2011 NCAA Football Thread

[Megatron]

Hands to the face is not a judgement call when a guys hand is on the defenders face mask and pushes it up almost off his head. It was more blatant then a little step forward a split second before the ball was snapped on a field goal. Not to mention Brendan Gibbons has been great all year and would have no problem going back 5 yards and making a 42 yarder.

I've found the run you're talking about and you're adding some extra detail to it. His head went back slightly, but it wasn't about to come off. It seemed more like a play where he got as far to that border without crossing over. Not as egregious as you're making it out to be.

And if they call flinching every time an offensive lineman does it then why shouldn't kickers get the same treatment. There is no debate for false starts, especially those 2 since he's a kicker and you can't argue he was lead on by a defender (like you possibly could with an encroachment). You flinch, even if it's a split second, it should be called. For refs to miss that twice, which lead to 6 points (including the GW) is mind boggling.

And Gibbons hardly been great. Sure, he missed only 1 inside of the 40, but he was only 2/5 from 40-49 range all year and his long was only a 43 (which is 1 yard longer than what the GW would've been had the false start been called). Plus it is the Hokies and, while they only had 1 blocked kick this season, they have been known for their ST play. Finally, it's college kickers. The Fiesta Bowl and Outback Bowl showed us that they are an enigma, for sure. 5 yards is a lot, especially for a kicker in his first year of full time kicking where those potential kicks would've been near his season longs. To say he would have had 'no problem' is a little off.

 

[Big Sexy]

The receiver had his hand on the face mask of Kovacs and pushed up. Kovacs chin strap was in his mouth at the end of the play for a reason. That was a penalty, not a judgement call. If you want to take away three points from Michigan in regulation then I'll take 8 away from Va Tech because of the hands to the face and we have a 17-12 final with no need for OT. If you want to follow the motion rule 100% to a T then you have to do the same with the hands to the face. You can't have it both ways. Especially considering the hands to the face prevented Kovacs from making a stop while Gibbons little step had no effect on the play.

And Gibbons may have been 2-5 from 40+ on the season but one of those was a 47 yarder and all three were outdoors. A 42 yard field goal, straight on, indoors is a kick that I am fully confident Gibbons would have made.

The only people bitching about the officials are Va Tech fans and pissy MSU fans who still can't get over the fact Michigan was in a BCS Bowl. Get over it. The game has ended and no team was screwed over by poor officiating.

 

[ITurnGirlsGay]

The only people bitching about the officials are Va Tech fans and pissy MSU fans who still can't get over the fact Michigan was in a BCS Bowl. Get over it. The game has ended and no team was screwed over by poor officiating.

Not true! I have been bitching about the officiating because I have to deal with those officials for an entire season.

I think it's high time that the Pac-12, which they have promised to do, completely changes their officiating. Too many times I have seen those poor officials affect the outcome of a game. If nothing else, they have completely changed the tone of games by making a poor call. See Stanford vs. Oregon State when Owusu drew ANOTHER targeting call.

It needs to happen and it needs to happen now.

 

[Big Sexy]

Not true! I have been bitching about the officiating because I have to deal with those officials for an entire season.

I meant more along the lines of bitching how the officiating cost Va Tech the game. Bad coaching, mistakes, and poor execution at crucial times cost Va Tech the game. Calls were missed on both sides.

 

[Megatron]

The receiver had his hand on the face mask of Kovacs and pushed up. Kovacs chin strap was in his mouth at the end of the play for a reason. That was a penalty, not a judgement call. If you want to take away three points from Michigan in regulation then I'll take 8 away from Va Tech because of the hands to the face and we have a 17-12 final with no need for OT. If you want to follow the motion rule 100% to a T then you have to do the same with the hands to the face. You can't have it both ways. Especially considering the hands to the face prevented Kovacs from making a stop while Gibbons little step had no effect on the play.

I'm not gonna play the whole hypothetical game like you're trying to pull this into. I thought it was right on the borderline of a judgment call and Blackledge even said on the broadcast that it was a great block, so I'm not the only one. And in the heat of a play those calls can be missed, just like holding, facemask, etc. False starts are pre-snap plays. You have line judges that are there specifically to make sure nobody on the line jumps either way or move early. They flat out missed it twice. Whether or not it effected the play is irrelevant. A flag where the referee doesn't have to use his own discretion like false starts should be called.

And Gibbons may have been 2-5 from 40+ on the season but one of those was a 47 yarder and all three were outdoors. A 42 yard field goal, straight on, indoors is a kick that I am fully confident Gibbons would have made.

