Official Venting Thread AKA ACCCG/Sugar/Lockhart Venting Thread

[HokieGhost]

I might be a little slow on this one but what is the M in MNC. I thought it was the National Championship. I am missing the M

Mythical; Magical; and sometimes, Mysterious.

 

[bigesse16]

I might be a little slow on this one but what is the M in MNC. I thought it was the National Championship. I am missing the M

As others have said, it stands for mythical because it's not a true championship in the eyes of some fans/media since the polls select a winner rather than a playoff.

 

[NickVT10]

makes sense

 

[HoHumHokie]

I finally got around to watching some of the Sugar Bowl last night on my DVR. Did anyone else notice that on the 1st qrtr play where DW lost like 26 yards that both his knee and elbow were down at about the 12 yard line before he jumped up and kept running backwards? Should have been 2nd and goal at the 12, instead of the 30. Damn Pac-12 officials!

Then on the 3rd and goal play, the refs spotted the ball a whole yard shorter of where any part of LT's body went down. The QB sneak on 4th down would have been good had they spotted the ball correctly on 3rd down.

Does VT not have someone in the booth who can quickly review these types of plays and call down to Frank to challenge?

 

[757Hokie83]

I finally got around to watching some of the Sugar Bowl last night on my DVR. Did anyone else notice that on the 1st qrtr play where DW lost like 26 yards that both his knee and elbow were down at about the 12 yard line before he jumped up and kept running backwards? Should have been 2nd and goal at the 12, instead of the 30. Damn Pac-12 officials!

Then on the 3rd and goal play, the refs spotted the ball a whole yard shorter of where any part of LT's body went down. The QB sneak on 4th down would have been good had they spotted the ball correctly on 3rd down.

Does VT not have someone in the booth who can quickly review these types of plays and call down to Frank to challenge?

just watched the run multiple times (it was painful)....neither knee was down...not sure about elbow...but it may have been

 

[Chrish1023]

just watched the run multiple times (it was painful)....neither knee was down...not sure about elbow...but it may have been

I don't think he was down, but his forward progress was stopped at the 25. Is this pickup football where you get marked down where you land?

 

[HoHumHokie]

just watched the run multiple times (it was painful)....neither knee was down...not sure about elbow...but it may have been

Well, my freeze frame was a little fuzzy, so maybe his knee wasn't down, but his elbow definitely was. Regardless, it was a poor decision on DW's part.

 

[Fetti]

Sparks, I am baffled that you believe the team with the best record doesn't get into the MNC. When has that EVER happened?

SOS is being widley over-valued in this thread. The only time SOS has an impact on what team gets to the national championship game is when there is more than two undefeated teams. If there are two undefeated teams those two teams will make the national championship every single time no matter if its Duke or Oregon. If we had gone undefeated in the seasons I pointed out, when there was only 1 other undefeated team, we would've gone to the NCG. There is zero argument against that, as the BCS has never left out an undefeated team out of the big game unless there was more than 2. The computers have not changed.

If Wake Forest had gone undefeated this year they would have been the #1 team in the country and LSU would have been #2. Plain and simple. That's how it works with the system in place.

 

[Sleepy T]

OK..You got me there. Since SOS is no longer included in the BCS formula I guess that could never happen, not that it has any affect on the perception of a team.

2001 Colorado (3) finishes ahead of Oregon (4) despite Oregon being higher in the polls..SOS

2002 Same thing USC (4) Iowa (5)..SOS

To say that it could never happen is simply not true. We are talking about the BCS here. Dont be naive.

 

[NickVT10]

Sparks, I am baffled that you believe the team with the best record doesn't get into the MNC. When has that EVER happened?

SOS is being widley over-valued in this thread. The only time SOS has an impact on what team gets to the national championship game is when there is more than two undefeated teams. If there are two undefeated teams those two teams will make the national championship every single time no matter if its Duke or Oregon. If we had gone undefeated in the seasons I pointed out, when there was only 1 other undefeated team, we would've gone to the NCG. There is zero argument against that, as the BCS has never left out an undefeated team out of the big game unless there was more than 2. The computers have not changed.

If Wake Forest had gone undefeated this year they would have been the #1 team in the country and LSU would have been #2. Plain and simple. That's how it works with the system in place.

Utah in 2008, BSU 2006, 2004 there were 4 Undefeated (just a fun fact)
I know they aren't BCS conference teams but SOS had everything to do with them not making it. SOS is not in the computers but the voters look at it a lot and they are 2/3s of the equation.

 

[Fetti]

Nick... We are in agreement. I'm assuming you read the part you bolded (especially the last part of the sentence: "unless there are more than 2.")

Sparks, I am baffled that you believe the team with the best record doesn't get into the MNC. When has that EVER happened?

SOS is being widley over-valued in this thread. The only time SOS has an impact on what team gets to the national championship game is when there is more than two undefeated teams. If there are two undefeated teams those two teams will make the national championship every single time no matter if its Duke or Oregon. If we had gone undefeated in the seasons I pointed out, when there was only 1 other undefeated team, we would've gone to the NCG. There is zero argument against that, as the BCS has never left out an undefeated team out of the big game unless there was more than 2. The computers have not changed.

