Spaz's goals

[twballgame9]

I love how "transferring to find a program that actually knows how to use you after an inane coaching hire of a 70 year old offensive coordinator" translates to "quits on the team." I applaud any kid with talent that looks for a place that fits him, not stays with a place where they can't figure out how to run a screen pass.

Notice that the week after Haden leaves, Tranq runs a disaster of a screen and a disaster of a stretch play in the first two series? Was that supposed to be tribute? What a fucking tool.

[h2o]

By the way, HJS and I both go to the games - he travels. And I had better things to do on a Saturday night than listen to your nonsensical defense of this mediocre coaching staff, bragging about 6 wins with this shit schedule, and bashing a RB that transferred when we really could have used him the past two weeks.

I'm not picking sides, but Haden didn't play last week because he was hurt. And even if hadn't quit the team, he would have been scratched yesterday because of the same ankle injury.

Irrelevant to the point. Point is that they are bashing a kid that we desperately need.

Which makes his decision to quit all the more disappointing, he was getting plenty of reps when he wasn't hurt. I guess being the starter meant more to him.

[pick6pedro]

BC's schedule is fucking easy.

Ranked 40th by Sagarin. About the same as every year we've been in the ACC.
2008 = 35
2007 = 45
2006 = 44
2005 = 22

[b0mberMan]

Notice that the week after Haden leaves, Tranq runs a disaster of a screen and a disaster of a stretch play in the first two series? Was that supposed to be tribute? What a fucking tool.

This bears discussion. When I saw those plays I said "Finally!" followed by, "those would've been great for Haden."

[twballgame9]

BC's schedule is fucking easy.

Ranked 40th by Sagarin. About the same as every year we've been in the ACC.
2008 = 35
2007 = 45
2006 = 44
2005 = 22

You can point to whatever computer poll you would like. The eyes say that the shit we are seeing on the opposite side of the ball this year is nowhere near as good as the past 4-5 years. FSU and Clemson are close to what they have been, but not quite. ND remains as bad. The rest has dropped off tremendously, especially NCSU, MD, Wake. Even VT is way down. Kent was a shell of last year's team with Edelman. Northeastern is the worst team BC has ever played. UNC dropped off the map this year. And skipped Miami and GT this season.

This year's schedule is shit.

[BCFAN94]

By the way, HJS and I both go to the games - he travels. And I had better things to do on a Saturday night than listen to your nonsensical defense of this mediocre coaching staff, bragging about 6 wins with this shit schedule, and bashing a RB that transferred when we really could have used him the past two weeks.

I'm not picking sides, but Haden didn't play last week because he was hurt. And even if hadn't quit the team, he would have been scratched yesterday because of the same ankle injury.

Irrelevant to the point. Point is that they are bashing a kid that we desperately need.

Stupid comment. It is precisely to the point. He was hurt and couldn't play anyway so whether he quit the team or not or posters "bashed" him or not, he wasn't playing.

[twballgame9]

By the way, HJS and I both go to the games - he travels. And I had better things to do on a Saturday night than listen to your nonsensical defense of this mediocre coaching staff, bragging about 6 wins with this shit schedule, and bashing a RB that transferred when we really could have used him the past two weeks.

I'm not picking sides, but Haden didn't play last week because he was hurt. And even if hadn't quit the team, he would have been scratched yesterday because of the same ankle injury.

Irrelevant to the point. Point is that they are bashing a kid that we desperately need.

Which makes his decision to quit all the more disappointing, he was getting plenty of reps when he wasn't hurt. I guess being the starter meant more to him.

He wasn't being used properly. I don't blame him for transferring. If you were a doctor being asked to keep the books instead of treat patients, would you switch hospitals?

[twballgame9]

By the way, HJS and I both go to the games - he travels. And I had better things to do on a Saturday night than listen to your nonsensical defense of this mediocre coaching staff, bragging about 6 wins with this shit schedule, and bashing a RB that transferred when we really could have used him the past two weeks.