Yes and none of those kicks had the same type of pressure that kick would have, since it was a game winner and all for the 2nd time which was almost as long as his season long. I'm sure Georgia was fully confident when they sent out their kicker to kick a 40ish yarder in the first overtime, since he was the leading scorer in SEC history. I'm sure Stanford was fully confident when they sent out their kicker, since he was kicking 80% on the season before that game. Doesn't change the fact they missed. Just because it was straight on the first time doesn't mean it'd be straight on again, especially after having to kick the game winner twice. College kickers are some of the most inconsistent players in the country.

But yeah, since you're fully confident he would've made it I guess that's all that matters.

The only people bitching about the officials are Va Tech fans and pissy MSU fans who still can't get over the fact Michigan was in a BCS Bowl. Get over it. The game has ended and no team was screwed over by poor officiating.

Jesus christ it's like talking to a brick wall with you. I guess you're too dense to realize I said this before I said anything to you:

I didn't care who won the game either way, but those are three questionable calls that I think they either missed (false starts) or just had their eyes play tricks on themselves that had a huge impact on the game.

So no, I have no dog in this race. I was actually happy they won so the Big 10's reputation wouldn't be brought down even more. I was simply pointing out that there were 3 calls (1 questionable, 2 missed) that had a pretty important impact on the game. It's not like I said UM won only because of those plays or VT lost only because of those missed calls. Don't believe me? Here you go:

Obviously 1 play didn't effect the entire game and VT has nobody to blame but themselves, but those were some pretty clear miscues that aren't up for debate.

But I'm done with you. You're not even bothering to read what I'm saying and are making 100% false and ignorant statements. Guess I can't comment that the officiating was poor. Sorry Big Sexy, I'll never do a dick move like that again.

 

[Big Sexy]

I'm not gonna play the whole hypothetical game like you're trying to pull this into. I thought it was right on the borderline of a judgment call and Blackledge even said on the broadcast that it was a great block, so I'm not the only one. And in the heat of a play those calls can be missed, just like holding, facemask, etc. False starts are pre-snap plays. You have line judges that are there specifically to make sure nobody on the line jumps either way or move early. They flat out missed it twice. Whether or not it effected the play is irrelevant. A flag where the referee doesn't have to use his own discretion like false starts should be called.

The announcers also said nothing about Gibbons having illegal motion. Plus the line judge usually is watching the line to make sure no one jumps, not the kicker. And again it was a split second before the snap. Just like with delay of games there is that split second where sometimes it doesn't get called because you can't be focused on a snap and a player or play clock etc.. at the same time

Yes and none of those kicks had the same type of pressure that kick would have, since it was a game winner and all for the 2nd time which was almost as long as his season long. I'm sure Georgia was fully confident when they sent out their kicker to kick a 40ish yarder in the first overtime, since he was the leading scorer in SEC history. I'm sure Stanford was fully confident when they sent out their kicker, since he was kicking 80% on the season before that game. Doesn't change the fact they missed. Just because it was straight on the first time doesn't mean it'd be straight on again, especially after having to kick the game winner twice. College kickers are some of the most inconsistent players in the country.

Yet Gibbons made his kick so what's to say he doesn't make it again from 5 yards back? Here is a direct quote from you above:

I'm not gonna play the whole hypothetical game like you're trying to pull this into.

It seems to me you are a playing a hypothetical game by saying there is a chance Gibbons would have missed from 5 yards back had a penalty been called.

Jesus christ it's like talking to a brick wall with you. I guess you're too dense to realize I said this before I said anything to you:

I read everything you said and you made that statement in your first post after an entire paragraph describing every missed call you thought went Michigan's way. Obviously you cared somewhat or you wouldn't have taken the time to point out all of those specifics against Michigan and then continue to debate me on hypothetical aftermaths of the missed calls during the game.

So no, I have no dog in this race. I was actually happy they won so the Big 10's reputation wouldn't be brought down even more. I was simply pointing out that there were 3 calls (1 questionable, 2 missed) that had a pretty important impact on the game.

And I responded by pointing out a big call that was missed that would have negatively affected Va Tech. One you're downplaying because it wasn't against Michigan.

But I'm done with you. You're not even bothering to read what I'm saying and are making 100% false and ignorant statements. Guess I can't comment that the officiating was poor. Sorry Big Sexy, I'll never do a dick move like that again.

Again, I read everything you said and no one is stopping you from commenting on poor officiating, however, when all of your comments completely favor one team over the other you should expect a debate.

 

[TNA cross the line]

How about the 4th and 11 Logan Thomas run where the receiver Boykin clearly should have been called for illegal hands to the face on Kovacs? That happened with Michigan up 17-9 and likely would have made everything else you guys are talking about irrelevant. There were also a couple pass interference penalties that could have easily been called on Va Tech in the game. Moral of the story is, calls get missed all the time and in the end they cancel out. No call was so blatantly missed that the outcome of the game was affected (the ot play in the end zone was not a catch). Michigan won, get the fuck over it and move on.

OK first of all even if Boykin had not been there for the block Logan Thomas would have bulldozed Kovacs punk ass like this...







