLA team was in like a bowl in early december I could see that, but not a BCS bowl.
  
  Louisville was flying around all night. Florida put up some BIG hits on defense so you could tell they were flying around too. I think the gators tried to get a bit too cute and got away from their game early and the MO just stayed on the Cards side. Plus some breaks went the cards way.
  
  
  Plus..Fla offense was bad all season...reminded me of the OSU team that won it all in like 02 or whatever.
  
  Call it whatver ya want, but I dont think you can use the disinterested excuse when you are in a bcs bowl.
• sleeper

  

  Midstate01;1356502 wrote:Osu wasn't interested in 06 then.

  Or in 2007. The only reason teams lose is because they aren't interested in winning.
• vball10set

  sleeper;1356518 wrote:Or in 2007. The only reason teams lose is because they aren't interested in winning.

  I think you're onto something here...
• queencitybuckeye

  If I were a Florida fan, being "disinterested" about playing the game would make the loss worse, not better. Getting your ass kicked happens, not showing up to play your best is a character issue.
• lhslep134

  

  SportsAndLady;1356498 wrote:What garbage philosophy that is. SEC logic is so ridiculous.

  Garbage philosophy? How is blaming them for the loss a garbage philosophy? Louisville outplayed Florida, but the fact is, it was an EXHIBITION GAME.
  
  This isn't an SEC problem, there are a lot of bowl games where teams or, more likely, individual players just don't show up with the same intensity as the opponent.
  
  I'm not defending Florida, I'm critiquing the bowl system as enabling performances like this one. In all reality, what the f*ck does it matter Louisville beat Florida? It doesn't affect the outcome of this season like a regular season game does, doesn't affect next season, it's a damn exhibition game. That's how I feel about all bowls except the championship game, which actually does affect the season's outcome.
• lhslep134

  

  queencitybuckeye;1356557 wrote:If I were a Florida fan, being "disinterested" about playing the game would make the loss worse, not better. Getting your ass kicked happens, not showing up to play your best is a character issue.

  Totally agree. It was an embarrassing performance, which is worse than a poor performance.
• SportsAndLady

  

  lhslep134;1356562 wrote:Garbage philosophy? How is blaming them for the loss a garbage philosophy?

  I took it as not blaming the players for being outplayed but rather blaming them for not caring because they're better than the Sugar Bowl. If I took it the wrong way I apologize.
• lhslep134

  

  SportsAndLady;1356564 wrote:I took it as not blaming the players for being outplayed but rather blaming them for not caring because they're better than the Sugar Bowl. If I took it the wrong way I apologize.

  You got part of it right. I'm blaming them for not caring. But it's not because I think they're "better than the Sugar Bowl", it's because bowls don't matter (see above post) and maybe they realize that.
  
  The players on Florida that failed to show up mentally unfortunately dragged down the performance of the team as a whole. There were Florida players who cared. And those that cared? They got outplayed by Louisville the same amount that the players who didn't care got outplayed by.
  
  I guess my point is that disinterest is a major reason for the loss, but because it's something that the player's have control over, it's no different to me than being outperformed when everyone is hyped up. A loss is a loss regardless of the reason.
• thavoice

  lhslep134;1356568 wrote:You got part of it right. I'm blaming them for not caring. But it's not because I think they're "better than the Sugar Bowl", it's because bowls don't matter (see above post) and maybe they realize that.
  
  The players on Florida that failed to show up mentally unfortunately dragged down the performance of the team as a whole. There were Florida players who cared. And those that cared? They got outplayed by Louisville the same amount that the players who didn't care got outplayed by.
  
  I guess my point is that disinterest is a major reason for the loss, but because it's something that the player's have control over, it's no different to me than being outperformed when everyone is hyped up. A loss is a loss regardless of the reason.

  Again, how can you be disinterested when you are playing in a BCS bowl? I just dont understand that. I dont think they looked disinterested. To me it looked like a team who got down early and couldnt get a foothold to get it back. Even the announcers made comments how they seemed to be playing out of character. I think it boils down to the coaches maybe trying to outthink themselves and changing what they do best.
  
  I could see if they played in the Scott Toilet Paper bowl on December 20th in being disinterested, but not in a prime time BCS game. Doesnt matter though...they were out played. I think it was MORE about a team feeling disrespected and not taken seriously and coming out on fire and LESS about the other team being disinterested.
• Heretic

  

  Pick6;1355449 wrote:really surprised they made it up to 15 if the schedule was that weak.

  I think they made it up to 15 more because of what other conference teams did.
  
  OU opened the year by beating Big 10's Penn State. Who finished 8-4, 6-2 in conference. Later in the year, both Kent and Toledo beat ranked Big East teams in (respectively) Rutgers and Cincinnati. That gave the MAC respect and Northern Illinois wound up benefiting even though they had a horrid schedule because they outlasted the other conference teams and personally beat both Toledo and Kent.
  
  Especially when you consider that conferences can only have 2 teams making a BCS bid and a couple of the conferences were pretty damn weak this year. When it came time for those final polls, you really got the idea that NIU/Kent was going to get boosted to the top 16 just so it'd be someone new getting in a game and not someone from the vast sea of mediocrity that'd been most of football. An attempt to catch lightning in a bottle with an upstart, I'd say.
• lhslep134

  

  thavoice;1356572 wrote:Again, how can you be disinterested when you are playing in a BCS bowl? I just dont understand that.

  Simple: It's an exhibition game. Some players only enjoy bowls for the externalities (vacation location, free swag, nights on the town in a new place) and frankly don't care about the game.
  
  How is that so hard for people to understand? Maybe the majority of people not being around players in a bowl environment is a reason for that, but disinterest is definitely a real thing.