Worst Schedules played by Wire Service Champions

[Eric]

That wasn't my intention to compare the two teams at all. You talked about Temple having a role in the BCS, and then you said you don't think they have a terrible football program:

I don't really consider Temple to be a terrible football team, myself. Sure, they haven't been good as of late, but that doesn't mean they never can or ever will be.

Who knows? Maybe going to the MAC is the begining of a new era in Temple football, but as of the moment, they're freakin' terrible.

[billybud]

Temple is generally regarded as the worst team in IA...the power ranking number fed last year into the BCS was #154 (out of 119 teams)....that means there were a slew of IIa teams that were more powerful.

Temple is awful, bad, incompetent, ...they suck.

[billybud]

Last year, on the November 5, 2005 BCS ranking...Oklahoma had dropped out of the top 25....they were unranked because they had not played well early.

Heck, when the BCS released thier first ranking...October 15, 2005, Oklahoma was not to be seen...not in top 25.


http://www.bcsfootball.org/files/wk4-2005-long.pdf

[colorado_loves_football]

Temple is generally regarded as the worst team in IA...the power ranking number fed last year into the BCS was #154 (out of 119 teams)....that means there were a slew of IIa teams that were more powerful.

Temple is awful, bad, incompetent, ...they suck.

No, it doesn't. Division II teams don't enter into the equation, but there were I-AA teams that were seen as better overall. I'm not debating that Temple has had a bad team for a long time, it's one reason why they were dropped from the Big East. But, you were suggesting that Temple, beating Pittsburgh, was 'evidence' for Pittsburgh being bad.
Actually, Pittsburgh wasn't a very good team, 1984, overall. But they weren't as bad as you are suggesting, either.
So, BYU beating them, probably isn't 'evidence' BYU was necessarily the best team in the country, that year, but it certainly isn't' evidence that they weren't, either. All Pittsburgh did was beat Penn St, to close their season. Maybe pride played a role, but regardless, Pittsburgh didn't 'suck.
I'd be careful about what you say about football programs. It took exactly one year for George O'Leary to turn UCF around. They were the worst football program, that year (2004). Then, they nearly won a C-USA title. Was it a 'fluke'? Unlikely. Does C-USA 'suck'. Not hardly.

[billybud]

Does C-USA 'suck'. Not hardly.

Naw...CUSA doesn't suck...depending on your definition...But they just are much, much weaker as a conference than a BCS conference like the ACC...The number one and number 2 CUSA team, if switched for the bottom two teams in the ACC, would still be power ranked #11 and #12 in the ACC.

#1 and #2 go to #11 and #12...that's the difference....yeah...as a BCS conference, they would suck.

[Eric]

That's the thing. I don't think a team like Tulsa, UTEP, Houston, or Southern Miss are bad or that they couldn't beat teams like Arizona, NC State, or Kansas State, it's just that it isn't totally likely. Plus the size of the teams; they could wear down playing a BCS schedule.

At any rate, C-USA is a decent conference. There is only one conference where every team sucks and that's the Sun Belt.

[Derek]

Who cares if Temple lost to Delaware? I don't.

Well, why can you pick and choose what games you care about? If a team loses a game to a very bad team, you don't care, but if they win against a better team, you think that's a good gauge to measure the team by. Apply the same standard.

DANG!! You hit the nail on the head there.

[colorado_loves_football]

At any rate, C-USA is a decent conference. There is only one conference where every team sucks and that's the Sun Belt.

No, I don't think being 'assigned' to a conference necessarily makes a team 'terrible'. N. Texas is a 'respectable' Sun Belt team. They might not be the best overall, within conference, any more, but they had a pretty good team, for most of their tenure. And they also have a strong tradition, too.

So, unfortunately, I disagree with your analysis, such as it is. I will agree, however, N. Texas would be better suited to C-USA, and Tulane would probably be a better 'fit' in the Sun Belt. Other teams I think would make good Sun Belt additions: Louisiana Tech, UCF. The Sun Belt could be on the 'fringes' of being a pretty respectable conference.