The play in the endzone was a catch! Also i love how u say to me get the fuck over it and move on after i told you last night good game and enjoy your teams win i never had any thing bad to say about you or michigan my gripe was with the officials but now after all the shit you have talked about Virginia Tech all i have to say is FUCK MICHIGAN... it was a catch VIRGINIA TECH WAS ROBBED!

 

[Big Sexy]

OK first of all even if Boykin had not been there for the block Logan Thomas would have bulldozed Kovacs punk ass like this...

Highly doubtful.

The play in the endzone was a catch! Also i love how u say to me get the fuck over it and move on after i told you last night good game and enjoy your teams win i never had any thing bad to say about you or michigan my gripe was with the officials but now after all the shit you have talked about Virginia Tech all i have to say is FUCK MICHIGAN... it was a catch VIRGINIA TECH WAS ROBBED!

Where did I specifically tell you or quote you and say get the fuck over it? I was talking about Virginia Tech fans in general because they seem to all be full of nothing but excuses. It was a hard fought game and Michigan came out on top. End of story.

 

[TNA cross the line]

Where did I specifically tell you or quote you and say get the fuck over it?

I am the only Virginia Tech fan the frequently post' in the sports stadium it sure sounded like you indirectly were talking about me.

 

[Big Sexy]

I am the only Virginia Tech fan the frequently post' in the sports stadium it sure sounded like you indirectly were talking about me.

It was a generalized statement. All I've seen from Va Tech fans on different websites and on ESPN comments is a lot of excuses and complaining. The statement I made about pissy MSU fans was also a generalized one as I have a few coworkers and multiple friends who went to MSU, and all they seem to be doing is trying to downplay the Michigan victory by talking about all these supposed blown calls, and acting like it was a completely one sided game in terms of officiating. Once again nothing more then excuses and complaining.

[YOUTUBE]-yXiWZyJL90[/YOUTUBE]

but Michigan was victorious.

 

[TNA cross the line]

Both teams did play hard and it just hurts so much because i believe VT needed this win more than michigan. Now spare me the whole crap about how UM needed this to get back to elite status. Michigan never left elite status Michigan is the most winning-est football program in collegiate history and just because they had 3 to 4 bad years doesn't mean they dropped as a lower tier team. For Virginia Tech coming into this we were 1-4 in bcs bowls and have 4 ACC titles in 8 seasons and are on the brink of elite status with only a few big non-conference wins away from that elite club with the LSU's, Oregon's, Oklahoma's ect... And for once VT actually has a legitimate shot at winning the big one we usually lose to take one step closer to the elite status and its decided on a pac 12 officials judgement on a review that was called a touchdown on the field with no conclusive evidence in the replay going either way... just let the kids play the game, its fucking heartbreaking!

 

[ITurnGirlsGay]

Both teams did play hard and it just hurts so much because i believe VT needed this win more than michigan. Now spare me the whole crap about how UM needed this to get back to elite status. Michigan never left elite status Michigan is the most winning-est football program in collegiate history and just because they had 3 to 4 bad years doesn't mean they dropped as a lower tier team. For Virginia Tech coming into this we were 1-4 in bcs bowls and have 4 ACC titles in 8 seasons and are on the brink of elite status with only a few big non-conference wins away from that elite club with the LSU's, Oregon's, Oklahoma's ect... And for once VT actually has a legitimate shot at winning the big one we usually lose to take one step closer to the elite status and its decided on a pac 12 officials judgement on a review that was called a touchdown on the field with no conclusive evidence in the replay going either way... just let the kids play the game it fucking heartbreaking!

Dude, I feel your pain, but you are so far off base right now that you could be picked off by the centerfielder.

Oregon is not elite. They have been good recently, but they're far from elite. They just won their first Rose Bowl since 1917 and their first BCS game since they played in the 2001-02 Fiesta Bowl.

Virginia Tech is nowhere near elite. Regardless of how you may feel, you're not even close to approaching elite status. LSU doesn't even belong in the same sentence as Oklahoma if you're talking about "elite."

Recent success, yes. Oklahoma is part of college football's blue bloods, though. There's very few programs that will ever belong to this club and Va. Tech is never going to be one of them. USC, Notre Dame, Alabama, Oklahoma, Ohio State, and Michigan are about the end of the line when you're talking about royalty.

There's several things wrong with your assertion. 1-5 in BCS bowls is the least of your worries. You cannot win big games, you cannot win tough OOC games, you cannot seem to get through a year without dropping 2 or more games since the 2000's. You're about the exact opposite of Oklahoma in the sense that they keep making the National Title game and losing while you guys knock yourselves out of it with an inexplicable loss every single year. Your lone BCS victory has come over, arguably, the worst AQ conference in all of college football. Personally, I think the ACC is the worst conference in college football. They have won as many bowl games, as a conference, during the entire BCS, as Auburn has won as a team.