I'm not picking sides, but Haden didn't play last week because he was hurt. And even if hadn't quit the team, he would have been scratched yesterday because of the same ankle injury.

Irrelevant to the point. Point is that they are bashing a kid that we desperately need.

Stupid comment. It is precisely to the point. He was hurt and couldn't play anyway so whether he quit the team or not or posters "bashed" him or not, he wasn't playing.

Whatever. The consensus around here is "oh he got beat out anyway, screw him." The point is that the last two weeks have shown how much we need him. Leaving or injured he is a vital cog that we can't lose, contrary to the assertions of the "we didn't need him anyway" crowd. That's the point.

[commavegarage]

Whatever. The consensus around here is "oh he got beat out anyway, screw him." The point is that the last two weeks have shown how much we need him. Leaving or injured he is a vital cog that we can't lose, contrary to the assertions of the "we didn't need him anyway" crowd. That's the point.

Exactly. Just because Clemson had James Davis doesn't mean they didn't need Spiller when he was backup.

[BCFAN94]

By the way, HJS and I both go to the games - he travels. And I had better things to do on a Saturday night than listen to your nonsensical defense of this mediocre coaching staff, bragging about 6 wins with this shit schedule, and bashing a RB that transferred when we really could have used him the past two weeks.

I'm not picking sides, but Haden didn't play last week because he was hurt. And even if hadn't quit the team, he would have been scratched yesterday because of the same ankle injury.

Irrelevant to the point. Point is that they are bashing a kid that we desperately need.

Stupid comment. It is precisely to the point. He was hurt and couldn't play anyway so whether he quit the team or not or posters "bashed" him or not, he wasn't playing.

Whatever. The consensus around here is "oh he got beat out anyway, screw him." The point is that the last two weeks have shown how much we need him. Leaving or injured he is a vital cog that we can't lose, contrary to the assertions of the "we didn't need him anyway" crowd. That's the point.

Absolutely, we need a change of pace guy. Haden didn't want to be that. Hopefully we can find a guy who can and wants to fill that role.

[h2o]

By the way, HJS and I both go to the games - he travels. And I had better things to do on a Saturday night than listen to your nonsensical defense of this mediocre coaching staff, bragging about 6 wins with this shit schedule, and bashing a RB that transferred when we really could have used him the past two weeks.

I'm not picking sides, but Haden didn't play last week because he was hurt. And even if hadn't quit the team, he would have been scratched yesterday because of the same ankle injury.

Irrelevant to the point. Point is that they are bashing a kid that we desperately need.

Which makes his decision to quit all the more disappointing, he was getting plenty of reps when he wasn't hurt. I guess being the starter meant more to him.

He wasn't being used properly. I don't blame him for transferring. If you were a doctor being asked to keep the books instead of treat patients, would you switch hospitals?

So was he not being used properly last year? Because he was talking about transfering last year.

All things considered, number of reps he was getting (when healthy), etc. Haden was having a much better year in 09 IMO than he did in 08.

[twballgame9]

By the way, HJS and I both go to the games - he travels. And I had better things to do on a Saturday night than listen to your nonsensical defense of this mediocre coaching staff, bragging about 6 wins with this shit schedule, and bashing a RB that transferred when we really could have used him the past two weeks.

I'm not picking sides, but Haden didn't play last week because he was hurt. And even if hadn't quit the team, he would have been scratched yesterday because of the same ankle injury.

Irrelevant to the point. Point is that they are bashing a kid that we desperately need.

Which makes his decision to quit all the more disappointing, he was getting plenty of reps when he wasn't hurt. I guess being the starter meant more to him.

He wasn't being used properly. I don't blame him for transferring. If you were a doctor being asked to keep the books instead of treat patients, would you switch hospitals?

So was he not being used properly last year? Because he was talking about transfering last year.

All things considered, number of reps he was getting (when healthy), etc. Haden was having a much better year in 09 IMO than he did in 08.

