grow up.

This is the sort of conversation which ends up in someone's scrotum being torn.

I'm out.

http://newsok.com/article/3108932/1187842091

If you are going to claim something, then at least make sure are correct first:

Read the quote again, it says sound. Not spelling.

Now read what I said: "Actually, alliteration has to do with sounding alike, not being spelled with the same beginning consonant."

While alliteration can be employed with words that have the same beginning letter (such as Crazy Coffee), they do not have to have the same beginning letter (such as Crazy Kim), nor do all words that share beginning letters have alliteration (such as Crazy Central).

She misspelled words with a K and claimed it was alliteration, and while it was, sound-wise, that still doesn't explain her misspellings.

I did read what you wrote, but I interpreted incorrectly. Sorry.

I can't believe I'm going to root for FSU today.

I am finding it refreshing to see the traditional football powerhouses from across the country regain their old glory. I live in the midst of SEC territory and I think that I am one of the few who has not partaken of the SEC kool aid. The SEC has been strong the last few years there is no denying that. However, they are falling short at a time when traditional powerhouses like OU and Texas are making a huge comeback. Yes, Florida and Alabama are kicking some a** this year, but across the nation there seems to be a resurgence of power outside of the SEC. Maybe I am a bit nostalgic, but I love the fact that Texas, OU, TT, TCU (geeze, what is going on in Texas?) Ok. State, and Penn State are back in the saddle. It's about time that some of these old rivalries have regained their old glory, it makes bowl season so much more interesting! As for the SEC, which is still a very strong conference, I don't think that Ole Miss got the respect they deserved for their role as the spoiler this year. They are playing some damn fine ball in Oxford lately and they will be a team to watch next year. The ACC is populating the bottom of the rankings but with the very young teams they are fielding I think that at least 2 of their teams will be shake things up even further next year. FSU and GT have two of the youngest teams in the nation, each playing a significant number of true freshmen. Miami is not far behind in that respect but they have yet to show that they are on their way back to their old glory status.
Why on earth is Boise State even ranked? First, they should lose points for that awful blue field that they have....it's nauseating. Second, they have only played one ranked team and have otherwise played a very weak schedule. How on earth are they ahead of a team like Georgia or Ohio State? Ok, I'll stop the rant now and make my predictions for rivalry week:
Florida over FSU - I think the game will be closer than some expect but I don't think that the Noles will pull it off this year. However, if there is going to be a spoiler in any game today I think it will be FSU.

Bama' over Auburn - Auburn had a bye week last week so they have time to rest and recuperate, but they are in 'Bama territory with a strong 'Bama team. I don't think they can pull off an upset.

Georgia Tech over Georgia - Tech is running a great option offense that will keep UGA on their toes.

OK over OK State - This will be a close one but I think OK will pull it out in the end.

Oregon State over Oregon - OSU has stepped up their game lately and if they play as well today as they have been recently this should be an easy win for them.

OK, lt's time to start the show! Let the games begin!

Georgia Tech? Wow!

OU v. Mizzou for Big XII Championship Game.

Bah. But whatever, I guess. We should have taken care of business in Lubbock.

Or paid off a few more voters.:D

I keed... I keed.

On a more serious note, I think this will be good for college football. Not necessarily because this decision was correct. That's debatable either way. Both teams can make compelling points (and no, I don't think head to head is dispositive in a three-way tie, but I'm an Oklahoma fan, so you shouldn't be shocked). Why I think this is good for football is that from now on, athletic directors in big conferences will be more motivated to schedule high-caliber OOC games. Beating Big East champion, Cincinnati and 10-win TCU was a big part of what OU in the championship game over Texas.

Also, considering the movement in the human polls (how do you drop in the polls after beating the No.12 team by 20 at their house?), I think all votes should be public every week.

It won't motivate teams to schedule better OOC games (and if that was the effect it would only occur in the Big XII since the SEC and ACC have the tiebreaker set up differently and the Big10, BigEast and Pac10 lack conference championship games), it will end up that after the season the Big XII will adopt the SEC version of that tie breaker where it is BCS standing, but if the top two teams are within 5 positions of each other than the head-to-head matchup between those two teams is dispositive.

And UT fans will squeal like pigs under a gate when that policy someday excludes them from a CCG :)

IMHO, the BCS standings shouldn't be used at all. I actually thought Mike Leach had the best idea for determining the winner -- go by the graduation rate.

But if you want to be even more fair, I'd take the points for v. points against of all common opponents (the highest difference wins) before looking at something as arbitrary as BCS standings.