Two wins since 1998? You're fucking kidding me. Only Notre Dame sucks more than the ACC when it comes to blowing it on the big stage. I'm not trying to shit on you or your team bro, but you need to remove your Hokie goggles and realize that Va. Tech isn't even close to breaking into CFB's elite. You just happen to consistently be the best team in a conference that is consistently awful and shouldn't have an AQ bid.

 

[Kermit]

Now spare me the whole crap about how UM needed this to get back to elite status. Michigan never left elite status

Apparently you have not watched college football for the last few years. Michigan has done jack crap and has to under-go huge coaching changes.

Michigan is the most winning-est football program in collegiate history and just because they had 3 to 4 bad years doesn't mean they dropped as a lower tier team.

They will always have their history, but that doesn't mean that they have not blown for the last few years. You can only ride off of past achievements for so long. Look at Notre Dame. They are perhaps the most prestigious of all college football schools, but have completely fell off the radar on the status of national title contender.

For Virginia Tech coming into this we were 1-4 in bcs bowls and have 4 ACC titles in 8 seasons and are on the brink of elite status with only a few big non-conference wins away from that elite club with the LSU's, Oregon's, Oklahoma's ect...

No... Sorry. Winning the Sugar Bowl wouldn't of even got you close to LSU or Oklahoma. Maybe Oregon, but definitely not in the upper-tier of college football. You are in a crappy conference that holds no real prestige, other than Florida State, but they haven't done anything in years.

On a final note, Clemson's embarrassing loss tonight just proves that you should be gracious that you even got into a BCS game. You lost twice to Clemson and beat absolutely no one of significant value, except for a below average Georgia Tech team, this season.

You can whine and moan all you want about a "missed call," but why don't you take off your VT goggles for a second and be gracious that you were even featured in a BCS bowl.

 

[TNA cross the line]

Dude, I feel your pain, but you are so far off base right now that you could be picked off by the centerfielder.

Oregon is not elite. They have been good recently, but they're far from elite. They just won their first Rose Bowl since 1917 and their first BCS game since they played in the 2001-02 Fiesta Bowl.

Virginia Tech is nowhere near elite. Regardless of how you may feel, you're not even close to approaching elite status. LSU doesn't even belong in the same sentence as Oklahoma if you're talking about "elite."

Recent success, yes. Oklahoma is part of college football's blue bloods, though. There's very few programs that will ever belong to this club and Va. Tech is never going to be one of them. USC, Notre Dame, Alabama, Oklahoma, Ohio State, and Michigan are about the end of the line when you're talking about royalty.

There's several things wrong with your assertion. 1-5 in BCS bowls is the least of your worries. You cannot win big games, you cannot win tough OOC games, you cannot seem to get through a year without dropping 2 or more games since the 2000's. You're about the exact opposite of Oklahoma in the sense that they keep making the National Title game and losing while you guys knock yourselves out of it with an inexplicable loss every single year. Your lone BCS victory has come over, arguably, the worst AQ conference in all of college football. Personally, I think the ACC is the worst conference in college football. They have won as many bowl games, as a conference, during the entire BCS, as Auburn has won as a team.

Two wins since 1998? You're fucking kidding me. Only Notre Dame sucks more than the ACC when it comes to blowing it on the big stage. I'm not trying to shit on you or your team bro, but you need to remove your Hokie goggles and realize that Va. Tech isn't even close to breaking into CFB's elite. You just happen to consistently be the best team in a conference that is consistently awful and shouldn't have an AQ bid.

To each his own sir u live smack dab in the middle of pac 12 country i live in the middle of ACC country u and everyone around u believe the Pac 12 is better than the ACC. Myself and everyone else over here agree the ACC is better than the Pac 12 behind the SEC B12 and Big 10 in that order. What u think is irrelevant to me i am biased but i firmly believe VT is on the brink of elite status and clearly you and i have a different opinion on "elite status".

 

[Kermit]

To each his own sir u live smack dab in the middle of pac 12 country i live in the middle of ACC country u and everyone around u believe the Pac 12 is better than the ACC.

No, I live in the Big 12 country and I agree that the ACC is below the Pac 12. Who exactly do you think is so great in your conference?

Myself and everyone else over here agree the ACC is better than the Pac 12

Then all of you are completely blind.

behind the SEC B12 and Big 10 in that order.

Even more blind. Pac 12 > Big 10.

What u think is irrelevant to me i am biased but i firmly believe VT is on the brink of elite status and clearly you and i have a different opinion on "elite status".

What is your opinion of "elite status?" Because obviously it is not what every one else in the United States thinks.

