Bloodless Coup

yep, gonna lose it.

Steve Slaton held to 11 yards. Wow.

So I find it interesting that no one, as far as I can see, is making a case for putting Hawaii in the National Championship. Why not? They are the only undefeated team. And sure you can say they played cream puffs - but so did Kansas and Ohio State (for the most part) and those 2 teams each lost a game - and everyone else lost 2! And finally I have 2 words - Boise State. Has everyone forgotten how exciting that game was last year? So I say put 'em in the championship. After all, this is the craziest season in memory - so why not?

Actually, I have seen it discussed. If only I could remember where... but you are right that the conclusion ended up talking about the cream puffiness. It seems like it is not for a lack of trying, however. The piece I read talked about how it tried to lure UCLA and some other worthy teams out - an Hawaii pays people to come - but the goodish teams won't go because the money doesn't make up for the chance of getting beat by a pretty good team.

We're #11 (in the AP poll)! Yes, behind Hawaii, who the reporters only ranked #10. So it'll be an Ohio State/LSU championship. Pardon me while I yawn.

11!

#2 teams are 2-7 this year. Make that 2-8 after Saturday.

And I'll agree with Armand...Hawaii should have a shot at the title. It's only right.

Not that I disagree that Hawaii's getting shafted, because they might be, but didn't they have some squeakers against some seriously crappy teams?

Indeed (he answers his own question): one touchdown margins or less against Nevada, Fresno State, San Jose State, and Louisiana Tech.

But naysayers will be eating crow if they trounce Georgia. They did beat Boise State, their only ranked opponent by 12, but BS was ranked 19. Or is. I'm not sure how that works. But most of my teams of interest saw tougher opponents than that, on balance.

Yeah, but Hawaii still won, close or not. And generally that's what matters in football.

well, with due respect, evidently that's question-begging and just plain wrong, at least in college football, given the way things have played out the last few years.

Oh, I should have been more specific. Traditionally it's not what matters (Al Davis and all that). But yeah in the age of the BCS and maybe going back to the age of Tom Osborne running up scores to show just how great Nebraska was, yeah, margin of victory has come to matter to some (and to the rankings).

But call me a traditionalist. Wins/losses seems much more important to me than margin of victory.

By that logic alone, however, any of probably a dozen undefeated college teams are most worthy of a title shot. And I know I'm including lesser divisions, but that's my point -- with so many teams, and such quirky schedules, to pretend that all D-1 teams are created equal is as silly as suggesting that D-1 and D-2 teams are created equal.