9 Days to January

Association Football - Barclay's Premier League - Arsenal
New Year's Day 2012 is now just 9 days away and that of course means that the Football transfer window will open for 31 short days. This is a time for managers to make additions (or subtractions) that will make a push into the second half of the season. 


Though nothing in European Football is ever certain, it appears certain that Arsenal will have to splash the transfer pool for at least one defender. This necessity is mounting as Kieran Gibbs' return from injury now appears to be further off than expected. Currently Gibbs, Bacary Sagna, Carl Jenkinson, Andre Santos are on the injury list. With the need being clear, here are five defenders Arsenal might realistically consider in January.


1. Wayne Bridge

Bridge's own manager doesn't
want him

The fallen-from-grace defender from Manchester City who is being implored by his own manager to quit the team. As soon as the Gibbs setback was made public the London newspapers were linking Arsenal to Bridge though no official word has come from Arsene Wenger or the club. Bridge has started only one match for City this season without much to show for it. Bridge does present some problems for Arsenal, he is 31 and Arsenal can't be interested in getting older in the back line, particularly with someone whose mobility on the ball has been questioned. Moreover, Wenger has spoken about a loan move during January, not a full transfer, and City are looking to rid themselves of Bridge, they won't want him back to deal with in a few months. However, Bridge is a defender and is available two things that Arsenal are looking for right now...


2. Gary Cahill

Bolton won't hang on to
Gary Cahill

With Bolton currently just two points out of last in the Premier League, Gary Cahill is probably wishing he had left in the summer when his name was floated extensively. Arsenal were linked to Cahill in the summer, but Spurs and Chelsea are the current frontrunners for the England international. Nothing would delight Arsenal supporters more that filling a need right from under the nose of two of their most hated rivals. Cahill will have to be a full transfer though, he'll want to be assured he'll be playing Premier League football next season and so far Arsenal have only talked about a loaned defender.


3. Stephen Warnock

At right back, Warnock is exactly the position Arsenal are in need of. Having just played against Warnock and Aston Villa on Wednesday-last he must be fresh in the mind of all who say the game, as he was Villa's most consistent defender on the pitch. Having just turned 30, Warnock would only be a loan move and with Villa now 25 points back of Manchester City in 12th letting Warnock loan to the Emirates doesn't seem outlandish. The only thing that would really stop this move? Not that Warnock is two years in to his four-year Villa contract but that currently Aston Villa have only seven defenders on their squad. By comparison, Arsenal have 13 (most of whom are injured) and Man City have 11.


4. Philippe Senderos

With a 5-0 thrashing at the hands of Manchester United in their last match, Fulham are spiraling down the table. Senderos has been in and out of an Arsenal shirt during his 8 year career and familiarity with the club could help as he will have to contribute immediately. Senderos is a consistent defender who can play anywhere on the back line and while he probably isn't going to win you a match, he is the type who isn't lose a match for you. Fulham have swayed back and forth between starting and sitting Senderos as he as been an unused sub as often as he has started so it doesn't seem like they would be keen to hang on to him if Arsenal came calling. A loan move here seems like it would go off without a hitch.


5. Michael Ciani

Ciani wasn't a big fan of players
leaving Bordeaux over the summer
but if it got Chamakh back to the
French club, the move could happen

I'll be honest, I know little to nothing about Ciani, but I do know a lot about Arsene Wenger. Because of that I know Wenger is a master at randomly dialing up a transfer from a French club when he needs it. Wenger already has a relationship with Bordeaux and Ciani has recently gone from an every day starter to a hit-and-miss sub, much like Senderos; suggesting he might be available for loan. If Wenger really wanted to make a splash he could transfer Ciani in a player-for-player move sending Marouane Chamakh back to France, as Bordeaux manager Francis Gillot has reportedly been trying to convince Chamakh of that all season. Ciani might be a difficult transfer though, as he was defensive over the topic of teammates who left Bordeaux in the summer. Ciani is also in year two of a four year contract. 