 

[ITurnGirlsGay]

To each his own sir u live smack dab in the middle of pac 12 country i live in the middle of ACC country u and everyone around u believe the Pac 12 is better than the ACC. Myself and everyone else over here agree the ACC is better than the Pac 12 behind the SEC B12 and Big 10 in that order. What u think is irrelevant to me i am biased but i firmly believe VT is on the brink of elite status and clearly you and i have a different opinion on "elite status".

This is not a biased thing based on my locale. It's what I am paid to do for a living; I am a sports writer. I rip on the Pac-12 plenty. The ACC, as a conference, is not a powerful conference. The Pac-12 actually performs when we get to big games. The ACC has the worst winning percentage of any conference to be featured in a BCS game. Your entire conference has won 2 games. TWO.

Also dude, you're not looking at the whole picture. If you honestly believe that you're approaching "elite" status then why are your recruiting patterns telling a different story?

Here are your nationally ranked recruiting classes since 2002.

2002: 45

2003: 27

2004: 41

2005: 14

2006: 32

2007: 29

2008: 18

2009: 23

2010: 23

2011: 33

You're averaging the 28th or 29th best recruiting classes over the last 10 years. FAR from elite, bro.

Here's your own ACC recruiting rankings since 2002: This is out of 12 teams.


2002: 9th

2003: 7th

2004: 8th

2005: 3rd

2006: 6th

2007: 7th

2008: 4th

2009: 4th

2010: 4th

2011: 5th

You're right about the middle of the pack in the ACC in recruiting. You aren't even in the top 25% of your own conference when it comes to recruiting and, as you stated, you have all those BCS appearances and ACC titles.

 

[ITurnGirlsGay]

I am really not trying to rip on you, dude. I'm not one of those posters that wants to come in here and tell you that your school sucks and that you're an idiot. Far from it.

I'm looking at trends, recruiting rankings, BCS appearances AND performances, OOC wins, and national prestige. Va. Tech just isn't up there with any of the schools that you have mentioned. They don't even have conference prestige anymore. You have to realize that plenty of the ACC recruits out of the Southeastern pipeline and those kids are actually picking schools like Vanderbilt and Kentucky because of SEC prestige over playing for a top ACC school.

Miami has been promising us that they've been back for a decade.

Florida State has been promising the same thing for over a decade.

Virginia Tech has been the premier team in the ACC for much of the last decade and you guys have fuck all to show for it. That's not a rag on your school, it's a simple fact. Virginia Tech, in my opinion, has achieved all they are going to achieve under Frank Beamer. It's time for him to move on and for Va. Tech to head in a different direction.

Stoops is approaching that same spot at Oklahoma. He seems to have maxed out what he can accomplish and has HUGE problems winning the big games. Sound familiar?

You can say all you want about moving up in the world of college football, but when a school like USC, facing a 2 year bowl ban, lands a recruiting class that is 19 spots higher than your school, there's a problem. USC STILL landed the nation's 4th highest recruiting class in 2009.

After they were on sanctions, they landed the HIGHEST ranked recruiting class. Va. Tech had the 24th highest that year. We had the nation's 4th highest last year and y'all had the 33rd highest. We would have had the number 1 ranked recruiting class, but De'Anthony Thomas backed out at the 11th hour and chose Oregon. That dropped us to 4.

Simply put, kids would rather come to a school that cannot play in a bowl game or a conference championship than go and play for a school that has appeared in 5 BCS games since 2004.

 

[Kermit]

Stoops is approaching that same spot at Oklahoma. He seems to have maxed out what he can accomplish and has HUGE problems winning the big games. Sound familiar?

Why is it Stoops fault if the players don't make the plays? I think Stoops still has a few years left in him and possibly even another national title to win. The biggest problem that Oklahoma has is the fact that the players get hot headed and think that they can pounce over anyone because of who they are. Not to mention that Oklahoma has been under an injury curse for the last three years.

This is coming from an OU fan, but I think there is a thin line between bad coaching and poor performance from players. I'd rather have a coach make it to the national title four times in a decade and win one, than someone who just makes it to one and wins one.

 

[ITurnGirlsGay]

I actually follow Oklahoma with quite a bit of interest since my best friend has covered them for quite some time. She is an alumnae of Oklahoma and has been covering their football team for almost a decade.

Stoops is approaching that level because of his choking in big games. Not to mention that he almost always has an inexplicable loss of his own. Tech this year just had no words. You know it, I know it, she knows it.

I realize that this season was marred by Broyles' injury, Whaley's injury, the death of Austin Box, and Jones' inconsistency, but Stoops has had these problems for quite some time.

I don't think Stoops is there yet, but Venables needs to be gotten rid of and then Stoops can be assessed more accurately from there. Right now I think Venables is the issue, but if he's replaced and Oklahoma's present problems persist, it might be time to replace Stoops with a fresh face.