No, he wasn't being used properly by Logan either. Mostly because we didn't have a QB that could throw a screen pass last season. Although they did run him outside more. But Shinskie ought to be able to throw a screen. Ideally, Haden is a spread option RB in a Wake Forest type passing and running offense. But with a real QB he should play the Callendar role - 500 yards rushing, 50 catches - plus he should have been the returner.

[apbc12]

Absolutely, we need a change of pace guy. Haden didn't want to be that. Hopefully we can find a guy who can and wants to fill that role.

He's been here for four years, how do people keep forgetting about him?

[pick6pedro]

BC's schedule is fucking easy.

Ranked 40th by Sagarin. About the same as every year we've been in the ACC.
2008 = 35
2007 = 45
2006 = 44
2005 = 22

You can point to whatever computer poll you would like. The eyes say that the shit we are seeing on the opposite side of the ball this year is nowhere near as good as the past 4-5 years. FSU and Clemson are close to what they have been, but not quite. ND remains as bad. The rest has dropped off tremendously, especially NCSU, MD, Wake. Even VT is way down. Kent was a shell of last year's team with Edelman. Northeastern is the worst team BC has ever played. UNC dropped off the map this year. And skipped Miami and GT this season.

This year's schedule is shit.

And you can use all the baseless assertions that you like. ND remains as bad? 6-2 thusfar isn't better than the 10-15 they put together the last two seasons? As much as I hate to say it, Clausen is 2nd in QB rating in the country. You seem to forget that NCSU started 2-6 last season before finally deciding to play football. FSU is worse than last year, but they have a very good offense. MD blows and WF is worse than last year. KSU already has more wins than they did all last year with Edelman. UNC has no offense, but a very good D. Clemson went 7-6 last year and are at 5-3 now.

I'm not saying our schedule is very good, but your evaluations of the teams we've played are way off.

at the very least you have to agree with these:

CMU 09 > UCF 08
CU 09 > CU 08
ND 09 > ND 08
KSU 09 > KSU 08

[twballgame9]

BC's schedule is fucking easy.

Ranked 40th by Sagarin. About the same as every year we've been in the ACC.
2008 = 35
2007 = 45
2006 = 44
2005 = 22

You can point to whatever computer poll you would like. The eyes say that the shit we are seeing on the opposite side of the ball this year is nowhere near as good as the past 4-5 years. FSU and Clemson are close to what they have been, but not quite. ND remains as bad. The rest has dropped off tremendously, especially NCSU, MD, Wake. Even VT is way down. Kent was a shell of last year's team with Edelman. Northeastern is the worst team BC has ever played. UNC dropped off the map this year. And skipped Miami and GT this season.

This year's schedule is shit.

And you can use all the baseless assertions that you like. ND remains as bad? 6-2 thusfar isn't better than the 10-15 they put together the last two seasons? As much as I hate to say it, Clausen is 2nd in QB rating in the country. You seem to forget that NCSU started 2-6 last season before finally deciding to play football. FSU is worse than last year, but they have a very good offense. MD blows and WF is worse than last year. KSU already has more wins than they did all last year with Edelman. UNC has no offense, but a very good D. Clemson went 7-6 last year and are at 5-3 now.

I'm not saying our schedule is very good, but your evaluations of the teams we've played are way off.

FSU, Clemson, Wake, VT, Kent, NSCU, MD and UNC were all much better teams last season. We skipped GT and Miami and avoided a resurgent Duke, playing a horrid UVa instead. Northeastern is a wash with URI, but substantially worse than Buffalo or UMass.

Wins is not a great stat to determine whether a team is tougher to play from one year to the next - this is kind of the point, schedule makes all of the difference. For example, Kent played a tougher schedule last season in a much tougher MAC. Same goes for ND - their schedule this year is horrid, their team is the same, and they are without their best player (which they had last season).

[twballgame9]

And yes, I disagree with all of your > comparisons, except maybe ND, who might be slightly improved when they have Floyd.