More to come,
XoXo
-Joshua

Welcome to the Jungle

NFL Football - Cincinnati Bengals
Originally, I considered naming this post "The Tragedy of the 2011 Cincinnati Bengals", basically because it sounds more dramatic. But the truth is, it isn't a tragedy, not really anyway. What this season is for the Bengals, more than anything, is exactly what we thought it would be.


Well, those of us who are realistic. Realistic people being those of us who didn't start out this season saying the Bengals would be 0-16 or saying that the Bengals were going to the Super Bowl at 6-2. I began the season saying the Bengals would finish 9-7, when they were 6-2 I said they would finish 9-7, when they lost 4 of 5 heading into this weekend I said they would finish 9-7. 

Andy Dalton and the Bengals might
be just short of the playoffs at 9-7, if that is their
final record.

If there is tragedy to this season it is that 9-7 isn't going to equal playoffs, at least it looks that way with the Bengals needing to win a tricky game against a 7-7 Arizona team and then defeat the Ravens who will probably being playing for a shot at the AFC's #1 seed on New Year's Day. Not only so, but the Jets also need to lose to either the Giants or the Dolphins. Both of those games are losable for the Jets, but New York and Miami have been so inconsistent that they are equally winnable.


The real question is, what do we know about the Bengals headed for the last two games of the regular season? What has this season taught us?


1. Rookies can have success
This hasn't been all the Bengals doing. Cam Newton in Carolina and Christian Ponder in Minnesota have added to Andy Dalton's reality that in this incarnation of the NFL, rookie QBs can win now. The Bengals have added their own flavor to the rookie phenomenon, though, as they also have seen great success with rookie Offensive Coordinator Jay Gruden and rookie WR A.J. Green, who appears to be on pace to be one of the next great NFL wide receivers. 

Jay Gruden's hiring as Offensive
Coordinator wasn't exciting, but has
been successful

This has, however, turned out exactly as it should in week 15. Andy, AJ and Jay surprised a lot of teams through the first 8-10 weeks of the season but now that we are deep in and other teams have more film on this trio it becomes easier to plan for them. This is nothing they've done wrong, it's just how the NFL works. Plus, we've begun to see a little Tim Tebow in Dalton and Gruden. What I mean by that is that the limitations of having a rookie QB have become more evident. It isn't that Dalton has played poorly, in fact he has played very well. It is that a young QB makes you limited, partly because he's still experiencing the NFL and adjusting and partly because no coordinator, particularly a rookie coordinator is going to open up the play book for a rookie in the depths of a wild card chase.


No one's fault, it's just how the NFL works.


2. The Bengals need a consistent running back.
The limitations of a rookie QB are only exacerbated when your running game is wildly inconsistent. That is the state of Cedric Benson and the Bengals. If you follow the blog, you know that I have never been crazy about Benson, I had hoped the Bengals would look into some free agent running backs in the off season and was floored when I found out they resigned Benson a day before Ahmad Bradshaw was supposed to come for a free agent visit. 

2012 will be Benson's
8th NFL season, a long
career for a RB in this era

Benson's supporters will surely say that he is about to eclipse 1,000 yards on the season so the decision to bring him back was a good one. However, it is Benson's lack of consistency that makes me question him. He will amass 1,000 yards (well, probably, he's 41 shy) but the way he has done it has been ugly. Going down his game log his yards spike and dip, in the last six games - 57, 41, 106, 52, 91, 76 with only 3 TDs to show for it. This inconsistency isn't good for the Bengals and the type of offense they are trying to run. Now, you can argue that this is also just how the NFL works and I understand that the RB position has changed over the last five years but what about the eye-test on Benson? When it's 3rd and 4 and the Bengals come out in a running formation, how confident do you feel that Benson is going to get the 1st down? 

Do the Bengals go with the
speed of LaMichael James
or power of Trent Richardson?

With a complete back like Alabama's Trent Richardson, a power back like Wisconsin's Monte Ball and a speedster like Oregon's LaMichael James (reportedly) entering the draft, I don't know how the Bengals can't be considering where they are heading with Benson. I'm not saying get rid of him, he could be a great two-back, but in this NFL you don't keep piling responsibility onto an 8th year, inconsistent running back; the RB shelf life is short and you have to get younger when you can.