 

[Kermit]

I don't think they will get rid of him as long as he continues to produce 9+ wins a season. Which I think will always be the case for the see-able future. I can agree with you to an extent on Venables; the word on the street is that they are bringing in Mike Stoops, former Arizona head coach, back onto the sideline as a co-offensive coordinator. Hopefully this happens, as Mike was a key part of Oklahoma's last national title win against Florida State. Maybe we can see Venables slowly slip out from his job after Mike comes on board.

Tech was an embarrassing loss, but I can't argue some of his last few calls. Yes, they shouldn't of messed around so much with the run in the beginning, but they, like every other person, didn't think Texas Tech was anything to worry about. On the opposite end, some of the calls he did against Baylor were head-scratching to say the least.

I don't buy into that whole "game-choking" idea. It's just a large amount of odds stacked on one side. If Oklahoma had went to a lower BCS bowl every year that they played for a national title, instead of playing against the #1 or #2, they would of probably won all of them. And we wouldn't be hearing any of this "choking" nonsense. Losing to top opponents like that don't really bother me or make me think of Stoops as a coach who is losing his touch. People like to mix that with the Boise State loss and turn it into something that it's not. People will never let us forget about that; never.

I know that Oklahoma has been mediocre compared to what has been expected of them, but who isn't guilty of a slump every now and then. Now, if we pick up a couple 8, or less, win seasons. Then I'll probably say that something needs to be reevaluated.

 

[ITurnGirlsGay]

I don't think they will get rid of him as long as he continues to produce 9+ wins a season. Which I think will always be the case for the see-able future. I can agree with you to an extent on Venables; the word on the street is that they are bringing in Mike Stoops, former Arizona head coach, back onto the sideline as a co-offensive coordinator. Hopefully this happens, as Mike was a key part of Oklahoma's last national title win against Florida State. Maybe we can see Venables slowly slip out from his job after Mike comes on board.

Word on the street is actually leaning toward Mike joining Urban's staff in Columbus. Nothing has been set in stone, but I've been hearing more rumblings out of the Ohio State camp than I have the Oklahoma camp. As weird as this may seem, many of my closest connections in the sports journalism world are out of the Oklahoma and Ohio State camps. I have ZERO idea how this transpired, but it is what it is, right?

The best chance for Oklahoma to have gotten out from underneath the Venables era was when Kansas fired Gill, but that was squashed when they chose to hire Weis. Which I can ONLY assume was because he somehow managed to relay that he could bring in Crist, but also landed Heaps as an insurance policy.

Tech was an embarrassing loss, but I can't argue some of his last few calls. Yes, they shouldn't of messed around so much with the run in the beginning, but they, like every other person, didn't think Texas Tech was anything to worry about. On the opposite end, some of the calls he did against Baylor were head-scratching to say the least.

I'll actually concede this point to you. I will add a caveat and say that I picked Oklahoma to finish with 1 loss on the season and that it would be to Baylor, however. I think that final timeout against Baylor before RGIII's drive left a much more sour taste in Boomer's mouth than the loss to Tech.

I don't buy into that whole "game-choking" idea. It's just a large amount of odds stacked on one side. If Oklahoma had went to a lower BCS bowl every year that they played for a national title, instead of playing against the #1 or #2, they would of probably won all of them. And we wouldn't be hearing any of this "choking" nonsense. Losing to top opponents like that don't really bother me or make me think of Stoops as a coach who is losing his touch. People like to mix that with the Boise State loss and turn it into something that it's not. People will never let us forget about that; never.

Well, we will never live down the Rose Bowl loss to VY or the inexplicable loss to UCLA, but those aren't really the games I was referencing. Tech this year is a prime example. The WVU loss was rather inexplicable. Kansas State in the '03 Big XII Title game. There have been several more over the years that I would reference before the Boise loss. That was just a great game.

My problem here, and please don't take this as an insult, is that you're using revisionist history as a tool to gauge Oklahoma's losses in some of those big games. The only game in which I felt that Oklahoma was going to be overwhelmed was actually one of the better BCS Title games; the game against Florida.

Heading into their matchup with LSU, Oklahoma was the better team on paper. Same with USC. Even myself, a die-hard USC fan, couldn't have known that those players were going to be that good prior to that game. Oklahoma was very much in that game against USC until they appeared to quit after the Bradley punt debacle. Florida was the only game in which I don't feel they should have been a favorite.

I know that Oklahoma has been mediocre compared to what has been expected of them, but who isn't guilty of a slump every now and then. Now, if we pick up a couple 8, or less, win seasons. Then I'll probably say that something needs to be reevaluated.

The problem is that you're not dominating a conference when, your biggest rival, Texas is having an EXTREMELY awful run of luck. Look at what USC did once they took back control of the Pac-10 from UCLA. They flat out owned it. You guys have compiled a Fiesta Bowl victory over Connecticut and an Insight Bowl win over Iowa this year.