[kimmymd]

I think everyone is reading into this video:



Now at 3:11 he says after our fourth win "Now that's four and" and he holds up what appear to be two fingers and the audio cuts off. I don't know what he was going to say next, but if Vinny has access to the rest of the post-game speech, we might know what his goal was after the Wake game.[/quote]



Anyone else think Liz is banging Jim?

[pick6pedro]

BC's schedule is fucking easy.

Ranked 40th by Sagarin. About the same as every year we've been in the ACC.
2008 = 35
2007 = 45
2006 = 44
2005 = 22

You can point to whatever computer poll you would like. The eyes say that the shit we are seeing on the opposite side of the ball this year is nowhere near as good as the past 4-5 years. FSU and Clemson are close to what they have been, but not quite. ND remains as bad. The rest has dropped off tremendously, especially NCSU, MD, Wake. Even VT is way down. Kent was a shell of last year's team with Edelman. Northeastern is the worst team BC has ever played. UNC dropped off the map this year. And skipped Miami and GT this season.

This year's schedule is shit.

And you can use all the baseless assertions that you like. ND remains as bad? 6-2 thusfar isn't better than the 10-15 they put together the last two seasons? As much as I hate to say it, Clausen is 2nd in QB rating in the country. You seem to forget that NCSU started 2-6 last season before finally deciding to play football. FSU is worse than last year, but they have a very good offense. MD blows and WF is worse than last year. KSU already has more wins than they did all last year with Edelman. UNC has no offense, but a very good D. Clemson went 7-6 last year and are at 5-3 now.

I'm not saying our schedule is very good, but your evaluations of the teams we've played are way off.

For example, Kent played a tougher schedule last season in a much tougher MAC. Same goes for ND - their schedule this year is horrid, their team is the same, and they are without their best player (which they had last season).

KSU SOS 2008: 119
KSU SOS 2009: 124

ND SOS 2008: 50
ND SOS 2009: 28

More baseless assertions. Can I get a smilie of a guy with a shovel?

[pick6pedro]

And yes, I disagree with all of your > comparisons, except maybe ND, who might be slightly improved when they have Floyd.

So Central Michigan is not better than UCF of last year? Are you arguing just for the sake of arguing?

[twballgame9]

BC's schedule is fucking easy.

Ranked 40th by Sagarin. About the same as every year we've been in the ACC.
2008 = 35
2007 = 45
2006 = 44
2005 = 22

You can point to whatever computer poll you would like. The eyes say that the shit we are seeing on the opposite side of the ball this year is nowhere near as good as the past 4-5 years. FSU and Clemson are close to what they have been, but not quite. ND remains as bad. The rest has dropped off tremendously, especially NCSU, MD, Wake. Even VT is way down. Kent was a shell of last year's team with Edelman. Northeastern is the worst team BC has ever played. UNC dropped off the map this year. And skipped Miami and GT this season.

This year's schedule is shit.

And you can use all the baseless assertions that you like. ND remains as bad? 6-2 thusfar isn't better than the 10-15 they put together the last two seasons? As much as I hate to say it, Clausen is 2nd in QB rating in the country. You seem to forget that NCSU started 2-6 last season before finally deciding to play football. FSU is worse than last year, but they have a very good offense. MD blows and WF is worse than last year. KSU already has more wins than they did all last year with Edelman. UNC has no offense, but a very good D. Clemson went 7-6 last year and are at 5-3 now.

I'm not saying our schedule is very good, but your evaluations of the teams we've played are way off.

For example, Kent played a tougher schedule last season in a much tougher MAC. Same goes for ND - their schedule this year is horrid, their team is the same, and they are without their best player (which they had last season).

KSU SOS 2008: 119
KSU SOS 2009: 124

ND SOS 2008: 50
ND SOS 2009: 28

Baseless assertions. Can I get a smilie of a guy with a shovel?