3. Champs stay healthy
Is there much else to say? Sports commentators will always tell you that often it is not the best but rather the healthiest team that wins a championship. The Bengals have won only two of their last six games but that stretch has a seen a rash of injuries on both sides of the ball. You can't win football games if all of your best players aren't playing and practicing, that just the truth. Not an excuse but a reason. I don't know how a team "figures out" how to stay healthy, but if it's possible, that is what the Bengals will need next season.


4. Roll the Wide Receiver dice?

Justin Blackmon looks good in
black and orange, will the
Bengals have a chance to pair
him with AJ Green?

Along with the Bengals' RB issues there is a need for another true WR. The transcendence of AJ Green has only made it more apparent how truly lacking the rest of the corp is. Jordan Shipley's return to the slot next season will help this, but the Bengals need a true #2 WR to balance this offense and create the consistency that is hampering it right now. Currently there are three WRs in Scout's INC. top 32, the highest of which is Oklahoma State's Justin Blackmon. Blackmon has been fairly prolific with only two games where he has less that 70 yards receiving this season and none with less that 50. Add to that only two games without a touchdown. This type of consistency might be what the Bengals need to pair with Green for to form an explosive offense. (say that in your head like a call, "Dalton under center, Blackmon and Shipley to the left Green to the right, Gresham is the tight-end, James the single back"...scary...)

Is DeSean Jackson a smart
move or a big risk?

The "rolling of the dice" comes when remembering that it is apparent that Eagles receiver DeSean Jackson will not be returning to Philadelphia next season. If Jackson hits the free agent market I think the Bengals need to at least bring him in for an interview to see where his head is at. As I have said in the past, the Bengals cannot afford to bring in a negative influence on Dalton and Green but if Jackson's poor performances and attitude have only been a result of the negativity in Philadelphia and he is willing to renew his work ethic in Cincinnati, he could flourish. Jackson is a big "if" and perhaps even a risk. But the Bengals have had a fairly successful track record of being the haven for want-away players so they might consider adding his skills to the offense.


Blackmon sounds like a better move, brining in another rookie and inducting him into the Gruden-Dalton-Green club before he has a chance to pick up bad habits elsewhere. However, Blackmon will go high in the draft and may be out of the Bengals reach, especially because the RB spot is a much bigger concern, opening the door for a Jackson free agent move. Blackmon will also make the offense less experienced instead of more, which is what you always want. However, if the Eagles slap the franchise tag on to trade Jackson that could complicate the move too, there is no reason to trade away the small fortune the Eagles will surely want. 

For those wondering, if the season
ended tomorrow the Bengals would
draft 21st. Scouts Inc lists Arizona St
ILB Vontaze Burfict as their #21 prospect

I realize this is a "next year" post when the Bengals are still in the wild-card chase. However, one place the Bengals need to get better as a franchise is being aware of their faults and having a plan to address them. The Bengals often know their short-comings but do not begin to prepare to fix them until after the season or even after the Super Bowl when other clubs are already at work. I am only keeping an eye on the future while being in the present. And that eye on the future sees only one word with which the Bengals now need to become obsessed; consistency.


More to come,
XoXo
-Joshua


Links:
ESPN NFL Playoff Machine
Current NFL Standings
Scout's Inc. Top 32 Draft Prospects

Know Who You Are

I'm a big fan of Colin Cowherd. And something Cowherd says all the time is the simple principle of "own your baggage". That is to say, know who you are. I take self-awareness very seriously, I think its a quality that is too rare in our culture. 


I bring all of this up because there is an individual and related group out there who currently are not self-aware and not owning their baggage.


If you've been reading my BCS posts the past few days you know I talking about the Boise State Broncos and their coach Chris Peterson. Peterson, who be sure is a fantastic coach, came out Monday and was extremely critical of the BCS, saying that everyone is sick of the system.