The fact that OU went on the road to the No. 12 team in the country and beat them on their own field and then was dropped in the polling is just ridiculous.

At any rate, UT is due a screwing after what Mack and his campaigning did to Cal in 2004. If nothing else, there's a solid karma argument to be made.

At any rate, how would you feel about this policy:

Divisional Tiebreakers: The following procedure will determine the representative from each division in the event of a tie:

If two teams are tied, the winner of the game between the two tied teams shall be the representative
If three or more teams are tied, Texas wins.
If Texas is not one of the three teams tied, Texas wins.
If one or both of the divisional winners lost to Texas at some point during the season, Texas wins.
If three teams are tied, but Texas beat the North winner, Texas win

Sounds good to me!

I also kid.

Only slightly.

HAHA! Yes, I'd go for that scenario. Kidding.

It ended up as I suspected, and I'm sure the OU - SEC champ (fingers crossed for Florida) game will be great.

But, this debacle has certainly given fodder to the sportscasters to lobby for a playoff system. Everyone of them are calling foul (and they would have done so if OU had been excluded). They were just waiting for this kind of controversy...

As for me, it saves me thousands of dollars because I was going to spring for tickets and airfare for the whole family if it was UT/Florida. There is a silver lining!!

I'm a huge Alabama fan this week.

Oh, hush you!! ;)

GO GATORS!!!

Sorry, nittanyalum
 

^^^^Sorry Nittany, I had to laugh too.

Behind The BCS Rankings
 

I found this video on espn.com that gives a quick look at the people behind the rankings. I found it interesting that they do indeed take strength of schedule into consideration although sometimes it seems like they don't.

Wouldn't it be great if every conference had the depth and strength that the Big 12 has this year? UGA -v- Hawaii last year was a joke. While Hawaii may have been the champions of their conference, they were not in the same league as UGA. I feel the same way about Utah and Boise State this year. It looks like Boise may face either Wake Forest or Maryland, both formidable opponents. Utah faces a more difficult opponent in one of the leading SEC or Big 12 Teams. Utah has only faced two opponents of note this season, Oregon State and TCU. I just don't see Utah as being on the same level as UT, Bama, or UF and I foresee them getting blown out of the water.

It seems natural to me that a conference would want the team with the highest BCS standing to play in its conference championship simply because it increases the chances of a team from that conference playing in the national championship game. I know this year a win by either Texas or Oklahoma would likely have resulted in a Big XII team in the national championship; however, a conference cannot always count on having two (2) teams with such high BCS rankings. I think it could be a mistake for the Big XII to change the tiebreaker system. Sometimes even a difference of only five (5) positions would result in the conference sending the lower BCS ranked team to its conference championship; thus, potentially prohibiting the higher BCS ranked team’s appearances in a national championship game.

There really isn’t a perfect solution.

Another 3-way tie is unlikely.

It isn't the conference championship game's job to send a team to the national championship game, it's their job to crown the conference champion in the fairest way possible.

And yeah, I think another 3 way tie isn't likely for a while again anyways, particularly since if I had to guess Leach will be at Auburn next season.

You guys, I'm so pumped for tomorrow.

My peeps and I are setting up a party at one of the bars here that call itself an "official" outpost of Gator Nation. My orange and blue is out and ready. I even wore an orange and blue cardigan on Tuesday. It's cuter than it sounds.

For someone who didn't even go to UF, I love those Gators!

I agree that another three (3) way tie is unlikely.

However, considering the money, both for the school and the conference, at stake when appearing in a national championship game, I cannot agree that the conference championship game shouldn't be (and isn't) somewhat calculated to attempt to send a team to the national championship game.

National Title Game pays the same as the rest of the BCS Bowl Berths (I believe $17 million, but I'm not sure) and the conference champ gets an automatic berth and in the event of a 3 way tie a second berth is almost guaranteed. Since you're limited to 2 BCS berths and would receive 2 almost assuredly either way, than there is no monetary difference between the two. Most conferences split their bowl money, so it really doesn't matter to them who goes or to which game, as long as it's a BCS bowl.

Oh, no worries, I have no sympathy for that kid. I won't know the difference as a viewer of the game, another cheerleader will just wear the mascot uniform. But that idiot just aced himself out of a trip to the Rose Bowl and he's a senior. He's guaranteed to have a V-8 moment about that in the years to come.

I went to the UConn-Pitt game; what a disaster. I feel bad for Donald Brown, the rest of the offense is so bad, especially the passing game. The defense wasn't bad, besides a couple of big plays.