You do see the inherent flaw in comparing stats based within an individual season no? Do those stats account for the fact that this year's #5 USC team would have lost to last year's #5 USC team by 40 points? Each helps ND's SOS equally.

With the exception of 4-5 teams, college football is very weak this season. The ACC in particular, is very weak. But since they play each other, somebody has to win, and somebody ends up ranked. BC is a great example - no one would say that this team is as talented as last season, or as difficult to beat (ask VT) but they have a similar record. Thus, for blind statistical analysis, there is no difference between this year's BC team and last year's or, to a lesser extent, the year before. While I don't think the talent dropped off as much as some here (that use that to pretend Spaz is a genius), BC is an easier team to beat this year, for what ever reason (ask VT). Yet we helped ND's SOS just as much.

[twballgame9]

And yes, I disagree with all of your > comparisons, except maybe ND, who might be slightly improved when they have Floyd.

So Central Michigan is not better than UCF of last year? Are you arguing just for the sake of arguing?

I attended both games. That team yesterday was fucking horrible.

[pick6pedro]

And yes, I disagree with all of your > comparisons, except maybe ND, who might be slightly improved when they have Floyd.

So Central Michigan is not better than UCF of last year? Are you arguing just for the sake of arguing?

I attended both games. That team yesterday was fucking horrible.

So your only evaluation is the games that each team has played against us? BC played terrible against UCF and played pretty well yesterday. You should probably use a team's overall effort to judge their quality, not just one viewing. Is only looking at the VT debacle a good way to evaluate BC's 2009 season?

[pick6pedro]

BC's schedule is fucking easy.

Ranked 40th by Sagarin. About the same as every year we've been in the ACC.
2008 = 35
2007 = 45
2006 = 44
2005 = 22

You can point to whatever computer poll you would like. The eyes say that the shit we are seeing on the opposite side of the ball this year is nowhere near as good as the past 4-5 years. FSU and Clemson are close to what they have been, but not quite. ND remains as bad. The rest has dropped off tremendously, especially NCSU, MD, Wake. Even VT is way down. Kent was a shell of last year's team with Edelman. Northeastern is the worst team BC has ever played. UNC dropped off the map this year. And skipped Miami and GT this season.

This year's schedule is shit.

And you can use all the baseless assertions that you like. ND remains as bad? 6-2 thusfar isn't better than the 10-15 they put together the last two seasons? As much as I hate to say it, Clausen is 2nd in QB rating in the country. You seem to forget that NCSU started 2-6 last season before finally deciding to play football. FSU is worse than last year, but they have a very good offense. MD blows and WF is worse than last year. KSU already has more wins than they did all last year with Edelman. UNC has no offense, but a very good D. Clemson went 7-6 last year and are at 5-3 now.

I'm not saying our schedule is very good, but your evaluations of the teams we've played are way off.

For example, Kent played a tougher schedule last season in a much tougher MAC. Same goes for ND - their schedule this year is horrid, their team is the same, and they are without their best player (which they had last season).

KSU SOS 2008: 119
KSU SOS 2009: 124

ND SOS 2008: 50
ND SOS 2009: 28

Baseless assertions. Can I get a smilie of a guy with a shovel?

You do see the inherent flaw in comparing stats based within an individual season no? Do those stats account for the fact that this year's #5 USC team would have lost to last year's #5 USC team by 40 points? Each helps ND's SOS equally.

With the exception of 4-5 teams, college football is very weak this season. The ACC in particular, is very weak. But since they play each other, somebody has to win, and somebody ends up ranked. BC is a great example - no one would say that this team is as talented as last season, or as difficult to beat (ask VT) but they have a similar record. Thus, for blind statistical analysis, there is no difference between this year's BC team and last year's or, to a lesser extent, the year before. While I don't think the talent dropped off as much as some here (that use that to pretend Spaz is a genius), BC is an easier team to beat this year, for what ever reason (ask VT). Yet we helped ND's SOS just as much.

