like several of the posters here, I'd like to see Rutgers beat UL simply for the pleasure of watching the BCS officials squirm at the thought of the undefeated Scarlet Knights becoming the proverbial "turd in the punchbowl" However, Rutgers hasn't neaten a ranked opponent in 18 seasons ........ and it's doubtful they'll do it tonight either. On the other hand, the mighty Cardinals have beaten ........? ...... nobody. The combined records of their opponents , including WV, is 35-33 .... hardly worth annointing as something to crow about. The home-dog component is interesting, but the only chance Rutgers has is to strategically control possession at every, single opportunity. For example, instead of running out-of-bounds, instead fall down inbounds. Get a first down? .... stay inside the sideline. Dont have an open receiver? .... take a knee instead. in other words, do whatever you have to do to keep the UL offense on the pine.:thumb:
I think Rutger's defense will get exposed tonight. I thought they MIGHT hang in there for awhile, but 3 min. left in the 1st quarter and Louisville is marching up and down the field. THrow in the fact that the Cardinals got a lucky break on that PAT following their kickoff return for a TD, and they score 2 and lead it 15-7. I'm predicting a 57-17 final.
i think the big least has a higher bcs ranking the last 3 years than the ACC. maybe we should abolish the ACC instead like we wanted to do with the Big Least.
Yeah, who would have thought that the Big LEast would have 3 teams better than the ACC does with the addition of Miami, Va Tech and BC!
The analysis doesn't take into consideration, no time to heal from injury before playing the next big dog. UT just finished playing us, now has to play Arky in back to back weeks. Fla had us and Aubie in back to back weeks Right after playing Bama. By the way, they only had 2 weeks to heal up from Tennesee. to reward them for that stretch, the got a bye week, then had to play UGA. It's hard enough to stay healthy in this league, let alone succeed. Notice how they didn't become "good" until the good teams left? Why is that? Could it be because WVA has lost 9 of their last 10 against Miami, 7 of last 10 vs VT, and split the last 10 vs BC? And Rutgers is o-fer the last decade against all of them (0-11 vs Miami all time, 11 straight losses to VT, 0-12-1 since the last time they beat BC) The competition leaves, and they "look" better, but are they better?
Rutgers defense as good as advertised. Holding auguably the best offense in all of college football to only 17 points early in the 4th quarter (8 pts scored by the special teams).
I'm still not convinced that any of the Big East teams would not be totally crushed by not all, but several SEC teams or by Ohio State or by Michigan. There are rarely any 63-55 type scores in these conferences. That's because they play defense. Also, I agree with the notion that to survive in the SEC, you have to be very deep. You get beaten like a step child by all these great defensive teams. This tends to leave you limping toward the end of the season. Unfortunately, I live in ACC country. When the ACC added VT and Miami, I told a lot of the people I know to kiss the NC good bye for a long time to come. Since undedeated seems to be the virtual rule of the day for the NC, your conference is going to beat the hell out of each other all season, then again in the title game. Good luck getting through unscathed. My point, you are better off in a weak conference than a strong one. It leaves lots of room to go undefeated. With that said, I would not trade the SEC for any other conference, because I love great college football. If I can get that without the NC...good enough for me.
louisville having one of the best offenses is about as legit as saying rutgers has one of the best defenses. two overrated teams proving nothing on the field except louisville deserves to be sitting home during any meaningful bowl as well as rutgers. nothing new here. move along now.