Gotta love those Gators!!! What a game! :-)

I kept texting my friend in Alabama about the game. I ticked him off. LOL :p

College football is my weakest sports as far as knowledge, so thought I'd throw this out there: does today's game do anything for Tebow as far as repeating for the Heisman? Or are Bradford and McCoy out too far ahead?

Tebow did an amazing job in tonight's game, so he is still a much talked about contender. If the Gators take the National title, then I definitely think he has a HUGE chance at a repeat. After the Gators lost to Ole Miss and his speech where he promised that the Gators would be the hardest playing team, and then they possibly come back and win the National title...that just shows what an amazing player Tebow is. They keep saying that he is quite possibly the best player in college football history. I say give him another Heisman.

The voting is before the national title game, though; it's in a couple of weeks, right, a few days before Christmas?

The Heisman is generally awarded around the 15th of December. So yes. Well before the Nat'l Championship game.

I think Tebow's got a good chance but you can't count out Bradford, McCoy and Harrell just yet.

You are right. The Heisman Dinner is December and the game is not until January.

Officially, the Heisman is based on regular season performance, and not what happens in post-season play. But, his performance tonight was pretty good. I won't be surprised if Bradford or McCoy pull it in, though, since Tebow's numbers aren't as good as they were last year.

The ballots are due on Wednesday, and the presentation is Saturday night. I wonder if OJ Simpson voted this year?

I will confirm that my gang (7 girls, 2 guys) almost got into a brawl with another group tonight at the bar over this game. We are awesome!

The Heisman ceremony is the 13th I think. Tebow deserves it IMO, but he made it too hard for himself last year. There was no way he was gonna repeat his numbers from last year, and despite the fact he was probably the most important player this year he couldn't repeat this year because he couldn't duplicate his huge numbers from last year.

I really don't see how Tebow can make an argument with his numbers being what they are -- especially compared to last year and especially considering the numbers they put up in the Big XII.

I think it's between Bradford and McCoy.

The argument against Bradford and McCoy is that everyone in the Big XII put up those kind of numbers, good teams or not. That suggests something other than great offensive years (namely a terrible defensive year for the conference as a whole). If I had to pick between the two I think McCoy has a much better argument than Bradford though, he's done more with less around him and his growth into somehow being a running QB this year was impressive. I think Tebow's leadership puts him into the running though, and carrying Florida without Harvin today against a significantly better D than anything in the Big XII (I think Texas is the best in the conference at 50 vs. Bama at 3) gave him a shot at it. If I had to vote I would say Tebow, McCoy, Bradford/Harrell (they are essentially interchangable IMO), but a lot of that does have to do with the appearance that no one in the Big XII plays a lick of defense this season. Essentially everyone in the conference is the same kind of system QB that was the argument against Harrell and Brennan last year.

Typical SECist argument really. The counter, of course, and I'm sure you've heard it, is that the SEC has completely awful offenses, so, of course, the defensive stats will be better.

The only head to head we have is UT v. Arkansas. If you'll recall, Arkansas was routed 52-10 (how's that for some SEC defensive football?). That terrible Arkansas team went on to play the rest of the weak SEC in a very competitive way, losing a lot of games, but every single one of them was close.

As for McCoy doing more with less, a great quarterback makes the players around him great by putting the ball where it needs to be. Bradford has done just that and he's the spark of the best offense in NCAA history (discounting the teams of the 19th century). Bradford also will set the record this season for being the most efficient passer of all time.

At any rate, the SEC is having a really bad down year. They have awful offensive play except for Florida. That does not make the defenses better (Auburn? Arkansas? LSU? Come on, they're all pretty bad).

The SEC hasn't done that much better in bowl games than any other conference... in fact, they don't have any reason to say they're any better than anyone this year.

You can't really say Bradford is a system QB. His performance vs. those before him is not even really comparable. Also, if it's a "system" that can produce ridiculous yards and scores, as OU does, why doesn't everyone run that system? Not enough Bradfords to go around I guess. Also, if you're wanting to talk about the head to head -- Bradford v. McCoy, Bradford actually had better numbers at OU-TX, tossing 5 TD's versus 2 interceptions (one coming on a hail mary at the end of the game).

The fact is that there is very little to go on re: SEC vs. Big XII. The SEC is not better than the Big XII, especially the Big XII South. Top to bottom, at least in 2008, I think the Big XII would dominate the SEC due to the horrendous quarterback play in the SEC.