Of course there are flaws in using such stats, but I trust the numbers far more than the opinion of a guy who bases his judgments of teams solely on one game and has a picture of a smiley pissing next to his name.

SOS is not static and the fact that USC was #5 isn't part of the equation for the calculation of ND's SOS anymore because USC is 6-2 and #12/13 now.

BC's SOS is about the same as it has been over the last 4 years. If the schedule this year is "shit", then these past schedules were "shit" as well. Some teams are better, some teams are worse, but this tremendous difference in SOS you state is simply not there.

[twballgame9]

BC's schedule is fucking easy.

Ranked 40th by Sagarin. About the same as every year we've been in the ACC.
2008 = 35
2007 = 45
2006 = 44
2005 = 22

You can point to whatever computer poll you would like. The eyes say that the shit we are seeing on the opposite side of the ball this year is nowhere near as good as the past 4-5 years. FSU and Clemson are close to what they have been, but not quite. ND remains as bad. The rest has dropped off tremendously, especially NCSU, MD, Wake. Even VT is way down. Kent was a shell of last year's team with Edelman. Northeastern is the worst team BC has ever played. UNC dropped off the map this year. And skipped Miami and GT this season.

This year's schedule is shit.

And you can use all the baseless assertions that you like. ND remains as bad? 6-2 thusfar isn't better than the 10-15 they put together the last two seasons? As much as I hate to say it, Clausen is 2nd in QB rating in the country. You seem to forget that NCSU started 2-6 last season before finally deciding to play football. FSU is worse than last year, but they have a very good offense. MD blows and WF is worse than last year. KSU already has more wins than they did all last year with Edelman. UNC has no offense, but a very good D. Clemson went 7-6 last year and are at 5-3 now.

I'm not saying our schedule is very good, but your evaluations of the teams we've played are way off.

For example, Kent played a tougher schedule last season in a much tougher MAC. Same goes for ND - their schedule this year is horrid, their team is the same, and they are without their best player (which they had last season).

KSU SOS 2008: 119
KSU SOS 2009: 124

ND SOS 2008: 50
ND SOS 2009: 28

Baseless assertions. Can I get a smilie of a guy with a shovel?

You do see the inherent flaw in comparing stats based within an individual season no? Do those stats account for the fact that this year's #5 USC team would have lost to last year's #5 USC team by 40 points? Each helps ND's SOS equally.

With the exception of 4-5 teams, college football is very weak this season. The ACC in particular, is very weak. But since they play each other, somebody has to win, and somebody ends up ranked. BC is a great example - no one would say that this team is as talented as last season, or as difficult to beat (ask VT) but they have a similar record. Thus, for blind statistical analysis, there is no difference between this year's BC team and last year's or, to a lesser extent, the year before. While I don't think the talent dropped off as much as some here (that use that to pretend Spaz is a genius), BC is an easier team to beat this year, for what ever reason (ask VT). Yet we helped ND's SOS just as much.

Of course there are flaws in using such stats, but I trust the numbers far more than the opinion of a guy who bases his judgments of teams solely on one game and has a picture of a smiley pissing next to his name.

SOS is not static and the fact that USC was #5 isn't part of the equation for the calculation of ND's SOS anymore because USC is 6-2 and #12/13 now.

BC's SOS is about the same as it has been over the last 4 years. If the schedule this year is "shit", then these past schedules were "shit" as well. Some teams are better, some teams are worse, but this tremendous difference in SOS you state is simply not there.

This completely ignores the fact that talent levels can change across the board from one year to the next. Period. Yet they still rank them 1-117 for SOS. If all 117 teams were worse than the worst team the year prior, somebody would still be ranked one, and playing them would be the same as playing the #1 team the year before. But for people that go to the games would be right in saying things like "last year's #117 would beat this year's #1".

An absurd example, but you get the point. Outside of 4-5 teams, all of college football is pretty mediocre this season. This year's USC team probably wouldn't be ranked if they were playing last year. No idea as to the reason, but for someone that attends all BC home games, watches all road games, and watches about 2-3 other games every Saturday, it is pretty obvious.