If Wake Forest had gone undefeated this year they would have been the #1 team in the country and LSU would have been #2. Plain and simple. That's how it works with the system in place.

SOS only matters if there are multiple teams tied with the best record. Therefore, if we had not played LSU and won the first game of the year, with our only loss being to Boston College, we would've played in the National Championship. That is the only point that I have been trying to make and repeated it in about 4 posts now.

WINS > SOS.

Like I said, if Wake Forest had gone undefeated this year, they would've been the #1 team in the nation and played LSU. Sparks was arguing that a loss to LSU/Bama is better then beating "W. Michigan" (his example, not mine). That is not true. The point I was disagreeing with was that. Those games are not "win-win" where a loss to LSU gives a better chance than a win. That's the flaw I was addressing.

Now I'm not arguing for a cupcake schedule. They are not "win-win" either. Both scheduling cupcakes and scheduling Labor Day games have pros and cons. The pros are the national attention for Labor Day games, the cons are we never win them. Therefore, they start us out every year at 0-1. Where as, had we beaten say Nebraska, and then lost to Boston College, we still would've played in the National Championship, which according to Frank, is the ultimate goal. I am still for scheduling a tough OOC opponent, I just like them to be the 2nd or 3rd week, for the reasons I outlined in more detail a few posts back.

I'm arguing against Labor Day games unless they are someone already on our schedule (Just as Frank and Weaver requested for next year.)

 

[NickVT10]

In all of those seasons I listed there were only 2 undefeated teams except 2004. undefeated teams were left out every season due to SOS. I disagree that if USF goes undefeated that that play over Bama this year... I understand your argument for 2007.

 

[sparko]

was and in 2 different things

that was the case at one point .. but no longer is .. an ACC team with a weak OOC schedule would not have went over Alabama this past season .. that's a fact. Polls account for 2/3 of the equation and an undefeated VT team wouldn't have went -- unless they had absolutely blasted everyone ..

Regardless of what is or isn't -- I don't want to back into a trophy by scheduling a weak OOC schedule -- I'm not saying that scheduling Bama on the first game of the season is a good idea -- but this upcoming season's OOC is about right, if ya ask me

 

[Sleepy T]

Fair enough Fetti. I see your point on the LSU game that year and admit I may be wrong on that. I still do not think it is a foregone conclusion that an 11-1 record with a win against a scrub ( instead of a loss to LSU) gets us in. Probably but not definitely. I guess my whole point is that we have more to gain than lose in an OOC game like that. There has been very few years where there has been only 2 undefeated teams and no controversy. My point is that with a weak OOC schedule, if VT ever finishes undefeated with 2 other BCS teams, we will be left out every time. Put in a tough OOC team and we have an argument. For instance...If we finish undefeated this coming year and so does, USC, and LSU...we are left out and noone will even question it. If we played and beat Alabama or OSU...maybe we get the nod.

As far as your theory on not playing games like this first game of the year. We should have as much of an advantage as the opponent. Bottom line is they have been more prepared. Would you rather have Alabama frat game when they are rusty, breaking in new people, and you might be able to get the drop on them... Or after they have beat the hell out of the citadel. Jacksonville St., and ga southern And are hitting their stride??? I will take my chances in game 1 most years...

 

[VTscores]

WINS > SOS....

...I am still for scheduling a tough OOC opponent, I just like them to be the 2nd or 3rd week, for the reasons I outlined in more detail a few posts back.

I'm arguing against Labor Day games unless they are someone already on our schedule (Just as Frank and Weaver requested for next year.)

There is some truth to that, and I agree with you that VT would do better to play tough opponents around week 3 instead of week 1.

The fact is, however, that VT needs to play some non-cupcake teams, just so they'll be prepared when they get to the NC. Unfortunately, the ACC seems to be producing Jeckyll and Hyde teams these days. We got the good Clemson twice, and WVU lucked out and got the bad one that NC State faced. Go figure.

It does no good to get to the NC if you're not prepared to be there. If VT does get there, I want it to be because they deserve to be there and are actually going to make a go of it.

 

[Forty_Sixand2]

I am still pissed about the overturned call on Coale....

 

[Fetti]

that was the case at one point .. but no longer is .. an ACC team with a weak OOC schedule would not have went over Alabama this past season .. that's a fact. Polls account for 2/3 of the equation and an undefeated VT team wouldn't have went -- unless they had absolutely blasted everyone ..

Regardless of what is or isn't -- I don't want to back into a trophy by scheduling a weak OOC schedule -- I'm not saying that scheduling Bama on the first game of the season is a good idea -- but this upcoming season's OOC is about right, if ya ask me

And again, Alabama on Labor Day or a cupcake schedule are not the only two options.

 

[NickVT10]

I am still pissed about the overturned call on Coale....

We all are... we all are

 

[Lumbee09]

I'm personally very excited to take another trip to the Georgia Dome to watch VT play Alabama....

Just sayin'

 

[VTscores]

I'm personally very excited to take another trip to the Georgia Dome to watch VT play Alabama....

Just sayin'

I might have to make that trip myself.