• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts access private forums and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!

The terrible WAC?

Yeah, but that 1 is BIG. Who's have dreamed USU would almost beat the NCs? Auburn might have lost to a WAC team if not for that onside kickoff in the 4th QTR that the Aggies muffed. Maybe there's more parity in college football than just the BSC. :?:
 
Grizzoola said:
Yeah, but that 1 is BIG. Who's have dreamed USU would almost beat the NCs? Auburn might have lost to a WAC team if not for that onside kickoff in the 4th QTR that the Aggies muffed. Maybe there's more parity in college football than just the BSC. :?:
Click to expand...
You understand that Auburn is nowhere even close to half the team they had last year, right? The only reason their ranked is because of what they did last year. They will be a .500 team this year, and the WAC will continue to be the laughing stock of the FBS.
 
I still say these play-up, money games should not be part of a team's record. Saying that, the UStU game vs. Auburn is a nonsequitur. UM/UT, MSU/Utah, also. This is all due to hype by the media. Important point is all the coaches (hopefully) have a better idea of what their starters & reserves are capable of. Next weekend, all teams start at 0-0. Doesn't sell ads, but it's the truth. :geek:
 
Your point has no base whatsoever. You're saying Utah State, who plays the same division of football as Auburn, should not count because .....? Do you believe Richmond should have this win stricken from their record? How about Sacramento State? How about Delaware? How about Linwood? Or North Dakota State? Or Jacksonville State? Or Montana State? All teams that have defeated opponents in the division above them, and many more like them who have FCS wins vs. FBS. You can copy and paste your little diatribe in every thread, but you've not proven a single point on why this makes sense. These teams don't schedule just for the money, they schedule for the chance to compare themselves to their peers. Jim O'Day said himself that this game vs. Tennessee would net the same amount of money as a home game.. so if this was a game just for the money, why wouldn't have Jimmy boy scheduled us a home game against some D2 school who needed some cash? Or a poor FCS school like Rhode Island or some SWAC school? In case you haven't read the news lately, college football is ALL about the money. It's not about the sport anymore, it's about who can write and cash the biggest checks.. every game is a money game. Wyoming is raking in a ton of cash from Texas.. a 2 for 1 deal.. should that game not count? What about UNLV and Wisconsin? UNLV didn't even put up a fight, but they went home with their pockets filled.
 
You ignore the other point I was making: These games are as meaningless on a team's record as the pre-season NFL games are. Other than the money, the games are more meaningful for the coaches and players AND NO ONE ELSE. Yeah, it's great when a SacSt beats an OSU or when MSU beats CU. Meaningless. Exciting for the fans & media, but meaningless in the long run. I'm surprised, wise as you are, you fall for the hype. :geek:
 
I don't see how they're meaningless. The game is played, a win or loss is dropped in someone's column, and it can affect playoff/bowl positioning. I think that's the exact opposite of meaningless. And judging by the hundreds of thousands of fans that packed stadiums to watch play-up/play-down games, I'm guessing it wasn't meaningless to them either, and to the people doing the polls, it wasn't meaningless to them either.. so I don't know where you're going with this.
 
It's more like where I'm coming from. I may be confused re: these up/down games. I thought they were only games where teams could have a preseason full-contact scrimmage with another team. Games where players could hit on other players wearing different colors. Games where coaches could evaluate their players in full-game conditions, starting w/ the starters & then putting in 2d & 3d stringers to evaluate them. I could go on & on. All I'm saying is that, to me, these up/down games are glorified scrimmages, nothing more. And, I believe the coaches & players see it the same way. Yes, to come out w/ a winning score is great, but I think that score is only the tip of the iceberg of what happens underwater.

What I think you are saying is that, "No, these are real, consequential games, because the fans and media put so much emphasis on them." All I respond with is that you, the fans, and the media just see the tip of the iceberg. Yeah, if you see it from fan/media standpoint, these are consequential games, but I say, they are NOT consequential and should never be mentioned as a W/L record going into the season w/ REAL consequential games.

Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe college football is different from the NFL in this respect. Nobody, well, except for you, apparently, and the fans and media, gives a hoot re: the preseason record of an NFL team. Once the exhibition season is over, all records are 0-0. I think these up/down college games should be considered likewise. So SacSt is 1-0. UM is 0-1. I don't think it means a hill of beans & I'm disgusted the press & media describe teams like UM as being 0-1 at this point.
 
Grizzoola said:
All I'm saying is that, to me, these up/down games are glorified scrimmages, nothing more. And, I believe the coaches & players see it the same way.
Click to expand...

You couldn't be more completely wrong. No one here, or anywhere, will even attempt to agree with you.
 
MrTitleist said:
The WAC went 1-7 on opening weekend.
Click to expand...
This week: (including only the "garbage" left from the defections)

USU 54; Weber 17
Idaho 44; UND 14
NMSU 28; Minnesota 21
LA Tech 48; C. Arkansas 42
SJSU 17; UCLA 27

Really, really "terrible." Still waiting for a single BSC win over a WAC opponent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top