I concur, but I'm still holding out for a SEC victory. The media just says that Ohio State just sounds like they want it more.
Kansas? How do you get past that Georgia is playing like rock stars right now? I think Mangino is creating alternate weather systems around him like Kilimanjaro or Denali thus aiding his team in victories. That or, by shifting his center of gravity can make north/south runs east/west.
Kansas (U.): Gutless (they were well aware that neither Texas nor Oklahoma were on schedule when the embarrassing "cupcakes" were scheduled*; of course, at that time, K.U. was a "cupcake"!
* When OSU scheduled Washington, the Huskies were a perennial contender for Pac 10 and national championships.
You know I'm busy on Monday nights, and this was the only thing I saw with a score to the game on Tuesday (because I wasn't looking for it). So last night at dinner with friends when they started talking about LSU winning, I was extremely confused.
I didn't realize you had posted a prediction and not a score when I saw it on Tuesday.
Fortunately, it was friends I was with when I made a fool of myself and said, "I thought Ohio won 17 to 13."
As a Buckeye, I abhor OSU's current scheduling [one "real" game, two vs. Ohio MAC teams (although each season, one or two is "dangerous"), and one non-BCS conference team]. Ohio State's 2002 BCS Championship team, like LSU '07 and Florida '06, inter alia, was honed via COMPETITION. Now that K.U. is "for real", hopefully, they'll play "legitimate" opponents ... for their own good!
For the record, I am no KU fan. But I do think it is funny that Ohio State gets to play for the championship when their schedule was about as competitive as KU's and KU's one loss came to a stronger team (Missouri) than Ohio State's (Illinois). If you factor in KU's Virginia Tech win, then their schedule looks a little tougher and, being a one loss team, KU should have warranted some consideration. I also think KU would have been a tough team for LSU to beat. LSU as national champion is anathema to me. They lost to Arkansa AND Kentucky. And they looked bad in several other games. The fact of the matter is that the fans of college football got robbed again this season when it comes to a just and worthy playoff system. But without a good system I would have liked to see West Virginia play USC in the championship game. Both of those teams looked significantly stronger than LSU or Ohio State.
K.U.s non-conference opponents two MAC teams [Central Michigan and Toledo (my hometown team) -- as did OSUs -- and Southeastern Louisiana and Florida International. If you "match" the latter with Youngstown State, that leaves Southeastern Louisiana as the "match" for Washington. Sorry; no sale.
"On paper", the "knocks" against LSU have some merit; in reality ... did you watch the game?! That team -- healthy and "battle tested" as it was -- was no worse than the second-best in BCS history (Miami '02 was even better than its '01 championship team; OSUs victory is directly attributable to its having been "battle-tested"). Glenn Dorsey, the probable first NFL draftee this April, wasn't even the best DL Monday night.
I officiate high school football and am privileged to be on the field with some excellent teams. Yet, the dominant teams in Ohio utterly embarrass such good teams. Why? Depth.
LSU on Monday night had more depth than any team in recent memory. K.U.s emergence is good for college football(IF they cease the absurd scheduling); that said, the Jayhawks would have been physically destroyed by the Tigers -- even if LSU had played none of its starters.
I watched some of the game (before I got bored and turned it off) and saw a talented yet underachieving team that happened to be playing against a decidedly mediocre opponent. Missouri would have looked like '02 Miami against the Buckeyes (and they would have been more fun to watch than LSU).
I don't know what LSU team you've been following but the five or six games I have seen them in this year haven't convinced me to drink the Kool-aid.
I think Missouri could have beat LSU, KU could have cased more trouble for them than Ohio State did, WV could have beat them, USC would have beat them, and from what I hear about Georgia they could have beat them too (The two Georgia games I saw this year weren't very impressive).
LSU deserved its spot in the game as much as anyone, but I don't think a national championship was competitively decided in that game and particularly with that match-up.
George,
I find it humorous when statements are made about who would beat who, especially in a season that proves that such statements are foolish.
The teams that were successful this year were the one's with depth.
Georgia had none.
USC had none.
Oregon had none.
KU, WV, Missouri did want anything to do with LSU. They love just being in the woulda-coulda conversations.
Did you see LSU destroy the ACC champions?
Did you see LSU defeat the SEC East champions?
Did you see LSU beat ND so bad that they could not ever recover this year?
Did you see LSU embarrass Miami so bad that the whole coaching staff was fired?
But if it makes you feel better to speak of dreamland as reality then go ahead. I know he feeling: I am a New Orleans Saints fan. ;)
LSU negative 24
Ohio State negative 31
National Champion - Kansas
Posted by: george | January 07, 2008 at 03:05 PM
I concur, but I'm still holding out for an SEC victory. Ohio State just sounds like they want it more.
Posted by: Caleb Click | January 07, 2008 at 03:09 PM
I concur, but I'm still holding out for a SEC victory. The media just says that Ohio State just sounds like they want it more.
Kansas? How do you get past that Georgia is playing like rock stars right now? I think Mangino is creating alternate weather systems around him like Kilimanjaro or Denali thus aiding his team in victories. That or, by shifting his center of gravity can make north/south runs east/west.
Posted by: churnock | January 07, 2008 at 05:12 PM
OSU 27 LSU 18
Kansas (U.): Gutless (they were well aware that neither Texas nor Oklahoma were on schedule when the embarrassing "cupcakes" were scheduled*; of course, at that time, K.U. was a "cupcake"!
* When OSU scheduled Washington, the Huskies were a perennial contender for Pac 10 and national championships.