This is not to say I disagree with him. If you've looked, you know I think the BCS is a joke. But let's be clear about something, right now its the system we have and you have to be realistic about how the system works. I called from a mile out that Boise State wasn't going to go to a BCS Bowl, it was obvious. What was their argument? They beat down on an average Georgia team in the first game of the season. Just because Georgia made the SEC championship game and the media played it up for a week like they had a shot to beat LSU doesn't mean they were good. UCLA made the Pac-12 championship game! That's no indication of how good a team is, because don't forget, there are three good teams in the SEC, LSU, Alabama and Arkansas, then Georgia is a distant fourth. Everyone else in the SEC is below average, just like the bottom level of every other conference. It's just that the perception of the SEC is so strong right now you think every team is a juggernaut. Do you really this Ole Miss and Kentucky are any better than Northwestern and Minnesota? 


But this is about Boise, not about the SEC. You can be critical of the system if you want. But you cannot be Boise State and pretend you had a realistic shot. You beat an average team and lost to a team that was average at best. You play a laughable schedule in a laughable league. If you don't go undefeated, you don't get your shot, sorry, that's how it works. 


If feel like I should elaborate, but what's left to be said? Boise didn't do what they had to do. And by the way, I don't want to hear anyone banging on West Virginia or Clemson about them making the BCS and Boise not. I don't think West Virginia is very good, they're very average. But, the one thing I can say about these two schools is they did what we all say we want when we call for a playoff; they did what they had to do on the field. It may not have been pretty and you may not like it, but when these teams got into spots where they knew they had to win a game to get their conference championship and their BCS spot, they did and that is what a playoff spirit is all about. 


You know who didn't get it done on the field? Boise State.


Just be real. Know who you are. Own your baggage. That's what its all about.


More to come
XoXo
-Joshua

The Results...

Hmmm...

Good to know a logic based approach to the BCS doesn't work. The final BCS Standings and Bowl games are out, let's see where I was right and where I was wrong.

Called it - National Championship Game

By now, the ESPN personalities have made you feel better about this, but it is what it is. The truth of the matter is there is simply too much money at stake having two SEC schools playing for the National Championship Game to not let it happen. Is it right, no. Is it fair, no. Are they the best two teams, possibly. Either way, the media members called it out two months ago and here it is; end of story.

Wiffed it - Not voting for non-qualifiers

My logic in my BCS projections was voters wouldn't vote for teams that couldn't make BCS games. That was South Carolina and Arkansas because of the two SEC schools in the Championship game. So I thought they would slide a little. It's ironic that a system that isn't interested in doing the right thing did by voting for these teams to move up when the ones above them lost, hooray for selectivity.

Called It - Boise Skipped

There's nothing for me to say about this one, it was plain as day. Kirk Herbstreit wanted to know why Boise didn't get in, I can't believe he was surprised. They lost to a TCU squad they should've walloped and had one quality win over an average Georgia team. The only reason you even cared about Georgia was because the media pretended they had a shot against LSU for a week, which the aware ones among you knew wasn't going to happen. In the end everyone was what we knew they were, Boise, all flash no depth, Georgia, average, LSU, undefeated.

Wiffed it - Kansas State's BCS Bid

Wow, what a punch in the gut for the Wildcats. It's not the K-State is a great team but with where they are ranked and the work they did this season, only losing to the Oklahomas, well, that's just sad. I had two scenarios where they didn't make the BCS but that was only if an AQ TCU team stole the spot from them, this is the epitome of a busted system, particularly when considering my next point

CALLED IT - MICHIGAN MONEY GRAB

I warned you. I did. I heard the whispers, I saw them slinking around down there in the rankings. So now the team from Michigan is headed to a BCS Bowl. Oh, no, no that green and white team you watched play a killer game on Saturday only to lose on a bad call (catch for years) and a dumb play. No, it's that maize and blue team that is apparently really good now because they slapped up on an Ohio State team that would've had a tough time winning the Big East this season. It's the team from Ann Arbor who didn't do anything to prove their worth on Saturday but got to sit at home. THIS is why we hate the BCS, if you didn't think the system was broken before, you should now. Sparty gets bumped to the second tier after a great inaugural Big Ten Championship game and Michigan gets to get up of the recliner to help line the BCS' pockets. Kansas State are playing for peanuts while Michigan gets to puff out its chest and act like its something special. They did nothing to earn this, but then, earnings is what its all about. 