[pick6pedro]

BC's schedule is fucking easy.

Ranked 40th by Sagarin. About the same as every year we've been in the ACC.
2008 = 35
2007 = 45
2006 = 44
2005 = 22

You can point to whatever computer poll you would like. The eyes say that the shit we are seeing on the opposite side of the ball this year is nowhere near as good as the past 4-5 years. FSU and Clemson are close to what they have been, but not quite. ND remains as bad. The rest has dropped off tremendously, especially NCSU, MD, Wake. Even VT is way down. Kent was a shell of last year's team with Edelman. Northeastern is the worst team BC has ever played. UNC dropped off the map this year. And skipped Miami and GT this season.

This year's schedule is shit.

And you can use all the baseless assertions that you like. ND remains as bad? 6-2 thusfar isn't better than the 10-15 they put together the last two seasons? As much as I hate to say it, Clausen is 2nd in QB rating in the country. You seem to forget that NCSU started 2-6 last season before finally deciding to play football. FSU is worse than last year, but they have a very good offense. MD blows and WF is worse than last year. KSU already has more wins than they did all last year with Edelman. UNC has no offense, but a very good D. Clemson went 7-6 last year and are at 5-3 now.

I'm not saying our schedule is very good, but your evaluations of the teams we've played are way off.

For example, Kent played a tougher schedule last season in a much tougher MAC. Same goes for ND - their schedule this year is horrid, their team is the same, and they are without their best player (which they had last season).

KSU SOS 2008: 119
KSU SOS 2009: 124

ND SOS 2008: 50
ND SOS 2009: 28

Baseless assertions. Can I get a smilie of a guy with a shovel?

You do see the inherent flaw in comparing stats based within an individual season no? Do those stats account for the fact that this year's #5 USC team would have lost to last year's #5 USC team by 40 points? Each helps ND's SOS equally.

With the exception of 4-5 teams, college football is very weak this season. The ACC in particular, is very weak. But since they play each other, somebody has to win, and somebody ends up ranked. BC is a great example - no one would say that this team is as talented as last season, or as difficult to beat (ask VT) but they have a similar record. Thus, for blind statistical analysis, there is no difference between this year's BC team and last year's or, to a lesser extent, the year before. While I don't think the talent dropped off as much as some here (that use that to pretend Spaz is a genius), BC is an easier team to beat this year, for what ever reason (ask VT). Yet we helped ND's SOS just as much.

Of course there are flaws in using such stats, but I trust the numbers far more than the opinion of a guy who bases his judgments of teams solely on one game and has a picture of a smiley pissing next to his name.

SOS is not static and the fact that USC was #5 isn't part of the equation for the calculation of ND's SOS anymore because USC is 6-2 and #12/13 now.

BC's SOS is about the same as it has been over the last 4 years. If the schedule this year is "shit", then these past schedules were "shit" as well. Some teams are better, some teams are worse, but this tremendous difference in SOS you state is simply not there.

This completely ignores the fact that talent levels can change across the board from one year to the next. Period. Yet they still rank them 1-117 for SOS. If all 117 teams were worse than the worst team the year prior, somebody would still be ranked one, and playing them would be the same as playing the #1 team the year before. But for people that go to the games would be right in saying things like "last year's #117 would beat this year's #1".

An absurd example, but you get the point. Outside of 4-5 teams, all of college football is pretty mediocre this season. This year's USC team probably wouldn't be ranked if they were playing last year. No idea as to the reason, but for someone that attends all BC home games, watches all road games, and watches about 2-3 other games every Saturday, it is pretty obvious.

Of course talent level can change and I get all that, but this drastic change you're talking about simply isn't a reality. I have the exact same qualifications you listed and do not share this idea that outside of 4-5 teams that all of college football is mediocre. Besides that, even if all of college football is mediocre outside those 4-5, then it's still entirely possible that the teams at the bottom of the chain (or anywhere in the ranks) are not as bad as last year meaning it would all average out and end up about the same in the end.

