BYU finishes 14 in both the AP and the coaches poll

[Goatnapper'96]

Originally Posted by woot

I agree this is basically best-case for us. It seems like nobody noticed the score of our bowl game, since 14 is what I would have guessed had we won convincingly. Good times, I suppose. Hopefully that'll leave us in the top 20 next year, and more importantly, hopefully we can win some non-conference games next year.

The voters are more concerned with BYU's consistency than the poor bowl performance.

Consistency leads to perceptions that you are a good program. Perception is reality. For example, there is no way you will convince me that BYU '07 was even nearly as good a team as BYU '06, but the ranking is higher despite the less impressive year. Perhaps college football 2007 was that much worse than CFB '06, but I doubt it. I view this as the growing national respect for Mendenhall and his program even if the dudes Waters' balls with in his free time think BYU plays in the Wac.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

Do I have to correct every post you type?

That poll is before the bowls.

No kidding. Could it be because the oddsmakers don't have any reason to post a poll after the bowls, since there is nothing to bet on? This is their final poll. Are you expecting BYU to drop precipitously after a loss in a poll anyways?

Get a grip, Waters. Your "corrections" are very amusing, at the least.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Goatnapper'96

The voters are more concerned with BYU's consistency than the poor bowl performance.

Consistency leads to perceptions that you are a good program. Perception is reality. For example, there is no way you will convince me that BYU '07 was even nearly as good a team as BYU '06, but the ranking is higher despite the less impressive year. Perhaps college football 2007 was that much worse than CFB '06, but I doubt it. I view this as the growing national respect for Mendenhall and his program even if the dudes Waters' balls with in his free time think BYU plays in the Wac.

I agree, and Bronco is absolutely right that the easiest way to break into the BCS begins with being ranked in the top 20 when the season starts. BYU will accomplish that this year, as they lose almost nobody on offense.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

No kidding. Could it be because the oddsmakers don't have any reason to post a poll after the bowls, since there is nothing to bet on? This is their final poll. Are you expecting BYU to drop precipitously after a loss in a poll anyways?

Get a grip, Waters.

You are an idiot. I posted that I would be curious what an oddsmaker poll would show after the bowls.

BYU was a 6 point favorite against UCLA. A 6 point favorite is a fairly significant favorite. This tells me that the oddsmakers had badly misjudged the game.

I'm sure BYU would have dropped to lower than 10 in a final poll.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

You are an idiot. I posted that I would be curious what an oddsmaker poll would show after the bowls.

BYU was a 6 point favorite against UCLA. A 6 point favorite is a fairly significant favorite. This tells me that the oddsmakers had badly misjudged the game.

I'm sure BYU would have dropped to lower than 10 in a final poll.

Badly misjudged the game?

IF they had taken a knee at the end of the half, it would have been much greater than that.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by Archaea

Badly misjudged the game?

IF they had taken a knee at the end of the half, it would have been much greater than that.

BYU was manhandled, and would have lost by 3 touchdowns with an average QB.

Even Indy acknowledges this.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

BYU was manhandled, and would have lost by 3 touchdowns with an average QB.

Even Indy acknowledges this.

Bruce Davis manhandled his man, that is all. Last time I looked a football team involves eleven players per side, including the QB. But if your definition of manhandle is one player outplaying his opponent while still losing the game, then I hope to be manhandled every game.

BYU did not look inspired and the offensive line looked sluggish, but BYU had enough sparks to win and could have won convincingly but for a few mistakes. UCLA only had a chance to win barely but had no chance to win convincingly.

[Goatnapper'96]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

BYU was manhandled, and would have lost by 3 touchdowns with an average QB.

Even Indy acknowledges this.

This reminds me a bit of your jock holding comment.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

BYU was manhandled, and would have lost by 3 touchdowns with an average QB.

Even Indy acknowledges this.

Attaboy Mike. Keep beating that horse.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by Archaea

Bruce Davis manhandled his man, that is all. Last time I looked a football team involves eleven players per side, including the QB. But if your definition of manhandle is one player outplaying his opponent while still losing the game, then I hope to be manhandled every game.

BYU did not look inspired and the offensive line looked sluggish, but BYU had enough sparks to win and could have won convincingly but for a few mistakes. UCLA only had a chance to win barely but had no chance to win convincingly.

OL looked "sluggish"? They had their asses beat in backwards. (1.2 yards/rush)

The defense knew that runs were coming every time and struggled mightily to stop them.

It was a terrible, ugly game, and one that I hope pollsters didn't watch.