Wiffed it - Baylor

My apologies to Baylor who I know had a strong season. I miscalculated everything about them, they rose to #12, nice job, too bad the #13 team travels better than you.

So there you go, I've had time to complain, you've had time to complain, but let's be positive now. It's still college football and its still a lot to talk about. Here's your full BCS lineup

Orange Bowl (Dec. 31, 12pm ET, ESPN) 23. West Virginia vs. 15. Clemson

Rose Bowl (Jan. 2, 5pm ET, ESPN) 10. Wisconsin vs. 5. Oregon

Fiesta Bowl (Jan. 2, 8:30pm ET, ESPN) 4. Stanford vs. 3. Oklahoma State

Sugar Bowl (Jan. 3, 8:30pm ET, ESPN) 13. Michigan vs. 11. Virginia Tech

National Championship Game (Jan. 9, 8:30pm ET, ESPN) 2. Alabama vs. 1 LSU

More to come
XoXo
-Joshua

Oh What Could Be...

As we sit about five hours out from Super Computers deciding who will play for one of our favorite sport's Championship, let's consider what could be.


What if the BCS did this like other sports? Like, oh say, the NFL? Of course, that P-word that sends a chill down the BCS' spine-playoff.


This is what a playoff of the top two teams from every BCS conference seeded by Champions then record (and starting next week) would look like. [with simulated predictions]

1. LSU (13-0)
2. Oklahoma State (12-1)

3. Oregon (11-2)

4. Wisconsin (11-2)

5. Clemson (10-3)

6. West Virginia (9-3)

7. Alabama (11-1)

8. Stanford (11-1)

9. Virginia Tech (11-2)

10. Kansas State (10-2)

11.  Michigan State (10-3)

12. Cincinnati (9-3)

Round 1 (Dec. 10-11): 

1. LSU/2. Oklahoma State/3. Oregon/4.Wisconsin - Byes

Dec. 10, 3pm ESPN - 12. Cincinnati (9-3, Big-East 1st place tie) at 5. Clemson (10-3, ACC Champion)

Dec. 10, 8pm ABC - 11. Michigan State (10-3, Big Ten Championship 2nd place) at 6. West Virginia (9-3, Big East Champions)

Dec. 11, 3pm ESPN - 10. Kansas State (10-2, Big 12 2nd place) at 7. Alabama (11-1, SEC 2nd place)

Dec. 11, 8pm ABC - 9. Virginia Tech (11-2, ACC 2nd place) at 8. Stanford (11-1, Pac-12 2nd place)

Round 2 (Dec. 17-18):
Dec. 17, 3pm ESPN - 5. Clemson (11-3, ACC Champions) at 4. Wisconsin (11-2, Big Ten Champions)


Dec. 17, 8pm ABC - 11. Michigan State (11-3, Big Ten 2nd place) at 1. LSU (13-0, SEC Champion)


Dec. 18, 3pm ESPN - 7. Alabama (12-1, SEC 2nd place) at 3. Oregon (11-2, Pac-12 Champion)


Dec. 18, 8pm ABC - 9. Virginia Tech (12-2, ACC 2nd place) at 2. Oklahoma State (12-1, Big 12 Champion)


Round 3 (Dec. 24):
Dec. 24, 3pm ESPN - 9. Virginia Tech (13-2, ACC 2nd place) at 4. Wisconsin (12-1, Big Ten Champion)


Dec. 24, 8pm ABC - 7. Alabama (13-1, SEC 2nd place) at 1. LSU (14-0, SEC champion) [how ironic]


Championship Game (Jan. 1):
Jan. 1, 8pm ABC (Cowboys Stadium, Arlington, TX) - 4. Wisconsin (13-1, Big Ten Champions) vs. 1. LSU (15-0, SEC Champions)




So yeah...nobody would be interested in watching any of that...and nobody could make any money from those games. Let's just keep the BCS system we have, it's working out, right?

