Running bowl thread

Impressed with Iowa - especially the way they defended GTech's offense. They seemed like they had a better idea where the ball was going than the Jackets backs did - kinda like the job Ohio State did against Oregon.
But that analysis by Charles Davis, praising the Tech running back for avoiding the safety, when he got the ball from the qb at the 11 has to be one of the dumbest bits of color commentary I've ever heard.
And I don't know what the ticket sales were, but I saw a lot of empty seats at the stadium - don't know if that means the Big 10 and the ACC should never get an extra BCS game because they don't travel. I do know that if the Fiesta Bowl looked like that - it would be used to justify that point of view.

 

The Orange Bowl seems to be the single game that has been fucked by the advent of the BCS. Their auto-bid is from the conference that is the weakest and travels the worst (not counting the Big East, because it is not tied to a specific bowl). I wonder if getting the extra game every four years makes up for it to the bowl committee.

 

Considering the Big 12 has more Big 8 members than SWC, I wouldn't mind seeing the Big 12 thrown to the Orange, it would be nice to see Nebraska or Oklahoma in that game every now and then, or make the Orange the Bowl for the higher ranked of the ACC or Big East and send the other conference to the Sugar.
The Orange will always be screwed as long as a) the Rose Bowl is still the grand daddy and plays only on Jan. 1 b) the Big 12 and SEC are involved in the BCS game giving the Sugar and Fiesta first choice of replacement teams and c) the ACC sucks. What's really a shame is even if Miami, Va Tech, or Florida State have strong seasons they'll either miss the Orange and play in the BCS, or not attract a top flight at large opponent.

 

Dan and Blitz, Iowa, all year long, has shown that being flashy, having "elite" stars, and keeping their mouth shut and playing, was beneficial and winning games ugly or pretty was more important than style points.

Apparently, some guys, like Buck, couldn't help but to keep ripping a guy like Kirk Ferentz and how much respect he gets to molding players to be solid players in college and to continue that in the pros.

I'm not just happy for Iowa, but for the Big 10 for shoving it up the asses of some of these pundits who continue to hate the Big 10, just because they are the Big 10. The Pac-10 teams proved that if they don't make it to the Rose Bowl, it's not worth it to care about playing in a lesser bowl.

Iowa is who they have been all year long. We told you that, but some didn't give a shit.

Give a shit now. Give DC Norm Parker a month to figure out how to shut down that triple option, eh, "flexbone" as Paul Johnson calls it, and you saw how frustrated Tech was all night long. Clayborn and Angerer are fucking beasts, and Clayborn's coming back next year.

And yes, I've had my beer and I drank it for those who couldn't have it in heaven. Coco, Armchair, Big Red, and I, are going to get our beers on all week long.

 

Iowa looked like the team they were before Stanzi got hurt against Northwestern. Before that injury they were on their way to undefeated season. They are right there as one of top 5 teams.

Defense was specially impressive in stopping the GT "O". They defended it better than anyone all season long.

 

Yeah, the Sugar will totally go for that. Nothing people want more than an annual SEC-Big East beatdown.

 

Yeah, I played about three picks games on Yahoo, etc., and I invariably took Iowa.
I was impressed throughout the year, with the level of talent and I know Ferentz is a classy, players' coach with a solid staff.
I'm guessing the program's never had a national title and certainly not in the modern era.
Maybe they did it or came close when Kinnick played?
Next year might be the year to appear in the title game. They have lots of studs who seem to buy in, which creates loads of depth in your program.

 

The Paul Johnson SportsJournalists.com Fan Club has been oddly silent the last few hours.

Nice job by the Big Ten this year. As a fan - and a student - I'm relieved. Ohio State got throttled in national title games twice this decade, but also won three BCS games. USC was a monster all decade which made the Rose Bowl painful. But at least the league closes the decade well and is still relevant. Time to win another national title, though, or at least play for one. I suspect the Buckeyes will have a strong shot at it next year.

Also, to reach back to the previous night, anybody who thinks that Boise State deserves a share of the national title is certifiable. I understand that it's symbolic, but please. They played one BCS school, in the first week of the season, at home. Last year, I thought Utah, with wins over Michigan, Oregon State and Alabama, deserved a share of the national championship. Boise, not so much. Play somebody.

 

Tech won the Citrus Bowl that year. They were the only undefeated team left (though they had a tie). In fact, after Miami crushed Texas in the Cotton Bowl, Georgia Tech (11-0-1), Colorado (11-1-1), Houston (10-1 and on probation) and Louisville (10-1-1) were the only teams left with fewer than two losses.

Colorado had a much better resume than Georgia Tech that year, though I think a lot of coaches poll voters counted the "fifth down" win over Missouri against the Buffs (as they probably should have). Colorado also only held on to beat Notre Dame in the Orange Bowl thanks to a cheap block-in-the-back call on a Rocket Ismail punt return for a touchdown.

 

Stop it. You are making them sound like Duke. Everyone will start hating the Hawkeyes.

 

Annual SEC-Big East beatdown? As best I can remember, over the last 10 years I think the Big East is 1-1 against the big, bad SEC in the Sugar.

 

This is a couple days old, so it may already be on this thread. Even then, it's worth another link...

http://www.statesman.com/news/texas/as-far-as-rednecks-go-alabama-may-have-159671.html