I realize it's only year 3, but I think that there's going to be more growing pains if Landry continues to consistently play inconsistent. Most people are of the mindset that Jones murdered his NFL draft-stock value this season and will likely return to Oklahoma to address some of those issues.

I think next year will be the most telling year for Oklahoma. The Pokes will lose Weeden and Blackmon. Baylor is going to lose RGIII. Texas still has to pick a fucking QB between Ashe and Baby McCoy (this makes me to no end), Missouri is gone, TAMU is gone, Kansas is anybody's guess with Weis and Crist running that show. I love Steele Jantz, but I don't think he's going to turn the Cyclones into a powerhouse. TCU is honestly the only threat to Oklahoma in the Big XII next year.

They need to win it all (Big XII) or at least only lose 1 and get to the title game with some help or people in Norman are going to be greatly upset. Oklahoma doesn't have that conference title game to put them over the hump anymore. Oklahoma State happened to be the first victim of what happens in the Big XII when you don't have that title game.

If Landry does decide to go pro and they turn the keys over to Heath Bell then Oklahoma is going to have some setbacks until he acclimates himself to the full-time QB. I love Bell, but he will cost them a couple of games before he becomes the second coming of Tebow at the collegiate level.

OU, as you said, is entering a very interesting spot in the college football landscape. There's zero reason they shouldn't own that division almost every single year now. Especially with Texas toiling in obscurity.

 

[ITurnGirlsGay]

Also, I meant to say Blake Bell. Not Heath Bell. I have zero idea why I said that, but I would like to make that correction.

Either way, interesting note since we were talking about Oklahoma.

Landry Jones will return for his senior season at OU. This was announced earlier today.

 

[TNA cross the line]

What is your opinion of "elite status?" Because obviously it is not what every one else in the United States thinks.

Personally i think we are pretty damn close, examples:
Well when your are the winning-est college football program since 1995, Have 8 consecutive 10 wins seasons and counting which is tough no matter what conference you play in with 12 total 10 win season's in the past 16 years. 4 Conference titles in 8 years which once again is tough no matter what conference you play in with a total of 6 conference titles in 12 years. VT is tied for fourth in BCS bowl appearances with FSU and Florida with 6 total trailing only USC 7, Oklahoma 8, and Ohio State 9. Has ARGUABLY! one of if not the best home field advantages in all of football. And Have the winning-est active coach in all of College Football.

Sound close to elite to me even if i were a UVA fan. BUT not yet Elite!

You're averaging the 28th or 29th best recruiting classes over the last 10 years. FAR from elite, bro.

That is because Virginia Tech focuses on recruiting talent from the state of Virginia over here we produce allot of 3 and 4 star players and we try to scoop up as much as we can. We also produce allot of diamonds in the rough and coach them into superstars. Besides sometime recruiting classes mean dick and don't produce on the field just look at FSU Miami and Clemson they have had great classes since 2005 and have done shit with them besides lose to Virginia Tech's underrated recruiting classes... Omit 2011 Clemson. And now we have one of the best recruiters is the nation who spent the last few seasons recruiting for USC gamecocks classes. Virginia Tech's Running backs coach Shane Beamer who is regarded as one of the best recruiters in the Nation.

Virginia Tech, in my opinion, has achieved all they are going to achieve under Frank Beamer. It's time for him to move on and for Va. Tech to head in a different direction.

Once again sir your Opinion, As a matter of fact i believe the exact opposite Frank Beamer has achieved a god like status in Blacksburg and is legendary here in the state of Virginia and when im in my 50's ill be talking about how i was able to watch coach Beamer coach on the sidelines live in person like old Bama fans talk about Bear Bryant. Beamer is not going anywhere anytime soon and that's how it should be, and he still has much to accomplish like getting his National Championship that he deserves.

I will be the first one to admit i am biased about my team. But i am Biased within reason.

 

[ITurnGirlsGay]

Personally i think we are pretty damn close, examples:
Well when your are the winning-est college football program since 1995, Have 8 consecutive 10 wins seasons and counting which is tough no matter what conference you play in with 12 total 10 win season's in the past 16 years. 4 Conference titles in 8 years which once again is tough no matter what conference you play in with a total of 6 conference titles in 12 years. VT is tied for fourth in BCS bowl appearances with FSU and Florida with 6 total trailing only USC 7, Oklahoma 8, and Ohio State 9. Has ARGUABLY! one of if not the best home field advantages in all of football. And Have the winning-est active coach in all of College Football.

So, you think that being the winning-est program since 1995 brings you CLOSER to being elite? If anything you just proved my point. You've had 16 at this and have only even come close to sniffing a title one time. Only to get hammered by a much better team. Pretty much the same thing that happens every time that Va. Tech plays in a bowl. Dude, you're talking to a Trojans fan. Talk to me when you've appeared in 7 Rose Bowls in a decade, winning all but one of them.