2011 BCS Bowl Projections

I know I haven't written an article in months, but as I've been trying to tweet out BCS bowl projections I'm realizing there are actually a ton of "ifs" based on the final polls, here's the issues.


1. Did Oklahoma State do enough to get to the National Championship Game? 
No way to be sure about this, the twitter seems to be leaning that way, but we'll have to see. Personally, I think there's too much of what college football is all about ($$) at stake for an LSU-Bama rematch to not happen.


2. Where does TCU finish?
The BCS rules state, that the champion of a non-AQ conference can become an automatic qualifier if:  

  A. Such team is ranked in the top 12 of the final BCS Standings, or,
  B. Such team is ranked in the top 16 of the final BCS Standings and its ranking in the final BCS Standings is higher than that of a champion of a conference that has an annual automatic berth in one of the BCS bowls.

Here's the issue. In the current (not updated) BCS standings, Boise State is #7. With V.T. and Houston losing they should move up to #5. However, the rule is the champion of the conference, that if you recall a little 36-35 victory is the Horned Frogs of TCU. Currently they sit at #18, but if they move up to #16 then they take the automatic spot and in any simulation would almost certainly drop into the Fiesta Bowl. The if that gets them to #16 is a big if though, Baylor, Michigan and Wisconsin are the three teams ahead of them, all of whom should shift up in the final BCS standings. Michigan State and Georgia should fall down but Clemson is behind TCU in 20th and will certainly rise on winning the ACC, this little rule actually changes a lot of how the BCS bowls will shake out. (For those wondering, TCU will stay well ahead of West Virginia who is #23 and AQs for on tie-breaker for the Big East. They wouldn't even be BCS eligible if it weren't for that fact).

3. How Far Does Virginia Tech Fall?

The BCS rules state that all of the automatic qualifiers must be picked first, that means there will only be one spot left open in the Orange Bowl for who is left if TCU claims the spot mentioned above (see, told you it was important). Currently, Virginia Tech is #5 but will slide after losing to Clemson. That should worry the Hookies because Kansas State is currently #11 but with Oklahoma and Houston losing and a fair presumption that voters will give less consideration to #8 Arkansas because it cannot qualify for the BCS and #7 Boise State (because it isn't an AQ if TCU takes that) K-State could easily rise above VT and take the last BCS spot.

4. How Far Do Houston and Oklahoma Fall?

By all rights Houston should vanish from the final BCS standings, however, at 12-1 and Southern Miss being #24 in the current standings, it's possible they might have a parachute for this free fall. There is essentially a 0% chance they make it to a BCS game, but, where they land could impact how other teams move, particularly pesky TCU.

Oklahoma is in the same situation. Currently at #10, they'll slide...but how far?

Let's shake some scenarios out: (*these are based on my projected and logic-based final BCS projections...because I am using logic they probably will not look like the actual final BCS projections)

Here's some basic information, the selection order is Fiesta, Sugar, Orange and these bowls are under contract to take conference champions like this:

Fiesta - Big 12, Sugar - SEC, Orange - ACC

moreover, in a normal procedure all of the AQ schools must be picked before at-large teams can be, however, if a bowl loses their contracted team to the National Championship game they can pick any AQ or at-large team to fill that spot before any others are filled...but...all of the AQs still have to be selected after that (starting to see what a mess this is?)