Posted by: Jim McDermott | January 07, 2008 at 05:35 PM
Nice one, dude.
Posted by: Jason G | January 08, 2008 at 10:01 AM
Matt,
Glad you made no claims as a prophet or it could get ugly!
Posted by: Gregg | January 08, 2008 at 02:30 PM
Thanks, guys. At least I had the stones to put it out there...
Posted by: Matt Adair | January 08, 2008 at 03:20 PM
Do I win anything for picking the correct winner? Or did I forfeit my prize by promoting Kansas as the Champ?
Posted by: george | January 09, 2008 at 07:17 PM
You know I'm busy on Monday nights, and this was the only thing I saw with a score to the game on Tuesday (because I wasn't looking for it). So last night at dinner with friends when they started talking about LSU winning, I was extremely confused.
I didn't realize you had posted a prediction and not a score when I saw it on Tuesday.
Fortunately, it was friends I was with when I made a fool of myself and said, "I thought Ohio won 17 to 13."
Posted by: rob | January 10, 2008 at 02:43 PM
George - picking anyone from the Big 12 to pick anything throws out your vote.
Rob - I'm glad I could help...
Posted by: Matt Adair | January 10, 2008 at 08:02 PM
USA TODAY, 1/10/08
ODDS/'08 season BCS Championship
USC 4:1
Florida 6:1
Oklahoma 8:1
Ohio State 10:1
Georgia 12:1
Texas 12:1
Va. Tech. 15:1
WVU 18:1
LSU 20:1
Illinois 25:1
George ~
As a Buckeye, I abhor OSU's current scheduling [one "real" game, two vs. Ohio MAC teams (although each season, one or two is "dangerous"), and one non-BCS conference team]. Ohio State's 2002 BCS Championship team, like LSU '07 and Florida '06, inter alia, was honed via COMPETITION. Now that K.U. is "for real", hopefully, they'll play "legitimate" opponents ... for their own good!
Posted by: Jim McDermott | January 10, 2008 at 09:38 PM
For the record, I am no KU fan. But I do think it is funny that Ohio State gets to play for the championship when their schedule was about as competitive as KU's and KU's one loss came to a stronger team (Missouri) than Ohio State's (Illinois). If you factor in KU's Virginia Tech win, then their schedule looks a little tougher and, being a one loss team, KU should have warranted some consideration. I also think KU would have been a tough team for LSU to beat. LSU as national champion is anathema to me. They lost to Arkansa AND Kentucky. And they looked bad in several other games. The fact of the matter is that the fans of college football got robbed again this season when it comes to a just and worthy playoff system. But without a good system I would have liked to see West Virginia play USC in the championship game. Both of those teams looked significantly stronger than LSU or Ohio State.
Posted by: george | January 11, 2008 at 10:56 AM
For sake of the record:
K.U.s non-conference opponents two MAC teams [Central Michigan and Toledo (my hometown team) -- as did OSUs -- and Southeastern Louisiana and Florida International. If you "match" the latter with Youngstown State, that leaves Southeastern Louisiana as the "match" for Washington. Sorry; no sale.
"On paper", the "knocks" against LSU have some merit; in reality ... did you watch the game?! That team -- healthy and "battle tested" as it was -- was no worse than the second-best in BCS history (Miami '02 was even better than its '01 championship team; OSUs victory is directly attributable to its having been "battle-tested"). Glenn Dorsey, the probable first NFL draftee this April, wasn't even the best DL Monday night.
I officiate high school football and am privileged to be on the field with some excellent teams. Yet, the dominant teams in Ohio utterly embarrass such good teams. Why? Depth.
LSU on Monday night had more depth than any team in recent memory. K.U.s emergence is good for college football(IF they cease the absurd scheduling); that said, the Jayhawks would have been physically destroyed by the Tigers -- even if LSU had played none of its starters.
Posted by: Jim McDermott | January 11, 2008 at 01:14 PM
I watched some of the game (before I got bored and turned it off) and saw a talented yet underachieving team that happened to be playing against a decidedly mediocre opponent. Missouri would have looked like '02 Miami against the Buckeyes (and they would have been more fun to watch than LSU).
I don't know what LSU team you've been following but the five or six games I have seen them in this year haven't convinced me to drink the Kool-aid.
I think Missouri could have beat LSU, KU could have cased more trouble for them than Ohio State did, WV could have beat them, USC would have beat them, and from what I hear about Georgia they could have beat them too (The two Georgia games I saw this year weren't very impressive).
LSU deserved its spot in the game as much as anyone, but I don't think a national championship was competitively decided in that game and particularly with that match-up.
Posted by: george | January 11, 2008 at 04:18 PM
George,
I find it humorous when statements are made about who would beat who, especially in a season that proves that such statements are foolish.
The teams that were successful this year were the one's with depth.
Georgia had none.
USC had none.
Oregon had none.
KU, WV, Missouri did want anything to do with LSU. They love just being in the woulda-coulda conversations.
Did you see LSU destroy the ACC champions?
Did you see LSU defeat the SEC East champions?
Did you see LSU beat ND so bad that they could not ever recover this year?
Did you see LSU embarrass Miami so bad that the whole coaching staff was fired?
But if it makes you feel better to speak of dreamland as reality then go ahead. I know he feeling: I am a New Orleans Saints fan. ;)
Posted by: Jason Robertson | January 12, 2008 at 12:46 PM
Is that supposed to be a response to me?
Posted by: george | January 13, 2008 at 03:53 PM