[billybud]

Just how bad does the Sun Belt suck? Really bad.

The strongest Sun Belt team is rated weaker than New Hampshire...North Texas sucks so bad that they are ranked as less powerful than William & Mary.

How bad is the Sun Belt? The Sun Belt's best team is ranked about the same level as the worst team in the Big East...1-10 Syracuse.

The IIA Gateway Conference shows far stronger team strength as a conference. The Gateway's top five teams are rated stronger than the strongest of the Sun Belt...now that sucks!

[colorado_loves_football]

Just how bad does the Sun Belt suck? Really bad.

The strongest Sun Belt team is rated weaker than New Hampshire...North Texas sucks so bad that they are ranked as less powerful than William & Mary.

How bad is the Sun Belt? The Sun Belt's best team is ranked about the same level as the worst team in the Big East...1-10 Syracuse.

The IIA Gateway Conference shows far stronger team strength as a conference. The Gateway's top five teams are rated stronger than the strongest of the Sun Belt...now that sucks!

I think we've already discovered your 'ranking' forumula has a lot of holes in it.

Perennial champion, UNT finally was overthrown. Arkansas st, along with Louisiana lafayette, and Louisiana Monroe all finished with better records within conference. As far as the 'formula' you are using, it doesn't address how UNT managed to beat Cincinnati, in 2002, or does it? It's possible there are I-AA conferences with more ability. Even so, I don't think it's a forgone conclusion that a Sun Belt team couldn't play 'competitive' football against a 'major' opponent. Troy plays FSU.

[billybud]

Ain't my ranking formula, pardner.

Troy plays FSU? Sure...how much money you want to put on Troy...I'll put my whole 5,000 against 2,000 of yours..LOL..Oh..maybe betting on Troy isn't too smart!

Troy was ranked #107 by BCS ranking

N.Mexico St...#119 BCS

N. Texas...#113 BCS

Ark. St...#101 BCS

La. Monroe...#103

These teams, as a group, make up the weakest in college IA ball...more than 100 teams are stronger.

Make up your rationalizations...but this is what the BCS thinks.

[Eric]

It's not that their being assigned to the Sun Belt is what makes them bad, it's just the fact that every team at the moment is very, very bad. If you analyze every team individually, they are horrendous. They had one win OOC last year in 1-A football, and that was that stunning game against Vanderbilt, MTSU winning. If that doesn't suck, nothing does to you.

[colorado_loves_football]

It's not that their being assigned to the Sun Belt is what makes them bad, it's just the fact that every team at the moment is very, very bad. If you analyze every team individually, they are horrendous. They had one win OOC last year in 1-A football, and that was that stunning game against Vanderbilt, MTSU winning. If that doesn't suck, nothing does to you.

We've been around this argument before, when Kttfan was still posting. (What happened to him?)

Anyway, I am of the belief, rather than teams like N. Texas getting 'worse' their competition is likely getting better. You have to take into consideration the Sun Belt, lost 3 'key' members to the Western Athletic Conference (Idaho, New Mexico St., Utah St.). 'Fairness' I think should allow for their being 'bad' one year. And just how bad were they?

Arkansas St, in their bowl pairing really didn't do that badly. They lost, but they kept it respectable. How good S. Mississippi was, is still something of a mystery. They werent' terrible, however.

[billybud]

Southern Miss isn't terrible...but the betting line has them getting 21 points against Florida....that tells you that they are much weaker than a ranked team like Florida. And Southern Miss clobbered Ark. St. 31-19....

[colorado_loves_football]

Southern Miss isn't terrible...but the betting line has them getting 21 points against Florida....that tells you that they are much weaker than a ranked team like Florida. And Southern Miss clobbered Ark. St. 31-19....

That game was a lot closer than the final score suggested. I simply referenced it because Arkansas St was the Sun Belt representative to the New Orleans Bowl (which wasn't in New Orleans). Put Louisiana-Lafayette in that bowl, if you want to see a football game!