Now to those scenarios:

1. If everything goes as planned and Alabama meets LSU in the National Championship Game and TCU does not make it to #16 in the final standings:

Fiesta Bowl: 3. Oklahoma State vs. 1(. West Virginia

Sugar Bowl: 5. Stanford vs. 7. Virginia Tech

Orange Bowl: 10. Clemson vs. 8. Kansas State

Rose Bowl: 4. Oregon vs. 9. Wisconsin

National Championship: 1. LSU vs. 2. Alabama

2. If everything goes as planned and Alabama meets LSU in the National Championship Game and TCU does make it to #16 in the final standings:

Fiesta Bowl: 3. Oklahoma State vs. 17. West Virginia

Sugar Bowl: 5. Stanford vs. 16 . TCU

Orange Bowl: 10. Clemson vs. 7. Virginia Tech

Rose Bowl: 4. Oregon vs. 9. Wisconsin

National Championship: 1. LSU vs. 2. Alabama

(this actually gives us a rematch of LSU, Alabama and the third game between Clemson and VT)

3. If Oklahoma State has won over enough voters to get to the National Championship Game and TCU does not make it to #16

Fiesta Bowl: 5. Stanford vs. 19. West Virginia

Sugar Bowl: 3. Alabama vs. 7. Virginia Tech

Orange Bowl: 10. Clemson vs. 8. Kansas State

Rose Bowl: 4. Oregon vs. 9. Wisconsin

National Championship: 1. LSU vs. 2. Oklahoma State

4. If Oklahoma State has won over enough voters to get to the National Championship Game and TCU does make it to #16

Fiesta Bowl: 5. Stanford vs. 17. West Virginia

Sugar Bowl: 3. Alabama vs. 16. TCU

Orange Bowl: 10. Clemson vs. 7. Virginia Tech

Rose Bowl: 4. Oregon vs. 9. Wisconsin

National Championship: 1. LSU vs. 2. Oklahoma State

Other Issues: Of course there are more problems than just this. All four of my projections leave Boise State out of the BCS though I project them to finish at #6. That's a high ranking, but with 11-2 Virginia Tech and 10-2 Kanas State on the table, I just don't see any bowl selecting Boise State even though they are at 10-1, especially if TCU gets the no-AQ conference auto-bid. 

What makes this even hairier is that half of the projections have not just a rematch, but the third game of the year between Clemson and Virginia Tech. There is a catch-all stipulation on the books that says the Bowls can shift participants around for a bunch of reasons including,

"whether alternative pairings may have greater or lesser appeal to college football fans as measured by expected ticket sales for the bowls and by expected television interest, and the consequent financial impact on ESPN and the bowls" (which of course is translated $$)

A third game in a row gives plenty of reason to shift Virginia Tech out of this game, but I don't feel like the Orange Bowl would be motivated to okay the shift for West Virginia or TCU. If they feel a third game could negatively impact the reception of their Bowl, they could skip VT and select 8. Kansas State or even 13. Michigan to fill the void (I doubt they would go the Michigan route and forego 10-2 Kansas State, but Michigan is a bigger school that travels well and that equals, you guessed it, $$). 

So, as it turns out, all we know for sure is that the Rose Bowl will be Pac-12 Champion Oregon against Big Ten Champion Wisconsin, at least something in college football works out the way it's supposed to.

See you soon?
XoXo
-Joshua 


In case you're really curious, here are my projected final BCS standings from which I was working.


[TCU in at #16]
1. LSU

2. Bama

3. Ok State

4. Oregon

5. Stanford

6. Boise State

7. V.T.

8. Kansas State

9. Wisconsin

10. Clemson

11. Arkansas

12. South Carolina

13. Michigan

14. Michigan State

15. Oklahoma

16. TCU

17. Georgia

18. WVU?

[TCU out]

1. LSU

2. Bama

3. Ok State

4. Oregon

5. Stanford

6. Boise State

7. V.T.

8. Kansas State

9. Wisconsin

10. Clemson

11. Arkansas

12. South Carolina

13. Michigan

14. Houston

15. Michigan State

16. Oklahoma

17. Georgia

18. TCU

19. WVU

-I think these are sound predictions, I think the new conference champions really move up, hence Clemson at 10. For both you just flip OkState and Bama if you think they need to be. You'll notice in TCU out version, it is Houston not falling out of the BCS that pushes TCU down to far to make it. I like the first list the best, I don't think Houston is still ranked in the top 20 if at all tomorrow night. I also see the voters letting Arkansas and South Carolina slip because they cannot make a BCS game because two SEC teams are already selected. My logic is, why vote for teams that have no bearing on the final standing?