Also, dude Boise State is the winning-est program. You're using a painful alteration of stats to sell your program's success. For example, you moved it back to 1995 to make it so.

Congrats on having a tough stadium. Many places lay claim to that. It's all subjective. I've seen Lane Stadium not ranked in the Top 10, I've seen it #1, I've seen it #5. Personally, I think the Horseshoe is tougher, Kyle Field, Jordan O'Hare, Bryant-Denny, Death Valley, and Autzen are all tougher than Lane Field.

Also man, you just talked about how tough it was to appear in all of those bowls while naming teams from the Pac-12, Big XII, B1G, and SEC. All of whom have more than you. The only major AQ conference left is the Big East. Even Florida State has as many BCS appearances as you and, like you, they have completely choked every time they have been there except once.

Let's take a look at those records, shall we?

Ohio State 5-3

Oklahoma 3-5

USC 6-1 (I say fuck them, if they count the Texas loss, I count the OU win: Bush made them ineligible for both, can't have it both ways)

Florida State 1-5

Virginia Tech 1-5

Two of these things are not like the other. You're failing to grasp the concept that you actually have to be winning games against tough competition (BCS) before anyone is going to believe that you're close to being elite. You've had 6 chances to prove this and you've won 1. How is it that you expect anyone to believe that you could beat an SEC team (we will use them since they dominate the title game) when you can't even beat a fucking Kansas team that had ONE good season in like 25 years. Stop dude, just stop.

Sound close to elite to me even if i were a UVA fan. BUT not yet Elite!

Again, winning games that matter make you close, Va. Tech has never done this.

That is because Virginia Tech focuses on recruiting talent from the state of Virginia over here we produce allot of 3 and 4 star players and we try to scoop up as much as we can. We also produce allot of diamonds in the rough and coach them into superstars. Besides sometime recruiting classes mean dick and don't produce on the field just look at FSU Miami and Clemson they have had great classes since 2005 and have done shit with them besides lose to Virginia Tech's underrated recruiting classes... Omit 2011 Clemson. And now we have one of the best recruiters is the nation who spent the last few seasons recruiting for USC gamecocks classes. Virginia Tech's Running backs coach Shane Beamer who is regarded as one of the best recruiters in the Nation.

And that is precisely why you're not elite. You choose to focus on a region that consistently pumps out 3 and 4 star players. Meanwhile, Florida, LSU, Texas, Oklahoma, USC, Oregon, Boise, TCU, and Alabama rape the pipelines (CA, TX, and FL) and they're constantly in the picture. Everyone knows that Va. Tech will end up in a BCS Bowl, but they also know that they're going to lose.

You're also proving my point again. Clemson, FSU, and Miami all play in WHAT conference? The ACC. The ACC's winning percentage in BCS games? .133 The ACC is so awful that they JUST got their first EVER at-large bid. YOU GUYS. The BCS HAS to take the ACC. There's a reason they've never taken an At-Large from the ACC before this year and they likely won't be doing it again for a long time unless they HAVE to.

Once again sir your Opinion, As a matter of fact i believe the exact opposite Frank Beamer has achieved a god like status in Blacksburg and is legendary here in the state of Virginia and when im in my 50's ill be talking about how i was able to watch coach Beamer coach on the sidelines live in person like old Bama fans talk about Bear Bryant. Beamer is not going anywhere anytime soon and that's how it should be, and he still has much to accomplish like getting his National Championship that he deserves.

I will be the first one to admit i am biased about my team. But i am Biased within reason.

He may have achieved god-like status in Blacksburg, but he's nowhere near the same kind of name that Nick Saban, Les Miles, Urban Meyer, Chris Petersen, Mack Brown, etc...

Frank Beamer is about there with Steve Spurrier. He used to be a name you didn't want to see across the sidelines, now he's just a big name that you don't really fear playing anymore. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but it certainly doesn't bring Virginia Tech any closer to "elite" status. Just like South Carolina is a decent team, so is Va. Tech. They're a decent team, not a great team, not an elite team, but they should be cool with that. 10 win seasons are a great thing. Just don't go making them out to be more than they are.

 

[TNA cross the line]

Whatever ITurnGirlsGay there is obviously no reasoning with you although everything you have said I completely disagree it is only your opinion so to each his own sir. But saying that Chris Peterson is a bigger coaching name than Frank Beamer is the last straw. What have you been smoking bro!? I'm completely disregarding everything you have said about Virginia Tech. Chris Peterson is nowhere near Frank Beamer's status as a head coaching name. To me you just sound like a biased west coast USC fan. And i mean that in the most respectful way. So im done debating with you on this topic because its like beating ones head against a brick wall over and over again.


Atleast my NFL team is ELITE! GO PATS!