Just because you say it and it's possible doesn't make it true. This year's #40 SOS is just plain not extremely different than last year's #40 or the year before that or the year before that. Are you going to use anything resembling fact to support your assertions?

[joemack13]

Our offense should have been significantly better this year and our three losses have come because we couldn't score points. A mildly effective coach should have us with 1 loss maybe 2. That's where I think we should be

[hansen]

BC's schedule is fucking easy. I applaud Spaz for going 6-3. I think it should be 7-2. And I think that a good team shows up with...I don't know...his team for Death Valley and Lane Stadium. Unlike the past two seasons, we had NO shot to win either of those two games before we got off of the bus.

I predicted 9-3 because I didn't overestimate this shit schedule or underestimate BC's high level of talent across the board. And Spaz may get there. So for that, I say congrats. For the way that many of the games have unfolded this season, I say he is a suck ass coach that allows his team's talent to cover his deficiencies as a coach.

question: if BC makes the acccg and wins it, then will ur opinion change?

not flaming, just curious.

[twballgame9]

I completely disagree. Outside of the top teams, the talent is way down from what I have been watching. Teams like USC can lose twice, start a frosh QB and lose most of their defense and stay in the top 15. Some of the top teams have suffered major injuries (Bradford, for example) rendering them mediocre. Several of the teams just off of FLA and ALA in the SEC lost early entrants (Moreno and Stafford at Georgia, for example) from which they have not recovered. Even ND, who is terrible, lost Floyd.

The depth in the SEC and Big XII from last year is gone. TTU, OU and OSU were national title contenders last year, now they are decent at best. Same goes for the second part of the SEC - maybe you can argue LSU is back, but meh.

Other than Florida, Alabama, Texas (which has been blah, despite winning) and Oregon (which has been great since choking in the opener), I haven't seen a very good team all season.

[hansen]

By the way, HJS and I both go to the games - he travels. And I had better things to do on a Saturday night than listen to your nonsensical defense of this mediocre coaching staff, bragging about 6 wins with this shit schedule, and bashing a RB that transferred when we really could have used him the past two weeks.

I'm not picking sides, but Haden didn't play last week because he was hurt. And even if hadn't quit the team, he would have been scratched yesterday because of the same ankle injury.

Irrelevant to the point. Point is that they are bashing a kid that we desperately need.

Stupid comment. It is precisely to the point. He was hurt and couldn't play anyway so whether he quit the team or not or posters "bashed" him or not, he wasn't playing.

Whatever. The consensus around here is "oh he got beat out anyway, screw him." The point is that the last two weeks have shown how much we need him. Leaving or injured he is a vital cog that we can't lose, contrary to the assertions of the "we didn't need him anyway" crowd. That's the point.

agreed losing haden is a huge loss magnified even more by finch's mono diagnosis.

[twballgame9]

BC's schedule is fucking easy. I applaud Spaz for going 6-3. I think it should be 7-2. And I think that a good team shows up with...I don't know...his team for Death Valley and Lane Stadium. Unlike the past two seasons, we had NO shot to win either of those two games before we got off of the bus.

I predicted 9-3 because I didn't overestimate this shit schedule or underestimate BC's high level of talent across the board. And Spaz may get there. So for that, I say congrats. For the way that many of the games have unfolded this season, I say he is a suck ass coach that allows his team's talent to cover his deficiencies as a coach.

question: if BC makes the acccg and wins it, then will ur opinion change?

not flaming, just curious.

Opinion of what change? Spaz? If he does the crap that he did at Clem and VT and ND and home against Wake and FSU, and they win anyway, and Clemson loses, I will credit the players. I don't think that they can win the next three playing that way though. If they play like they did against NCSU for three straight games, I will change my opinion. Because that is how well they should always play.